Limits on Destiny Point use?

[Zorbeltuss]

Taking drawbacks should be a player option, he can always grab one or two, sure, and he'd be getting DP for it.

Imposing drawbacks is a double penalty, first he must burn a DP to avoid death, then he must also take a drawback that usually would have given him a DP. Which amounts to two DP's for something the book lists that only requires one.

[BeardedDork]

For the record I'd have done it pretty much the way you did. That best reflects what we see in the ASIF books, nobody escapes scott-free. This mechanic to me simulates what happened to Catelyn very well. Destiny points are not so huge that a character should escape all things without penalty.

[DaimosofRedstone]

Catherine is not DP-use.
Thats story-arc.
I will not even wade into the how and why, because i think it is obvious, but let me get back to the rules:
As write, and as i presume, intended DPs free the Players partly from the tyranny of the dice to tell a better story.
They also free them from the supremacy of the GM. A player can WITHOUT the GMs placet spend or burn DPs to alter the story in import ways (If a NPC tries to kill you by throwing you out of a window you could, for example, brun a DP to 'alter a major detail' and add a refuse heap under that window. Your character will stink but will be very much alive).
This also takes away a large part of the GMs usual ability to 'mold' characters to fit his story without the ascent of the players.
In the example we had, the player could have burned a DP to change the scene in a way enabling him to survive or escape (he could have burned one to stated that he kept his chainmail under his doublet for example) on his own terms.
I find it problematic in the extreme if a player gets punished (and a flaw where he himself could have avoided that flaw is a punishment) if he trusts the GM with is character.

[Cap_T]

Taking drawbacks should be a player option, he can always grab one or two, sure, and he'd be getting DP for it.

That’s not entirely correct. Taking a drawback is not only a players option it may also be imposed on you as a result of a defeat. When it is imposed on you that way, you don’t get the DP.

Catherine is not DP-use.
Thats story-arc.
I will not even wade into the how and why, because i think it is obvious, but let me get back to the rules:
As write, and as i presume, intended DPs free the Players partly from the tyranny of the dice to tell a better story.
They also free them from the supremacy of the GM. A player can WITHOUT the GMs placet spend or burn DPs to alter the story in import ways (If a NPC tries to kill you by throwing you out of a window you could, for example, brun a DP to 'alter a major detail' and add a refuse heap under that window. Your character will stink but will be very much alive).
This also takes away a large part of the GMs usual ability to 'mold' characters to fit his story without the ascent of the players.
In the example we had, the player could have burned a DP to change the scene in a way enabling him to survive or escape (he could have burned one to stated that he kept his chainmail under his doublet for example) on his own terms.
I find it problematic in the extreme if a player gets punished (and a flaw where he himself could have avoided that flaw is a punishment) if he trusts the GM with is character.

The wording around avoiding death is pretty clear and only states that your character is presumed dead and removed from the game until Narrator deems it a appropriated for you return. That to me is where the influence of this DP ends. It does not turn defeat into victory. It is just absolutely amazing that you are where obviously dead and now you are alive.

Further you are never free from the supreme GM here either. The GM decides when your character returns. If he decides it’s only appropriate to return on the last hour of the last session then the player has to live with that.

For me It comes down to the situation that the PC was supposed to have died. In the case of the being pushed out of the window and landing in a dung heap then I won’t apply any penalties. If however there is no dung heap and the PC is seen bouncing off the ground then he is going to return with a few issues.

Now if the player went with the “add a significant detail to the game” use of Burning a DP then I would said sure you can have your chainmail on. That does not mean the character is presumed dead. It may give him a better chance to survive the initial attack.

[Canarr]

Sorry for the thread Necromancy, but I found this discussion interesting and wanted to add my two cents.

The DP - the part where they allow the player to actively influence the story, not just reroll some dice - is a new game aspect for me. Normally, I play mostly D&D or Shadowrun, where such options don't exist - or, at least, not in this magnitude.

Now, what's confusing me: spending or burning a DP can always be overridden by another character spending or burning a DP to counter that, correct? Meaning, in a case of NC vs. PC, as long as the NC still has a DP left, the GM can always simply forbid the player from using their DP, correct? So, in the end, it still boils down to whether or not the GM wants to allow the player to save his character (in a deadly situation) - correct? For if not, he can just declare that his NC spent the DP to block the action; and it's not like the GM can't just give the NC a new DP afterwards - possibly as a reward for dispatching a threat to him (in the form of the PC).

Also, it's pretty much a matter of the game you want to play; to me, at least. Westeros is a dark and dangerous place, filled with intrigue, deception, betrayal... play the game of thrones, win or die, right? Now, if any player could just spend a DP to basically counter anything really bad that the world (the GM) could do to his character, then where's the darkness and the danger? "Ah, my arch-enemy; you may *think* you have cornered me in this room; but you do not know that behind this tapestry is a secret door! HAHA!" (Burn DP, escape). Or, alternatively, the NC enemy knew of the secret door and put the Mountain behind it (burn DP, counter).

And yes, I get that burning a DP is, in theory, a major sacrifice - but as long as you're supposed to get a new one for every completed story, it really isn't; you can easily afford to burn one to avoid one major danger/defeat per story, and still not lose anything. Especially if you don't limit yourself to altering your fate after a defeat, but think of a solution that actually avoids the defeat - the secret door to escape, the manure cart below the window... those are available for the same DP you'd otherwise spend to avoid death upon defeat, and without the restrictions placed on reentering the story afterwards.

Disclaimer: My opinions should be taken with a grain of salt, since I have yet to actually *play* the game.

[Tedric]

I must agree with this too and, actually, I don't really get the difference between "spending" or "burning" a DP as you receive a new one at the end of a story.

Now, if some NC have Destiny Points, this is not everyone's case. I think the GM must give DP only to important NC..not to any common guard or wench.

[Canarr]

Now, if some NC have Destiny Points, this is not everyone's case. I think the GM must give DP only to important NC..not to any common guard or wench.

Of course. But a common guard or wench is not very likely to be orchestrating a major defeat of the PCs. Any serious antagonist of the PCs would be a Primary NC, and thus, have DP. At least, that's how I understand it.

[uncleho]

Sorry for the thread Necromancy, but I found this discussion interesting and wanted to add my two cents.

The DP - the part where they allow the player to actively influence the story, not just reroll some dice - is a new game aspect for me. Normally, I play mostly D&D or Shadowrun, where such options don't exist - or, at least, not in this magnitude.

Now, what's confusing me: spending or burning a DP can always be overridden by another character spending or burning a DP to counter that, correct? Meaning, in a case of NC vs. PC, as long as the NC still has a DP left, the GM can always simply forbid the player from using their DP, correct? So, in the end, it still boils down to whether or not the GM wants to allow the player to save his character (in a deadly situation) - correct? For if not, he can just declare that his NC spent the DP to block the action; and it's not like the GM can't just give the NC a new DP afterwards - possibly as a reward for dispatching a threat to him (in the form of the PC).

Also, it's pretty much a matter of the game you want to play; to me, at least. Westeros is a dark and dangerous place, filled with intrigue, deception, betrayal... play the game of thrones, win or die, right? Now, if any player could just spend a DP to basically counter anything really bad that the world (the GM) could do to his character, then where's the darkness and the danger? "Ah, my arch-enemy; you may *think* you have cornered me in this room; but you do not know that behind this tapestry is a secret door! HAHA!" (Burn DP, escape). Or, alternatively, the NC enemy knew of the secret door and put the Mountain behind it (burn DP, counter).

And yes, I get that burning a DP is, in theory, a major sacrifice - but as long as you're supposed to get a new one for every completed story, it really isn't; you can easily afford to burn one to avoid one major danger/defeat per story, and still not lose anything. Especially if you don't limit yourself to altering your fate after a defeat, but think of a solution that actually avoids the defeat - the secret door to escape, the manure cart below the window... those are available for the same DP you'd otherwise spend to avoid death upon defeat, and without the restrictions placed on reentering the story afterwards.

Disclaimer: My opinions should be taken with a grain of salt, since I have yet to actually *play* the game.

I just want to point out that spending a destiny point will allow you to regain one at the end of the story. Burning a destiny point reduces your maximum allowed destiny points. If you only have on destiny point for your character and spend it, you get it back at the end of the story (you can get one sooner if you buy it for 50exp). If you burn it you don't ever get any destiny points back.

Spending is temporary destiny point loss, burning is permanent destiny point loss. Only primary NCs have destiny points. To negate the spending of a destiny point you must spend one as well, conversely, to negate the burning of a destiny point you must burn a destiny point. Burning a destiny point is the only way out of death and other nasty situations.

Burning destiny points is a very big deal.

[Canarr]

Yes, I realize all that; especially the difference between spending and burning a DP. However, the rewards chapter (page 198 in the GoT edition) states: "In addition [to Coin, Experience, Glory] grant each player 1 Destiny Point".

So, you gain 1 DP at the end of a Story (and regain all spent DP at the same time), which means you can easily afford to burn 1 DP every Story, if it means you can avoid certain defeat.

[coldwind]

Not to pile on, but yeah: spent destint returns, burnt destiny does not.

In addition, some Narrators reward extra destiny in addition to experience, Glory and coin, but they certainly don't have to.

[uncleho]

Yes, I realize all that; especially the difference between spending and burning a DP. However, the rewards chapter (page 198 in the GoT edition) states: "In addition [to Coin, Experience, Glory] grant each player 1 Destiny Point".

So, you gain 1 DP at the end of a Story (and regain all spent DP at the same time), which means you can easily afford to burn 1 DP every Story, if it means you can avoid certain defeat.

You can't be rewarded a destiny point if you have burnt your allowance of them though. If you start with 2 DP on a character and burn one and spend one over the course of the story, you only will get 1 DP back at the end of the story, as your limit is now 1 DP since you burnt one. If you burn that DP in the next story you won't get any DP back because you don't have any.

Plus those rules state you should reward one DP back, not a refill of all DP spent, if your GM wants to do that on his own that is fine.

[Canarr]

Where does it say that in the rules? I haven't found that anywhere.

[uncleho]

Where does it say that in the rules? I haven't found that anywhere.

P.72 of the GoT Edition rulebook under Burning Destiny Points:

"When spending a Destiny Point is not enough, you can always burn a Destiny Point for a much greater effect. Burning a Destiny Point permanently reduces the number of Destiny Points you have. In effect, they function like extra lives, giving you much more control over the dice when they turn against you. Destiny Points are rare and precious commodities, so burn them wisely."

[coldwind]

That just means the burnt one doesn't come back. It does not mean that new ones cannot be rewarded for good play.

[Canarr]

Yeah, okay... but the rewards chapter speaks of "granting" a Destiny Point. Grant a DP; not regain a spent one. Would that not, then, increase the number of DP again?

So, if you have 2 DP, burn one for a safe escape, then receive a new one as reward for completing the Story - wouldn't you be back at 2 DP again?

EDIT: what coldwind says.

[uncleho]

That just means the burnt one doesn't come back. It does not mean that new ones cannot be rewarded for good play.

Fair enough, but that is up to whoever is GM isn't it? If you are just sticking to the suggested rules then you aren't granting burnt destiny points back and thus its easier to not abuse them.

[coldwind]

That just means the burnt one doesn't come back. It does not mean that new ones cannot be rewarded for good play.

Fair enough, but that is up to whoever is GM isn't it? If you are just sticking to the suggested rules then you aren't granting burnt destiny points back and thus its easier to not abuse them.

Oh, I agree.

But if your Narrator is awarding more Destiny for good play, then it's not really abusing them to use them to stave off undesireable results - that's pretty much their mission statement.

[uncleho]

That just means the burnt one doesn't come back. It does not mean that new ones cannot be rewarded for good play.

Fair enough, but that is up to whoever is GM isn't it? If you are just sticking to the suggested rules then you aren't granting burnt destiny points back and thus its easier to not abuse them.

Oh, I agree.

But if your Narrator is awarding more Destiny for good play, then it's not really abusing them to use them to stave off undesireable results - that's pretty much their mission statement.

I agree with that as well, I guess in the example above it was more of a GM vs PC thing, and I don't see the point in awarding burnt DP back to the GM's NC. I mean the NC isn't displaying "good play" when controlled by the GM lol.

[Canarr]

I agree with that as well, I guess in the example above it was more of a GM vs PC thing, and I don't see the point in awarding burnt DP back to the GM's NC. I mean the NC isn't displaying "good play" when controlled by the GM lol.

Depends on the GM, I'd say. I've played with people who'd run NPCs so you'd really think they were living, breathing people. Just because a character is played by the GM instead of a player, doesn't mean it can't display "good play". Besides, the Rewards chapter doesn't mention good play as a condition for granting a DP at the end of a Story; though I guess you could interpret the sentence I quoted as regaining a spent DP, I find the wording very peculiar, if that is the case.

In any case, in the end the GM has the final say; that's definitely something we can agree on.

[BeardedDork]

There's a disconnect here. Nobody is saying it is appropriate to give back burned destiny points. When you burn one the total you have is permanently reduced by one, everybody agrees. At the end of each story another should be awarded, as per GoT Ed P. 198 "Story Rewards", this is completely independent of whether a DP has been burned, spent, or not.

[Canarr]

That was my and (I think) coldwind's point, yes.