Comments on 2012-02-28 I don't like Bennies

Same here... I find such systems just drag me away from what’s happening in the imaginary world and a step further into some kind of abstract management... most distasteful! ;)

Gavin 2012-02-28 13:58 UTC

In games with Bennies and the like I tend to put them on auto-pilot. E.g. make a rule for myself that I’ll always and only use any available Bennies if the alternative is death. Then I don’t have to think about them to the detriment of in-character thinking.

In the SFX! games I write, I do give players mechanics that allow them to adjust their rolls, but I tie them into in-character thought and action. E.g. you can use “Supreme Effort” for something that you really need to succeed at, and get a bonus equal to your Will score, but become “tired” as a result. There’s player agency and decision making, but it’s congruent with what the character might be deciding about whether to strain so hard as to risk exhaustion or injury.

Joshua Macy 2012-02-28 14:39 UTC

Hypothesis: Hitpoints in D&D are Bennies.

– Harald 2012-02-29 17:05 UTC

Haha, I have heard the same thing on the Happy Jacks RPG Podcast with regards to Savage Worlds: bennies are hit-points.

Here’s why I disagree: In D&D, I don’t get to decide whether to spend hit-points or suffer consequences. I automatically spend hit-points while I have them and suffer consequences when I don’t. Since I have no decision to make, there is no disconnect.

You could argue that using Shields Shall Be Splintered turns shields into bennies. There are two things that are different, however. 1. Since shields cannot be used for anything but saving you from certain death, you don’t need to make any meta-game decisions about saving bennies for later. Essentially this seems to be how Joshua uses them and I can see how that helps. 2. My mind’s eye can conceive how shields work, how many shields you can carry. I don’t “spend a shield” and cook up a story on how exactly it happened that I was saved. Both D&D hit points and shields are unlike bennies in that they are more immediate and require no meta-game decisions.

In fact, if you want to look at it from another point of view, bennies are a dissociate mechanic.

You might be right when talking about my second point. I claimed that bennies cushioned me from consequences, allowing me to be a lazy player as long as I had bennies to save me. It is true that some people play D&D as if a lot of hit points mean that you cannot be killed and therefore you don’t need to be risk averse. Personally, I think this is where save-or-die effects and level drains come into play. If you strip away those attacks, then you are right, hit points act like a cushion and I can be a careless player. If you play with an old school mindset, however, I claim that you’ll see low level characters fearing hit point damage (well, anything that moves, most likely) and mid level characters afraid of level draining and poison. I’m not sure how high level play goes but I’m suspecting that high level characters will be afraid of loosing their magic items and other possessions.

In short, while hit points can cushion you like bennies do, old school D&D provides alternative threats that kick in once hit points start to show this cushioning effect.

Which is why I like old school D&D and don’t like bennies. :)

AlexSchroeder 2012-02-29 17:42 UTC

I completely agree with you.

We tried adding Bennies to 1w6 more than 5 years ago (when they were still called Chips in deadland). The result was, that the game got less exciting: Sure, we could do cooler stunts, but they did not mean much anymore.

So we discarded them again. I think Bennies are often a tool to save a badly designed system: If you need a Benny to survive (and if no player wants to die), then the system made the error of getting you in the danger of dieing in the first place.

I think the same about explicit cannon-fodder (i.e. mark someone as killable in one shot): That smells of weak game design which is hidden by only applying its rules to some characters, but not to others.

Drak 2013-01-30 11:18 UTC

Absolutely! Rules for mooks is another thing I don’t like.

AlexSchroeder 2013-01-30 11:24 UTC

willst du dann nicht mal 1w6 ausprobieren? Zum Beispiel auf dem Gratisrollenspieltag am Samstag?

Argl, falsche Sprache… (sorry to the non-german commenters here)

How about trying out 1w6 then? For example on the german free RPG day this saturday?

Drak 2013-01-31 21:33 UTC

Der Wiki ist mehrsprachig, kein Problem. Da ich “mein” System schon gefunden habe, bin ich da nicht so scharf. :) Und für Samstag habe ich schon ein anderes Programm.

AlexSchroeder 2013-01-31 22:28 UTC

Please make sure you contribute only your own work, or work licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. Note: in order to facilitate peer review and fight vandalism, we will store your IP number for a number of days. See Privacy Policy for more information. See Info for text formatting rules. You can edit this page if you need to fix typos. You can subscribe to updates by email without leaving a comment.

To save this page you must answer this question:

Please say HELLO.