A PC who does not participate in a session may take part in a Solo Adventure or Heist. The player must describe what the character is attempting to do (it should not involve permanent consequences to world, those are for actually on scree adventures). Then roll on following Table
3d6 Roll Result
3-5 0xp, lose carried possessions, imprisoned by enemies
6-8 0xp, lose 100gp
9-11 1xp, gain 200gp
12-15 2xp, 500gp
16-18 2xp, 1000gp minor magic item
- If we used this, then we shouldn't do XP transfer from character to character
- This is just first draft, if you have adjustments please chime in
- I do think it should be impossible to get more than 2 xp this way
- there should definitely be serious risk in this option
I like this! I have a few suggestions to add.
ReplyDeleteI think there should only be more reward by taking on additional risk. For example, maybe there is only the chance of winning XP if you take the risk of losing ALL possessions rather than losing a single random possession?
Let's consider other consequences as well. Perhaps the PC is marked for revenge by one of the factions in Newport such as the Krondor Trade Company, Fishy Joe's, Sultan's Palace, The Screamers, or something even more general such as "gnomes."
I believe that successes should be narrated by the GM with the help of the player, while failures should be narrated by the player with the help of the GM. These narrations should appear in the game log.
>>If we used this, then we shouldn't do XP transfer from character to character
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, XP shouldn't be something any PC can win "offstage." It shouldn't even be an option for down time hijinks. I would rather expand the XP a PC can win in-game to share with "offstage" PCs rather than give this option.
I disagree strongly. I'd much rather see Character #2 potentially get XP for a roll that entails a risk but is offstage than to see Character #1 give XP to Character #2. I think the character who undergoes risk should get the reward.
Delete>>I'd much rather see Character #2 potentially get XP for a roll that entails a risk but is offstage than to see Character #1 give XP to Character #2.
DeleteAt the risk of sounding incredibly snarky, why bother having adventures, then? I can get XP just sending my PCs on a solo adventure offstage - potentially more than adventuring.
All of our characters are adventurers by trade. We focus on 1 character at a time. What would the other two be doing but having adventures. We just use a die roll to model those off stage adventures.
DeleteIt certainly makes more sense than taking XP from the active character and giving it to a non-active character because, reasons?
>> What would the other two be doing but having adventures.
DeleteExactly! I suppose I would just prefer that we incentivize types of play we want in game to model those off stage adventures rather than do it with an arbitrary dice roll.
>>It certainly makes more sense than taking XP from the active character and giving it to a non-active character because, reasons?
Perhaps the disconnect is that I feel that the PLAYER should get the XP rather than the CHARACTER. It is nonsensical that a PC gets more proficient at fighting by bringing home over 500 GP of treasure from the wilderness. That rule gives PLAYERS incentive for the PCs to explore and adventure.
>>there should definitely be serious risk in this option
ReplyDeleteI think that perhaps the only way to win a magic item in "offstage" hijinks should be to potentially risk the life of the PC. Alternately, a player could risk the PC being captured or mutilated instead if death is too much.
I was only thinking the most basic of items like healing potions.
Delete