Post originally by Chris Aylott at 2003-05-26 08:51:03
Converted from Phorums BB System

Kobold Lord wrote:

> there's no way positive reinforcement is
> inherently more effective than negative
> reinforcement. If you use only positive
> reinforcement on children, they'll quickly
> learn to exploit your generosity.

I absolutely agree on this point, which is why there are some balancing mechanisms built into the personality feats system.

First, you only get the reward once per session. I've intentionally made some feats easier than others to fulfill, so this prevents someone from repeatedly triggering an easy feat like "Team Player".

Second, the feats are frequently built around getting the *group* to do something rather than doing it yourself. Take our friend the Pacifist, for instance. The Pacifist doesn't get his reward for not being violent -- the Pacifist condition is: "Persuade the party to choose a peaceful solution when a violent alternative is available."

The sneaky secret of most of these feats is that they are naturally limited and in some ways controlled by the rest of the party. The Pacifist doesn't decide to be peaceful, the Pacifist persuades others to be peaceful, and if they can't be persuaded he gets nothing. At the same time, the other members of group has an incentive to go along with the Pacifist, because if they don't, *they* get nothing. If they want to hack then they're welcome to do so -- but if they choose the peaceful path then they get a bennie.

Get one person in a situation and he'll naturally act in his best interest, exploiting the situation whenever possible. Get *several* people in that situation, and you get some interesting group dynamics that can help balance out the possible excesses of an individual. The most beneficial situation for the players as a whole is for them to cooperate to help each other fulfill their character's goals -- that's the way they get the greatest reward. They never *have* to cooperate, but it's in their interest to do so. The end result is usually going to be more fun for everyone.

> Back to the topic, shouldn't role-playing be
> its own reward?

For some people, sure. But I don't have to write rules for those people. They're doing just fine on their own.

Seriously, one of the primary goals of DYNASTIES is to be a bridge between hack-and-slash players and story-oriented players. The rules provide a structure that players of both styles can agree upon, with clear rewards for the hack & slash types and lots of interaction for the storytellers. They provide a way for players with different styles to communicate their expectations to each other and have fun together.

John Nephew wrote:

> This kind of rules insight is one of the
> reasons we really, really like publishing
> Chris's work

Now there's some nice positive reinforcement. Which is why I'll be working that much harder on an outline that I'm hoping will blow John's socks off...

cheers,

Chris Aylott
The Space-Crime Continuum
http://www.spacecrime.com/dynasties.htm