Achievement-based advancement

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:22 am

A thought struck me recently. What if, instead of levels or skill points, you advanced in a game by completing a certain achievement, which came with its own, unique reward? For example, defeating an ogre for the first time grants you +1 BAB. It'd be a nice way to run an E6 sort of game without removing any kind of advancement.

The biggest potential problem with this is that, unlike the video games that inspired it, you can't be expected to be running the exact same adventure. So, your players might really want to fight an ogre to get the +1 BAB but the DM doesn't particularly want to run an ogre adventure.

Another potential problem is that I just thought of this ten minutes ago and then decided to write it down as a lark, so it's probably filled with holes I'd have thought of myself if I wasn't so impatient and lazy.

K · Post by K » Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:02 am

I've thought about this. It is more fun because it make organic characters, but the problem is that you need to have a game that supports organic characters.

I mean, you can't be a fighter in DnD and not get BAB. You can't be a spellcaster and get random spells because 75-90% of the spells are worthless.

Under the right kind of game, it could work. You'd first need sideways advancement. Then you'd probably need each monster to grant several choices so different characters could get appropriate things.

The biggest problem is that you'd end of murdering everything and sometimes murder things you didn't need t murder.

Hey, it's an angel.... kill it for the +2 Wisdom!

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:12 am

It's going to color player choices with what they want to gain, instead of what they want to do. Even if you try to fix K's proposed problem (killing everything for the bonuses) by adding alternative win conditions (talking the angel into doing something for you), they're going to make decisions based on what bonuses that win condition gives and how capable they are of fulfilling that win condition.

In the end, instead of people approaching a situation with the idea 'what would my character do' or 'what advances the plot the best?' you get 'what bonuses do I want off this thing, and how can I best get them?'

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:53 am

Scion does something like this, in line with myth, a lot of the Titanspawn have trophies that do various stuff.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:59 am

DSMatticus wrote:It's going to color player choices with what they want to gain, instead of what they want to do. Even if you try to fix K's proposed problem (killing everything for the bonuses) by adding alternative win conditions (talking the angel into doing something for you), they're going to make decisions based on what bonuses that win condition gives and how capable they are of fulfilling that win condition.

In the end, instead of people approaching a situation with the idea 'what would my character do' or 'what advances the plot the best?' you get 'what bonuses do I want off this thing, and how can I best get them?'

Unless the reward for every win condition is the exact same thing (or the exact same set of options).

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:44 am

Chamomile wrote:Unless the reward for every win condition is the exact same thing (or the exact same set of options).

That just simplifies the questions they ask to, 'how can I best get them?', them being the bonuses.

The only way to make that work is to broaden the win condition to include any possible thing the character could do in the situation. I.e., they get the bonuses for interacting with the creature in any way. If you provide the bonuses only for completing the challenge in certain ways, they will want to limit themself to those ways.

At which point, it becomes sort of meaningless. Basically, everything the DM plops down corresponds to some sort of character growth, and the DM is deciding your character advancement by making things exist.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:20 pm

you could do this if you did it in a published adventure I'd imagine

Red_Rob · Post by **Red_Rob** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:52 pm

How is a published adventure any different to any other adventure? I can write down my plans for the next session if I want to.

This would probably work best if the bonuses worked kind of like magic items are supposed to work in D&D, i.e. you only get them from important enemies, and they provide additional options rather than straight up power boosts.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:57 pm

because writing out a published adventure dictates exactly what is going to happen. if you write "+1 BAB from ogres" and "fire resistance 5 from dragons" then the players are going to make a checklist of enemies they want to fight to get certain bonuses. with a published adventure, you can create a path for the PCs to follow to advance

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:30 pm

It's going to color player choices with what they want to gain, instead of what they want to do.

I've run into this exact problem with RPGA games. At one point, in Living Greyhawk, several organizations were introduced that the player could gain favor with by accomplishing certain tasks. And this provided access to feats/items that were normally restricted.

However, for me, it was just annoying. The reason? The organization that fit my character's personality and IC goals better gave benefits that were nearly useless to me. The organization whose benefits were actually good was a pretty lousy fit from an IC standpoint. So it was kind of lose-lose.

I've heard that the PFS is doing something similar to this - I'm curious whether it runs into the same issues. Although not personally, as I'm pretty much burnt out on organized play.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:29 pm

I tried RPGA once. Never again.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:50 pm

Ice9 wrote:
However, for me, it was just annoying. The reason? The organization that fit my character's personality and IC goals better gave benefits that were nearly useless to me. The organization whose benefits were actually good was a pretty lousy fit from an IC standpoint. So it was kind of lose-lose.

Seems like a problem of poor implementation, to me. Each organization should potentially offer identical or very similar options. Build shouldn't dictate IC actions like that.

This would probably work best if the bonuses worked kind of like magic items are supposed to work in D&D, i.e. you only get them from important enemies, and they provide additional options rather than straight up power boosts.

Straight-up power boosts are fun to get and easy to write, though. Finding a way to make them work in a theoretical system will make writing the achievements available for that system much easier.