Being the Berk that I am, Im working in version 3. Or 3.5. I don't even know anymore. But I have never heard of belife points, and It may answer some question about how my characters beliefs alter the plains, their alingments, whatever.
What are belife points and how do they work. Are they only for version 2e?
Personally, I never thought this was a good system. Individuals should get rewarded for roleplying their beleifs, yes, but not on a point system.
I base my Planescape Campaigns around belief completely. My current Campaign involves 5 humans* who are searching for their past lives. (Led by a Godsman) Slowly, though trials, tribulations, planehopping, and subtle clues, they are finding their past and evolving over game sessions.
There are many different ways to bring Belief into the forefront without a point system, and the roleplay can be much greater. Belief points are a decent concept for a non-planned campaign, or a printed set of adventures, but it doesn't fit my personal style.
-JordarAd
*If any of you care:
The five used to be trapped in Soulstones (like those of Alluvius Ruskin and Lykritch's search). They were freed, and given their (human) forms made of magic on a Experimantal Demiplane known as Thrice. They have since escaped the "experiment", and are roaming the planes to find out what they once were, and why they were trapped in the Soulstones. They still posess their soulstones, and slowly are transforming through experience (paying for the race in levels) and realization of their past.
See, if you have an orchestrated campaign, that's one thing, but how long can you lead the players around before they'll want to go off on tangents? Will you force them to stay on your script, or will you adapt?
Xan-
Being an improvisor helps. ( www.94east.com ) The campaign started with just three people. I rewrote for the extra three players that added on after the inception. Six players total, four have the Soulshards still. The Cleric (was a Per for Pelor's Realm) snuffed it. As we went along, and changes occourred, I re-wrote as necessary to include a Fire Elf, a Cambion Spy, a tool of a Scribe, and other PCs.
Tangents are always welcome in my campaigns, as I never write anything fully down. (And after DMing for 20+ years, I've figured out they're unavoidable at times...) I have a general idea where I would like the campaign to progress, and being able to corral the PC's is a necessary skill. It is the NATURE of this campaign that will bring its players forward.
-JordarAd
Knowing how to change is a far cry than from letting players make decisions for their characters.
Improv only takes a DM so far. As a writer, one of the hardest lessons to learn is that you're not in as great of control as you think you are of a story. You can plan it out up to a point, but beyond that, you have to let it take its course to get to the scenes you want in the story, even if that means changing locations.
In gaming, it is important that at all times you let the players feel they are in control of the game without coralling them in any fashion. The carrot always works better than the stick in plot enticements. However, it's only when the players want to go off on a different direction do you have them set upon by the plot, especially if you allowed them to make enemies connected to your original plot.
You make that sound like a bad thing.
Fact is often times as a GM you have to do what the PLAYERs want. After all they out number you, and they are often between you and the door. Besides seeing where things go is half of the fun. Do you really think that campainges lasting years and years are always planned out ahead of time simply from the GM? The fun is sharing control. After all if you force the players through one coarse no matter what they want you might as well just write it down as a "choose your own adventure" novel. Personaly while those were fun, I've grown out of them.
In gaming, it is important that at all times you let the players feel they are in control of the game without coralling them in any fashion. The carrot always works better than the stick in plot enticements. However, it's only when the players want to go off on a different direction do you have them set upon by the plot, especially if you allowed them to make enemies connected to your original plot.
Yes let them feel in control because in good roleplaying games they will be in control. You know many roleplaying games DON'T have gms. The GM is simply the leader. The arbiter. Ie. the GM is the one who has to see to all the details and as anyone who has GMed for a while does a large share of the work. Thus the gm for doing that also gets a larger share of control, but it is a SHARE. You make it sound like players have to be controlled, duped and tricked into loving the game and thinking they did the work. Heh as a gm I can tell you it is much more fun to let them actually do all that then try to pull the wool over their eyes.
Gracias, Gerzel. I had a long-winded response with many quotes concerning my feelings on this, but I lost it in a crash, and appreciate your well-thought (and much shorter) response. You pretty much summed up my thoughts on the matter.
In addendum:
>>>The carrot always works better than the stick in plot enticements.
I'm going to have to amicably disagree with you on that one, Xan. Sometimes you DO need to beat the PCs over the head. I know for a FACT that I am always dumber when I PC than when I run the game. Sometimes the stick will make them realize what and WHY they are doing things. A wake-up call may just be what the cleric ordered, so to speak. Dangling a magic item, opportunity, faction gain, wealth, etc may get tedious over time. Variety is necessary in a long-term game.
One of my favorite PS campaigns involved a Pit Fiend using a carefully-worded WISH on the PC's to make them *wish* to do something for him. (Insert malevolent cackle *here*) They HAD to progress further, each time they deviated from their course, they started losing experience points, instead of gaining them. At one point, when one of the PCs actually went counter productive to the wording of the wish, he lost a point off of his character's prime requisite score. If that isn't a beat-'em to do something stick-fest of a campaign, I don't know what is.
The thing is, all my players LOVED that campaign. Because there was a REASON for the stick beat-down. And it provided them with a continuous flow of character development and set parameters for reaching their goals. Each time they were detrimental to the plot, they were punished, and after awhile, they found a way to provide the Fiend with its wish's request, while still making sure they were working against it. A beautiful set of sessions where they went above and beyond their expectations for the campaign by working together to achieve a goal. And on top of it all, the players felt as though they were really up against an all-powerful Evil who could outwit them at the drop of a hat. What a fiend's deal just must be, I believe. (Most of them only knew a Baatezu from a series of random scores and dice counters in the MM.)
The same type of campaign could not have been accomplished if I had told them there was a big, shiny treasure on *insert random plane here* that they could get to by jumping through some hoops. I know that this is an oversimplification of the carrot-dangle theory, but I truly feel that the "Get thing, become more powerful" campaign is done to death in the roleplaying world. I prefer to think of my campaigns as challenges overcoming strife, just as real life can be at many times. The most interesting stories, to me, are about people associated with conflict and overcoming that conflict, not going out to actively achieve power, wealth, or some other abstract gain. There is greater character development and roleplay opportunities presented in this manner in my opinion.
And, not to diverge too much from the original question (too late, I know), Beleif Points are a great tool for DM's to use to further Beleif (capital "B")in short games without much of a cohesive plotline. I feel, however, that it does not work in my longer, established campaigns, because I believe Belief should not be restricted to a statistical improvement. The DM can make changes within their own campaigns and present role-playing opportunities and gains due to Belief in other fashions than a reroll or a briefly-added stat or feat, but this concept does not necessarily work for me.
Crap, this one's long too.
-JordarAd, the Manuel of the Planes
Belief Points aren't statistical improvements. They're temporary and easily used up. Additionally, they're hard to come by if you read Planewalker's Handbook.
And by carrot, I never mentioned any type of rewards. Carrorts are enticements. In fiction writing, we refer to them as hooks.
>>>Belief Points aren't statistical improvements. They're temporary and >>>easily used up.
Statistical as in a numerical bonus, not the standard six (Str, Dex, Wis, Con, Chr, and the almighty Int). A plus to hit, a reroll, a bonus to a numerical is what I mean.
>>>Additionally, they're hard to come by if you read Planewalker's >>>Handbook.
Mmmm... Yeah. I've looked at the PWH, and I can name numerous times my PC's would have earned these points. I tend to give XP rewards for Belief and finding the connections to the 3 Laws, number fudging isn't my style.
>>>And by carrot, I never mentioned any type of rewards. Carrorts are >>>enticements.
No, you didn't, which is why I put forth a lot of examples.
My point was, ALWAYS is a VERY suspect phrase. Sometimes plots need to be forced, and sometimes plots need to be optioned by the players. A good balance is what I feel is necessary with running a successful campaign.
I am by no means a writer, the Sketches I write are all based on previous Improvisations, and my adventures/campaigns in PS are given only the barest bones of thought before both the players and myself weave the tale together. But looking back, this style works best for me, which is why I commented as such regarding this thread.
Guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this matter...
-JordarAd
I'm a professional writer. So, I know how to draw people in without rewards or penalities. To paraphrase Lao-Tzu, it is better to govern invisibly than to lead openly.
Since I've yet to see an actual answer to the question posted on this thread, here goes.
Belief points are a system introduced in the Planewalker's Handbook for 2e. Essentially, it's a system that gives a PC a "belief point" for adhering very strongly to his own personal beliefs at any cost. I am using the belief system in my PbP game here on the forums, "Return to Home." If you look at the Announcement for it, you can see a bit more about what the belief point system entails.
Belief points are very powerful, and the Planewalker's Handbook lists two (maybe three, I forget the third) ways to spend belief points. The first is an automatic success on a check or saving throw. The second is using a belief point (or, perhaps, several) to gain insight from the DM on something pertaining to the adventure. In that regard, it's sort of like a divination spell that lets you see the future or learn something you didn't know before.
The PH reinforces the suggestion that if you use belief points, they should be awarded ONLY sparingly, and ONLY when the PC has defended his beliefs at some great cost to himself. They should be once-in-a-while rewards, not "Ho-hum, I got another belief point." I think it says you should award no more than 1 per session, and even that's being generous. The beliefs presented are usually very simple, and can be summed up in one or two sentences. "Lying is wrong" is an example of a belief that fits into the system. Despite what Xan said, the belief points are not required to be faction-specific. Generally speaking, if it's something the PC can and would die to uphold, it fits under the belief point system.
The belief points system, in my opinion, would work fine in 3e. It's not really "2e specific." The mechanics behind the system adapt very easily to any gaming system.
Some people, as mentioned above, may not agree with a "point-system" for rewards for PCs adhering to their beliefs. If you find the concept of the belief points interesting, you should experiment with them and how (or if) you want to reward your players for sticking to their beliefs.
Belief Feats is a small system I use in my campaign. You'll need to port the rules from Planewalkers Handbook though.
Nopes.
Just a mental fart regarding a bit of threadomancy - this thread is after all over a year old. 
:shock:
My mother used to call me a little slow. Never could understand what she meant by that. A little tardiness goes a long way I always say.
They're from the 2e book "The Planewalker's Handbook." I'm designing rules for them based partially on d20's Action Points and SW's Force Points.
The purpose of them was to reward great role-playing of faction beliefs by points that could be used to slightly alter dice rolls.