The whole 'crutch' critique is patronizing and dickish.

My only thought about the inspiration mechanic is that it puts too many constant judgement calls on the DM and would have been better done like Pendragon, where you have scores for traits and both players and DM's can treat them more objectively. Or like Prince Valiant, where you just get to call on them for something like inspiration whenever it seems clear they are appropriate.

I intend to run inspirations in D&D like Prince Valiant - i.e., if it seems obvious to both player and DM that your personality trait, bond, whatever is relevant, then you get to claim an inspiration point.  I am not into the idea of making players 'prove' they deserve it by talking in a squeaky voice or whatever, which seems like another kind of patronizing and dickish.

This is a very interesting discussion. I had never considered some of the criticisms against meta-gamey rules. My players and I have always responded well to this sort of thing, having always seen it as the "GAME" part of roleplaying games.

I can see why it could be disruptive to some now. Luckily 5e doesn't break if you omit it (say, unlike Fate Points in Fate, which is intrinsic to the system, I think).

Quote from: CRKrueger;766490That's the narrative rationalization Catch-22.  The second you begin to rationalize how an action could be considered in character, you have just stepped out of character.  The very act of the rationalization means you are comparing two different things.  You are clearly in an authorial stance playing out the Bridge scene.

No, I'm analyzing an example of "actual play" after the fact. I can easily imagine how this would work at the table in real time; I've done it on numerous occasions in the 34 years I've been gaming. My sense of IC is not fragile: if it can survive bog-standard hit points (what, I can fight like a demon up until the moment I run out of this meta-game approximation of my ... well, whatever the hell it is that hit points represent), spell slots, and all the quantification of non-quantifiable qualities that is the usual character sheet, it can handle Inspiration.

I'll respect your phenomenological boundaries. But don't tell me what mine are.

What have spell slots to do with it?

Quote from: Phillip;766513What have spell slots to do with it?

I don't remember things in distinct slots in my brain. Nor do I suddenly decide that *this* memory will take up a larger space than normal because I want to fire off an upgraded reminiscence.

Vancian magic has clearly been as controversial as it has been for all these years in part because it runs counter to how many players experience memorization. It's a game mechanic, the manipulation of which doesn't map perfectly onto an IC experience. For a great many players historically, then, it's a "dissociated" mechanic. Hence the explosion of spell point and mana systems that followed over the years (to give one example.)

Quote from: CRKrueger;766473Go read the other thread.

You are comparing my ignorance of an adjacent thread to your ignorance of behavioral science?   How is this persuasive?

Quote from: CRKrueger;766473You can read, right?

Words, yes.   Minds, not quite yet.

Quote from: CRKrueger;766473Training wheels don't teach you to ride a bike, they teach you to pedal, balance bikes teach you how to ride a bike.

Then Inspiration is like peddling.   It ain't the whole bike.  So problem dissappears?

Quote from: CRKrueger;766473To sum up, you're incapable of seeing the difference between Conan and Robert E. Howard, or the difference between DiCaprio and Scorcese, gotcha.

I would argue the basics of behavioral science with Robert E. Howard, DiCaprio and Scorcese.  Don't change the subject.  I am discussing stimulus and response and the impact on behavior.  You're building an edifice that even if perfectly true wouldn't impact behavior.

Quote from: CRKrueger;766473Riiiight, because making decisions completely divorced from anything a character could possibly be involved with is roleplaying the character, yeah, I forgot. :rolleyes:

Is showing up at the table part of playing the game? If so, did you ride a fucking horse to the GMs house?

Metagame MUST exist.  Must.

QuoteYeah snarky, but hey, you chose it.

If I was impolite enough to trigger such an immature response then I genuinely apologize.  But it's hard for me to gently say "you don't seem to know what the fuck you are talking about".

Did you even bother to hit up Wikipedia?

Let me be more succinct:

Did the bell train Pavlov's dog not to salivate when offered food?

What did he wind up having to do to get the dog to stop?  And was he able to achieve complete extinction?

Quote from: CRKrueger;766475So your point in defense of the mechanic as a tool to teach roleplaying is that players will roleplay by themselves and not need it to reinforce the behavior...hmm, I could have sworn that was my position that RPing is it;s own reward.

Ever hear the phrase "fake it until you make it?"  Yeah, I'm comparing roleplaying-challenged people with alcoholics, deal with it.

But really, if you're playing your character, you should naturally get Inspiration without thinking about it.  If you're just doing it to get Inspiration, there's little way for others to know (unless they're mind readers) and at least now the min-maxers are acting somewhat in character.  Hopefully they'll get the idea that it's cool to do that and switch from the extrinsic to the intrinsic reward for roleplaying.

Quote from: CRKrueger;766490Either the Inspiration exists totally OOC, and just amounts to a mechanical advantage, or it exists totally OOC, until you attempt to rationalize it by mapping to an IC action.  The effect is the same, the choice to use it and what it represents is OOC, because the character can't choose to gain it or lose it, only YOU can.

Exactly.  It exists outside the model of the world - it is a totally OOC and dissociated concept.  This is not arguable in any reasonable way.

What *is* arguable is how damaging it is to overall immersion.  There are many things in RPGs that involve player-level, not character-level decisions or knowledge.  Most of them we've just gotten so used to that they don't phase us any more.

And how much they harm immersion is going to be an individual thing.  It's not objective.

Personally, placing the *exact center* of where I want my fireball to go in 3.x to maximize damage while minimizing damage to allies is at least as immersion-breaking as the Inspiration mechanic.  Your mileage may, and probably does, vary.

Quote from: Maltese Changeling;766508My sense of IC is not fragile: if it can survive bog-standard hit points (what, I can fight like a demon up until the moment I run out of this meta-game approximation of my ... well, whatever the hell it is that hit points represent), spell slots, and all the quantification of non-quantifiable qualities that is the usual character sheet, it can handle Inspiration.

Exactly.  Except spell slots.

Quote from: Phillip;766513What have spell slots to do with it?

Nothing.  They have everything to do with not knowing the fiction/magic model that they came from.

Quote from: CRKrueger;766475So your point in defense of the mechanic as a tool to teach roleplaying is that players will roleplay by themselves and not need it to reinforce the behavior...hmm, I could have sworn that was my position that RPing is it;s own reward.  Your very example shows the DM distracting the player from RPing his vengeance by talking about his Inspiration mechanic and the player not giving a shit.  

If that's the best support you can muster for the mechanic, your heart ain't in it man.

No that was how it will actually play and you and I both know that that is how it will go with any DM that engenders roleplay.
If you think oh here is an inspiration point is less OOC than can you roll initiative or roll to hit or any other game parts of the game then meh... can;t help you.

This is how the idea may engender and encourage roleplaying.

DM: You come out of the cave your eyes adjusting to the bright sunshine. You see Belinda's body lying on the ground blood coming from a gaping wound in her head. Above her body stands a large winged ape a crude club covered in blood in its huge hand.
Player: Right so how tough is a Flying monkey whatsit again? Sounded tough and Cormac is down to 8 HPs.
DM: You haven't fought one of these before so you don't know how tough they might be but as you look at it standing nearly 7 feet tall its mouth filled with sharp fangs  it sure doesn't looks like a walkover.
Player: I have this Bond thing here on my character sheet about Belinda what does that mean.
DM: remember when we created PCs and we discussed bonds, traits flaws. These are things that have a big impact on your character the stuff they care about. So to you Belinda is like say your girlfriend (I am stretching reality to assume that a teenage roleplayer may have a girlfriend but they probably understand the concept of girlfriends so bear with me).
Player: Right so if this critter had smashed her head it then Cormac, I, would get pretty pissed right.
DM: Yeah, yeah probably.
Player: Well in that case. I charge the beast all guns blazing. "No one harms Cormac's mate" I shout as I charge forward.
DM: Okay roll initiative, oh and as you acted out a Bond you get an inspiration token. You can only have one at any one time but you spend it to get advantage on a roll.
Player: Cool so I will use it to get advantage on this initiative roll cos I am all fired up with wrath at this thing.
etc ....

Quote from: Maltese Changeling;766516I  It's a game mechanic, the manipulation of which doesn't map perfectly onto an IC experience. For a great many players historically, then, it's a "dissociated" mechanic. Hence the explosion of spell point and mana systems that followed over the years (to give one example.)

No, it does map to the character's experience. Likewise any other system that is how magic works in a given game world.

Nothing else is described as being abstracted -- and abstracted is not what dissociated means, anyhow.

Quote from: Phillip;766548No, it does map to the character's experience. Likewise any other system that is how magic works in a given game world.

Nothing else is described as being abstracted -- and abstracted is not what dissociated means, anyhow.

I agree spell slots are not dissociated but they are badly explained in the rule book.

The magic system needs to be explained as a system.
You learn the words of a spell which form a construct in your memory that traps the magical energy when the energy is released the spell is cast and the words are lost and need to be remembered again. Simple spells have simple constructs which are quite quick to memorise, complex spells take far longer to learn and are only available to high level wizards of great power.

As a system this is just as internally logical as any other. Of course D&D adds on a need to rest overnight to relearn spells which is a gamist tweak added for balance reasons

The Inspiration-as-learning-to-roleplay... not sure I'd take it that far.

When I discovered FATE - I was dubious about Aspects. But conceptually it was what a couple of my introvert-players kinda needed. My good players who had attitudes like CRKrueger, were "I don't like these rules. They do nothing for my roleplaying." didn't use them - I get that. But for my other players they helped, a bit (not completely).

That said - I'd rather look at Inspiration as just another system mechanic, not as a training-wheels for roleplaying. But simply as a mechanic to reward you for doing what you want your character to do and should be doing regardless. Sure you can ask why do you need it? But then I could ask - why do you need most such mechanics that currently exist that require you as a player to activate a power, ring, discipline blah blah blah

Much like when I'm playing Oriental Adventures and I choose to do activate my Ki power as a Yakuza in order to withstand a barrage of attacks, or as a Kensai to max my damage. It's *just* a mechanic. Does it in any way take away from my personal experience in the roleplay I engage in...

When my kensai twirls his blade to clean the blood from it in a flourish, and raise it to the roaring crowds after killing the last dumbass that they thought could best me... if you wanna give me an Inspiration point for that, then nope it takes nothing away. I'm still roleplaying and I don't feel disconnected at all.

To the degree that someone wants to tell me I'm not "feeling" the RP as deeply as I could/should be due to this particular mechanic is kinda arbitrary isn't it?

Quote from: jibbajibba;766541No that was how it will actually play and you and I both know that that is how it will go with any DM that engenders roleplay.
If you think oh here is an inspiration point is less OOC than can you roll initiative or roll to hit or any other game parts of the game then meh... can;t help you.

This is how the idea may engender and encourage roleplaying.

DM: You come out of the cave your eyes adjusting to the bright sunshine. You see Belinda's body lying on the ground blood coming from a gaping wound in her head. Above her body stands a large winged ape a crude club covered in blood in its huge hand.
Player: Right so how tough is a Flying monkey whatsit again? Sounded tough and Cormac is down to 8 HPs.
DM: You haven't fought one of these before so you don't know how tough they might be but as you look at it standing nearly 7 feet tall its mouth filled with sharp fangs  it sure doesn't looks like a walkover.
Player: I have this Bond thing here on my character sheet about Belinda what does that mean.
DM: remember when we created PCs and we discussed bonds, traits flaws. These are things that have a big impact on your character the stuff they care about. So to you Belinda is like say your girlfriend (I am stretching reality to assume that a teenage roleplayer may have a girlfriend but they probably understand the concept of girlfriends so bear with me).
Player: Right so if this critter had smashed her head it then Cormac, I, would get pretty pissed right.
DM: Yeah, yeah probably.
Player: Well in that case. I charge the beast all guns blazing. "No one harms Cormac's mate" I shout as I charge forward.
DM: Okay roll initiative, oh and as you acted out a Bond you get an inspiration token. You can only have one at any one time but you spend it to get advantage on a roll.
Player: Cool so I will use it to get advantage on this initiative roll cos I am all fired up with wrath at this thing.
etc ....

Sorry; I want less ooc mechanics, not more.

So while I agree that initiative rolls are ooc, just like an inspiration point is ooc, I consider initiative a necessary evil whereas inspiration mechanics completely unnecessary.

I could add hundreds of ooc meta mechanics to an rpg; but I don't want to. I want as few as possible.

Quote from: Bill;766562Sorry; I want less ooc mechanics, not more.

So while I agree that initiative rolls are ooc, just like an inspiration point is ooc, I consider initiative a necessary evil whereas inspiration mechanics completely unnecessary.

I could add hundreds of ooc meta mechanics to an rpg; but I don't want to. I want as few as possible.

I suspect D&D isn't for you:)

Maybe try Amber. No dice, no initiative few mechanics etc etc

The point I was trying to make is if a rule can take someone who's usual attention to roleplay is non-existent and make them act in a consistent manner that you can approximate to roleplay its a good start.

As I said right back on the other thread the inspiration discussion is separate to traits, flaws and bonds as you can still have them without inspiration at all just as roleplay guides.

Quote from: jibbajibba;766569I suspect D&D isn't for you:)

Maybe try Amber. No dice, no initiative few mechanics etc etc

The point I was trying to make is if a rule can take someone who's usual attention to roleplay is non-existent and make them act in a consistent manner that you can approximate to roleplay its a good start.

As I said right back on the other thread the inspiration discussion is separate to traits, flaws and bonds as you can still have them without inspiration at all just as roleplay guides.

Dnd has worked just fine for me for 35 years of heavy gaming.

I just don't see a reason to add mechanics for roleplay.

The best guide for roleplay is playing an rpg with roleplayers.