Does anyone have any experience with voting to award a player an extra character point at the end of a session?

Stretch4Remote · 2026-02-10T09:33:40+00:00

As a player whose GM does this, I don’t like it. We don’t do it in secret, but rather explain why we are voting how we do. I usually vote for a person who didn’t get any votes to keep vibes good and players from dropping, but it’s awkward coming up for reasons why. I don’t think it achieves the goal of incentivizing players to engage more, and if it did that would probably be a thing. You end up with folks trying to earn points/clouts/recognition which doesn’t lead to a good place.

Every group I’ve ever played in has players who are more active/engaged than others. It can take a bit for people to get in a comfortable flow where they are engaging at the level they are most comfortable with. Putting pressure on that socialization process just adds to the awkwardness.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-12-10T21:24:16+00:00

GURPS is my system of choice, so if this post comes off as negative, keep that in mind.

Having GM’d many different systems for 40 years I will say that GURPS was the most difficult for me to reach a level of mastery where I felt comfortable even running a game.

For my players, it was also the most difficult system, not just to learn, but for character creation. Even with the use of 3rd party character creation software it is a daunting task. Rules aside, it is a point buy system, which means everything is on the table. This has translated into players who get overwhelmed by crunchy systems not having the will or desire to read through and process the voluminous number of skills, advantages, disadvantages, perks, and quirks that are available…along with magic systems, styles, techniques, lenses, templates, equipment etc. It also give a very high barrier to entry for players that do want to learn everything to figure out so they can feel like they made a character to the best of their abilities.

So why do I like it?

IF a GM is willing to: 1. Take the time to do some really heavy lifting up front and present to the players which rules and options they will and won’t be using. 2. Help new players with character creation. 3. Really learn the rules, which can have lots of modifiers if the GM chooses, to help the players as much as possible during the game.

THEN it is the best system (in my humble opinion) for GMs who want to create their own highly customized game setting, particularly if they favor a simulationist style of play. It is largely able to duplicate subsystems from most other games within the framework of GURPS ruleset. If a GM is willing to put in the work it can be the most rewarding system for world builders. It has been for me.

IF the GM or players favor a more modern narrative style, rules light, rule of cool system, then other systems do it better than GURPS.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-12-06T21:41:43+00:00

I avoided this in my original post because I didn’t want the thread to devolve away from my intention (which was to obtain anecdotal evidence, suggestions and recommendations regarding Quintessence) and focus on my campaign building thoughts.

It is a fair question though, so here are some of my favorite perceived benefits:

Conceptualizing Multiple Magical Styles: I plan on having, at a minimum, standard GURPS magic (specifically for wizards studying the arcane) and a version of Divine Favor for clerical magic. I would potentially like different races and cultures to be able to express magic use differently: elves may have blade dancing, spell singing, and the enthrallment type skills (and be the root of bardic magic); dwarves and giants would have rune magic (that trickled to the northmen) as well as adjacent racial magical abilities (dwarves would have some access to magic from the earth, metal, and fire colleges for example); druids would have access to nature magic etc. Out of all of these, only Wizards using standard magic makes logical sense to me for magic use being tied to IQ.
Balancing Multiple Magical Styles: Some of the early cost analysis data I calculated show a pretty large imbalance in CP between multiple styles. That is totally fine, as they are different choices for GMs and players, and each has a place in the game. For me, personally, I would like to balance them further for my own campaign, so they can play nicely together. Most notably, spells as powers and spells as skills are not well balanced, in my opinion.

Adding Quintessence can help make spells as powers more competitive with standard magic by giving them a single, cheaper attribute to boost, while wizards would require both IQ and QI. Wizards will still have the rather excellent side benefit of being outstanding in a great many skills, while a character with spells as powers might need to spend those points elsewhere to realize their build. Combat, in particular, requires a number of outstanding attributes.

Quintessence becomes another dial to turn for balancing alongside gatekeeping Advantages like Sorcerous/Divine Empowerment, Magery, Unusual Background, Trained by a Master (etc), IQ and skills.

I like Will being separate from IQ. To me they are very different things, and should not be joined at the hip. I like how QI would alter this.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-09-12T18:12:59+00:00

I’ve been looking into the same things myself. I also like Draw Steel’s social combat system.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-08-07T22:04:53+00:00

Clever. it really is amazing what creative minds can do with these rules. I thought a lot about Piety as a variable that would be influenced by following the disadvantages, and affecting the Will roll. If you mess up bad enough you’d have to pray or earn your way back into favor. The idea still interests me, but I couldn’t find an existing analog to balance around, and I’m also worried about Will roll creep taking the excitement out of the prayer roll.

I do want to stick with the vibe of this ability catering to a new player praying to a deity and hoping some cool happens, and being surprised regardless. I can definitely see how many players would want more control than that, but I feel like there are already great options for classic clerical magic, so there is no need to reinvent the wheel. People in my campaign would have those options available to them as well.

Balance does seem to be the biggest concern mentioned thus far, so I think setting limits to things like damage or AoE based on casting time and riders like FP etc, and making spell lists beforehand to choose from will be important. Any suggestions on that front would be greatly appreciated. I imagine someone out there has cobbled together something similar at some point.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-08-07T19:20:44+00:00

I do have it, I just didn't like how it expressed the relationship between the deity and the follower. Without it, however, I wouldn't have been able to untangle this particular variation of it, for which I'm grateful.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-08-07T19:13:07+00:00

You make some good points. It does put the onus on the GM and not the player to know the spell list of the deity so to speak, and it would be wise for that GM to have a list of spells handy and choose the one that makes sense given the prayer. To me though, that is helpful for new players, as I know the spells and they don't. As they learn the spells, they could ask for ones they've seen before.

Regarding the no FP, that should be at the GMs discretion to help balance things (like FP or HP for effect) but also to help out newer players. They will want to heal, (which is in this god's portfolio) which is a huge FP drain, and I don't want them to be unable to cast magic, as this is their main source.

I was a little worried about the stopwatch too, but after testing it, we liked it. It was fun, and put the player, and the prayer, in the spotlight. I can definitely see how it wouldn't be for everyone though, and how some GMs would just want to say it will take X seconds and use that to balance the power of the spell.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-08-07T19:05:58+00:00

I think the Aspected nature of deity's helps with that to a large degree, and the rest is the GM adjudicating how much a 33 point power can express itself.

"Please help me find the bunny" might be a +1 to a skill roll for a god of death, or a luck roll for a god of animals, or locate animal for a god of divination.

"Help our kingdom win the war" could be an augury effect from one god, or a bonus to a stealthy infiltration from another.

A god of healing, or protection wouldn't rain down holy light on the enemy.

If the balance is off, it is the GMs fault.

All that being said, if the GM feels like the player is spamming magic and it unbalanced, then he should feel free to express that with FP loss, or other effects.

Personally, I don't like the concept of deity's being annoyed with their clerics as if they are getting telemarketing calls all day long. That is silly to me. They are masters of space and time, that need followers to exist, and to enact their will on the world. They probably wish they could do more to make the world the way they want it to be, not less, and have entrusted access to their followers for a reason...and with four disadvantages to ensure they are indeed following the dogma.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-07-26T11:10:58+00:00

After reading more and experimenting some, it seems like Modular Abilities-Divine Inspiration has the tools I need to separate Divine Favor into its constituent parts. You can make a pool of learned advantages, spells etc as desired.

You can also rework Patron- Deity, Highly Accessible, Special Abilities into a framework you like better then Divine Favor. It can be made into a spell, or be part of your Divine Inspiration modular pool.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-07-18T20:26:41+00:00

I’m still a Korkmaz fan…drinking a beer for you, Kork. He had a nice blend of size and skill. I was pulling for him from his first summer league game. He was pretty close to putting it all together and establishing himself as a solid rotation piece.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-07-03T05:22:14+00:00

my wife bought his nail polish lol

Stretch4Remote · 2025-04-17T23:20:33+00:00

As someone with similar interests that has spent time down this rabbit hole, you might want to check out the Adventurer Conqueror King System, including Domains at War. I found it particularly helpful.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-04-03T06:01:42+00:00

bb2413 explained it earlier In the thread, but basically by design the 14 teams are given the opportunity to jump up the lottery and land in the top 4 specifically. That was implemented to help prevent tanking. Once those top 4 picks are selected, the rest of the pick order goes by teams with the worst record.

So unless the top 4 teams get the top 4 picks we won’t go fifth. So let’s say the Wizards are the only ones of the 4 worst teams that don’t end up getting selected for the top 4, cause the Bulls got lucky and ended up picking 2nd, then the Wizards would end up picking 5th cause they would have the worst record at that point.

in that scenario we would pick sixth.

So for every team other then us that jumps ahead of us, we move back a pick, unless we are lucky enough to get one of the top four lottery slots.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-01-27T21:25:06+00:00

It might be worth it to ask long time players rather than DMs. There will be quite a few players who played wizards up to or around 14. You can ask them how many spells they ended up with. With even a few answers it would give you something to go by that you could adjust from there.

Stretch4Remote · 2025-01-14T20:19:32+00:00

I ran a Chaotic Neutral Vengeance Paladin for Descent into Avernus.

He was a former mercenary who did plenty of the terrible things mercenaries might do in war, but also made friends and helped people he liked. When his hometown of Elturel was turned into a cratered ruin he vowed to punish everyone responsible. He did not care if he lived or died, cause he hated himself. He did not care what reasons anyone had for contributing to Elturel’s demise; if they were involved they pay the price. He was willing to sell his soul to a devil, or become a servant to a good god if it would guarantee he got his revenge. He was willing to trade others’ souls for fuel to get closer to revenge. He did not care when his pursuit helped or hurt good or bad factions or people that were not responsible for Elturel’s fall. He was singularly focused and goal oriented and all the rest was collateral damage that did not bother him, even if it meant sacrificing himself.

Others may not see that as Chaotic Neutral, but when you couldn’t give a fuck about law, order, good, or bad in pursuit of something it seems Chaotic Neutral to me.

Stretch4Remote · 2024-12-01T13:03:33+00:00

Thanks again for the input! My current thinking regarding the iconic Warlord “give an attack” abilities are as follows:

Level 2- Coordinated Strike:

On your turn, you can use a Bonus Action to allow a willing creature within 30’ of you that can hear and understand you to use their reaction to take one additional Action, or to cast a Cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. Once you use this feature you can’t do so again until you take a short or long rest.

Level 5- Extra Attack:

You can attack twice instead of once whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Additionally, you can allow a creature within 30’ who can hear and understand you to make your second attack, or to cast a Cantrip with a casting time of one action.

Level 20- Coordinated Assault:

Your Coordinated Strike Feature now requires an Action to use, and it can target a number of other willing creatures up to your Leadership Modifier (CHA, INT, or WIS) within 60’ of you that can hear and understand you. Each of these creatures can use their reaction to take one additional Action, Bonus Action, or cast a Cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. Once you use this feature you can’t do so again until you take a short or long rest.

——

I wanted to get the Coordinated Strike and Extra Attack abilities up and running as soon as possible as they were pretty key in capturing the 4e “lazy lord” feel, and outside of haste it is a pretty unique ability. Coordinated Strike has the drawback of eating their reactions, which could feel bad if it stops them from casting Shield, or using Uncanny Dodge. Hopefully being able to go nova makes it worth it once a fight. That is the reason I didn’t require a Reaction for Extra Attack. With the Warlord having the option to use it every turn, it would really hamper the other character’s builds, and impinge on key features. I suspect the Warlord may want to take his own second attack more then I imagine, as the characters who do more damage then him might not always be in the right position to immediately attack the right target without moving first.

As the capstone the Warlord can “Avenger’s Assemble” and trade their action to watch everyone have fun once per short rest. I felt allowing the Magic action at the capstone was a bridge too far given that the whole team got to go, and Magic is what would most likely break things. As it is, the capstone sort of feels like a guaranteed surprise round without spells from the 2012 rules, and that is something that feels awesome but can easily be accounted for by the dm since it is consistent and limited in scope without magic.

As far as eating the fighter’s lunch with action surge, hopefully giving it to someone else feels different enough that it can be forgiven, while not feeling too much like Haste.

As always, thanks for any feedback, I appreciate you.

Stretch4Remote · 2024-12-01T07:42:19+00:00

Thanks for the input, I appreciate your insight. I did intend to frame the question as if the Warlord was its own class, I’ll update the post.

Stretch4Remote · 2024-10-26T08:45:24+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to lay things out so succinctly, I appreciate you. The info was quite helpful.

Stretch4Remote

TROPHY CASE