Hello!
While I'm a massive fan of 2E so far, the one thing I haven't really been able to enjoy is Hero Points.
When I first read the CRB, I didn't like the idea of it very much (having a resource tied to something out-of-game didn't appeal to me). However I still resolved to use the mechanic since it was a pretty minor hangup and I didn't mind it as long as the players were having fun. The reception of the mechanic was lukewarm at best, with my players not being particularly into it either. We all forgot it even existed pretty quickly as we got into the game and everyone was learning how the game worked.
I'll be starting a new campaign soon since we just ended Plaguestone a few weeks back and I'm not sure if I should try to reintroduce the mechanic or not. I feels a bit silly to use the mechanic if nobody at the table likes it, but then again it's possible it'll be more popular now that everyone has a feel for the game.
I'm wondering if there are any alternatives to hero points people have tried at their tables? Essentially, I'm looking for a similar advantage of a defensive nature to give my players instead - preferably something that could be "baked into the game world" a little more elegantly. It's possible I'll bring in some sort of an artifact that has some kind of inspiration mechanic with a once-per-day limitation. None of my players watch Critical Role so they would think it's a totally neat and original idea ;P
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let me be the first to say, whatever works best and feels best for your table is absolutely the way to go.
When the Playtest was going on, I really hated Hero Points and so did my group. I don't remember if I gave a lot of feedback about it, but I resolved to houserule it away when the game released.
Cut to release and I still didn't like Hero Points. It looked like a clunky resource that I would consistently forget about and never use. At the table, for my group, that turned out to be quite different. When a player went down to a lucky crit, he seemed satisfied, but not thrilled to blow his one Hero Point to avoid the dying condition. But as the tension around encounters (not just combat ones) increased, my players were often reminding each other "No, no, wait! Hero Point! Hero Point!" And others saying, "I don't know, you wouldn't have any left, so maybe just save it in case you go down."
As for giving them out, my players are the ones to remind me more often then not. "Hey, that was cool," I'd say. They'd reply with, "Cool enough for a Hero Point?" It felt very natural and encouraged my players to be a little more risky and daring. I've completely 180'd on Hero Points and I really enjoy them now.
If you feel like it breaks verisimilitude, I can understand that. Personally, I spice up Hero Point usage a bit since... well, they're heroes. "You felt your blow connect with his pauldron, but you hammer it home, cutting through the armor and into his shoulder!" I don't see them as things the characters know about, but something that happens because they're the stars of the show, so to speak. They are special.
All that said, I think you could completely cut Hero Points and be just fine. Your group ran Plaguestone and didn't really use them, so I don't see any case for them needing them balance-wise. If anything, you could institute a rule like, "If brought below zero, you get one 'freebie' and don't gain the dying condition on the first go around." I don't think that's something your group needs, honestly.
All that said, I think you could completely cut Hero Points and be just fine. Your group ran Plaguestone and didn't really use them, so I don't see any case for them needing them balance-wise. If anything, you could institute a rule like, "If brought below zero, you get one 'freebie' and don't gain the dying condition on the first go around." I don't think that's something your group...
I feel it needs to be added that didn't run the adventure particularly "by the book". Each character had a personalized side quest rather than the ones provided and I reduced the deadliness of several encounters.
|
A lot of game systems these days have "extra effort" points of some kind. Whether they're called edge, drama, story, willpower, moxie or something else. Obviously, they don't all work the same. Actually, Starfinder's Resolve is also a form of this, particularly as more abilities are published that are powered by it.
They tend to have roughly two functions: an emergency power button for characters in dire straits, and a currency for narrative intervention. Narrative intervention isn't really part of Pathfinder's style, but the emergency button is a fine thing to have.
I've seen people use hero points quite a bit in PFS2, for example when an important-looking roll goes poorly or people really want to nail an enemy before he gets another turn.
I think the "pulling on reserves for some extra effort" bit isn't really all that meta and that doesn't annoy me.
I'm not such a fan of the "give a hero point to the player for OOC stuff, like buying snacks for the table". That's a bit too meta for my taste. I'd rather just give everyone say, 2 points per session to roll with, lost if not used by the end of the session.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually the snacks thing didn't make it into the final version of the game. Hero points are now strictly for in game shenanigans. My table likes the snack rule though so we still use it.
Here's what I've been doing as for house rules.
- Players get their hero points set to 6 (if it is less than six) for showing up.
- PCs cannot gain the "dying condition" nor can they gain additional hero points unless they opt in by "raising the death flag".
- PCs who have raised the death flag (as a free action) are eligible for the dying condition, instantly gain 6 more hero points, and can gain hero points via heroic actions.
- All "raise dead" and "resurrection" rituals and spells are rare and I won't be making them available unless narrative circumstances dictate. If you character dies, you're going to need a new character (even if you can gain access to a resurrection ritual, gaining access to that ritual is a months long campaign).
- The death flag stays up until you lower it by spending 6 hero points.
- While the death flag is up you may spend 3 hero points for an extra action and 2 hero points for an extra reaction.
I'm still tweaking it a little bit, but this seems to be working.
I am still struggling with the whole "award in game" thing. If I am running a game I am usually thinking so much about what happens next or roleplaying an NPC that awarding hero points is the last thing on my mind.
Doesn't matter what system it is.
I also feel iffy about awarding it for people just getting a lucky dice roll.
Going to have to put some sticky notes on my GM screen saying "AWARD HERO POINTS" r_r.
I am still struggling with the whole "award in game" thing. If I am running a game I am usually thinking so much about what happens next or roleplaying an NPC that awarding hero points is the last thing on my mind.
Doesn't matter what system it is.
I also feel iffy about awarding it for people just getting a lucky dice roll.
Going to have to put some sticky notes on my GM screen saying "AWARD HERO POINTS" r_r.
I agree with this (despite receiving several Hero Points via lucky dice rolls and comments that happened to tickle the GM). I'd rather just get them on a schedule, plus bonuses for helping/journaling/being ready/etc.
I think my biggest hangup is that I consider "sessions" to be something very out-of-the-gameworld. I don't really have a problem with the idea that the PCs are special and heroes - they are clearly different from NPCs in the sense that they grow in prowess extremely rapidly. If hero points were a once-per-day thing I'd probably have an easier time with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I rather like the hero points resetting between sessions, because it means there's less incentive to hoard them. It is also easier not having to track how many you had left at the end of the last session, and frees up a little mental space for DMs like myself and Gleeful Grognard who have trouble remembering to give them out mid-game. The downside is that people often get meta about burning them at the end of a session.
My table uses them far more for rerolls than stabilizing though. They are quite nice for that. In PF2 it is much harder to get a skill to the "pass on a 1" automatic success levels. But sometimes there's a really important check your swingy d20 botches. Maybe it is the Diplomacy check to talk down the orc tribe, or the stealth check to slip by the dragon, or the bluff check to convince the guard you actually are supposed to be here.
Hero points give your player agency to choose those moments for themselves and reroll them.
I have used a similar system before, and it works ok. There are essentially 2 potential problems with it: if it is awarded for getting lucky, lucky players will get the lion’s share of them and if it is awarded for cool actions, more imaginative players will get the lion’s share. If you don’t have a player who is especially lucky, or you don’t have a player who keeps coming up with cool ideas this system works fine. Even with these types of players, there are ways around it. Rewarding normally unimaginative players for any slight idea or making the hero points a team pool that anyone can use are both ways around potential problems, or just scrapping the system if it doesn’t work.
In terms of game system, it’s a useful way of getting around unlucky rolls (some players are just unlucky all the time, most players are unlucky some of the time), and in narrative terms it just sucks if you can’t seem to fight your way out of a paper bag. In pf2, as has been pointed out, the increased chances of the BBEG getting a critical means a mechanism is needed to alleviate the effects of a critical. If you scrap the hero points, you either have to reduce the power of the encounters or come up with an alternative system.
As always, the key is to use what works for you and your group.
Not sure how you can play the game at all if out of world things bother you when it is founded on math of XP, HP and levels....
Well, one big difference is that those are out of world things informed by in game things. Session length isn't
I am still struggling with the whole "award in game" thing. If I am running a game I am usually thinking so much about what happens next or roleplaying an NPC that awarding hero points is the last thing on my mind.
Doesn't matter what system it is.
I also feel iffy about awarding it for people just getting a lucky dice roll.
Going to have to put some sticky notes on my GM screen saying "AWARD HERO POINTS" r_r.
I had the same problem: I was too busy having the enemy react to the PC's heroic action to even consider that the action deserved a hero point. To correct this, my wife developed a system of discussing among the players at the end of the game session to pick the Most Valuable Player Character whose actions had helped the party the most. The winner received a Hero Point. If the winner had maximum Hero Points already, second place received the Hero Point.
Hearing the other players praise other PCs actions made a nice ending for each session, too.
We tried the Pathfinder 2nd Edition temporary hero points during the playtest, The Lost GM. We had to reject the now-defunct bring-the-snacks reward, because one of our housemates cooked dinner for the entire set of players. That would be full hero points every session. But the published PF2 hero point system seemed less interesting than the playtest version. Thus, I stuck with the PF1 version of hero points in my new PF2 campaign, except I dropped the +4 and +8 bonuses and added rerolls, because bonuses don't fit PF2. That also let me keep the Most Valuable Player system.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm better about it for PFS scenarios than I am in longer sessions (I too can get immersed in the game and forget to do it), but I've been handling it by awarding a player an "MVP" Hero Point at the end of each encounter, during the same "cleanup" phase as going over the loot and so on. Generally, the players will agree with me, though I've made it clear that if the players think someone else should have got it, I just award it to both. There's also an implicit restriction that it shouldn't be going to the same person at the end of this fight that it went to at the end of the last one. It's worked out pretty well so far.
having a resource tied to something out-of-game didn't appeal to me
Has anyone tried a simple "Award X hero points each time you gain a level" system? That ought to be better balanced against the amount of danger you face than "X hero points per session".
|
|
having a resource tied to something out-of-game didn't appeal to meHas anyone tried a simple "Award X hero points each time you gain a level" system? That ought to be better balanced against the amount of danger you face than "X hero points per session".
That doesn't play really nice with "spend all your hero points to stabilize". A steady trickle works better than getting them all at once.
Me, I'm perfectly happy tying them to a session rather than some other schedule. Creates an incentive to use them or lose them.
|
|
I've been running my 2 hour sessions with hero points and usually say at some point "Only 15 minutes left if you want to use your hero point on that" when someone fails close to the end of the session. After several weeks of doing this, my players are starting to remember to use them on their own for what they consider important.... Last night it was fairly early on when the party got caught in a fireball and two of them crit failed. I reminded them of the option and all but 1 pc had used their hero point well before the 15 minute mark.
|
|
I've been running my 2 hour sessions with hero points and usually say at some point "Only 15 minutes left if you want to use your hero point on that" when someone fails close to the end of the session. After several weeks of doing this, my players are starting to remember to use them on their own for what they consider important.... Last night it was fairly early on when the party got caught in a fireball and two of them crit failed. I reminded them of the option and all but 1 pc had used their hero point well before the 15 minute mark.
This gets me thinking;
I'm thinking of making some handout cards as a physical reminder of how many hero points are in the mix, and what they can do;
* Spend 1 Hero Point to re-roll a d20 after you see the result but before you learn whether it's a (critical) success or failure. This is a fortune effect.
* Spend all your Hero Points (minimum 1) to avoid death. You can do this when your dying condition would increase. You lose the dying condition entirely and stabilize with 0 Hit Points. You don’t gain the wounded condition or increase its value from losing the dying condition in this way, but if you already had that condition, you don’t lose it or decrease its value.
And I'm thinking of adding:
* Spend all your Hero Points (minimum 1) to grant another player a Hero Point to immediately use. You can only give Hero Points in this way who currently has no Hero Points.
Allowing the players to redistribute Hero Points a bit like this, but in a lossy way, should take some of the tension out of "fair" distribution problems. Or let the players aid one of them who's been having all of the bad luck that evening.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we have taken to a very literal approach to awarding hero points in a session. Every hour we take a break as players. As the GM, I also look over the past hour's play and award a hero point to the the hour's MVP. All the players are in the discussion so its pretty fairly awarded, and tying it to the hour break means we aren't hero point starved that session by forgetting it.
As a side benefit, when the players know they can win a hero point each hour, they are both more likely to use it and more likely to do things that may warrant it then they would if it was never awarded throughout a game session. It brings the mechanic front and center. Sure, its a bit clunky compared to a more elegant in-game at the moment awarding, but it seems to work for us.
|
I started roleplaying games with Dark Heresy that had a similar system (Fate Points) so I don't have a problem with Hero Points other than the inconsistencies of acquiring them. In DH they were a stat, basically, and completed campaign arcs would increase the number and most players had at least 2 every session. I found they worked fine, and so do hero points.
While we're all adjusting to the system and getting a feel for balance I'd even say to toss them out pretty liberally. While daring feats are cool, the players already being cool probably aren't the ones who need the chance to cheat luck.
|
|
We only award hero points for heroic actions in a limited capacity and not by default each session. They don’t expire. We tend to play a grittier game where encounters feel dangerous. If everything is easily attained, what’s the point?
You could make your game even grittier by not getting more HP each time you level up. I mean, why stop at hero points? In a realistic game even big heroes can get killed with a single crossbow bolt.
---
Me personally, I prefer a bit more Die Hard and a bit less True Grit.
Has anyone tried a simple "Award X hero points each time you gain a level" system? That ought to be better balanced against the amount of danger you face than "X hero points per session".That doesn't play really nice with "spend all your hero points to stabilize". A steady trickle works better than getting them all at once.
Good point, though one could add another house rule to balance that. "Spend 2 hero points (or 1 if you only have 1) to stabilize". And a cap to prevent accumulating dozens of hero points if you don't use them.
Me, I'm perfectly happy tying them to a session rather than some other schedule. Creates an incentive to use them or lose them.
It also creates an incentive to end the session early. "I'm out of hero points and I need to stabilize... Hey, everyone, I suddenly remembered an urgent appointment. Let's call it a night."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also creates an incentive to end the session early. "I'm out of hero points and I need to stabilize... Hey, everyone, I suddenly remembered an urgent appointment. Let's call it a night."
I'm all for hero point houserules, but this is just silly, right? I've been playing by the book, averaging 7 - 9 hour sessions and I haven't had anyone try and game out more hero points by... not playing. Anecdotes and all, but I'm assuming this is a joke post, right?
I have no idea if anyone would ever really do that, but it is an incentive that exists in the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the game has an incentive to cheat in the sense that cheating makes you roll better and win more. At some point you just have to assume your players aren’t jerks.
I'm so very confused that in your mind an incentive to play the game is to... not play the game. In which case the optimal strategy just becomes: "Play the game in 10 minute bursts, starting a new session every time."
Or it's just a fun game mechanic that honestly doesn't have that big of an impact. Hero points help out when the dice aren't on your side and are there for GMs to reward cool or risky behavior. You can houserule 'em however you want, but they certainly aren't there to make people stop playing because they're that good.
In which case the optimal strategy just becomes: "Play the game in 10 minute bursts, starting a new session every time."
No, 10 minutes is too long. The true optimal strategy is to declare a new session around once per combat round so you can always have hero points to spend. It's stupid, but would make you more effective.
I mean, the game has an incentive to cheat in the sense that cheating makes you roll better and win more. At some point you just have to assume your players aren’t jerks.
And yet some players do cheat. That's why I prefer them to roll their dice where I can see them so they don't get tempted.
Let's say your favorite ever character is dying and would be saved if the session ended right there and you continued next week with a new hero point. If you were within a few minutes of your normal end time, would you be tempted to argue for calling it a night?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, okay, this is a comedy bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say your favorite ever character is dying and would be saved if the session ended right there and you continued next week with a new hero point. If you were within a few minutes of your normal end time, would you be tempted to argue for calling it a night?
I'm an eternal DM, so I guess it's a little hard for me to answer that question. However, character deaths or especially almost-deaths is usually what shoots certain characters into legendary status at my tables - and I try to ensure all character deaths are dramatic and/or heroic.
I'm so very confused that in your mind an incentive to play the game is to... not play the game. In which case the optimal strategy just becomes: "Play the game in 10 minute bursts, starting a new session every time."
Or it's just a fun game mechanic that honestly doesn't have that big of an impact. Hero points help out when the dice aren't on your side and are there for GMs to reward cool or risky behavior. You can houserule 'em however you want, but they certainly aren't there to make people stop playing because they're that good.
If the GM is okay with ending and restarting a session every 10 minutes to restock hero points, then that becomes a houserule and the players won't really need to end and restart a session every 10 minutes. Just restock.
Or go with an automatic stabilization rule. The main difference between automatically stabilizing and spending a hero point to stabilize is that the hero point is an acknowledgement that the character lived only because he was a player character.
My wife ran the first half of Rise of the Runelords without hero points (the Advanced Player's Guide was published after we finished the 1st module and she did not adopt every new option). Once, a foe dealt enough damage to the wizard to kill him outright. Except that she decided to fudge the damage roll so that he was still alive but unconscious. And the foe did not take an attack of opportunity against the cleric who healed the wizard.
When she stepped down as GM and I took over running the game, I added hero points. I did not want to fudge damage rolls.
Most of my players carefully hoarded two hero points for Cheat Death. My wife didn't. She liked to spend hero points for bonuses at key moments or to pull off some impossible stunts. Her character frequently indulged in bold actions that earned her hero points. Nevertheless, she was willing to spend her hero points down to zero. She inspired a new player who took the Hero's Fortune feat to have a maximum of 5 hero points, so that he could keep 2 for Cheat Death and have fun with heroic stunts like my wife's character.
The other reason that I kept the PF1 hero points rules is that being able to spend a hero point only for a reroll or stabilize is dull. My wife can't pull her Errol Flynn stunts on mere rerolls. She needs extra actions, or act out of turn, or restock a focus point.
EDIT (I forgot a paragraph). In our Jade Regent and Iron Gods campaigns, the party ended up with a NPC party member, Amaya Kaijitsu in Jade Regent and Val Baine in Iron Gods. I did not give them hero points and I was willing for the enemy to kill them. Since Amaya was the escorted secret heir, the party carefully protected her. Val Baine, in contrast, was a bloodrager who charged into battle. I once had an assassin use a Death Attack against Val, expecting her to die if the party did not cleverly devise a solution. Then I doublechecked Val's character sheet and spotted Uncanny Dodge, which foiled the Death Attack. I outsmarted myself. Nevertheless, it demonstrated that a party member can survive without hero points.