I don't like artha

Burning Wheel First Reading
1

Hello, new fan here. Haven’t read the book, but have already complaints :). I have however read through the free paragraph of the BIT system and earning Artha bonuses. I really like what this system wants to empasize and the Gold edition is already on it’s way to my collection. I have already tested the BIT system with a D&D game few years ago (there was one fan-made add-on, which was taken straight from this game) and this is what my criticism is based on.

I say once more, that I really like what this game makes us do: for players come up with clear motivation and beliefs and for GM to challenge these aspects.

What totally makes me feel uncomfortable is the end of a session judgment (voting) of other players. It is meant to provide extra bonuses for great roleplay (isn’t a good game enough of a bonus?), but it ends up putting people in difficult situation and be judged for not so good roleplay. Basically for doing it wrong. I play voluntarily, for myself and I try to do my best - I don’t want them to say I suck or am stupid (because that’s what one is for failing these simple goals). May be the guy is more quiet, new in the group or hobby and needs a session or two to feel comfortable to roleplay more. Nothing is more counterproductive, than a public therapy session about how bad one sucks.

Our group liked it when we read the rules, but I refued to participate after the second session.

Meanwhile I have played Savage Worlds for the past year and I really like the bennie system which is similarly small bonus for good roleplay (whether for great moment, moving story forward, playing hindrances well, etc). In SW the bennies get resetted at the end of every session, but for BW I would keep them from session to session. But other than that I would give Artha bonuses only during the game session, just after the awesome moments like in SW and drop the end session bonus voting.

It seems it would work fine and not break anything in BW or will it make the characters too weak? I might give few Artha points for everybody for free like group experience points (in SW).

2

First of all, you might change your mind when you read the chapter on Artha. It isn’t about voting on people’s roleplaying (mostly).

Fate Artha is awarded for manifesting the character’s Beliefs, getting into trouble with his Instincts, story-altering use of Traits, in-character humor, and having the right (character) skill in the game to keep the game moving.

There’s no voting there. It either happened, or it didn’t, and the GM decides.

Persona is earned for really pivotal moments of better-than-normal roleplaying, BIT-related inner turmoil, and achieving personal goals. Again, no voting, and not really any judging. When it happens, you know it.

Persona for being the “MVP” (Most Valuable Player) and the “Workhorse” are voted on, but they’re still not about quality of roleplay. The quiet guy who just rolls the dice when he’s told, or comes up with good ideas once in a while could still win these.

Deeds Artha is also awarded by the GM based on in-game events.

So, changing the way the game is played probably isn’t necessary. That said, people used to award Artha immediately in play, and it wasn’t the end of the world, but “free” Artha every session would likely take the teeth out of the BITs.

3

Workhorse is for mostly in-game stuff, not roleplaying. If a character has all the necessary gear and skills to keep things moving when other characters don’t, he’s the workhorse. No roleplaying involved. It can overlap a little bit with the Fate award for “Right Skill, Right Time” but it’s more than that.

MVP can be for awesome roleplaying, but at my table it more often goes to someone who pulls off an awesome roll or series of rolls. Stabbing the demon to death is likely MVP. Winning the crucial duel of wits with the king could be MVP. Great roleplaying isn’t MVP; it’s much more likely to be “Embodiment” artha. That’s also a Persona point, but it’s not voted on. The GM assigns it.

Bluntly, the votes should not be about quality of roleplaying at all. They’re about quality of characters and role in the story. There are awards for RP, but BW is a game where it is very much up to the GM to push good roleplaying out of everyone roughly equally. If the artha is flowing unevenly then unless there’s a truly disengaged player it’s probably the GM’s fault!

BW has artha assignment at the end of a session, but it’s supposed to be mostly from GM notes. Make a tick when someone earns artha and then bring it up at the end of the session. “You had the right skill there, take a Fate. Oh, and things really got interesting when you used your instinct to leave no pocket unpicked to rob the Duke, that’s another Fate. And then a Persona for when you finally paid off your father’s debts and bailed him out of prison according to your Belief about saving him.”

One thing I’ll note is that I often give out those artha during play. It’s not recommended, but it works just fine. I usually wait until there’s a bit of a break in the game, between scenes, to hand out the artha, but only because I think it’s less intrusive that way. Otherwise the SW system and BW’s are quite similar—just keep an eye on what actually earns artha. A lot of it isn’t the roleplaying!

Last point: following and finishing Beliefs isn’t dramatic roleplaying, exactly. You don’t have to ham it up to do that. If a character keeps acting, however quietly, to accomplish her goals, she’s going to rake in artha regardless.

4

Both of these are very good comments about the merits of artha and that most of the rewards aren’t rooted in roleplay and instead rooted in completing goals and being relied on. Only Humor and Embodiment are RP rewards (as is Moldbreaker to some extent).

And for a bit of admin voice now. Hi everyone, this is an interesting topic but please don’t dogpile on. Let’s wait for megoman to get back before replying some more.

5

Your experience comes from what someone did with Artha Awards in a D&D game? I’m not sure that has much relevance to how they’re used in BW. If your group used them as a time to bash each other in a D&D game, I can see why you wouldn’t take to them.

I get that. It can make people feel uncomfortable. It really should be a time to recognize something you liked at the table, rather than being judgemental in the pejorative sense.

It is meant to provide extra bonuses for great roleplay (isn’t a good game enough of a bonus?)
Well, embodiment is the only one that really fits that description, but I think it’s primary function is to point out that engaging with Character on a deep level is a good thing for the game. Challenging BITs is so much easier if the player is really engaged with the character’s goals and aspirations. Awards for Beliefs that drive play, are a good way to recognize whether Beliefs are doing their job. It’s a good way to focus everyone’s attention on those Beliefs that aren’t firing and to recognize the ones that are providing good dramatic weight to the game.

but it ends up putting people in difficult situation and be judged for not so good roleplay. Basically for doing it wrong. I play voluntarily, for myself and I try to do my best - I don’t want them to say I suck or am stupid (because that’s what one is for failing these simple goals).

Is that what the people you play with would say to you? Why would you play with these people?

May be the guy is more quiet, new in the group or hobby and needs a session or two to feel comfortable to roleplay more. Nothing is more counterproductive, than a public therapy session about how bad one sucks.

The game doesn’t say hold a public therapy session. It just says recognize a moment of embodiment, a funny out of character quip, or the time when they rolled really well. Here’s the thing about the quiet dude. You can be as quiet as you want in Burning Wheel, but the game will not function for you unless you pursue your beliefs and put them into play. If one person is not getting artha awards, it’s not about bad roleplay, it’s an indication that the fundamental currency of the game isn’t functioning for one of the players. That’s likely to be a problem that should be addressed.

Edit: Sorry Colin, didn’t see your Admin statement until after posting.

6

Ok, some good points here. No worries about piling up the topic, I like to see multiple opinions about this.

Firstly, I clarify that in this D&D game at the end of the session we awarded xp for Artha. In fact this was the only way to get xp in our game and it immediately put some weird pressure when people ended up with different amounts of xp. So maybe in BW Artha works better, than in our D&D, where leveling is the most rewarding thing that can happen.

Yes, you talk about MVP and Workhorse awards, agreed - these are not for roleplaying, but with these there still was situations where more than one did good job and there came a vote, who was the “coolest” of the two or smt. Don’t like that “sorry, you were just a bit less cool - better luck next time”. I’d rather give them both rewards and not point out the categories of their rewards. It is also weird, if all but one get rewarded. It just brings up this weird conversations like “and what were you doing?” or “let me teach you how it is done” - no thanks, I play how I want.

But the most problematic I find the rewards that you give for roleplaying, that is for following your Belief or Intent. Sometimes in the session there just is not much opportunity for this and one may feel as they did not do well enough. Sometimes you thought you totally did it, but people vote “not enough, sorry”. It feels a bit being judged and that is what I am mostly against. On the other hand, I can now see how it could have been the GM’s fault for not challenging the players beliefs enough. Still, I’d rather leave this discussion out of our gaming time.

I do like going over the beliefs at the end or start of the session to see if they could be changed for better gameplay.

Is that what the people you play with would say to you? Why would you play with these people?

Good god no! They are all sensible people :). It is just how it may make me feel for not getting awarded sometimes. It may be totally personal thing, for not wanting to be criticized or something. I am just thinking that I may not be the only one.

So, it may totally be that it works much better for BW than what I experienced with D&D. Also, I might get better overview of the system once I finally read the gold book.

7

It basically works like this:

Beliefs are the players’ way of saying “This is what I want the GM to challenge”. You play to a Belief by rising to the challenge as a character. This is rooted in action, not in roleplay. (The Embodiment award and the Humor award are the only two artha awards used for pure roleplay, and those are not supposed to be frequent.) You can’t earn Fate for following a Belief if all you do is bluster about the Belief but don’t actually do anything. :slight_smile:

Instincts are mostly there to be useful, and to create trouble; traits are usually there to create trouble. Finding creative ways to work them into the situation is generally the players’ job. However, because the sole requirement is “gets you in trouble”, it shouldn’t be too hard to think up ways to do that.

8

Believe me, Colin knows what he is about. You don’t want to come back to read the avalanche that is a BW dogpile. It’s overwhelmingly helpful :wink:

Firstly, I clarify that in this D&D game at the end of the session we awarded xp for Artha. In fact this was the only way to get xp in our game and it immediately put some weird pressure when people ended up with different amounts of xp. So maybe in BW Artha works better, than in our D&D, where leveling is the most rewarding thing that can happen.

yup, first problem. D&D rewards you for overcoming challenges, defeating opponents, finding treasure. Introduce Artha awards as the only xp source and suddenly defeating monsters isn’t directly tied to leveling. That’s a profound change. In D&D, taking down a monster is good play. Why shouldn’t you get XP for that? Whereas, in BW you could kill a big nasty and get nothing for it except relief that you’re not dead.

But the most problematic I find the rewards that you give for roleplaying, that is for following your Belief or Intent. Sometimes in the session there just is not much opportunity for this and one may feel as they did not do well enough.

Well, if I’m running BW and you’re not getting Artha awards for your Beliefs driving play, my first thought is not that you’re doing it wrong, but that I’m screwing up as GM. There’s nothing else to focus on in BW, unlike D&D where you can have entire adventures that are just about killing some things to raise money.

Also, “the award is given when playing a Belief serves a purpose and drives the game forward.” It’s not a voting thing. There may be some discussion as to whether the Belief actually drove play or was just mentioned, but it’s not about voting for this award.

Sometimes you thought you totally did it, but people vote “not enough, sorry”.

Sure, but its not about bad roleplaying. The question is what did that Belief do to change things and push the story forward.

So, it may totally be that it works much better for BW than what I experienced with D&D. Also, I might get better overview of the system once I finally read the gold book.

I think reading it would be a good start. You may never like Artha awards, but I think you’ll see that they function a bit differently when they’re bolted on to another system.

9

If you’re really concerned with the roleplay awards (Humor, Embodiment), you can just not do them. Ditto for the voting ones (Workhorse and MVP). But the belief related ones are absolutely essential to Burning Wheel; taking them out would change the nature of the game in fundamental ways.

10

One perspective that might be useful is to look at Artha less as dog biscuits the GM throws you if you’ve been a Good Roleplayer, but rather as points in the same sense you earn points in, say, soccer for kicking the ball into the net.
It’s not like the points are there to bribe you into kicking the ball into the net, or make you feel good for doing it or something. Kicking the ball into the net is the goal of the game. The points are for keeping track of whether you made those goals.
So when you award Artha, it’s just like in soccer. Did you kick the ball into the net? Then you get a point! Did you pursue your Belief and face its challenges? Then you get a point! Same thing.

11

Yeah, my group does this essentially. They’re still warming up to the idea of voting on rewards to give each other (they’re STILL used to the “gm-as-candy-machine” ethic). Last session, they simply voted in a way so that each of them got a Persona point, for example, there being three to vote on. So…getting there. Most of the other awards I judge, and quickly, at the end of the session.

12

Not to add to the dogpile, but it reads to me like there’s a fundamental difference in terminology going on in this thread. This line jumped out at me in particular:

But the most problematic I find the rewards that you give for roleplaying, that is for following your Belief or Intent.

To my way of thinking, and I think that of other long-term BW players, pursuing your Beliefs and Instincts (I think you meant Instincts here) is totally orthogonal to “roleplaying.” Again, just to define terms here: when I hear “good roleplaying” I think amateur theatrics, funny voices, and definitely an opinion about aesthetics from the GM and maybe the other players. That’s not how you evaluate whether your BITs are earning Artha.

Evaluating whether your character has pursued or completed a Belief doesn’t take an aesthetic judgment, not really. Did you proactively pursue the to-do attached to your Belief? You get paid. Doesn’t matter if you did it well, or whether you succeeded, or even if you bothered using a funny voice or emoted. Instincts are similar: did you follow and Instinct and did doing so get you into more trouble? You get paid. And similar again for Traits: Did you invoke a Trait and, by doing so, add new fictional material to the game? You get paid. Moldbreaker: did you have to choose between conflicting Beliefs, Instincts or Traits? You get paid.

None of those, none, require the GM to call someone out as a “bad roleplayer.” This is a huge relief for someone like you (and me)! I am 100% on board with you about not liking roleplaying-judgement-based reward systems in RPGs.

MVP and Workhorse are also not really about “good roleplaying” either. You can get pretty objective about these as well: Was there a focalpoint character? It’s usually pretty obvious when a session is “about” someone’s stuff. Give 'em the Persona. Workhorse usually means, in our group, the guy who did the most rolling (but wasn’t the MVP). And Right Time/Place is usually given for the most obscure skill rolled.

Again, I repeat none of these are given for “good roleplaying”. That’s not BW. Burning Wheel economies all work together to convince the players to get their characters into hot water (rather than playing optimally and carefully), to introduce conflicts of interest (because that’s where good drama is, with or without funny voices and amateur theatrics), and to help shape advancement (since there is no leveling system).

I can tell you that there’s not a single “Good Roleplayer” in our group, and we’ve been playing BW for a lot of years now. No funny voices. No emoting. But lots and lots of great drama and hard choices!

EDIT: The only Artha payout that’s explicitly for “good roleplaying” is Embodiment. As a group without any real “Good Roleplayers,” I will say that this is also one of the most difficult steps of the postmortem. It plays out like you fear: sometimes someone doesn’t get that Persona, which can lead to either hurt feelings or a little disengagement. I’ve never come up with a good solution. We lowered the bar on Embodiment, but when everyone is getting Embodiment it ceases to be special. We raised the bar, and then it was like a once-every-several-sessions thing and it dragged the advancement economy down a little. So, no good solutions that I’ve ever found and I do feel you on that one. Luckily it’s the only one!

13

Enough. No more dog pile. Really. I expect better out of you all!

No more responses until the OP responds.

14

Sorry, my book haven’t arrived yet, but I tend to agree with everybody. I want to read it before I respond something, but I think my main problem was the nature of the adventure that had little relevence to our beliefs and so on.

So I’ll get back to you once I have read the book.

Cheers :slight_smile:

15

That’s actually a very important problem, although not necessarily one tied to artha. Adventures that aren’t tied very closely with Beliefs, and ideally with at least one Belief of every character at the table, will ruin a BW campaign. The GM can’t just think up an adventure and throw the PCs into it or the game will be awful. I’ve been there; it’s a bad place.

It’s absolutely critical to sit down and design compatible character, a compatible world, and a compatible sketch of what the plot will look like in content and themes so that when you play you’re all playing the same game, players and GM and all.

16

I understand and appreciate your sense of discomfort. Let me suggest a different spin.

The discomfort forces the group and the GM to examine whether people are getting appropriate spotlight time and whether the GM is playing to characters’ beliefs. There’s no hiding from a situation where the game isn’t working–when someone isn’t getting a fair share of spotlight and character attention. The system forces accountability for how the game is being played among everyone. In this way, the discomfort is helpful.

It’s a trade off. You lose some egalitarian element–yes–but really, how much of a difference does it make in mechanics? Honestly–with the way “failure” is in this game? Not much I think–not if the group responds appropriately. The benefit? A real awareness of table play–an awareness that is rooted in the mechanics of the game.

It took me some time to adjust to, and it took some of my players adjusting as well. In practice, if you consider it a tool, I have found it very helpful to initiating a meta discussion about table play. “Look guys, we all can see things aren’t working for Abe. Can we problem solve this?” If you frame the mechanic as a competitive thing with a winner, then that’s not going to work.

I really do understand why you find it uncomfortable or even distasteful–I did initially, but have since changed my perspective. I feel the same way about doling out individual artha awards–it’s accountability for whether I am doing my job–and if I am not, the discomfort really motivates me to fix it.

17

Late to the topic, but I just wanted to add that you can always change the criteria that artha is awarded for.

In our group we’ve replaced Workhorse with one we call “Perfect Gentleman.” You get a persona if you took actions to bring other characters into your spotlight, basically. So if you’re the street-smart young fence and you’re supposed to meet a guy who’s got some goods to sell and you go get another PC or two to go to the meeting with you, you’ve put them into a spotlight you could have hogged and “you get paid,” as Paul puts it.

The point of artha is to reward the behaviors you want to see at the table, so make sure the descriptions of the rewards fit the behaviors your group wants to see. Don’t take away the ones that reward you for engaging your BITs, though - those are linked to other parts of the engine that makes the game go.

18

No worries!

I’ve gone ahead and closed this thread until you’ve had a chance to digest the actual book a bit. Please start a new thread when you’re ready!

PS: if you get impatient waiting for the book, the “free pdf’s” section of the store has the first 70-some pages of the book, which includes the artha rules