From: oliver@bodie.cs.unc.edu (Bill Oliver)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: GURPS character questions
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:13:13 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

>In article <1992Sep1.161230.58558@cc.usu.edu> sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
>
>First, in your campaign, how many points and how much starting money 
>do your players get to build characters? How many characters do the
>players have? Please mention the type of campaign/setting when you 
>answer.
>
>

I generally like to run medium level characters, probably from my 
distaste from the old D&D days where low level characters were
so weak they were worthless and high level characters were so
powerful that the DM couldn't get up a good challenge without
being silly.

Accordingly, people in my games simply start off medium level
and don't get *any* experience points.  Any advance in level
or ability has to come directly out of the play of the game.
In other words, if a charcter wants to increase an ability by
+1, or gain an ability, then he or she must either demonstrate
enough use of that ability in play to warrant an increase in ability
as "on the job training," or must explicitly get some training as
part of the game.

In my fantasy and post-holocaust games, I generally give my players
between 150 -175 points with the provision that the character must be
designed on 100 points, and the rest spent as experience. 

>
>
>Second, how much experience do you award? Do you award individual 
>experience to players/characters who play well or do something out-
>standing? What do you award experience for? What things do you look 
>for when deciding how much experience you will give?
>
>

Rather than give experience, I tend to let the players earn their
own rewards within the context of the game.  If they are in a 
dangerous situation, the reward is survival.  If they are on a 
difficult mission, the reward is payment/contacts/etc.
If the players do something interesting and innovative, then
reward will, I hope, be interesting and innovative.


As a rather simple example, I once had a group which was transported
forward in time by a factor of geologic ages.  The world which
they entered was rather different than the world of the 1990s,
being both more advanced and more primitive than the world
of today, and they faced a number of challenges in staying alive and 
learing how to deal with the civilization into which they ran.

I moved before the campaign came to a resting point, but had I
stayed I would have awarded some increase in abilities in 
survival, area knowledge, diplomacy, and specific combat skills.  Conversely,
after a period of game time, I would have had some of the more
technically-oriented of the folk start to lose or change some of
the skills with which they would be getting rusty.

I award these skills as they are dictated by the game.  If a
player goes to school, then the increase is given when he or she
completes training, or, if it involves a multipoint increase,
is pro-rated.  If the increase is gained from experience, then
I award it when it "feels" right. When a player does something
repeatedly, I just ask myself if he or she should still
be considered a rank amateur, novice, professional, expert, etc.
If the answer is no, then I change things.

 

Bill Oliver