In todays video, continuing the exploration of the Palladium roleplaying system, in which
one set of core rules is used across a wide variety of different roleplaying story themes
and settings, as we call them.
I'd like to illustrate one of the fundamental differences in the palladium play style and
the deeper impact it has on how the game is played, compared to the original roleplaying
system, Dragons & Dragons and how it is largely still played today, so you could say this
is an integral, core difference that really defines the difference between these two rules
systems and the way players of the two think about the game.
So today, lets take a look at Alignment and experience points, first though, I'd like
to point out that I personally don't really need such a defined set of rules for these
concepts, I have been enjoying roleplaying games so long and in such variety, I don't
really need the training wheels anymore, I can just ride the bike, but it doesn't change
the fact that I learned to ride with these same training wheels and to this day, they
form the language and framework i still use when I think about some aspects of psychology
and even the way memory works, so, I think this topic is quite important, even if it
can be optional, I don't personally believe a roleplaying system should ignore them completely,
just as I don't think experienced players need to cling to the strict use of these rules
in all their games, I just think they are a necissary building block that goes into
training someone like me how to roleplay.
So lets look at what is most likely familiar to you first, the Dungeons & Dragons alignment
system and the way experience points are viewed in the modern game.
I'd also like to touch on how even this core part of the system, or what we would call
a game mechanic, has changed over the years and different editions, along with the change
in the way we gamers think about the concept of mental growth and such.
Then we can look at the Palladium alignment system and how that system deals with players
gaining experience points.
In Dungeons & Dragons, the moral and ethical outlook of any thinking creature can be divided
into categories, we call these alignments.
There is a fairly stark divide between them along two concepts, one the one side, its
how comfortable a person or thinking creature or thing is with things either being lawful,
or chaotic.
A strictly lawful creature is compelled to follow rules, understand how things work and
expects the same results if they do things a certain way, they like things to be set,
predictable, controlled and managed; They are uncomfortable with the unpredictable and
unknowm, lawlessness and, well, chaos.
The other aspect of alignment is related to either being good or evil in their outlook,
proclivities, or what brings them satisfaction and pleasure, and the sort of environment
they are comfortable in, particularly when it comes to the welfare of themselves over
those of others, there is a middle ground here, called Neutral, which represents a lack
of strong drive toward either, they don't care so much and are thus motivated more by
the law or chaos side of things, and there is even a completely neutral alignment type,
where they don't care much for law or chaos either, and are really just very self centred,
they are not persuaded by much other than their own self interest, to their credit the
tend to avoid impacting on the lives of others if they can be bothered, one way or the other.
Despite this sounding like a character very hard to motivate into action in the game,
I've found its not like that at all, they can be some of the most interesting, contradictory
and driven characters to play or deal with, as their behavior is very hard to read and
yet very self motivated, a great character to drive interesting plots in your games.
that levelling up in Dungeons & Dragons is a fairly big deal, unlocking new abilities,
attribute points increase, access to new feats and so on, while levelling up a character
in Palladium's roleplaying system is really not as dramatic, it has never been the focus
of game play from my point of view, nowhere near the driving factor is has always been
in Dungeons & Dragons.
Also the way experience points are gained is quite different.
Let me go right back to the very first edition of Dungeons & Dragons and quote what is written
there directly, and then I will skip ahead to the introduction of the Cavalier and Barbarian
character classes and some interesting quotes from their text regarding experience points,
but first, lets compare how the psychological alignment system differs from D&D.
In the Palladium Megaversal rule system, the alignments have a single word name, the two
good alignments are Principled and Scrupulous, the two selfish alignments are called Unprincipled
and Anarchist, and there are three evil alignments, which are named Aberrant, Miscreant and Diabolic.
These alignments have a set of clearly defined hard limites on what the creature will and
will not do, a short list, but it conveys the alignment very well.
Principled characters will always keep their word, never use torture for any reason, respect
authority and never betray a friend, while an Anarchist aligned character may keep their
word, may use torture but never for enjoyment of it, they may betray a friend and has little
respect for authority, and Diablic characters rarely keep their word, have no honor, regularly
use torture as they enjoy it, betray anyone without hesitation and blatantly break laws
while mocking figures of authority.
Just to name a few of the 13-14 different behavioral examples provided.
Added to this are clearly defined rules for mental illness, trauma and quite a good education
system, but we can delve into trained skills in a later video.
I've found over the years the simple change of calling a character selfish rather than
neutral is instantly clearer on the basic motivations they have, and the palladium system's
guidelines of behaviour just lend themselves to understanding what sort of character you
are dealing with, its a personality type, not some personification of cosmic principles.
Players of the Palladium system often refer to the different alignments by the names of
famous characters from popular media that best fit the definitions, such as the Principled
character being like Superman, the Unprincipled character is like Han Solo, the Aberrant alignment
is a perfect representation of an honourable, but a basically evil person, such a mafia
leader or even a former hero now twisted by an overwhelming drive for revenge, for example.
Diabolic beings are truly evil, with no real redeeming qualities and a danger to anyone
they are around, but its possible for an Aberrant character to blend into society perfectly
well, they may even appear to be doing good most of the time.
I find the Palladium system was clearer and more nuanced at the same time, a good evolution
of the way psychological profiles and motivations are handled in the roleplaying game.
Back to experience points, here are the quotes from the very early editions of Dungeons & Dragons,
first, from the original white boxed set.
"One point of experience will be awarded for one gold piece gained by a character, with
copper pieces, silver pieces, electrum pieces, platinum pieces, gems, jewelry, and like treasure
being converted to a gold piece value.
Magic items gained and retained have only a low experience point value, for they benefit
the character through their use.
They also have limited values if the situation or monster guarding the loot was easy to overcome
to gain it."
Later this is explained in more detail and does give great insight into how the early
editions of D&D were intended to be played.
"Experience points awarded for treasure gained - monetary or magical - are modified downward
if the guardian of the treasure (whether a monster, device, or obstacle, such as a secret
door or maze) was generally weaker than the character who overcame it.
A 4th level character versus a single orc is an overmatch, and only about 10% of the
treasure value gained could count towards experience points; but if nine or ten orcs
were involved, the experience points awarded would generally be on a one-for-one basis.
Monsters captured or slain always bring a full experience point award.
Captured monsters ransomed or sold bring a gold piece: experience point ratio award.
Monsters slain gain a set point award.
Low hit point/dice monsters have a low experience point amount.
Monsters with high hit points/dice have large experience point awards.
Special abilities such as magic resistance, spell capability, gaze or breath weapons,
regeneration, and the like also increase experience points amounts.
Finally, clerics' major aims are to use their spell abilities to aid during any given encounter,
fighters aim to engage in combat, magic-users aim to cast spells, thieves aim to make gain
by stealth, and monks aim to use their unusual talents to come to successful ends.
If characters gain treasure by the pursuit of their major aims, then they are generally
entitled to a full share of earned experience points awarded by the DM.
Your DM will award your character(s) experience points as explained.
He or she has detailed information respecting this subject, and a chart of experience points
to be given for monsters slain, with bonus points shown for special abilities of monsters.
After being awarded points, you will be expected to add any bonus due for high major characteristic
ability, total the whole, and record the number of experience points now possessed by the
character.
Remember, character henchmen will gain only one-half of total experience.
Your referee might require you to inform him or her of new experience point totals in order
to keep records.
This prevents any "fudging" on the part of over-zealous players."
So player characters gained additional experience by capturing and ransoming enemies for gold,
which also gave them experience points, which goes massively against the narrative that
early D&D was all about kicking down doors.
looting treasure and killing anything in the way... far from it; this game was about a
leader who had proven their metal, who now leads a team of henchmen and other specialists
into danger, captures exotic monsters and villains, ransoms them back for profit and
supports the local civilisation by spending that wealth on wages for the henchmen, equipment,
some sort of home base and their obligations to whatever guild, order or faith that both
trains them and keeps them supplied.
To go further into how different the experience point and levelling up concepts were, just
check these quotes from early D&D classes when they first appeared officially in the
rules for the cavalier and barbarian.
"To advance a level, the cavalier must be trained by another cavalier of at least 4th
level, or 2 levels higher than the cavalier’s current level, whichever is higher.
However, after attaining 6th level, the cavalier’s normal regimen will suffice for training,
and the cavalier does not need others to allow an advance in level."
'Allow an advance in level', this means that if the Dungeon Master had some antagonist
force wipe out the whole order of Cavaliers in the region (something that is very cliche
in character back story essays players tend to provide to DMs these days like they are
somehow allergic to any family, faith or organisational ties to their character's origin), they could
not advance in that character class until they found higher level cavaliers surviving
elsewhere, they would have to either stop gaining levels or choose another class to
gain levels in.
Now for the Barbarian, one of my favourite obscure official rules from early D&D, and
you can imagine the absolute mayhem this would cause in a modern game.
"Barbarians in general detest magic and those who use it.
They will, at low levels of experience, refuse to employ any sort of magic item if they recognize
it as such.
They will often seek to destroy magic items, and if successful they receive an experience-point
award as if they possessed the destroyed items.
While magic-users will be shunned initially, and always viewed with suspicion, clerical
spells of the type used by shamans and witch doctors are not so viewed, though high-level
clerical spells are suspect".
Also, in first edition D&D only humans could ever be barbarians.
Can you imagine the outrage if a barbarian destroyed magic items for experience point
gains, and remember, characters were expected to attain experience levels at different rates
of speed in the early game, so a barbarian could literally prevent other characters gaining
gold coin experience from selling magic items, because the barbarian already destroyed the
enchanted gear, or their rage caused them to have to kill enemies rather than capture
and ransom them.
This is stuff nobody talks about these days and I question if the modern designers of
D&D's next iteration would even know what I am talking about.
Ignore history and you are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
Now, compare this to Palladium's attitude to how experience points work, it is a stark
contrast, so here is the experience point guidance chart, you will notice the difference
immediately.
It is focused on roleplay, encouraging clever thinking and playing in character is tangibly
rewarded, this is a much more narrative system, quite advanced and far more like a modern
roleplaying game, including Dungeons & Dragons latest editions.
I will quote the game designer directly here, as he summed up the reasoning behind this
chart and the way experience points are viewed quite nicely.
From the Palladium Role-Playing Game, revised edition, published since 1983.
"It is difficult to devise a point system by which a Game Master can judge and reward
his players fairly.
The ultimate purpose of experience points and experience levels is to provide a means
by which the player's character can grow and develop."
"Many games avoid the whole question of experience points by a system in which points are pumped
back into the powers, but this leaves skills undeveloped, as well as being pretty drab.
The subjective method of observation and logic introduced in the Palladium Role-Playing Game
has been so well received that I'm not only keeping it in the Second Edition, but I've
successfully transplanted it into all of our games.
I feel that any twit can punch out or blast a villain that just crawled out of the woodwork.
Most experience systems concentrate on the "kill factor," but what about the thought
process?
What about the decisions, plans, or motives behind a particular action?
Doesn't cleverness and a cool head count?
Aren't these the true ingredients of good role-playing?
Shouldn't the brilliant medical student playing a character with an I.Q. of 4 (and staying
firmly in character, saying and doing things as the character would, even though he realizes
the foolishness or stupidity as a player) get experience for playing in character?
Hell Yes!!!
Considering how flexible and subjective most of the other role-playing conditions and rules
are, I don't see the logic in having a strict, limited experience point system.
Each player's character involved in a given situation/confrontation should receive the
appropriate experience points.
The Game Master should make a list of his players at the beginning of the game and jot
down each player's experience points as they gather them throughout the course of the game.
At the end of the game, the Game Master totals each player's points and gives them the total
to keep track of their growing experience and skills.
The difficulty with this system of determining experience points is subjectivity.
The Game Master must utilize the proceeding experience outline with some thought and try
to be fair and unbiased.
Example: Eight third-level characters brimming with magic and armed to the teeth attack and
subdue one, lone, fourth-level villain or minor monster.
The eight players should receive experience points for subduing a minor menace.
After all, the poor guy didn't have a chance and presented no real threat to the characters.
However, if one or two first or second-level characters subdued the same villain, they
should receive experience for subduing a major or even a great menace (depending on how powerful
it was), because the threat and ingenuity involved were much greater.
I have found this method stimulates imaginative playing instead of promoting slash-and-kill
gaming.
Warning: Game Masters, don't be Santa Claus, heaping wonderful amounts of experience points;
be fair and tolerant.
Let your players truly earn their experience points, grow ing in skill, knowledge and power.
If you have a group of players rising rapidly in experience levels, you will know it's because
they are clever and imaginative players.
And that's what this game is all about!"
So I hope today you will have a much better understanding of the fundamental differences
between Dungeons & Dragons and Palladium Megevarsal Rules based Roleplaying games, and if that
helps push you toward trying out some games in my favorite RPG of all time, nothing could
make me happier, my name is AJ Pickett, I make videos about Alien and Monster lore,
RPG history and gaming lore, as always, thank you for listening and I will be back with
more for you, very soon.