Would This Houserule Bother You: Unusual Backgrounds attached to high ability scores

[muduri]

I'll put in an endorsement for the UB premise. We've just started implementing a "double cost to increase attributes over 15" rule in a Fantasy game I'm GMing, and the characters have since felt more well-rounded as they advance above 200 points - of course still totally possible to focus on becoming a combat monster / apocalyptic spellcaster, but seems to have encouraged more balance of narrative builds with fighting power.

Will have to consider making these points not just sunk but instead spendable on Reputation, Social Status etc. as well!

[Pragmatic]

I'm not sure if it's been brought up yet, but have you considered the "buckets of points" rules? (Basically, characters start with their points allotted to different "buckets"--attributes, social advantages, skills, etc.) I think one of the rules was that it was possible to move between buckets, but there was a non-equal exchange rate.

You could even give out points from game play into the different buckets.

[RGTraynor]

In a low-powered, gritty campaign, I just don't see the need. However useful IQ is, if you're starting players in the 125-150 point range -- and more than that, you don't have a "low-powered" campaign -- the points just aren't there for 15+.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

In a low-powered, gritty campaign, I just don't see the need. However useful IQ is, if you're starting players in the 125-150 point range -- and more than that, you don't have a "low-powered" campaign -- the points just aren't there for 15+.

I would suggest, even in a fairly low-powered game, it's worth considering how long the game is likely to run, and where the point totals might end up. Sure, in a game starting with 50-100 points a cap of even 15 might seem unnecessary, even pointless, but if the game runs for over a decade of weekly sessions some sort of caps or other constraints on how points are spent could well be useful. Either that or some idea of where you'd take the campaign as the power level rises.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Rupert

I would suggest, even in a fairly low-powered game, it's worth considering how long the game is likely to run, and where the point totals might end up.

I'd phrase that as "Allow for the game running a long time."

The campaign I mentioned above started with 150 point characters plus a 75-point bucket for supernatural abilities, and is now at around 700 points, after about 155 monthly sessions. My Infinite Cabal campaign started at 300 points, and reached about 800 points in about 170 fortnightly sessions. I don't think we had any real idea of how long either campaign would last at their starting points, or the directions in which they'd develop.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by johndallman

I'd phrase that as "Allow for the game running a long time."

The campaign I mentioned above started with 150 point characters plus a 75-point bucket for supernatural abilities, and is now at around 700 points, after about 155 monthly sessions. My Infinite Cabal campaign started at 300 points, and reached about 800 points in about 170 fortnightly sessions. I don't think we had any real idea of how long either campaign would last at their starting points, or the directions in which they'd develop.

As I noted earlier, my current game has run for a long time, and started at 150 points (I think), and the remaining original characters are over 1200 points. More recent ones range from 800 to 1000 points, as do some NPCs.

There are a number of things I'd have done differently in the early years had I known that same campaign with the same characters would still be going a decade later.

[bocephus]

Im amazed by the amount of points that are given out. Based on the numbers from the last few that's 3-5 points per session. Thats crazy.

I think I give maybe 1-2 per session (3-5 hours) my longest game that's currently active right now is coming up on session 64 and a game I'm playing in now I think we are in session 23 and have received a total of ~14 points each incl some special RP points that have been 1-3 per player

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by bocephus

Im amazed by the amount of points that are given out. Based on the numbers from the last few that's 3-5 points per session. Thats crazy.

I think I give maybe 1-2 per session (3-5 hours) my longest game that's currently active right now is coming up on session 64 and a game I'm playing in now I think we are in session 23 and have received a total of ~14 points each incl some special RP points that have been 1-3 per player

Actually, with over 550 sessions for the longest running characters, and about 1100 points improvements, that's around two points per session.

I used to give out more, to match the amount recommended in Campaigns (~3/session, assuming reasonable role-play, etc.), but some years ago switched to 3/session if the character's point value was <400, 2/session if 400-800, and 1/session if 800+, plus the odd point here and there in rep, contacts, etc. gained directly from in-game events, and a few more from skills trained in downtime.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by bocephus

Im amazed by the amount of points that are given out. Based on the numbers from the last few that's 3-5 points per session. Thats crazy.

My average is 3 points a session. I give out 2 points if nothing much happened; I may give 4 points for impressive roleplaying or really dramatic events.

But my campaigns don't run as long. I'm just coming to the end of Tapestry, which started in July 2014 and has been played in monthly or bimonthly sessions—so less than 100 total sessions. The player characters who were there at the start are worth around 300 points now.

[Varyon]

While this isn't something I'd be inclined to do, in general I don't have an issue with a GM opting to increase the cost of a trait (via Unusual Background) or give it prerequisites in order to better match with the campaign he/she wants to run. I will say that (aside from cases where it's a balance issue - Flight is arguably worth more in a setting full of open fields where OpFor lacks projectile technology more advanced than throwing a rock, for example) the traits that get a UB surcharge should be ones the GM is willing for characters to have, but would prefer them not to have. If you want skilled martial artists to have Trained by a Master, it doesn't matter that it's a rare trait in your setting, it should just be available at normal cost. UB is an inconvenience charge. At least, that's the way I look at it.