Too many Prizes: What do I tell my players?

[Glacialis]

If you can't have more than X Prizes, that X+1 needs to be gone somehow. What reason do I give my players? I understand the balance and cinematic quality of the mechanic. I don't grok how to portray the loss in a campaign.

[Krensky]

Depends on the Prize.

Contacts: People die. This is a plot hook in addition to a correction.
Favors: People forget, time limits expire, you loose contact, etc.
Holdings: Seizure, failure, relinquished, etc.
Magic Items: Same advice every other game has ever given. Thieves, sundering, have it fail when used, or just disappear over night, whatever.

[Rhishisikk]

Or - let the player choose which prizes to 'maintain', and the other(s) go into mothballs.  A domain is run by a steward, rather than the player.  They loose touch with the contact/favor... but make it clear that there is a 'dusting off' time when the Prize comes out of mothballs, during which neither it nor the prize it is replacing is available.

[MugMug]

Note that any/all of these can occur to drop the number of prizes below X. The rules fully anticipate loss of prizes.

Walter

[Glacialis]

I just can't wrap my head around it. I know this isn't D&D, but my brain is still having issues with this.

Ex: I find magic items A, B, and C, can only have one Prize, and choose to keep A. What prevents the character from holding on to them? Do I always have to use GM fiat to take them away? It's going to feel cheap if the contact always gets killed, thieves always steal items, holdings always get destroyed or overrun, etc.

I have no problem with the mechanics, I just want help describing the in character ramifications.

[Wolverine]

The players don't always have to lose one of their new prizes. Perhaps one of their older contacts dies, is kidnapped, or moves out of the area. One of their magic items might run out of charges. There are way to keep things limited, it just takes a little imagination.

[Sletchman]

You know what makes a great gift to keep contacts happy?  Spare magic items.   I know back in DnD some of my players used to give their spare magic armour and lesser weapons to guard captains, or other friendly NPC's to both keep them friendly, and alive longer.  Maybe they could give that flaming sword to a mistress so she can keep warm in the winter easier.

Work with the players to figure where spare prizes might go, they might have some cool ideas, stuff doesn't have to disappear.

[Crafty_Pat]

You know what makes a great gift to keep contacts happy?  Spare magic items.  I know back in DnD some of my players used to give their spare magic armour and lesser weapons to guard captains, or other friendly NPC's to both keep them friendly, and alive longer.  Maybe they could give that flaming sword to a mistress so she can keep warm in the winter easier.

Work with the players to figure where spare prizes might go, they might have some cool ideas, stuff doesn't have to disappear.

This was exactly our feeling. Sometimes the reasons will come from players, sometimes from the GM. Ultimately, all of them must make sense within the context of your setting and story, so having the rules define them is actually counter-productive.

In addition to the many reasons already offered, and just off the top of my head...

- Religious characters may donate Prizes to their Church
- Military characters may donate Prizes to their quartermasters
- Any adventurer might donate Prizes to up-and-coming or friendly NPC groups
- Wasteful characters, and those who like to live expensive lifestyles, may sell them, or gamble them away, or lose them in a drunken haze
- Prizes may even be refused for various personal or campaign-related reasons

Remember, the more you link the reasons to details in your game, the more plausible they'll feel to your group.

[TheTSKoala]

They also make a terrific gift to present to the lord, lady or ruler of whichever town, province or region you're in.  I make my players work for their audiences.  ...and god save them if they don't bring presents like it's Xmas and they're Santa.

Case in point...

My players (level 2.. we're getting our feet wet in FC) used to horde items like the world was running out of magic back in D&D.  Something that always drove me nuts.  Level 7 players with 14 pieces of Magic gear.. 10 of which didn't help them.  My biggest problem (as it seems with Glac's) wrapping my head, and my player's head, around the idea that not everything they found were theirs to keep...

So.. players find that a local councilman plans to kill the Mayor of a town.  However, the Mayor's advisor is in on the coup.  They need to get a meeting with the Mayor.  Mayor regards them as traveling riff-raff and not worth his time.  However... he was highly interested in that broach they were carrying....

Ever since, they use prizes like Bribery is the new fashion.

[Glacialis]

All of these are very good.

But when they ask why they're limited to a certain number, is there anything I can tell them other than "that's how the system is designed"? Now that I can put it into words: I'm looking for an in-game reason for the mechanic. There probably isn't one, and I can ask them to accept that conceit. With the player group I have in mind that won't be a problem, but if I was a player it probably would be. :p

[TheTSKoala]

But when they ask why they're limited to a certain number, is there anything I can tell them other than "that's how the system is designed"?

The simple answer, that's the way the system was designed.  Why?  (Maybe one of the Crafty_? will tell us the design round table chat when this was under pen.)  Perhaps to balance characters vs. game design?  That'd be my best bet.  Though.. I have been tinkering... and by tinkering.. I mean.. I have notes in a notebook.. along with 20 other adventure ideas.. but.. at least it's on paper!.. with an idea.  Going to copy my idea straight from the page (any help would be great!)

Feat / Favor / Perhaps even a Prize itself::

"Magical Mystical Backroom":  Your players gain a store room for their "prizes" in a building they do not own.  The owner of the building will be an NPC with a Intrigued disposition.  This allows the players access (when in town) of the holdings, however, it does NOT increase the amount of prizes a player may possess.

Obvious issues:  Upkeep cost?  What happens if they anger owning NPC?  What happens if the owning NPC is killed and shop taking over?  etc etc.

[Wolverine]

I would explain that it is part of the 'game balance'. If they complain, offer to lower the Soldier's skills ranks to 2 + Int mod per level and the Mage's vitality to 4 + Con mod per level and see what they say then

If they press the point, you could allow them to keep all of the prizes. They can still only use the correct number each time they adventure, with the excess left behind with their stash. That way they could pick and choose the best prizes to use for each adventure. This would work especially well if they're based out of a fixed location.

[Desertpuma]

Which is when you employ the Cyberpunk method, it only takes one very skilled thief to gain access to their holding facility and remove all the material prizes in the middle of the night. Of course, neglecting favors, contacts, and lands are ways to lose those.

[MugMug]

"I know it's near sacriligeous, but I would like our game to avoid focusing on loot. To that end, we will be using these mechanics. However, I need your help in making the game work. We will all be happier if you figure out reasons why you end up keeping only a certain number of magic items, because the only real tools I have to use involve forcibly removing those items from your character through confiscation, theft, or disaster."

Note the inclusiveness ("our game"), and the blatant appeal to self-interest.

I would also be comfortable allowing a limited amount of storage of items (maybe using # storable = holding scale), while using the number of prizes as a sort of carrying capacity (i.e. the # carried, and not the # stored, counts against the prize limit). If my players really got into the idea I could pretty easily indicate this was the number that could be safely stored, and as long as the character didn't mind risking the entire stash he could store above that level (e.g. every additional magic item stored results in a 20% chance of the stash being raided/stolen during an adventure). That ought to help players over the conceptual hump.

If players wouldn't work with me on this (and I didn't have the option to "upgrade" my players ) I would indicate the collection of magic items brings the party to the notice of thieves/gov't officials/crime bosses/whatever, with inevitable losses resulting. Make ownership/possession of magic items subject to permit (you might want to do this even with accomodating players, to provide an opportunity for legal drama), and quickly do away with any notion of freedom from unreasonable search/seizure. Violation of the law revokes any legitimate permits the character may possess (i.e. if they're caught with any unpermitted items, they lose all magic items).

Walter

[meadicus]

And there's another option that I don't think has been mentioned. Don't limit the number of prizes they can keep. Ignore that rule. If it doesn't work for you and your game table then don't use it. I'm not yet sure if I'll be using it at my game table, I'm need to read it a couple more times.

Or for an approach specific to magic items, how about saying magic items need to draw some of their power from the person wielding/using them, and a person's soul can only power so much at any time, all excess items becoming useless. As they adventure more (spend rep on renown) their bodies grow accustomed to being laden with magic items they can power more.