Splitting off Memory Points from IQ completely

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Skarg

It might help if the cost to add talents started low and increased as the character gained talents (not attributes).

I think there's probably a need for an ability to train talents with study time, rather than (and/or in combination) with XP. And probably some more thought into what's required to learn some of the talents, and whether or not they _can_ just be "learned" or not (Charisma? Acute Hearing? Can I really just "study" those, or gain them from adventuring experience?).

I.e. I want it to be possible to take some peasants and train them to use weapons, by spending time training them, and without giving them XP that could be spent to raise attributes. And I don't want it to be possible to learn Charisma or Acute Hearing, or at least not as easily as it is to learn Ax/Mace.

I'm thinking of adding a talent to PCs as a reward for an important mission. This would require time to practice and be trained. I may also require a partial payment of XP, which can be an XP deficit if they haven't the XP already available.

The idea is that they're performing a valuable service for a buncha unarmed combat trained monks. As reward, they can learn UC I, but it will require some investment in time and XP to receive this reward. Since they will be engaged in training at the monastery, there will be some cost of living to figure in as well (though it should be lower than $50 per week).

Note that this talent isn't really all that useful for most adventurers anyway. It's not like I'm granting two-weapons at a substantial discount. Only those characters who are keen to wear nothing more than cloth armor will have much use for this benefit. (UC I is really not as good as brawling, by itself. It's only useful as a springboard to UC II and higher.)

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by Skarg

I want it to be possible to take some peasants and train them to use weapons, by spending time training them, and without giving them XP that could be spent to raise attributes. And I don't want it to be possible to learn Charisma or Acute Hearing, or at least not as easily as it is to learn Ax/Mace.

This is essentially what I have tried to create with my Background/Career system (adapted from the Jobs Table). XP is earned based on the risk of the chosen path which can then only be spent on talents or spells. Attributes can be increased as well, but at a much slower pace. This way even peasants can have a bit more diversity in their capabilities.

[zot]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Memory Points (MP) indicate the amount of training a character has achieved to date.

A starting character starts with 12 MPs, whatever their IQ is. These are then allocated for starting talents, spells, and languages as usual.

As the character progresses they can buy additional memory points for 500 XPs as usual.

OK, I suggested 10 a couple days ago but 12 works too...

Originally Posted by zot

If you're really shooting for consistency, you should remove the link between initial IQ and skill points, giving all starting PCs the same skill point budget -- maybe 10 skill points. Let the characters purchase more skills with XP as they grow.

[Steve Plambeck]

Originally Posted by hcobb

A starting character starts with 12 MPs, whatever their IQ is. These are then allocated for starting talents, spells, and languages as usual.

I see this as pretty viable because, despite the fact low and high IQ figures would have the same amount of these MP, the high IQ character gets rewarded for that IQ by having a substantially larger menu of talents and/or spells to choose from, with those requiring the highest IQ usually the most valuable. But the "intellectual" might squander most of those MP on those attractive IQ 14 spells and talents others don't qualify for, while forgetting to take "Swimming", a mistake they don't realize until they fall into a swimming pool. It's kind of Darwinian.

[Anomylous]

I just came to basically this conclusion over on the "Missile Weapons for Wizards" discussion on the main board, except I called them "Skill Points", as a potential answer to some excellent observations people were making about how Legacy Edition character advancement rules make it unreasonably hard for beginning characters to learn new spells and talents.

My idea was a little closer to the original rules: you start with Skill Points (MPs) equal to your IQ, and then during the course of play you buy more, at whatever XP cost you're currently paying for attribute points. MPs don't count against your attribute point total. The number of talents / spells / languages you know can't be more than your IQ, so you're eventually forced to increase your IQ if you want to learn more stuff. [Edit: this last sentence is something I'm toying with, but not sold on yet.]

Once you're using that system though, it's a pretty simple change to rule that all characters start with the same number of Memory Points regardless of IQ. If I were to do it that way, I'd say everyone gets 10 Memory Points, but also grant starting characters the option to trade 1 attribute point for 2 extra MPs.

[Zimzerveran]

There's a Hexagram article or three in this thread, I'm sure of it. As someone who is a relative newcomer to TFT, I see a lot of derivative XP systems being proposed. Has anybody worked out an advancement system that's not based on the existing ones from the original or Legacy editions?

[TippetsTX]

Yes, but mine relies on altering a few other design elements...

Characters start in the NOVICE tier where...
Attributes cost 100 XP up to 32 points;
200 XP for 33rd/34th points;
300 XP for 35th/36th points;
250 XP for 'simple' Novice talents or spells; and
400 XP for 'complex' Novice talents or spells.

All talents or spells available to starting characters must be selected from the NOVICE tier (though the GM may allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis). These generally align to talents/spells up to IQ 11.

In my game, I have recharacterized all talents and spells as either 'simple' or 'complex' which roughly correspond to items that previously cost 1 or 2 IQ points respectively. And yes, this means that some spells cost more than others.

Then, in the VETERAN tier:
600 XP for 37th/38th points;
800 XP for 39th/40th points;
1000 XP for 41st/42nd points;
900 XP for 'simple' Veteran talents or spells; and
1200 XP for 'complex' Veteran talents or spells.

Talents and spells in the two VETERAN tier categories roughly correspond to talents that cost 2 or 3 IQ points respectively, though TBH, those 'weights' are no longer relevant in my system. Most advanced combat talents are restricted to this tier, for example.

I also have numbers for a LEGENDARY tier which takes characters up to 48 points, but I consider those theoretical at this point since my game is still a ways off from that level of play (and I have some other things to figure out there including the creation of new talents above IQ 14).

[Zimzerveran]

@TippetsTX - I'm totally stealing this.

[Anomylous]

After a long discussion of the topic with my dad and brother (Dad's an OG TFT'er and thus a traditionalist, bro is a hardcore gamer/math nerd and munchkin extraordinaire), we came to the following conclusion on XP cost for Memory Points:

A Memory Point costs whatever your next attribute point would cost, or 500XP - whichever is less.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Anomylous

A Memory Point costs whatever your next attribute point would cost, or 500XP - whichever is less.

I think it's a nice feature if the number of XP needed to assemble a character doesn't depend on the path the character took to get there. I'd try to have a rule that gave you that effect. Your way, if I'm understanding it correctly, won't.

I also think when writing an experience system the philosophy should be: decide how long you want characters to sit at a particular level, multiply by how fast you expect them to acquire experience points at that level, and the result is how much it should cost to go up. I think doing this calculation quickly cures the delusion that experience costs should rise exponentially, a pernicious trope that refuses to die.