I've never seen so much drama over "lifestyle" decisions in RPGs that facilitate that little piece of simulation and yet, in the same token, also be the cause of some pretty authentic bonding between players (and their characters, of course!) over their shared lifestyle.
(Actually, no, I've seen MUCH worse drama -- been part of more than some myself -- but you can see my other posts on here for that... *ahem*)
Like I've had players give shit to other players for choosing a "top" lifestyle or one near the top and then had others, like, gloat over their top lifestyle being rewarded come downtime compared to others who were like "I rweary need the autorifle with AP rounds!". And then when it comes to RP, it's actually been pleasantly surprising when the guys actually RP hanging out pre/post-mission or, say, the perils of being utterly broke as shit.
I think it's awesome when games do include lifestyle sub-systems in their ruleset -- even better, when they actually reward players in it or it influences play in some way. It can just be basic prompts for the GM -- "well, you've got hot water at night and the front door locks..." -- but at least then the players will probs have read that themselves and, strangely enough, will probably actually WANT to RP that. And its always a good sesh when the PCs finally can afford the next tier up, feels like they've done something major.
Anyone experienced this shit in their own games? What's your take on these type of systems?
I think we need to clarify "Lifestyle" because it comes up in two ways.
The way it usually comes up in D&D-like settings is that it's a set cost (in whatever the main currency is) per day or week (or per adventure with some of the Living campaigns) that allowed you easily track downtime expenses without having to account for every last meal, new shirt or horseshoe repair during that time. You typically get some minor penalties or bonuses if you spend less or more than whatever it defines as "average" (the first real exposure I had to this concept was 2e's Birthright where the minimum upkeep was one gold bar/2000 gp per month; by contrast a "high" lifestyle in Living Arcanis was about 25 gp per week or 100 gp/month).
By contrast, in modern settings "lifestyle" was generally a benefit (as opposed to a cost). The bigger the benefit the more income you had and the nicer fluff stuff you afford. It basically gave you buffs to certain tasks (bribes, travel and throwing lavish parties most typically), but it didn't generally solve the problems the PCs had to deal with (i.e secret magic/monsters, evil terrorist organizations, supervillains, etc.). At most it might be the fluff you buy up to explain why your superhero can afford to replace his multi-billion dollar powered armor (bought with character points) every time it gets banged up.
You seem to be referring to both versions in your OP, but they're practically opposites in terms of concept. One is designed to be an easy resource sink (so the adventurers have to get back out there and adventure) while the other is essentially how free you are to live a life of adventure in a setting where leading that life is unlikely to provide any material benefit (i.e. Demon Hunter isn't generally a lucrative gig in the present day).
I think they're both useful tools, provided you understand that the purpose of both is provide a reason for the PCs to adventure (or be able to adventure in a more modern setting) instead of spend their time living a mundane life.
I run post-apoc games so "lifestyle" is often a big part of the campaign.
My fantasy RPG play is more Sword & Sorcery where PCs live like rock stars, then wander to the next dungeon.
In Traveller, PCs lived on the ship, in hotels they could afford, or camped on hostile planets.
Quote from: Chris24601;1053441I think we need to clarify "Lifestyle" because it comes up in two ways.
The way it usually comes up in D&D-like settings is that it's a set cost (in whatever the main currency is) per day or week (or per adventure with some of the Living campaigns) that allowed you easily track downtime expenses without having to account for every last meal, new shirt or horseshoe repair during that time. You typically get some minor penalties or bonuses if you spend less or more than whatever it defines as "average" (the first real exposure I had to this concept was 2e's Birthright where the minimum upkeep was one gold bar/2000 gp per month; by contrast a "high" lifestyle in Living Arcanis was about 25 gp per week or 100 gp/month).
By contrast, in modern settings "lifestyle" was generally a benefit (as opposed to a cost). The bigger the benefit the more income you had and the nicer fluff stuff you afford. It basically gave you buffs to certain tasks (bribes, travel and throwing lavish parties most typically), but it didn't generally solve the problems the PCs had to deal with (i.e secret magic/monsters, evil terrorist organizations, supervillains, etc.). At most it might be the fluff you buy up to explain why your superhero can afford to replace his multi-billion dollar powered armor (bought with character points) every time it gets banged up.
You seem to be referring to both versions in your OP, but they're practically opposites in terms of concept. One is designed to be an easy resource sink (so the adventurers have to get back out there and adventure) while the other is essentially how free you are to live a life of adventure in a setting where leading that life is unlikely to provide any material benefit (i.e. Demon Hunter isn't generally a lucrative gig in the present day).
I think they're both useful tools, provided you understand that the purpose of both is provide a reason for the PCs to adventure (or be able to adventure in a more modern setting) instead of spend their time living a mundane life.
This was a great post that clarifies the two different approaches to PC Lifestyle in RPGs, thanks!
I tend to prefer the latter approach, the "this is how your PC normally lives & gains income, contacts etc" one, rather than the cost-of-living coin-sink approach typical of D&D type fantasy. Even in D&D many PCs have the skills to maintain a 2nd-type lifestyle, eg they may have valuable smithing, item crafting or spellcasting ability, or may have land income. 5e D&D has a really stupid table where owning inns, temples etc COSTS the PC money, rather than providing a suitable 2nd-type lifestyle for free. I'm generally not keen on compulsory extraction of gold from PCs, although I'm fine with carousing type rules that incentivise spending with benefits.
I'd like to note 5e's lifestyle options imply benefits, but they are left to the DM. For instance living an Aristocratic lifestyle is supposed to make you a mover and shaker in high society, being in contact with all the big shots, but also place you into the politics and conspiracies of nobles.
Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1053434Anyone experienced this shit in their own games? What's your take on these type of systems?
I find it interesting when it's integral to gameplay, like in Blades in the Dark. When it's there just to "look cool" without adding anything interesting or relevant, it's dead weight that wastes player time during chargen . Shadowrun is the last case for me - we had dozens of sessions and it never mattered much.
I tend to agree that these systems work best when there are specific benefits associated with it.
Most of the D&D style options I've played with (ex. Living Arcanis) had specific bonuses (or penalties for a low or destitute lifestyle) in social situations presented during that module (ex. negotiating for better payment from a patron was easier if you were living a high lifestyle and much more difficult if leading a poor or destitute lifestyle... since the wealthy adventurer clearly needs more incentives to risk themselves while the destitute one should be grateful just for the opportunity to make some coin). Something more concrete like +1-3 on Reaction Rolls with civilized NPCs depending on lifestyle wouldn't be unreasonable either.
Conversely, I'm fond of things like d20 Modern's Wealth Bonus or a Wealth Level system for more modern games. You can basically buy whatever you want that costs less than your Wealth Level, but need to make some type of Finance check if you want to obtain something above your Wealth Level (including bribes).
Quote from: S'mon;1053479I'm generally not keen on compulsory extraction of gold from PCs, although I'm fine with carousing type rules that incentivise spending with benefits.
"Spending 1 Gold = 1 XP" is all I needed to do. Players did the rest, causing all sorts of hijinx and repercussions!
My latest RPGPundit Presents sourcebook (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/250422/)has got you covered.