 |
GMing Methodology: Roleplaying Rewards |  |
From The House of the Harping Monkey:
Yes, good roleplaying should be its own reward . . . in a perfect world. However, you have to ask yourself which is more important: being upset that the world isn’t perfect, or using in-game tools to aspire to something that might one day approach perfection (or, at least, good roleplaying for its own sake).
Let’s take Serenity’s plot points as an example. These points are handed out to players for doing things in-character, especially roleplaying their flaws. In turn, merely having plot points encourages more good roleplaying, because you can spend them to affect the story in significant ways. I like to think of this as a Very Good Mechanic, because it creates a sort of roleplaying feedback loop that gradually improves everyone’s ability to roleplay. And, if you really don’t like the idea of mechanically rewarding a player for good roleplaying, you can treat them as training wheels: use them a lot at first, as a roleplaying catalyst, then gradually fade them out. However, I much prefer the idea of keeping this mechanic in the game, and using it in leu of pure experience points (especially since Serenity allows you to cash some of your plot points in for expereince at the end of the session).
I think the need to have good roleplaying be its own reward comes down to a fundamental difference in the experience and viewpoint of the GM and the players. Each player plays and is responsible for a single character. On some level, a player is aware that he is responsible for everyone else having fun in addition to himself (if he’s a really good player, he’s very aware of that and takes it into consideration often), but mostly he’s trying to have as much fun as he can playing. Getting a reward for doing something that makes the game more fun for everyone makes the game more fun for the individual player, and thus encourages the former behavior.
The GM, by contrast, has to be aware that he is responsible for everyone at the table having a good time; thus, you’re going to tend to see the GM doing more in-character roleplay, regardless of the consequences to that character, without expectation of tangible reward. The GM, in addition, has that luxury. If a favorite character dies, it’s dissappointing, but the GM can create a new one to take its place, and has a bunch more already anyway. If a PC’s favorite character dies (or is even handicapped temporarily by roleplaying a flaw particularly well), it might make the game overall more fun, and it might add to everyone’s experience, but it’s probably going to slightly decrease that player’s enjoyment on some level. We, as GMs, have to remember that good roleplaying often involves some sort of sacrifice to the alter of shared experience, a point that is far more poignant to players than to GMs.
