# Who Are Your Friends?



## The DMs Wife (Jul 4, 2013)

I love this idea. I've been gaming on and off for more than a year with a party of 4 with each of us taking turns as DM. My character and another character are definitely buds and it was a friendship earned over the course of the game - we now make different choices than we normally would if our friend feels strongly about something. I like the idea of being able to reward players for developing relationships through role playing. I think as a DM I'd hold this back and only give it to players who I feel "earn" it through good role playing at the table.  I often give exp bonuses for good role playing and this could be even better and be something visible to encourage the whole group to develop relationships.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 5, 2013)

While as a DM, I like to encourage buddies & rivalries for PCs- especially _within_ the party- I don't like to do it with mechanics or powers.  I stick mainly to XP and campaign-level stuff.  Political benefits, contacts & connections, "adoption" into a clique or family or organization...whatever seems appropriate.

As a player, I occasionally ask another player to have some kind of bond between my PC and his.  So I've gotten to play characters involving identical twins, blood brothers, rivals, and even bully/victim dynamics.


----------



## Silver Griffin (Jul 5, 2013)

This is a great idea.  Normally I try and encourage back-story via XP and other similar rewards.  I am severely tempted to try using this method instead, or maybe in addition.


----------



## Jhaelen (Jul 5, 2013)

That's a really cool idea - I wonder why I never thought of it myself? ;-)
I'm reminded of the relationship cards in the Arkham Horror board game.
Seems like a good inspiration for more relationship-based powers for 4e!


----------



## Morrus (Jul 5, 2013)

Surely a party will just declare that they're all friends with each other to get the bonus? At which point there's no difference between them, and so they may as all none be friends.


----------



## Gilladian (Jul 5, 2013)

Dungeon World uses "bonds". Each PC forms a number of bonds with other PCs (and NPCs) during character creation and then again later in the game. Bonds are statements of the PC's feeling about that other person; they may be "I trust X with my life because he has proven his worth" or "Y seems too weak to survive; I will protect him" or "Z worships an alien god and may not be trustworthy". 

During the game, as PC relationships emerge and shift, bonds can be "written off" as no longer appropriate when BOTH characters agree. At that point the bond-holding character gains XP. And has an empty "bond slot" to fill with a new bond; it can be with that character or another. 

Bonds can be positive or negative. They don't affect formal gameplay, except in a few situations where a move is "roll+bond" meaning you get a +1 if you have an active bond with that PC. But they're a major part of the "fiction" which is critical to how Dungeon World moves are carried out. 

I love the idea and will probably carry them over to DnD somehow the next time  I run it.


----------



## Janx (Jul 5, 2013)

Morrus said:


> Surely a party will just declare that they're all friends with each other to get the bonus? At which point there's no difference between them, and so they may as all none be friends.




I would limit a new party to one relationship request per PC.  So I can friend or rival you (if you accept), and I would have to wait for someone to friend/rival request me.  You will have recieved my request (let's say you accept).  You can still make your own request to somebody else in the party (not me, we're already linked).

this would set up each PC with 2 relationships, one they started, and one they were asked for.

Or just limit PCs to one pairing (so if I ask you, and you accept, you can't tie to somebody else).  I don't like this style, as I would like to see a starting relationship between every PC (so ultimately, there's a line connecting the party, before the first session ever starts).

I would propose a few more "Relationships" to enable this:
Common Cause
"Remember the Alamo!"
Reacion: Once per day
Trigger: When your ally is in combat
Effect: give your comrade in arms a +1 to-hit as you encourage them to fell their foe and bring you a step closer to your common goal.

Both PCs have a common goal they could work together for (ex. freeing their elven homeland).

I would also consider a pace for adding new relationships (connecting other party members to yourself over time).  perhaps, once every 4 levels.  Maybe a little more frequently than that.  If a PC leaves the party, that "relationship slot" is lost, so you'll need to build a new relationship to their replacement OR the new PC will choose you as their first relationship slot.

I like the idea.  I can see some expansions on it.  I like formalizing some of the pre-party setup to get the players connecting their PCs to each other.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jul 5, 2013)

Morrus said:


> Surely a party will just declare that they're all friends with each other to get the bonus? At which point there's no difference between them, and so they may as all none be friends.




I think this is kind of "mission accomplished," if it happens. If everyone decides they're all friends with each other to maximize the bonus, you've ALSO got a party of fast friends who got each others' back and want to help each other out. Since you can still only help out one of your friends per day, it basically means that the first X crits against PCs of the game (X being the number of people in your party) need to be re-rolled. That actually helps negate how the swinginess of most crits ends up screwing PC's, and since it still costs an action, it's not something that is going to be automatically chosen (though certainly it might be if the crit knocks someone unconscious!). 

So, mechanically, you're looking at a pretty small effect. A REAL effect, but not really a big deal -- a few less hits or crits per day.

And in terms of getting the goal of everyone working together as a coherent group...hey presto, that's what you've got!


----------



## EditorBFG (Jul 6, 2013)

To serve a very similar purpose in D&D/Pathfinder games, I adapted the Trust & Betrayal mechanics from Night's Black Agents and came up with the following system:
_LOYALTY DICE
At the beginning of an adventure, each player allocates a number of Loyalty Dice equal to half the party size (rounded up) +1 among their allies. A Loyalty Die is a d6. They divide these dice amongst their allies, and can retain none for themselves. No player can give more than 3 Loyalty Dice to one character, but they must assign 2 or more Loyalty Dice to at least one character in order to assign them at all. Unallocated Loyalty Dice are lost until the beginning of the next adventure. At the end of each adventure, any Loyalty Dice that were assigned but not used are lost.
You can spend Loyalty Dice allocated to you at any time when both you and the character who gave you the Loyalty Dice are present. An ally may spend one Loyalty Die for any one of the following effects at a time:_
•	To roll the Loyalty Die and add the result to any die roll made by the Loyalty-giver (whether it is a d20 roll or a damage roll) before it is rolled.
•	When the Loyalty-giver is healed, to roll the Loyalty die and add the result to the number of hit points the Loyalty-giver recovers
•	To roll the Loyalty die and add the result to the Loyalty-giver’s AC against a single attack.
•	To let the Loyalty-giver re-roll a die roll they just made.
_In addition, an ally may spend two Loyalty Dice for the following effect:_
•	To roll a d12 and add the result to any attack roll, damage roll, or skill roll against the Loyalty-giver before or after it is rolled (this is called Betrayal)_
The DM may ask for a quick explanation of how you helped out (“I distract Alexander’s opponent with a sudden shout” or “I lean over the thief Alexander is questioning and crack my knuckles”), or just decide that the presence of a trusted comrade encourages the Loyalty-giver’s success.
When Betrayal occurs, the character betrayed cannot spend Loyalty Dice from their betrayer for the rest of the scene. Until the next time the character betrayed gains a level, they cannot assign Loyalty Dice to any character who has previously betrayed them._


----------



## Umbran (Jul 7, 2013)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> I think this is kind of "mission accomplished," if it happens. If everyone decides they're all friends with each other to maximize the bonus, you've ALSO got a party of fast friends who got each others' back and want to help each other out.




Only in the sense that they can hand each other a bonus now and again, at the cost of an action.  And rivals get a very similar ability.  Not a lot of diversity there - little call to chose one over the other.  I think the idea of having defined relationships that the characters can call on has some legs, but it probably ought to have a little more depth than, "if you claim to be friends, you get a power". 

"Everyone is fast friends" isn't dramatically interesting, either.  If you want to explore relationships, a steady, happy state is about the last thing you want, as there's nothing to explore there.  Exploration depends upon there being some unknown qualities and/or dynamics to the relationship to give you some unknown territory you can enter, so to speak.

And, what about those people who aren't your friends, and aren't your rivals?  What if you just don't like them, but have to work with them for some reason?  That's arguably the most interesting situation, dramatically, but there's no incentive to explore it.

So, I think this would call on having a few more kinds of relationships defined - friendship, love, rivalry, dislike, and such.  Having the power is good, but you might want another aspect - if you have some form of "action point" mechanic, and you take some action that complicates your life for that relationship, you get an action point, or some other form of the "if you play your flaw, you get a bennie" format.


----------



## Argyle King (Jul 7, 2013)

I like the idea of encouraging relationships between characters.  I'm not sold on the implementation of this idea though.  From what I can tell, you pick a relationship and gain something similar to (but far weaker than) some of the Warlord powers from 4E D&D.  The idea isn't bad; I do play games which have mechanical things attached to concepts such as Sense of Duty and Ally advantages, but -as said- I don't like the implementation of this particular idea.  

I want to again say that I don't view the idea as bad.  However, for me personally, it doesn't fit into the style of play I want nor does it mesh with my ideas about how in-game relationships should work.  Even considering that I do play games which attach some amount of mechanics to some rp elements, this idea still somehow seems more metagamey to me; metagamey in a way which doesn't appeal to me.  (Though, it may very well appeal greatly to someone else.)


----------



## The Shadow (Jul 8, 2013)

I've always believed in having each party member knowing at least some of the others beforehand.  It just makes no sense to suddenly bond in a tavern.

The idea of giving some mechanical reason to roleplay friendship and rivalry is interesting.  I think there should be some consideration to letting rivalry and friendship change over time;  in particular, I can see rivals become friends.

This was certainly the case with Legolas and Gimli;  while they started out with animosity toward each other, that quickly became a friendly rivalry over orc kills;  and in the end they were inseparable friends, to the extent that Legolas took Gimli with him across the sea.


----------



## MacMillan (Aug 15, 2013)

MCM highland dress sporran 2013 blossom and summer a muscular advertising 
MCM, all products are made ??using the finest materials, clockwork, purses using exclusively the most advanced materials, leather is unpretentious, eternal, waterproof and can brave UV rays, MCM define was founded in 1976 in Munich, Germany, is the come to nothing of Hollywood superstar - Michael Cromer, the letters "MCM" reproduce Conduct, Nativity, Munich. MCM producer throw in the towel lines to  clothing, delighted rags and leather-based. MCM cardinal started to produce leather goods, in the 1980s, the maker's heyday, MCM forming, including jewelery, watches, perfumes, clothing, bags  and copied leather goods, etc., more than five hundred models of the product. It is fashion, voluptuary and reasonable products  are very  popular.


----------



## Smithson (Aug 15, 2013)

MCM carpet-bag 2013 blossom and summer a grand advertising 
MCM, all products are made ??using the finest materials, innards, purses using at most the most advanced materials, leather is comfortable, durable, waterproof and can confront UV rays, MCM medley was founded in 1976 in Munich, Germany, is the go to davy jones's locker of Hollywood superstar - Michael Cromer, the letters "MCM" role Trend, The the public, Munich. MCM see yield lines to  clothing, delighted rags and leather-based. MCM cardinal started to collect leather goods, in the 1980s, the brand's heyday, MCM presentation, including jewelery, watches, perfumes, clothing, bags  and copied leather goods, etc., more than five hundred models of the product. It is currency, greedy and credible products  are truly  popular.


----------

