Players, Remember, Just Because You CAN Doesn't Mean You SHOULD

When you're playing an RPG, it can sometimes feel like you have nearly absolute freedom. You can be almost anyone, and do practically anything as long as its in accordance with the rules. If you want to play a grumpy, aging gnome barbarian who constantly thwacks people with his walker, that's totally an option! If you want to play a burgeoning elven sorcerer, a peppy halfling warlock, or a sour knight who's just here for the paycheck, there is nothing standing in your way.

Honor and glory? More like dental and retirement benefits.

The same thing applies to actions you take in the game world. Do you want to sneak into the goblin encampment and spirit away the treasure from right under the sentries' noses? Do you want to blast the oncoming horde of ogre warriors with fire and lightning? Do you want to broker a peace treaty between the orcs and the farmsteads, creating a mutually beneficial arrangement that will strengthen the community?

You can certainly try to do any of these things. And if you've got lucky dice, along with a good DM, you can probably pull them off.

However, a lot of the time players can take that freedom a step too far. So before you go haring off into the wilderness, I'd like to ask all the folks out there to keep something in mind when tinkering with the engine; just because something is a legal, mechanical option, that doesn't mean you should pursue it.

Ask How This Benefits You, And Your Concept?

While it's all fine and good to talk about favoring story and roleplaying over mechanics, the facts are that you're still playing a game, and a game has rules. There are going to be certain decisions that make your character better at some things, and worse at others. And while it's true that you don't need to have a completely optimized character to have fun with them, it is important to understand the consequences your choices can have when it comes to your character, and their abilities.

Example time!

 

All right, let's say you're playing Pathfinder Classic, and you want to put together a dwarven sorcerer. You know that a sorcerer's magic is derived from their Charisma, and that as a race dwarves take a -2 to that score. So even if you roll top stats, the best you can manage to start with is a 16. With point buy, you're going to wind up with a lot less, unless you're willing to tank all your other attributes.

Now, do you need an inhumanly high Charisma score to play an effective sorcerer? No, but as I mentioned in No One Wins When You Build A Stupid Wizard, the game's rules are written with the assumption that you're building your characters to be good at things. Having a middling casting stat might not remove your use entirely, but it is going to leave you feeling frustrated when you can't get your enemies to fail their saving throws, or when you don't have access to higher-level spells despite your level (assuming you haven't been able to boost your attributes high enough to cast spells of that level by the time you gain access to them).

These are the challenges you face, and it's your job as a player to figure out how to deal with these challenges. Now, the easy solution is to just play a different race, but that isn't exactly necessary. For example, the Empyreal bloodline allows your sorcerer to cast off of Wisdom rather than Charisma, which is a score dwarves actually get a bonus to. This gives you all the power and benefits of an ideal stat, and lets you keep the class/race combo you started out with. Alternatively, your character could also be an aasimar descended from dwarves, giving them a dwarven appearance but with the traits of these native outsiders (something that cropped up quite a lot in 100 Unusual Aasimar, for those who are interested), which includes a +2 to Charisma as well as a +2 to Wisdom. Or you could stick with a standard dwarven sorcerer, and focus on spells that don't rely on your Charisma modifier for their effectiveness. Spells that buff and protect your allies, for example, rather than a blaster focused on damaging foes.

Wait... what were we talking about?

 

The overall point is that your actions have consequences in an RPG. If your PC starts a fight with the bouncer in the tavern, a possible result is that they get the crap beaten out of them by the retired monk, and the party gets evicted from the bar. And if you choose to squander your resources, or to invest in abilities that just aren't going to be that helpful, the result is often that your character becomes more of a hindrance than a help to their fellow party members.

What Are You Going To Do With It, Once You Have It?

A perfect example of mixing two things because you can comes up when players try out multiclassing. Certain classes just work well together, and offer a lot of synergy. Rogue/barbarian is one of my favorites from 5 Barbarian Multiclass Concepts Your Table Won't See Coming, since your abilities neatly play into each other. A paladin with a dip into swashbuckler can be quite powerful, since both classes rely on a high Charisma score, and you can even get some mileage out of combining ranger and fighter to boost your combat prowess.

Other class combinations though... well, they don't really work out all that well.

The druid/bard just... wasn't thought through all that well.

 

As an example of this, consider the wizard/monk. Can you do this? Sure, but what does it get you? The monk already needs a high Strength, Dexterity, and Wisdom score (barring focusing entirely on Dexterity for attacks, combat maneuvers, etc.), and now you're going to add in a need for a high Intelligence as well? Wizards get a very slow base attack bonus progression, and monks are on a less-than-full advancement path to begin with. You lose out on spell progression, and don't really gain any useful abilities to make up for what you're losing. And you're stuck with a lawful alignment to boot.

So what you end up with is sort of a mess that becomes less and less able to tackle the challenges appropriate to their level. Especially when you consider that a wizard who takes the feats Eschew Materials and Improved Unarmed Strike, and leads a life of contemplation and training could have the air of a monk (as well as the fashion sense of one), and still be a much more effective character. You could even flavor your somatic components as full-body kata, if you wanted, and make it into a big, esoteric tradition of warrior mages. There's even an unarmed magus archetype that would play into this style, if you did want to punch things with magic. Either option gives you all the aesthetic, with none of the mechanical drawbacks that the aforementioned multiclassing would stick you with.

Mastery of transmutation comes with many side benefits.

 

Whatever resource you're spending, whether it's feats, skill points, class levels, etc., you should always ask yourself what you're going to do with it. How is it going to benefit your character, and the party? Because the fighter taking the feat Exotic Weapon Proficiency to wield a bastard sword in one hand so they can use a shield in the other makes total sense. A magus doing the same thing, allowing them to use the huge blade to deliver spellstrikes also make total sense. But what does the wizard gain from doing that? Or the monk? What do you get from putting a handful of points into Sleight of Hand, or Handle Animal, when that task never once falls to you?

Can you do these things? Of course you can, they're legal under the game rules. But before you do, ask yourself what you're going to do with the resources you just spent. How do they impact your character, and what will they add to your repertoire? Because a barbarian who can identify spells is useful, and a druid with contacts in the city's underworld can be an asset... but a paladin who spent points so they could weave baskets really isn't going to help barring an extremely unlikely crafting challenge from the Prince of the Sixth Circle.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. Hopefully you enjoyed, and if you've used run these kinds of games before, leave us a comment to let us know what worked for you!

For more of my work, check out my Vocal and Gamers archives, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

For Tighter Games, Consider Nixing Random Encounters

A couple weeks ago I wrote a post titled Run Smoother, More Enjoyable Games (By Removing XP), and it was extremely well-received. Aside from one or two curmudgeons who felt the need to argue that removing an arbitrary number that determined how experienced a PC was, most readers were in support of the idea. In fact, most people who commented on the post said they'd done away with XP in games like Dungeons and Dragons, Pathfinder, and similar level-based games years ago, and it had made their lives so much easier as DMs.

And that got me thinking about other mechanics that, while perfectly functional, are about as necessary as a spoiler on a station wagon. And my brain immediately went to random encounters. Has there ever been a less-necessary, or more cumbersome, game mechanic?

You come across two males in breeding season vying for dominance. What a quirky random encounter!

Random encounters can only serve two functions for a storyteller. The primary function is to pad players' XP bars to make sure they gain the appropriate number of levels before they kick in the door at the next dungeon. The secondary function is to act as a drain on the party's resources, ensuring that they have to deal with unrelated combat, use of healing items, hostile negotiations, etc. in between wherever they were, and wherever they're going.

Now, the former is sort of useless if you're not bothering with XP. The latter function has potential, but only if used properly. But it's important to consider the drain and drag of combat, and how much time it can suck out of your session.

"Good" Random Encounters, Versus "Bad" Ones

If you want to use the mechanic of an unexpected encounter, then the encounter should be tied to what the party is trying to do in some way, shape, or form. Encounters that have nothing to do with the actual goal your party is trying to achieve just feel frustrating, and they're little more than a drain on your in and out of game resources.

For example, if the party is sneaking into a necromancer's stronghold, and you're rolling for whether or not they encounter a patrol of skeletal champions, that is a great random encounter. That actually shows the players they're entering an organic situation that can sneak up on them at any time, which can enhance danger and unpredictability. The same is true if they keep running across bandits in the forest while trying to track down the leader of the gang, or if they have to fight their way through a cult sworn to a dracolich as they climb his mountain sanctuary. The fights are part of the goal they're trying to achieve, and rather than being "random" they are just something that changes depending on the party's actions.

If you need examples/inspiration for some of these kinds of encounters, you'll find a lot of them in the supplements 100 Encounters in a Fey Forest and the not-so-random 100 Random Encounters For on The Road or in The Wilderness.

By contrast, say the party was walking into the burning desert wastes toward the Temple of The Broken Moon, and then they fall afoul of 6 giant scorpions. Not because they're guarding the temple, or because they've been enslaved by the mad druid who haunts the spire, but because they just happen to be there, and now they're your problem. That is a prime example of a random encounter that does nothing but act as a loading screen in your game, and which distracts from the story instead of enhancing it. It happens, the party fights it, and then it will never be spoken of again. Nor will it be meaningful in the overarching plot.

Brace yourselves... I hear percentiles rolling...

These kinds of encounters, under the right circumstances, can make the wilderness feel dangerous and unwelcoming. And if it keeps players on their toes, making Survival and Perception checks to avoid walking into a bear's territory, upsetting a tiger, or getting ambushed by bandits, that's all well and good. And if you need to make the party spend some resources on their journey to make them feel like they "earned" it, then these kinds of encounters are a good way of doing that.

However, they take time. Time that isn't being dedicated to your story.

Even if your group has combat down to a fine art, rolling for initiative, deciding on actions, appropriate description and RP, all take time. Even a small combat is going to last at least 10 to 15 minutes, and a mid-size one could go for half an hour or more. Do you really want to let a random fight on a random chart, which doesn't push your story forward at all, take up that much of your time?

Probably not.

So, while they're a staple of fantasy RPGs going way back, random encounters are often a bigger pain than they're worth. While you should randomize where enemies are in any "dungeon" area to keep players on their toes, don't throw in a rabid wolf pack and an angry crocodile just for funsies. Because they aren't going to help.

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday post. Hopefully it helps you make your games that much better! If you'd like to support Improved Initiative so I can keep sending new content straight to your screen, head over to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a patron today! There's a pile of RPG swag just waiting for you as long as you pledge at least $1 a month. Lastly, keep up-to-date on my latest releases by following me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter.

Run Smoother, More Enjoyable Games (By Removing XP)

DMs are always looking for ways to make their games better. They ask where they can get the right music, which monsters present the best challenge, and whether the plot hooks they have are suitably baited to keep their players interested. One of the biggest challenges DMs have, though, is figuring out how to manage experience points in their games. How do you balance out different levels when some players made game, and others didn't? Do you give XP to those who dealt the killing blow, or to everyone? Do you award XP for alternative solutions to problems? For good roleplay? What's to stop your party from killing everything they see in order to level up?

There's an easy way to nip this problem in the bud; stop giving your players experience points.

You can crunch the numbers of you want, but I'm telling you, this is WAY easier.

XP Causes More Problems Than It Solves

What do experience points do? Well, ideally, their purpose is to represent how much stuff the PCs have accomplished, thereby showing they've come far enough in this campaign that they need access to more class levels in order to continue. It's a gauge that shows how powerful your PCs should be at this stage in the game.

However, because XP can be granted by doing almost anything, it's not long before it becomes a meta concern. Players know they can sneak past an encounter, or solve it diplomatically, but will they be docked XP if they don't kill the bad guys? Sure, they might know that this group of guards is way too low to be a threat to them, but hey, they're almost to the next level and it might be just enough to push them over that peak. What about that town of commoners? Sure they might not be worth much, but that troll-blooded dragon just kicked their asses, and they need all the help they can get.

If we burn down the forest, we'll get XP for EVERYTHING in it!

If you want players to take the decisions that make the most sense for their PCs, or which make the most strategic sense, or which aren't blatantly evil in the pursuit of XP grinding, the obvious answer is to just take away experience points. Once there's no more counter keeping track of who killed who, or who disarmed which trap, you've done away with what can be a problematic motivation.

What Do You Replace It With?

Here's a new term you're going to learn to love as a DM; Milestone Leveling.

Milestone leveling is just what it sounds like; once players reach a certain, pre-determined milestone, they level up. It doesn't matter if they slaughtered the entire cavern of orc warriors, made peace between them and the human town, or hired them all to be personal bodyguards; if the plot has been solved, and the story is progressing, boom, the party levels. Even the players who missed a session or two. Even the ones who maybe didn't do as much damage, or contribute as much. Everyone levels.

I repeat, everyone.

As the DM, you can set whatever milestone you want for the little leveling button. It could be every third session, like you see in Pathfinder Society. It could be whenever players complete a certain plot arc, or just whenever you feel like chucking bigger, badder beasties at them. It might even be as a reward for doing something clever, or unexpected.

The point is that if players know their actions will not lead to the direct reward of more experience points, then they're more likely to do what comes naturally, what suits the story, or what's smart, instead of what will ensure they get another level. Because when you reward a behavior, that behavior continues. Even past the point of logic, sense, or alignment shifts.

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday installment. I hope it was helpful for my fellow DMs out there, and that if you try it you find it helps your games. If you want to keep up-to-date on all my releases, then follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter. And, if you want to do your part to make sure Improved Initiative can keep giving you great content like this, head over to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page. All I ask is $1 a month, which helps me pay my bills, and which will get you some sweet gaming swag just for becoming a supporter.

The Dehumanization of "Monstrous" Races in RPGs

Have you ever seen propaganda posters from the first World War? Many of them are full of classic art, brimming with patriotism. More than a few, though, were attempts to caricature America's enemies. The goal was to dehumanize them, and to turn them into a clear force of evil that had to be opposed. When combined with the efforts to lionize American servicemen, the effect was to create a clear divide; our heroes, against their villains.

Case in point, this wasn't satire.

While that sort of setup is the kind of story we get about the sequel, the first World War was a lot messier. There were no jackbooted thugs yanking people out of their homes, and putting them on trains to death camps before polishing the silver skulls on their hats. The first World War was a Rube Goldberg device of backroom political agreements that went awry, and it had everyone at everyone else's throats before too long. Hard to find heroes in all that moral gray area.

Of course, you could say the same thing about most RPGs. Which is why a lot of the same dehumanization tends to take place in our games... even if we don't think about it.

If You Cut An Orc, Does It Not Bleed?

Fantasy RPGs inherited a lot of baggage from Tolkien. All you have to do is look at the base races, and how closely they mirror the cast of The Lord of The Rings in both tone and concept, to see the inherited traits. However, we've come a long way since the 1st and 2nd edition of Dungeons and Dragons. These days half-orcs, and even full-blooded orcs, tend to be available as PCs. Goblins, long used as little other than low-level dungeon fodder, have also become fairly common as PC races. If you can name a monstrous race that has a language, and has typically been used for nothing more than XP grinding, you can probably play one in today's games.

Even bugbears... if your DM is particularly trusting.

This has led to a lot of players starting to question the idea that certain fantasy races are inherently evil, and thus can be slain without so much as a blip on the karmic radar. Rather than the old days, where we just knew things like ogres, trolls, kobolds, gnolls, drow, and other monsters were evil, we now question how we're allowed to play them if that's the case. Especially if the PCs we have aren't inherently evil.

And sure, you could argue that the power of being a player character allows you to be different than your base creature type. But it also makes us look at the issue of how we view these other races. After all, if they have a culture, language, and civilization all their own (and we've shown that by being PCs that the race is not inherently wicked, depraved, savage, or evil), then how to we justify mowing them down without a second thought?

Overcoming The Explorer Fallacy

There's a logical fallacy that happens all throughout our history books, and it can be explained in one sentence; Columbus discovered America. Now, ignoring the fact that the Vikings beat him to North America by several hundred years, what was the first thing Columbus said he discovered when he got to the New World? People. People that he described as docile, welcoming, and gentle, and whom he almost immediately enslaved and brought back to Europe to show off to the folks who kickstarted his trip across the open ocean.

Those of us in the Western world see this all the time. Whether it's in the accounts of Lewis and Clark, or in the stories about characters like Allan Quartermain in his adventures throughout Africa, these characters are seen as brave explorers conquering the world's frontiers. But even in fictional accounts, these brave explorers aren't usually wandering empty wilderness; they're poking through ruined cities, and constantly interacting with people who live in these remote areas; proof that the area has been inhabited for hundreds of years.

Terribly sorry, chaps, but it doesn't count till someone speaking the Queen's English arrives.

This is called The Explorer's Fallacy, and a version of it happens in a lot of fantasy RPGs. It's why we see orc tribes, gnoll packs, and kobold clutches as pests to be eliminated, or threats to be dealt with, instead of as cognizant creatures to be treated with respect. Or, at the very least, as hostile nations that could be met with diplomacy before it's time to reach for the swords. It's not until we start drawing PCs from these races that we question whether their place as murder bait is well-earned, or just lazy storytelling.

If you flip the script, the image is pretty stark. You're just living your life, trying to stay safe in your cave, when one day a group of armored thugs smashes in your front door. Your friends and family try to fight them off, but they're slain in front of your eyes. With fire and steel, the invaders handily kill anyone who stands in their way, taking what meager treasure your community hoarded for themselves. All they leave behind is blood, and dismembered corpses.

That's your average adventurer's origin story. But in this case, it's for a kobold, or a goblin who managed to survive a 2nd-level party raid.

It's All About The Game You Want

No one, least of all me, is saying that everyone has to grant traditional monsters citizenship in your world, and your game. If you are perfectly fine using these creatures as low-level threats and XP grinding, and your players have no trouble with it, then shine on you mad bastard!

With that said, though, there are plenty of options that could be used instead of the "savage monstrous humanoid" cardboard cutouts. Undead are an ideal fill-in for enemies who are nothing more than a walking plague of evil that can (and should) be mowed down without any moral compunctions. Given that demons, devils, and wicked fae represent creatures imbued with absolute evil (especially if you agree with the reasoning in Absolute Good, Absolute Evil, and Alignment in RPGs), they are also creatures that can be fought with little moralizing on the part of the PCs. Advanced animals and magical beasts (who lack the self-awareness, intelligence, and culture of the "fodder" monster races I've mentioned throughout the piece) are also perfectly valid targets to use as threats that need to be overcome.

However, with that said, it isn't just swapping one monster for another. If you are the sort of DM who wants to change the tune on this particular trope, you need to show these traditional "monsters" as having culture. Let players see that they have friends, lives, and drives the same as the PCs do. That might make them more likely to talk first, and fight only when it's been made clear they don't have another option.

Or if they kill first and don't bother asking questions, make it clear that kind of aggression can have long-term consequences on social standing, future relationships, and even the character's alignment.

That's all for my thoughts on this week's Moon Pope Monday feature. If you want to make sure you don't miss any of my future thoughts, then follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter. Lastly, if you'd like to support Improved Initiative, head over to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a patron. As little as $1 a month is all it takes to buy my everlasting gratitude, and to get some sweet gaming swag for yourself.

All That Glitters is Not Gold: Non-Monetary Rewards For Your RPG Party

Congratulations, you've conquered another dungeon! You've defeated the Beast of Brackenbridge, slain the wicked cult that brought it sacrifices, and laid to rest the victims of this vile monster. Your reward? A magic sword, and as much gold as you can carry. Again.

Sure, I guess. If that's all they've got.

The first few times players get this reward they're ecstatic. They're low-level adventurers who've been scraping by on a few spare copper pieces, and all of a sudden they're flush with cash and armed to the teeth. But how many times can you get the same reward before it loses its meaning? Three times? Five? How long before even epic level weapons (even ones created with this unique, alternative system for making magic weapons and armor) and enough gold to buy a country just feels like a ho-hum reward for your dragon slaying?

If you really want to keep your players interested, give them something they can't buy.

What Are You Talking About?

I'm glad you asked, bold Italic text. What I'm talking about is the concept of a non-numerical reward; something beyond XP, gold, and calculated magic items. These rewards aren't found on a table, and they don't require any number crunching on your part as the DM. Despite that though, these rewards may be what players talk about for years to come when they sit down to tell people about the coolest things their characters ever accomplished.

Status

Great deeds come with great rewards, but one of the most common rewards that gets left out of any game is a promotion. Take the cleric for instance. After serving faithfully and defeating the enemies of the church it would make sense for the lowly priest to be raised up to the position of chaplain, herald, or even Commander of the Faith. The post would come with increased responsibility, but it would also come with better quarters, access to more of the church's resources, and even lower-ranking priests to delegate responsibilities to.

Personal bodyguards in silly outfits are not out of the question.

The same is true no matter what game you're playing. Modern fantasy characters might be knighted by the faerie court, and given rank and power as well as access to the world between (actually being knighted is pretty damn cool no matter what game you're running). High fantasy warriors might be granted titles and land, elevated from sell swords to lords and ladies complete with heraldry and fiefdoms to oversee. Even something as simple as being moved up the ladder from patrolman to detective (sergeant to captain, watchman to inquisitor, etc., etc.) is a reward that will add more to the story and character development than any number of mechanical macguffins.

Reputation

Actions have consequences, and one of those consequences is a reputation. Whatever a character or a party does is going to leave its marks on them and on the world, whether for good or for ill. A pious quick draw specialist who always gets the first shot off may be known as the God's Gun. An acrobatic knife fighter known for her use of envenomed blades might earn the title of the Cobra Queen, the Poison Woman, or the Pestilent Princess. A heavy-handed gangland enforcer might earn the word "iron" before his name, and a slick-talking rogue who could make you believe anything might be dubbed The Salesman.

No one asked why they called Yuri the Horn Blower.

Fame or infamy, if you have a character who's done anything then that character is going to be known for that act by someone. The bigger the actions characters take, the bigger that reputation is going to loom. At earlier parts of the campaign characters might just be known by a small quarter of a city, or maybe by a small town. Once the party really hits its stride and the tales start getting told characters should be hard-pressed to go somewhere they are't recognized (unless they take steps like not wearing signature pieces of gear, disguising their faces, or making sure that the bards telling stories give purposefully false descriptions of the characters in question).

Giving characters a reputation among certain parts of the game world makes them feel more organic. It might also mean they can avoid some fights (since no one wants to challenge the Coffin Maker to a duel), get special treatment, or be sought out by plot hook NPCs who require men and women of their skills and abilities.

Following

Anyone who gains fame will also develop a following. A knight of great renown might draw crowds to a tournament if word gets out that he'll be riding in the joust, for instance. An infamous wizard might find acolytes at her door, begging for the privilege of becoming her apprentice. Characters who have renown, good or ill, will inevitably have people who want to learn from them, be like them, and pledge themselves to that character's service.

The Bowman's Children are not to be trifled with.

Sure there are ways to gain followers mechanically. Pathfinder, Dungeons and Dragons, World of Darkness, Savage Worlds, all of these game systems and many more besides provide ways for your character to have a set number of followers. However, while characters can use these rules to buy followers, simply purchasing them can be more mechanics than roleplay oriented. This is the primary reason many storytellers won't let players use these rules to add more characters to the party; in the wrong hands these rules can be bent till they scream.

The point is that a following and followers are similar, but different. If a character has followers then that means a player has a specific set of NPCs he or she can call on, and it can put a small army at a PC's beck and call. A following on the other hand can be an amorphous pool of people who are there for roleplay purposes, but whose mechanical capacity is entirely up to the storyteller. Followers can be bought, but a following is earned as a product of roleplay and a character's actions in the story.

But What About Loot?

What about it?

Ooooh... what does this do?

No one said to stop giving players magic items, XP, and money (again though, you might want to consider these alternative systems for generating magic weapons and armor to keep things interesting). I'd be willing to bet that special items, whether they're super-science gadgets in Spycraft or enchanted steel in the Iron Kingdoms, will always be a solid present for your players. But if you want to keep them interested and striving as hard as they can it's a good idea to create some rewards tailored to fit what they've accomplished in game so far.

And for DMs who just want lower-cost loot that is worth less than a gold piece (but which is still useful while adding flavor to your game), you might want to check out 100 Pieces of Miscellaneous Tat To Find. I wrote this guide for Azukail Games some time back, and it's ideal for giving treasure that isn't really all that valuable. The original was written for Pathfinder, but there's a system-neutral version, too.

I'm not suggesting you give status, reputation, and position instead of loot... rather, try to diversify the rewards you give your players. Because these kinds of non-monetary achievements let them feel like they're having an effect on the game world rather than just playing through a pre-determined set of rails with occasional loot drops. That individual attention, and an award tailored specifically to a given gaming experience, is something you won't be able to find on a random rolling table.

For those who'd like to keep Improved Initiative going, stop by my Patreon page and become a patron today! If you want to make sure you're getting all of my updates then plug your email into the box on the right to subscribe, or follow me on Facebook and Tumblr. As always thanks for stopping by, and I hope to see you again next week!