Action Points… or Meta-Gaming Points?
I read an interesting post at ENworld about Action Point systems and found myself really agreeing with the ideas that Jeff had in the post.
We have action points in our Eberron game and while I’ve been told it makes the game more “pulp”, I really have just grinned and nodded and thought to myself, “How?”
I just don’t see it.
What I do see happening is this:
We spend a round of fighting Monster A. We figure out vaguely what the AC of Monster A is… so in round two, when you are a few points away from hitting that AC, you roll an action point. It’s more about numbers than “pulp.”
Jeff’s suggestion is to roll a d10 for the action point and roll it WITH the d20 for the action /save in question. This eliminates the meta-gaming of “I just need 2 more to hit!” and makes it fit in better with a “pulp” style. Your character is putting in the extra effort to make that hit. You may still miss, but you’ll miss gloriously. And if you hit… woot!
Anyway, what do you think?
Loading ...
Well, you aren’t supposed to be able to use an action point after you know the DC. If you figure out the AC quickly, your DM could always say no more AP after that point. Saves, well, you should have everyone who needs to save roll the AP before when they find out they need a save.
It’s better than d20 Modern at least. Those stack. So if you use none first level, you have double when you reach 2nd. You could have a massive pool and end up way stronger than you should be.
Well, “pulp” being characters that are somewhat over-the-top capable, above the normal person.
In this respect, the use for action points becomes:
“Alright, I’m trying to leap over the dragon’s head, hitting him on the way down, and then tumble through the giant’s legs beside him. Okay, rolled an 18, plus 10 for my jump skill, but this is freaking hard, so spend an action point… 5, how’d I do?”
Action Points, in a pulp sense, aren’t there to ensure you never fail, they’re there to allow you to succeed beyond your normal abilities.
The “roll the AP before you roll the d20″ variant doesn’t accomplish this any better, and (to me) is actually worse.
I wondered what the whole action point thing was, I’ve never used it (but I haven’t been back into playing for very long). I like Jeff’s idea about rolling them together though, makes good sense.
Thanks e
I’ve always used action points both as described and as “plot points”
Basically, a player could use an action point to have better luck at something (the usual thing), or use one to change the plot a bit (think Spirit of the Century)
A player could go “Of course I know that wizard, I saved his life back in the war!”
The DM stares at the player’s action point, hunger in his eyes. And he snatches one.
I found this adds some narrative power to the player, and makes it more challenging (in an interesting way) for the DM.
I’m running an Eberron game right now, and the action points really do make some “impossible” things possible. I’m fairly liberal with my player’s use of them, and I bring in some of the variant rules from Unearthed Arcana, i.e. letting them spend an action point to stabilize, letting them spend an action point to emulate an instant use combat feat in the next round, etc. It seems to give my players more freedom to try new things. My one stipulation with the use of action points, is that the players describe how the situation changes because they used the point. What extra in-game thing happened to change the situation for the better. Was your first attack just a feint, and then a true lunge? They usually get pretty emphatic when they are describing it.
Having played with the GURPS system some, Action Points to me will always be the “currency” of actions/round. AP as implemented in Eberron (and now 4E) are a powergamer mechanic. I’m not a fan. As you pointed out, they are easily abused in the meta-game.
This came up with my last gaming group, when Eberron first came out. The AP help the Pulp feel by giving you something a little extra to tray the “over the top” stunts that you would not normaly tray with out the action points(I like Grahams example). There is a inherit flaw with the action points system, is more of a flaw of the system as a hole, AP were introduced to a game like 3.5 with already established rules so is bound to conflict. Unlike for example Dead Lands, Star Wars Saga systems that were build around the use of Chips/Force Points/AP. The bottom line is that it depend on the player…
If the player is a Power gamer he will hold his AP until he knows the exact number he needs, in other words so he can hit sh%#.
If the player is a roleplayer he will use them on other things other then combat, like trying crazy stunts and real heroic actions, not just so he can hit sh%#.
In my game I say the AP refresh after every gaming session as appose to the norm which is only at every level. The purpose for that is to promote the use of action point and so they don’t feel like they need to “save” them for one particular action, they can tray crazy over the top heroic action at every turn and any time they want, the more they use them, the more they increase the pulp feel.
I liked his idea about rolling the points before you roll the die which keeps players from metagaming. But a flat jacking up to a 1d10 is a bit much initially. Usually I use them like force points in Star Wars Revised. Instead of rolling multiple dice at high level and taking the best one, I just add the dice together so at levels 1-7 you roll 1d6, 8-14 2d6, and 15-21 you roll 3d6 and add the total result to the roll. Then I usually let humans roll 1d8s (I’ve toyed with using different dice for different races ala Karma in Earthdawn).
The variant of the stunt system mentioned in the thread is in itself cool (1d6 for describing you action, 2d6 for describing the action and using the environment, and 3d6 for making the entire game stop because what you did was so cool and then adding all the dice to your roll), but the straight jacket approach of d20 makes that difficult when anything cool requires you to take penalties or not do it at all. The biggest problem is that there is usually a tactical feat out there in one of the splat books that does something cool, so if you have a really gamist DM then he quash it or give you penalties. It gets worse if he has the Book of Iron Might by Malhavoc Press because it gives formulas for penalizing anything cool and recommends you don’t use anything to mitigate it just in case Players want to do those cool stunts all the time without penalties.
And there is the time that Buff used three action dice with a d20 and roll a “4″, twice in a row.
It doesn’t sound like the problem is with Action Points being meta-game, it sounds like figuring out the AC of a monster is the meta-game part. It also doesn’t sound like the fix would be a solution. In fact, I like the effect that you don’t: the characters know they need just a little more to hit the monster, so they spend it when it counts. And sometimes, even if they think they have the monster figured out, they’ll spend one just to be sure they finish it.
I use APs heavily in my game (they’re explained in an in-game way of being blessings by powerful dragon patrons, who provide luck when the character needs it most).
I loathe action points because it takes any of the chance, the good stuff, out of the game.
Nothing is better than watching that rock roll, and holding your breath.
Action points kill that so….thbbbbt!
Looking over the thread and some of the comments (and having never run in a D20 game with APs, unless you count the 4e demo), it sounds like the subsystems simply ARE metagamey. The Exalted method would, I think, work out the best thematically, but I wonder if kitbashing in some of the AP ideas from FATE might not be better in terms of flavor
In essence, you define a certain number of tags for you character, say, Strong As A Moose is one. When you want to use an AP, you tag Strong As A Moose with some descriptive flavor for either a) a reroll or b) a plus to your roll. (FATE grants a +2, which I think the conversion doc on RPGNow translates to a +4 in D20). The important part, though, is the refresh economy, in that once you spend an AP, you don’t get it back unless your tag is compelled to inconvenience you in some way. Again, using Strong As A Moose, maybe later on you have to lightly carry the Forgotten Crystal Of CrakBoom. Since Strong As A Moose person is carrying it, the GM might offer them an AP in exchange for your character _slightly_ squishing the FGoCB, leading to more “fun” for the party
Wow, I certainly opened a can of worms!
*sits back and reads*
To Sal M higher up : Tried that, it works wonderfully, you just have to convince your players to write nice FATE-like background stories.
In the long run, they make for awesome games… I’ll have to work on a system for 4E…
Its not that hard to compensate for action points, you just raise all the DCs by +3, this doesn’t eliminate the ability to pass without action points and doesn’t guarantee a pass when spending APs. A good DM who isn’t also a train conductor should be able to compensate for that.
To Juan Navarro:
I’m sorry you feel that way. I understand were your coming from because I played D&D for a long time with out AP and the AP do take away something from the 3.5 system…though I like the Pulp flavor Eberron bring and I like the AP in Eberron like I like the chips(AP) system in Dead Lands but in the 3.5 system AP belong no were els but in Eberron.
To Sal M:
SAY WHAT??!=/
Something about a Moose and and CrakBoom.
I’m really confused.=P
To Achan_hiArusa:
I do compensate for the AP. Though I wont say haw because E is one of the gamers in the my Eberron campaign, I am Mar’Kessa’s GM. As I said, Action pints are an addition to 3.5 and sometimes it conflicts. Is not like other gaming systems that were made with Action Points in mind.
Personally I never much liked Action Points period.
To LokyCat: it comes out better in actual play reports. Look up the Harping Monkey play reports for Spirit of the Century, or any APs for that game on RPG.NET. The FATE Points are what you’d be looking for
To Joey:
Not in any game? Have you plaid Gurps(AP), Heroes(AP), Dead Lands(CHIPS), ShadowRun(dice pool)? There are a LOT of systems that have AP or mechanics like AP and there are a lot of fun. AP type of mechanics in those games add some flavor and when there are systems that are build with those type of mechanics in mind there are part of the system them selfs. Action points have there place, Eberron is that place but no were els in the D&D 3.5 system.
To Sal M:
K…I check it out.
Off subject personal note:
It seams that D&D has taking things a bit backwards lately.=/
D&D invented RPGs, 3.0 and 3.5 were a GREAT improvement from 1e and 2e and they definably made the game new and funner but instead of always pushing forward by coming up with new ways to make the game fun; they tray implementing things from other games systems. AP is just one example(I still say they have there place in Eberron) and it become more and more evident with 4e which makes me think of a table top MMO. =/
I’m probably playing a game for which I don’t have all the pieces as I haven’t played D&D with action points but….
I have to agree with LokyCat: Fate chips in Deadlands were great - they added that little (or not so little) extra something when you needed it but never actually took away the ‘it is going to work?’ tension, made the players feel they had a little more control, and provided some lovely roleplaying opportunities. The three different colours/levels of fate chips let you scale your effort (providing you have the colour you want to scale to) and legend chips….drool….
but Deadlands was built with fate chips integral to the system….as an add-on? Not sure.
In a Modern game I would consider some form of action points, but just in a typical D&D fantasy I see no use for it