Thanks Arthur for your very good ideas. When I am a storyteller I always try to involve all the skills of the game possible at the first available opportunity because I do not like there to be too much difference in importance between the various skills. But even doing so in our adventures there are not many rolls, or at least not enough to exhaust the confidence points compared to how many are generated.
Thank you all for the interesting and valuable answers and suggestions. Through your feedback I have learned that one of the main problems is that my playgroup receives too many confidence points because our play sessions are too short compared to the sessions for which the rule was designed. A simple solution would be to divide the confidence points gained in one of our sessions by 2 or 3.
However, your contributions have inspired me to develop a new House Rule on confidence that I would like to submit to you to hear your thoughts (@David_Chart ).
Aureliano Confidence House Rule
Confidence points are earned at the rate of 2 or 3 points for every 5 hours of play approximately depending on how each character meets the game requirements as indicated by the 5th edition of AM. You can have a maximum of Confidence points equal to Confidence Score x6. So with a score of 1 a maximum of 6 points and with a score of 2 a maximum of 12… and so on.
advanced optional rule
It is possible to use a confidence point to reroll a die instead of adding +3. If the character has multiple confidence scores then the player can decide how many Confidence Points to spend in the reroll (up to the maximum of his Confidence Score) and then reroll a die for each confidence point spent and use for the purposes of the test the score of the die he likes the most (the highest probably...). When evaluating which die result to keep to solve the test, the result of the first die roll made on the test is also included in the choice of the best score, therefore with a confident score of 2 and the use of 2 confidence points, 2 dice would be re-rolled and the player could choose which of the 3 die results to keep (the first one made + the two re-rolled using the confidence points). This reroll option can also be used in the case in which a zero is rolled on a stress roll to avoid a botch test, but it must be declared and chosen before checking for any botches (as it was in the 3rd edition of AM). The rerolled dice are of the same type (Simple or Stress) of the initial test. As in the original rules, confidence points cannot be used in laboratory or seasonal activities. With this system the player can defend himself from a potential botch in the stress rolls in the event of a zero, but if in the reroll a zero is rolled again, that score is kept and the normal check for botches is made. I would also add that defeats and failures in important battles or challenges make you lose confidence points (1), representing the effects of a drop in morale and self-esteem.
A player may, if he wishes, instead of rerolling a die, add a cumulative +3 bonus to the chosen die roll by spending a confidence point (just like in the official rule), and may do this with any combination of rerolls and cumulative +3 bonuses as long as his Confidence Score allows him to spend Confidence Points on that action. So for example a player with a Confidence Score of +5 (a legendary hero) could, by spending 5 confidence points, reroll 2 dice keeping the best of the 3 die results made and add +9 to the result (+3 x 3 = 9) and then calculate the total by adding the appropriate ability and characteristic bonuses.
This allows you to defend yourself from botches that potentially in combat can be the cause of a character's death and allows you to better protect yourself in defensive combat rolls by using them to compensate for an extraordinary success of your attacking monster. It also leaves more uncertainty and variability, and in this way more confidence points are spent. This alternative rule, although it protects from botches, does not protect absolutely. In practice, using this option the risk of running into a botch is reduced by 10 times, but is not completely eliminated. Since a botch in a defense or soak roll in combat probably implies the death of the character, this rule allows a player to avoid the death of their character due to a botch, but does not completely eliminate the possibility. Personally, I have always thought that seeing your character die from a botch is not the height of an epic climax. Moreover, according to the official rules of Ars Magica, a character in combat should on average make a botch in defense every 100 tests, which represents the character's life spam in a fairly predetermined way and on which the player is completely helpless, instead with the implementation of this rule the death of the character from a botch in Defense rolls is postponed (therefore more variable) but not completely eliminated. However, this could unbalance the game in the case in which the characters had too many confidence points to spend, for this reason I set a maximum of accumulable points as a rule, which also encourages players to use them. This way the number of points awarded to players has less relevance than the official rule.
What do you think? Could it work? Do you see any drawbacks to this alternative rule?
The way we play, Confidence is granted after conclusion of stories, where you achieve some goal. Usually 2-3 pointer per story, stories can take several sessions.If somebody remembers to ask.
Confidence is readily used by players, especially if the characters both a Dfn or something, to save lives. In lots of sessions we have little combat and action packed spellcasting. But then we use Confidence for rolls about knowledge, and especially to social skills.
2 Likes
You have found an excellent balance in this rule. What do you think about the alternative rule I proposed above? Do you think it could work? Do you see any side effects and/or contraindications?
I like the idea of a maximum amount of points you may accumulate - if you don't spend them you don't get more. That way you never have the problems with someone having so many they can use them for all rolls.
Also, you could limit the amount of Conf you hand out based on the nature of stories, how hard the pc's work for a goal and whenter they achieve goals or parts thereof.
I like the 5th ed mechanic that Conf is spent after the fact to (maybe) ensure succes. I hated 4th ed where you spent in advance and risked it being meaningless. Grated, Conf was regained back then (but you had them in low numbers), and not it gone wen spent.
I don't like the re-roll idea. First off, it's not an ArM mechanic. Second, you risk rolling poorly again, wasting the point.. Thats why i like the current rules.
1 Like
Yes, it is important that this rule, in addition to realistically simulating self-efficacy (as described by psychologist A. Bandura) must also be fun and interesting in terms of game mechanics. You made a fair and interesting point that led me to further modify the above rule to address the problem you identified (Confidence rule: seem bugged! - #22 by Aureliano). Now there is no longer the risk of making less than the first roll, because its score is included in the choice of the best score. The expected average on a dice roll is 5.5 while on a two-dice roll it is 7.15, on three dice (for a Tytalus for example) 7.85. These are not huge increases, but considering that even in your group you would use them on a low first roll, the average increase could be around 6 points which is not bad. It is a rule that offers more chances of salvation on a defense roll in the event the opponent makes an extraordinary result, than the current rule offers. This mechanic is very similar to the third edition mechanic, so from my point of view it is not so alien to Ars Magica, but I understand what you mean. I think it is more important that the statistical distribution of the results is in line with what you want to achieve rather than its aesthetics being beautiful at the expense of effectiveness. However, you can keep the option that the player can cumulatively add +3 to the result of the saved die instead of rerolling the die, opting for any kind of combination between rerolled dice and added bonus as long as his confidence score allows it. Thanks for your important feedback and contribution.