04-20-2014, 05:49 AM
It's a perennial pain in the Dots, isn't it? You're pumping XP into Arete before you can even think about buying ever-juicier Sphere ratings and you don't earn that online XP at anywhere near the same ratio of time-in-play to XP-reward as the Tabletop environment that the game was originally designed for. And that's not even to mention the arguably equal concern (cost!) of buying Abilities that actually suit a given Chronicle's nature so one's character fits a notable (but no less individual) niche in a cabal or chantry or what-have-you.
Still, the notion of XP-free Arete advancement is something that I addressed for players in TT and led to a surprisingly simple tweak of the Storyteller System's XP mechanics we could perhaps all be far more satisfied with here. Basically, the nature of this debate/vote rather invited me to put that system forward as an option since it seems to me to cover most bases inherent in the debate while suggesting an equitable alternative to the current XP costs for Arete advancement.
XP was spent as normal on everything save for Arete, but OVERALL XP earned was furthermore used (being as it is indicative of the character's progress, ultimately filtered through their paradigm and varied escapades, interactions and reflections) as a naturally ever-filling pool from which Arete was paid for automatically. After all, IC life goes on, and on, and on, and all inescapably save for retirement and death, and Mages experience it through the lens of their Awakened self and the depth of that experience results in the correlative depth of character advancement reflected in any given character's Arete rating. In this at least, there is nothing different between online and tabletop Mage that I can see.
In short, players were free to spend their Current XP on anything their little hearts desired - Spheres, Abilities, Attributes, Toffee, Cake, Gin, etc - while only their Total XP pool was used as a somewhat automatic indicator of which Arete level they were applicable to. ("I've got 46 Total XP now. Only 2 more points and I'm knocking on Arete 3's door!")
It was similar to the Renown system of Werewolf, yes, and the AD&D Level advancement system, but nonetheless workable in terms of Mage: The Ascension's inherent pecadilloes - and in a way which still relied upon the core experience-for-dots mechanics of the Storyteller System.
Seekings were still required in-play events, of course, and could be failed or passed according to how they were played out but every player knew that their character was on a somewhat inexorable arc towards higher Arete. In this way, we felt that parity and fairness between players and their respective characters was maintained. If people missed sessions, yes, they missed out on XP but it made no greater impact than that upon their progress towards higher Arete. A failed Seeking meant a holding pattern of a certain number of sessions, usually a month's worth so perhaps readily translatable to Denver's online nature, before a second attempt was run.
Furthermore, it meant that there could be no undue 'Arete Envy' between players. (Between Characters, hell yes! But not between Players!) Everybody was still playing within the same framework, to which each could refer with co-equal parity, regardless of how many new people joined the game, missed sessions or switched between characters at various points in the overall Chronicle.
Perhaps it might seem to others that it was a little lacking in the subjective awards of XP for excellent roleplaying or beautiful writing or what-have-you but Denver Mage has it's Kudos XP for that, and it would continue to take that into account so I believe it is at least a viably functional option for the game.
As a system, it does have one clear flaw when applied to Denver Mage. In Denver's specific case, what with different characters being able to start at different levels of Arete, there would however be an easy fix to the 'Total XP = Arete Indication' quirk - simply add the corresponding XP cost for starting Arete (1=8, 2=16, 3=24) to the Total XP (or, possibly, Arete XP) and go from there for subsequent in-play passing of XP 'waypoints' for Arete advancement.
Anyhow, there's my input to the debate: an option for an Arete Advancement system that is easily retro-fittable as required and effectively does away with XP expenditure for Arete advancement, retains the overall XP framework at the heart of character advancement, still requires the running of Seekings and would also forestall any questions of undue 'Arete Envy' and any attendance "Why can't I have higher Arete? He's got it, she's got it, everybody else has got it!" quibbles.
Sure, it's a compromise between the two 'extremes' generally suggested above but it's one that has a framework that I think goes some way to fit both poles of the debate.
Still, the notion of XP-free Arete advancement is something that I addressed for players in TT and led to a surprisingly simple tweak of the Storyteller System's XP mechanics we could perhaps all be far more satisfied with here. Basically, the nature of this debate/vote rather invited me to put that system forward as an option since it seems to me to cover most bases inherent in the debate while suggesting an equitable alternative to the current XP costs for Arete advancement.
XP was spent as normal on everything save for Arete, but OVERALL XP earned was furthermore used (being as it is indicative of the character's progress, ultimately filtered through their paradigm and varied escapades, interactions and reflections) as a naturally ever-filling pool from which Arete was paid for automatically. After all, IC life goes on, and on, and on, and all inescapably save for retirement and death, and Mages experience it through the lens of their Awakened self and the depth of that experience results in the correlative depth of character advancement reflected in any given character's Arete rating. In this at least, there is nothing different between online and tabletop Mage that I can see.
In short, players were free to spend their Current XP on anything their little hearts desired - Spheres, Abilities, Attributes, Toffee, Cake, Gin, etc - while only their Total XP pool was used as a somewhat automatic indicator of which Arete level they were applicable to. ("I've got 46 Total XP now. Only 2 more points and I'm knocking on Arete 3's door!")
It was similar to the Renown system of Werewolf, yes, and the AD&D Level advancement system, but nonetheless workable in terms of Mage: The Ascension's inherent pecadilloes - and in a way which still relied upon the core experience-for-dots mechanics of the Storyteller System.
Seekings were still required in-play events, of course, and could be failed or passed according to how they were played out but every player knew that their character was on a somewhat inexorable arc towards higher Arete. In this way, we felt that parity and fairness between players and their respective characters was maintained. If people missed sessions, yes, they missed out on XP but it made no greater impact than that upon their progress towards higher Arete. A failed Seeking meant a holding pattern of a certain number of sessions, usually a month's worth so perhaps readily translatable to Denver's online nature, before a second attempt was run.
Furthermore, it meant that there could be no undue 'Arete Envy' between players. (Between Characters, hell yes! But not between Players!) Everybody was still playing within the same framework, to which each could refer with co-equal parity, regardless of how many new people joined the game, missed sessions or switched between characters at various points in the overall Chronicle.
Perhaps it might seem to others that it was a little lacking in the subjective awards of XP for excellent roleplaying or beautiful writing or what-have-you but Denver Mage has it's Kudos XP for that, and it would continue to take that into account so I believe it is at least a viably functional option for the game.
As a system, it does have one clear flaw when applied to Denver Mage. In Denver's specific case, what with different characters being able to start at different levels of Arete, there would however be an easy fix to the 'Total XP = Arete Indication' quirk - simply add the corresponding XP cost for starting Arete (1=8, 2=16, 3=24) to the Total XP (or, possibly, Arete XP) and go from there for subsequent in-play passing of XP 'waypoints' for Arete advancement.
Anyhow, there's my input to the debate: an option for an Arete Advancement system that is easily retro-fittable as required and effectively does away with XP expenditure for Arete advancement, retains the overall XP framework at the heart of character advancement, still requires the running of Seekings and would also forestall any questions of undue 'Arete Envy' and any attendance "Why can't I have higher Arete? He's got it, she's got it, everybody else has got it!" quibbles.
Sure, it's a compromise between the two 'extremes' generally suggested above but it's one that has a framework that I think goes some way to fit both poles of the debate.