I was going to post this into my Middle-Earth conversion thread, but then I figured it was something that might be interesting to talk about more generally.

FATE POINTS

In our Pendragon campaign, we have been using unspent Glory Bonus Points (GBP, in our campaign, you could save them rather than spend them right away) as Fate Points: the use of a GPB gave you a success and a failure to the opponent if it was an opposed roll, usually to countering opponent's critical or your own fumbles either at battlefield or in court. It has worked OKish in keeping the characters alive vs. bad-luck criticals, but at the same time, it is clear that it has 'stunted' the characters a bit, as the GBPs are hoarded to forestall a character death or even taking a major wound. This has resulted in characters with 10 000+ Glory with their best skill about 20, with skills above 20 very rare. It doesn't really let them become legends that their Glory would imply that they are.

Thus, an alternative I have been thinking about is that I would give Fate Points, separate from GBP, which would allow a reroll (not an auto success like with GBPs before) on any dice roll directly acting on the character. So enemy hitting/defending against him for instance, and of course his own rolls. I'd also allow it to be used when a healer is patching him up. But not when the leader is making battle plans and fumbles. Sure, that will lead into increased danger, but it is not, right there and then, acting on the character.

So how do you gain the Fate Points? Well, at first I was thinking to tie them to Glory, but then I reconsidered. After all, not all character types are as 'Glory hungry', and Glory already gives a big big benefit. So now I am thinking more like +1 Fate Point per completed Major Adventure. That should keep them rare enough, but still common enough that the players can gain some more of them to use, and likely from adventures where they have already used the previous one, too.

Major Adventures would be the ones which are part of the big story of the campaign and have major impact. As an example, in GPC, I'd say that some of the Major Adventures (off the top of my head) would be:

1. Capture of King Octa
2. Killing of Duke Gorlois
3. Infamous Feast and dealing with its aftermath at the start of Anarchy (I had Salisbury facing a coup attempt by the seneschal followed by an invasion by Syagrius & his mercenaries, so yeah, the PKs definitely would have earned a Fate Point for preserving Salisbury through all that.)
4. The Death of King Nanteleod (if the PKs are participating in it on the enemy side, at least)
5. Arthur drawing the Sword from the Stone. (Not something the PKs have direct hand in, but giving them a fate point for this would nicely underscore the renewal of hope and optimism.)
6. Battle of Terrabil (maybe)
7. Adventure of the Grey Knight
8. Battle of Badon Hill
9. The Cambrian War: Builth mini-campaign
10. Battle of Autun (maybe)
11. Saving Arthur from Camille (if they do)
12. The Heart Blade mini-campaign
13. Adventure of the Spectre King
14. Destroying King Mark's Infernal Engine
15. Grail Quest (if you get to see the Grail during it, at least)
16. Fighting for/against Lancelot when he rescues Guinever from the pyre.


For my Middle-Earth campaign, it is slightly easier for me, since I can design the major adventures so that the PCs do play a major part in solving the adventure and hence are deserving of those Fate Points (and Glory, of course).

Anyway, any thoughts from the esteemed members of the Forum? Good/bad idea, good/poor execution?


Some other alternatives for FP gain I considered but felt the above one was a better idea:
1) One FP (reroll) per session, but they cannot be hoarded (use it or lose it). This would give the PCs some immunity vs. 'bad luck', but would keep major opponents still dangerous, since those rarely need criticals in order to harm the PCs. Also a string of bad luck could still take a character out. Advantage of this is that it would reduce bookkeeping, and reduce the 'random orc puts an arrow into your eye, you are dead' -occurrences, even though those do happen in the Lore. The big downside of this is that it is possibly way too common: it would pretty much cancel out Major Wounds, since it is quite rare, at least in our games, that there are more than one Major Wound possibility per knight in a battle. If the Fate Point is use it or lose it, and you know you will get a new one at the start of the next session, best to use it and avoid that Major Wound. However, if the FPs are rarer, like in the main suggestion, then you might weigh the pros and cons and decide to take the major wound so that you can avoid a mortal wound in some later adventure.
2) Karma: The Player can take a Bad Karma counter in order to get a reroll, but those Bad Karma counters need to be cashed back by the GM in the form of a GM called reroll before more can be gained. I am not too fond of this, since it feels adversial and would require me to keep notes on how many bad karma counters each Player has. But I figure I'll toss the idea out here to sink or swim. Maybe someone has used something similar and that it has worked fine.

I'd also be very interested to hear if you have used something similar in your campaigns (not just KAP) and how it has worked out?

The warhammer 40k franchise (Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, etc) uses fate points as a way to preserve character death.
How we used them in those systems:
Using Fate points
- Reroll one die roll per fate point per session. This gives to the option to reroll a bad result and is usually used to prevent being hit (you roll an evasion (dodge or parry) roll when hit. With heavy hitting enemies you do want to make these rolls). In the systems you cannot reroll a succesful roll, but the combat is a to hit roll that can be countered by a evasion roll.
- When the die result says you are dead you can burn a fate point (and lose it). The result is then that while you were hit hard (and end up with no hitpoints left) , but you will not die.

You start the game with 2, 3 or 4 fate points depending on character class/background and lucky roll on a table. During the game you can gain fate points when you complete a heroic adventure (Usually this is a storyline of adventures culminating in saving a world, secotr or the universe).

In our games we began to separate the reroll from the burning option and just gave everyone equal number of fate points. That reduced the envy between players, although I have seen that the burning of fate points is usually uneven among the characters as some are because of unlucky rolls or because they are the characters that engage the enemy more often than other PCs who are more in a supporting role.

In most games the Fate points were not changed much. Only rarely one fate point was burned. That usually happened during the final engagements with the enemy and at the climax of the adventure. Usually the gaining of a fate point also was rare, and that balanced out the rarity of the burning of the fate points.
I did not feel that the fate points had a big effect on the game. The rerolls made the PCs a bit more heroic, although you usually had used them before the big enemy arrived. For players it always a choice either to use it now on this bad roll or wait untill you engage with a bigger enemy later (if it happens at all).

Would I use Fate points in KAP?
The biggest gain of fate points is survivability and I am not sure if I want that in a Pendragon game. I like it that Pendragon is a lethal game. Each engagement there is a true sense of dread that your character will not survive. Combats that ended in the death of one or more PKs seems to resound in the game. The surviving PKs may think back on it and you can play all sorts of character development around it. Passions like hate become routed in real experience. that is something I like about the game.
Of course when there is one PK death per session you get a whole different game. So there must be a balance. Death of a PK must be real and happen, but not too often that attachment to a character cannot be made as this may result into a more slapstick kind of game. In my GPC game we now only had 1 PK death (we are at 508). There have been some close calls also, but these were lucky enough to get enough first aid to prevent death.

So, I've actually adopted a similar system. It came from when my player wanted to go on a solo to find his missing sister; I adapted a table from the Madness Solo table from the GPC, and he rolled the result that stated 1d3 prophecies. At the time I didn't feel like coming up with any prophecies, so just said write it down and we'll deal with it later. Later on, he Fumbled a roll against his Saxon nemesis, and I ruled he could use a Prophecy for a re-roll, going off the logic that prophecies don't ever make sense until right when they're happening anyways. I allow them to re-roll anything as well, not just your own roll, the player used one to prevent his wife from dying in childbirth once, for instance, and he also uses them to make an enemy re-roll a hit or something. But I only award them on a random chance that hardly ever happens, although do to some oddly lucky rolls, he managed to accumulate 8 of them, with 3 left at this point.

Would I use Fate points in KAP?
The biggest gain of fate points is survivability and I am not sure if I want that in a Pendragon game. I like it that Pendragon is a lethal game. Each engagement there is a true sense of dread that your character will not survive. Combats that ended in the death of one or more PKs seems to resound in the game. The surviving PKs may think back on it and you can play all sorts of character development around it. Passions like hate become routed in real experience. that is something I like about the game.
Of course when there is one PK death per session you get a whole different game. So there must be a balance. Death of a PK must be real and happen, but not too often that attachment to a character cannot be made as this may result into a more slapstick kind of game. In my GPC game we now only had 1 PK death (we are at 508). There have been some close calls also, but these were lucky enough to get enough first aid to prevent death.

I do like that there is a chance of death in KAP combat. However, since KAP is supposed to be generational, the deaths cannot be happening all the time, since then there is no attachment to the character, like you said. I must say that you have gotten pretty lucky in your game if you have had only 1 PK death in 23 game years, but then again, maybe I play too rough with my players, have too many fights -> more criticals. But still, I am quite surprised by that result. We use the glory points as fate points, like I said, and still a character bites the dust now and again due to a critical hit. Granted, many of the players spend Glory Points to avoid a Major Wound impacting on their character's SIZ or STR, in order to maintain their 6d6 damage.

For the Middle-Earth campaign I am envisioning, I expect Major Wounds to be rarer, by and large, as the opponents will mostly be low-damage orcs and the PCs should have high CON as Numenoreans. Deaths would likely be rare, too for the same reason (low base damage). So that should help in keeping the characters alive and well enough to start their families and so forth. The Fate Points gained now and again can be hoarded to save them from a critical hit from a troll or something. The chance of death is still there, but at least it will be somewhat rarer, and less likely to be an 'accident'.

I do like that there is a chance of death in KAP combat. However, since KAP is supposed to be generational, the deaths cannot be happening all the time, since then there is no attachment to the character, like you said. I must say that you have gotten pretty lucky in your game if you have had only 1 PK death in 23 game years, but then again, maybe I play too rough with my players, have too many fights -> more criticals. But still, I am quite surprised by that result. We use the glory points as fate points, like I said, and still a character bites the dust now and again due to a critical hit. Granted, many of the players spend Glory Points to avoid a Major Wound impacting on their character's SIZ or STR, in order to maintain their 6d6 damage.

I may be to friendly. Although they tend to roll the criticals, while I am not. Even if I give them opponents that are equal to them. The PK that died, died from a critical beserker axe. Also the PKs are the council that rules Salsisbury, so a fair amount of time is just roleplay and not much combat.

I let my player's convert a Glory Bonus Point to a "Plot Point. You can spend the points to:



Automatically succeed normally with a skill
Minimize damage done to you from a single blow with a weapon. The PK must declare that he is spending a Plot Point before damage is rolled. Alternatively, the PK can spend two Plot Point AFTER the damage is rolled.
Automatically receive a critical success with First Aid for maximum Hit Points (6)
Draw a plot card (I use Paizo's Plot Twist cards — which they can't always apply right away, but they can save it until it comes in handy).


I also start new knights with three of these.


Best,


T.

I may be to friendly. Although they tend to roll the criticals, while I am not. Even if I give them opponents that are equal to them. The PK that died, died from a critical beserker axe. Also the PKs are the council that rules Salsisbury, so a fair amount of time is just roleplay and not much combat.

The last one might be it. We have quite a lot of combat, often 2-4 fights per year (and multiple sessions per year), and some of those are against 'similar tier' opponents, so knights or heorthgeneats or some monsters. Given that there are 5 PKs (+ player lady healer), the chance that someone gets criticalled against at some point becomes higher. I don't recall if you were sticking to 1 session per year rule of thumb, but if that is the case, we might have the same number of fights in a couple of years than you have in a decade, which naturally would explain a lot of the 'discrepancy' even if the chance to die per fight stays the same.

I am noticing that the killers tend to be the high skill, high damage opponents like knights lance-charging, or when a PK gets ganged up on, since then he often loses the benefit of a shield and may suffer two big wounds even without criticals. This may bring him to minus hit points quite easily.


I let my player's convert a Glory Bonus Point to a "Plot Point.

Has it been happening a lot in your game, Taliesin? In ours, players were hoarding the 'Plot Points' obsessively, and apart from a few cases of either recovering SIZ (didn't have the point ready to avoid the major wound yet) or raising skills above 20, they were very seldom used for anything else.

Nope, they've been regularly converting GBPs to PPs, and using them as intended — making absolutely critical rolls to the story.


T.

Nope, they've been regularly converting GBPs to PPs, and using them as intended — making absolutely critical rolls to the story.


That was kind of my point [I think]:
In our campaign, the players were using GBPs to avoid being hit by criticals, or allowing them to succeed when they absolutely needed to succeed.
What they have not done (that much) is to use GBPs as they would be used in normal KAP, to increase their stats and skills (in particular, past 20, which is the highest you can get to from yearly training). Which means that in particular their skills feel low in comparison to their Glory total: About 10 000 Glory and still no skills above 20 was the norm, whereas the Extraordinary Knight with 8000+ Glory has Sword 24, if I recall correctly, in the writeup in one of the Appendices.

It is not a HUGE problem, since I am a bit of a skill minimizer myself, saving skills of 20+ to pretty much famous, named opponents. Most of our Round Table had skills closer to 20 than 25. Only the Big Names had skills of 25+, and I think I put Lancelot at Skill 30 (without passions, of course).

However, in the context of the Middle-Earth campaign I am thinking, I WANT the PCs have skills 20+, especially the first generation, since they will be the heroes of old. Which is why i was thinking of divorcing the GBPs and the Fate (or Plot) Points. This would save the GBPs to boosting the characters, as intended, whilst the Fate Points would, hopefully, keep them alive long enough to become legendary.

I have a simpler system of "Fate Points".

ONCE each age, a PK can ask for a "do over" - it might be on a fumble, or on a hit that kills them, or on a "sure thing crit - and they roll a 1 and don't crit". The key is, ONCE per age.

They usually use it when they are about to die, but they have also used it on a diplomatic fumble that would have led to VERY BAD THINGS (tm - grin).

Each age? You mean per generation? Or per year?

Each age? You mean per generation? Or per year? Each "Age" - Uther, Anarchy, Boy King, Conquest, etc etc.
Those who have not used them are allowed to carry up to 1 over, so a PK can have a maximum of 2 "Hand of Fate" points.
Most are unable to save them up.
OH - also it is no more than 1 per *player* - so if PK uses his Hand of Fate in the Uther Age and dies later in the same Uther Age, his heir does not suddenly have a Hand of Fate that can be used again in the Uther Age.

Ah, Period. That makes sense. It is about 1 point per decade, more or less. That might work quite nicely in GPC.

I hand out reroll chips for good and inclusive roleplay which the players can use to reroll and one die or make me reroll any one die by cashing it it. I also allow players to hand each other chips to encourage RP, which may allow a player to have more than one chip. I have a few limitations to keep this from being abused:
1) I don't hand out chips if the player already has one or more
2) Players can't give each other chips during combat or as they are rolling
3) The players can only reroll dice that are related to their characters (so either their own die or a die of an opponent attacking them for example)
4) I maintain a GM veto if the players try to abuse this

If the chips are unused after the winter phase, they net a little extra glory for them. This balances out the otherwise fairly lethal campaign I run.

I currently run a play-by-post and do all of the rolling myself, and most of it secretly. I've been thinking of trying something similar, but haven't yet tried it out.

Now, the game years that I run are single threads, all lumped together into one continuous stream over the course of several weeks. We're still in 485 right now, 130+ posts over a month of play so far, and they're still squires ON THE WAY to Imber to kill that pesky bear so they can be knighted.

What I'm thinking of is giving out 1 fortune point, per player, per game year. They can use this to

A) Guarantee 1 action as a critical success. This must be an action, it cannot be a passion or a trait (critical passion going into a battle, at will, every year would be fecking ridiculous). This can be used as a designated 'moment of cool' for story purposes, or used for that 1-in-a-million shot that almost never works in real life but does in tales of high adventure. This must be PROACTIVELY declared and spent, it cannot be used to amplify an action that has already been rolled for.

B) Reduce the damage of 1 enemy strike by half. This can be used retroactively, and I imagine it will mostly be used to mitigate criticals.


These points do NOT roll over from year to year, and have no other application.