Very nice adaptation. I like especially how it uses the existing system, rather than creating a new set of points. Although from the translation I can see how the other approach could work.

Yes, but it costs your entire pool. In order to not be in the building at the time you must spend one more point from your pool

The Dresden Files RPG uses the same mechanic. But for our 1 hour session we had the player choosing to not-roll their die. I don't think anyone in the room had ever seen FATE or the Dresden RPG.

This looks just like the way planning works in the Wilderness of Mirrors RPG works. This is a good description of the game.

I'm implementing a lighter version of this in tonight's session. The extraction doesn't have TOO many complications and while talking to contacts and doing recon as normal I'm putting a small number of these mission points in their pool, maybe from overflow hits. So they still have the fundamentals of the run worked out but any curveballs they missed due to bad rolls during planning phase or what have you can still be potentially accounted for as a real team with actual days to work this out may be ready for

If you don't mind giving us an after action report that'd be great tifunk. I'm planning on using it in 2 weeks and would like some more examples.

I'd be interested to hear how it goes as well.

Ditto.

This idea dosen't drop normal skill use or such it just lets you bypass a shit load of spefiic rolls and such be fore the run to then have the effect of such come in to play later. Or at least you can use it like that as I shall sure player planing can be done too but this lets me ignore the little things.

Highlighted just what I feel about it. Reminds me a lot of this video about the Thief and the Trap (the gamers?), but everyone should play as is most fun for them. This kind of game is just not for me ..

"I shot you."
"Nuuhu, I´ve got a bullet proof vest!"



That!



seconded, but ymmw



*yawn

again, everyone his own ..



I think those dice worked more like Edge. Otoh, I remember some mechanics for the GM to implement some random encounters (though why you need rules for that, eludes me).

There are a few things that nag at the back of my mind.

One is the question "How well does this system work outside of corporate runs, or with non-conventional type runs?" For example, I'd like to do a run where they J is a micro-manager and tries to get them to do the run bit by bit without telling them what the end goal is, making it a challenge to figure it out before hand and see if they even want to do it or not, or perhaps it's even a trap. Similar style to Neuromancer. How well would this system work with a run like this?

How does this effect karma gains? As a GM I'm not comfortable handing out karma for challenges completed with this sort of system, so "Objective Fulfilled", "Overall Threat/Challenge", "Brave or Smart", "Push Story Line Forward", & "Right Skills Right Place & Time" could all potentially be diminished by using planning pool points.

Also, as a GM I'm not sure I like how it limits the story. What do you do when you've made something plot important in the leg work? For instance, you go to talk to an Ares dockworker contact you have and he's supposed to pull a gun on you and add a whole different aspect to the mission. Now rolling with changes in plot due to character action is fine and just part of the game, but if a system is created that bypasses 90% of legwork entirely it somewhat limits the story telling elements to only things that would happen either in the meeting with the Johnson and once the character's have stepped onto the property in question.

I've never liked the mentality that the run only "starts" once the characters break onto a property, etc. I feel it starts from the meet with the J. Sometimes before that.

Anyhow, it has potential, but I'd like to hear from the GMs that play test this and see how they feel about it and how it addresses these issues.

Here's how I see it. My players have literally spent 3 sessions bickering about and planning runs in the past. All this does is instead of them having to plan out all the niggling little details ahead of time they instead build up a pool of points. They have to role-play the legwork and matrix intrusions but when it comes to the actual run they just say "we're going to sneak in the front door!" As a GM I only have to plan a few "encounters" for them where they either use their skills and role-play or else use their points and role-play. Either way the players are still being forced to role-play but it is much more collaborative.

I wouldn't recommend this for anything other than skipping the "high-tech dungeon" aspects of Shadowrun. In micro-jobs or street-type stuff you just use regular narrative. However, in those types of runs you don't normally have players sitting there for hours struggling to figure out how to break into the corporate facility. This is also wonderful for those times where players run off on an impromptu intrusion/con that you weren't planning.

Objective fulfilled: did they do the job they were supposed to? If yes, give Karma.
Overall threat/challenge: this becomes even easier because you design encounters with a certain cost in legwork points. More points required to get through the tougher the challenge/threat. Plus any set pieces you run.
Brave/smart: Can still be earned in those cases where legwork points aren't used or else during the actual legwork/post run phase of the mission. Ideally you should design encounters with a cost greater than the legwork points you will award.
Push storyline forward: I never really use this one except in cases where they've been spinning their wheels and someone takes leadership/responsibility. I'd save this award for players who encourage sub-plots and personal hooks.
Right skills: this is really just another smarts award so this can still be earned.

This system is going to depend greatly on the GM adjusting the way they design/play the game rather than the players. I think this will make things easier on everyone involved. YMMV of course.

Edit: just read the middle paragraph. This system doesn't skip legwork -- it skips the planning and the job itself. It presumes the characters know how to do that stuff better than your players who presumeably aren't hardened industrial spies. If you've got important plot points in the legwork/run/post-run you still run them. You are just stripping away the other stuff to get at the good stuff you've planned.

About the mechanics of the system, how does the players exactly acrue planning points?

Say your infiltrator would normally prepare for the run by using Disguise to get in as a janitor, and while inside Palming to borrow a keycard and clone it, and Infiltration to place a microcamera over a keypad.

Under the planning pool system, the infiltrator would say "I disguise myself as a janitor and scope the place out". Then, during the run, he uses his points to "buy" a cloned keycard and and access code as above.

But what happens mechanically?
- Pre-run, does he just roll Disguise + Int and the hits go into the planning pool? It doesn't seem right that the other skills used don't have any effect?
- Does he get a roll of each skill, and the average is used? Pre-run, the player won't know what skills will be good to use to overcome obstacles, how does he decide what to use to acquire planning pool points?
- During the run, is the player restricted to use points in a manner justified by what skills he used to obtain the planning points?

I was wondering rather the same things. Also:

- How many opportunities do players get to score pool points?
- Can they just "mine" one skill multiple times? What about characters with lots of varied skills?

I'm sorry. Drama dice did work like edge. Extra dice for tests you accrued during the course of the session that you could use by the end of the session. Unlike the Planning Pool Dice the OP is considering, which are dice the players can accrue during the session to use later in the session.

1) Pre run the players say "we are going to inflitrate the location by posing as employees" to use your example. So now the GM has guidelines set for how the players can build their Pool. Something like Disguise + Int works because that helps disguise the characters. Rigging up several sets of C4 does not because they are not planning on blowing their way into the facility. If the run involves blowing up the facility then they need to make those charges but the actual setting of the charges should be a set piece where they cannot use Planning Points.

2) I think you are having a bit of disconnect between what an Active Skill and a Knowledge Skill are. Think of legwork as building up a Specific Target Knowledge Skill. It is a temporary skill that will only be learned, used, and discarded for this one run. So to use your disguise example above, you have built up the knowledge skill to know that the Janitors look a certain way. Your character then builds a disguise with his Active Skill and that creates Planning Points. Now he could use those points when security inspects him to say "They believe I am the janitor." Or he could use Etiquette to act like a janitor and save the points for later. "Why are you in the server room and mucking around in the wiring?!" "I'm a janitor an cleaning those tough to reach places!"

3) I'd say no but that would take more game testing. Otherwise you have to start to track different pools as some people have suggested. I certainly wouldn't let them use planning points if they change their mind about how they want to infiltrate. If they switched from "pose as employees" to "cat burgle our way in" then they'd have to start over with a new planning pool.

1) The GM can set this in order to match challenge difficulty. Generally I'd allow a pool that covers most but not all of the encounters you are adding to the facility. Maybe like 75%. I'd let them have as many opportunities as they want within any time limits you set. So if they spend 5 of 7 days to get 3 points then they only have 2 days left to capture however many other points are available.

2) Depends on the skill. Hacking skills will certainly get multiple tries. But again it depends how they go about getting information. Hell Pistols and Intimidate could be used even for a "pose as employees" job if they choose to kidnap employees to replace. It is up to the GM to determine whether something will help them get pool points and the GM is the one who controls pacing. The idea is that the GM has to flesh out less details of the run and you can get straight to playing the game and letting the players come up with interesting ideas and interactions in the legwork phase instead of humming and hawing over every last detail of the job.

You're talking about something else than my example.

The PCs cat burgle their way - this is the run. They reach a keypad. They spend a planning point to know the code, with the explanation that previously someone went in during opening hours disguised as a janitor and planted a camera. Next they need a keycard, also acquired by the fake janitor.

The point is, the characters will use different skills during planning and preparation to overcome different obstacles. Since you roll dice before the run to get planning pool points, how do you know what skills to roll? This isn't detailed in the house rules for the system.


I'm thinking about doing it the other way around. Players accumulate spent planning points instead. The spent points plus points to overcome the current obstacle is the threshold for the test. So, for placing the camera, the player rolls Disguise + Int (1). Next he needs a cloned keycard, also requiring 1 point and he used 1 already, he faces Palming + Agility (2). Next obstacle, he needs 2 points, giving a threshold of 4 - he only gets 3 hits, so one of the other characters have to "help" and by adding a point.

Probably, each test would also be an Opposed Test that you need to win, otherwise the first problems are too easy, aren't they? This is a problem with the original system too - in the beginning, you have the points to easily buy solutions to impossible problems?

I think you are really missing the point of the system as presented in the OP. It is for people who want to keep the game fast paced and snappy. Not for simulating the situation slavishly. That's what the actual rules are for. I don't think it is at all up your alley.

Nobody said anything about "simulating the situation slavishly".

I'll try again.

The translated house rules read The characters have always foreseen the event and the players must explain when, how and why.

So, the question is, can you use any skill to put points in the pool, and then use points to get effects of other skills? Can I put in points with Disguise and take out Palming effects? If that isn't silly enough, can I even put in points with a Knowledge skill and take out Palming effects? If the answer is no, then when I put in points with Palming, I can only use Palming effects to overcome obstacles? That also seems wrong.

If you flip the rolls around, so you allow the players to take flashbacks to overcome obstacles, with just an explanation of how like in the posted house rules but with an Opposed Test, which also has to beat an accumulating threshold of spent planning points, you get the same "limited resource" effect, a quick resolution without need for an extensive planning phase, and a close match to skills and effects. It just seems like a nicer overall way to do it.

But if you can explain how the link between what you put in the planning pool and what you can take out during the run could work, then please explain it. If there really isn't a link, then I think that's a big weakness of the system.

Eh. Whatever floats your boat. I personally don't care if a Knowledge skill or Disguise lets them pull of a Palming vignette to bypass an obstacle. That's what I'm talking about where you are slavishly following rules. It just doesn't matter in this system. The point of the system is to give the players some narrative control and to help speed things along for the GM. It is a very indie design for what is otherwise a game system that is stuck in the 90's.

If you don't like them using disguise for palming then don't let them. Keep the pools separate. I think you are needlessly overthinking something that is supposed to be simple. As GM you tell them how and when they get to add points to the pool. You present them with generic encounters and they decide how to overcome them. If you suddenly decide that there is a palming scene that absolutely, positively must happen then call it a set piece where they can't spend pool points.

For instance. In my next session the players are going to be breaking into a facility to extract a target who was extracted by that corp. I am going to use planning pool but I am going to set it at 75% of the value of the planned encounters. I'm going to have a set piece in the middle where they have gotten to the target and have to fight the mage who was interrogating him and a bunch of security guards. Most of the encounters will happen before the set piece but there will be some afterwards that they can spend points on. If they blow all their points early on then they'll have to fight a whole bunch to get out with the target. I am going to tell them all this upfront so that the planning pool also has a resource management aspect to it.

I don't really care how they fill up the planning pool as long as it fits the style of run they chose. For anything except "going in guns blazing" both disguise and palming would work for me. I'm not keeping track of them separately because that is one more thing to have to keep track of and because it actually takes narrative control away from the players right after I tried to give it back. Now they can't spend points and describe a cool Ocean's Eleven scene -- they have to spend their 2 disguise points and 1 palming point to describe a scene that fits that ratio of spent points. Too fucking complicated! Just spend your points and tell me what happened. If the table enjoys your description you will qualify for extra Karma at the end.

I've typed out some suggested mechanics to deal with some of the uncertainties of the system as presented by the OP and the inventors. These have not been playtested, but I am working with my group to begin doing so ASAP. I will also probably post any revisions we come up with if these rules don't work so well.

Suggested Mechanics by Brainpiercing

Planning points are a powerful resource, they should not get out of hand. Proposed general rules for the acquisition of planning points:

Each point has a “legwork” cost in at least one, but often more than one, of three currencies: Time, Skill Use, and Money.
Each point provides an effect in one of the following areas: Social, Matrix, Equipment, Knowledge/Information, Magical.
The acquisition of a point via a certain means and its expenditure for a certain effect are not tied to the same area. It’s an abstract system. Generally though, all bases should be covered – if no information gathering via the matrix was done, then no Matrix points are available. If no team resource pool was assigned (and frozen) then no Equipment points are available.
Time expenditure, while not something a PC can write on his sheet as a resource, is a VERY VALID currency for the acquisition of planning points. Some points may be acquired spending no other limited resource than time.
Naturally, this makes preparation time something to be tightly controlled by the GM – runs with plenty of time in advance will grant better preparation, and hence, a much higher success probability.
Generally, Edge cannot be used on any tests used directly to gain planning points. Essentially, planning points are a mechanism that represents character experience, not luck or fate. However, Edge can be spent on tests taken in preparation or as a consequence of attempts to gain planning points normally. So the hacker can use Edge to hack the matrix host of the corp, but not on the extended test to gain information or manipulate the security system.
Sometimes extended tests and sometimes single tests are used. Single tests grant more points for fewer rolls, but should also be only available once, take less time, and offer no retries. Anything that can be retried should take extended test form. Extended tests are open tests only limited by available time (and sometimes invested money). The GM should set an appropriate base interval or use one from the normal ruleset. Usually a certain number of hits on the extended test grant one point (usually full 4 hits = 1 point). Sometimes a test will be left with an odd number of hits left over, with no time to take another – that’s tough luck, those hits go to waste.
In the case of multiple characters doing a certain legwork task, assign a leader who does the actual roll. The others aid via normal rules.
Whenever contacts are used to aquire points, either play out the encounter and award points depending on the social rolls involved, OR, when contacts are paid for tasks, roll the contact’s Connection rating x2 as an extended test, with a certain price based on the connection rating per actual roll, for example 500nY x Connection. Since money as well as time is involved, two hits grant one planning point.

Aquiring points

Social Points: Social legwork takes the form of extended tests in social skills. These should be roleplayed, too, as talking to contacts and other people in general terms. No detailed questions should be asked, and no detailed answers given. Usually at least a threshold of 4 hits are required for one point, with a base time assigned by the GM depending on the run.. The players state how many points they wish to achieve, or how much time they wish to spend. Every four full successes on the extended test gains one point.
Of course, when talking to a single contact about a specific thing, then a single social test can be used instead, and 2 hits grant one point. The GM then again provides general information.
Matrix Points: Matrix legwork is either done in person by a PC doing hacking runs which should be roughly specified, or by a contact. It can either gain Information Points or Matrix action points – but the destinction is blurred, anyway, since either points can be used for either task in the end.
First, (if this is not obvious) a data search or appropriate knowledge test with a threshold based on the type of run – and its target - is done to aquire knowledge about where to get information. Then the actual information gathering can begin.
If a PC does the hacking run, then he is required to hack into appropriate hosts normally (i.e. the city planning office, the corporate matrix node of the corporation the run is centered on, etc.). Then he has several options: He can either create fake accounts, leave backdoors, spoof fake IDs, hack security systems, etc., all of which are not specified in detail. To do so, he makes an extended test using Logic or Intuition + Hacking (or other skills he could reasonably use). Each 4 hits grant one point, and the base time frame is specified by the GM.
He can also gather information from the hacked nodes. To do so he must do an extended data search test to aquire the actual information – again, general information not detailed by the GM. As before, 4 hits on the extended test equal one point. The base time interval is again determined by the GM in a consistent fashion. The GM may also impose a limit on the number of rolls done.
Since hacking is a risky business for the PC, the time interval for the extended test should not be too long, and it is entirely ok for PCs to aquire a higher number of Planning Points in this fashion.
Of course, he may still choose to use normal game mechanics – i.e. create a perfectly normal backdoor to the system which he can use when the actual run starts. In this case this is resolved normally, and no planning points are derived from it.

If a contact does the hacking, then roll the contact’s Connection rating x 2 in the extended test. Each roll costs a flat amount, for instance, Connection rating x 500nY as appropriate for the target. In this case, every two hits give one point, and the players determine the number of rolls for the contact via resource expenditure.

Equipment Points: Equipment points represent resources spent on buying specialized equipment a character might foresee to need on the run, without specifying in advance what that may be. Equipment points must be bought in an abstract fashion: Resources are set aside in a team resource pool, and frozen with respect to other expenditure, in any amount thought appropriate. This grants one point. Afterwards, the resources can be spent at a rate of one point granting a 1000nY investment per PC. The expenditure must afterwards be correctly deducted from the resource pool. If the pool is not large enough, then the equipment cannot be bought. Sometimes the equipment may just be bought without further rolls, but sometimes the GM may still call for rolls to find out whether this piece of equipment is even available in the time frame. In this case, a small discount on the planning point cost is in order.
Equipment points can also be used to aquire services from contacts to be retroactively pre-arranged. For instance, after escaping narrowly from the corporate facility one or more points might be spent to have a contact Helicopter Pilot pick up the team at a “pre-arranged” time. Of course, such a thing might also be acquired with a simple call, and a subsequent wait, but expenditure of a point automatically succeeds.
Equipment points are unique in that you can only ever “buy” one point, but must use other points generated from other sources to actually spend on equipment later. This is to represent that special equipment is usually bought based on information or hunches.

Knowledge/Information Points: These represent most traditional legwork: Shadowing a corporate rep, asking around in seedy bars for information, finding a missing clue, etc. The players in this case give a brief description of their endeavors, and fitting skills are rolled. The GM then gives vague information in return.
Depending on the situation, either an extended test or single test may be appropriate. If the PCs do a stakeout, then an extended shadowing test might be called for. If they hunt for a specific clue, or only have a single chance of acquiring a certain bit of information, a single test might be more appropriate. In any case, four hits on an extended test or two hits on a single test grant a point.
A character might also roll a knowledge skill of his own – and be granted some information, and one point per two hits on the roll.

Magical Points: Magical points can be gained by doing magical reconnaissance (either by flyby recon in Astral Projection or by magical search powers), by questioning people with magical aid – or manipulating them to one’s own side. They can also be gained by rolling a character’s magical knowledge skills to learn about probably threats. Appropriate rolls are necessary for these actions – sometimes spellcasting, sometimes an astral search, sometimes something else. Still, magical preparation should still be general tasks – for example you influence a generic security guard, and when a situation arises pay the point to have this guard on scene.
As before, an extended test grants a point per four hits, and a single test grants one point per two hits.

Spending points vs acquiring points:
Once the legwork is done, the team is left with a certain lump sum of points. As stated above, they can only spend points on areas in which preparation was done. However, they could conceivably spend all of their points on a single encounter, if so inclined. (For instance, they could blow everything on having pre-arranged a clandestine meeting with the target corporations president and arranging a certain deal.) Since points always succeed, this should resolve a current encounter, but carry plausible implications for follow-up encounters.
ALL planning points must be spent with a team consensus. A single PC can’t spend planning points. Nevertheless, it is the person with the idea HOW to spend the point who should get the spotlight on the action, if there is any, when a point is spent.
When spending planning points, the players discuss the possible solutions to a given problem, and then present their solution, as a flashback or similar, to the GM. The GM then assesses the threat-level of the obstacle and assigns a point cost. Sometimes this may be entirely transpartent, sometimes the stakes may have been far higher (or lower) than the players imagined. Usually, in case of dramatic over-expenditure the GM should warn the players that this particular plan is very improbably and will cost more than initially imagined. In other cases, the GM might choose not to warn them in advance. For example, if the team wants to use a planning point to overcome an outwardly simple mag-lock, which is in fact tied to a complicated trap to bust the characters butts if they fail, then he might just announce after the fact that they did not just spend one point, but rather five. In this case the players should simply be happy that they overcame the obstacle. Of course, nothing stops the GM from just moving his trap to another obstacle, if he really wants to spring it on the PCs.
However, normally, planning points are a resource, to be spent or conserved at the players' discretion, with a good deal of transparency.
Speeding up the process even more Even when using planning points the players might find a situation where a solution should be possible using points, but they just can't think of the perfect one and take too much time discussing their options. While limiting over-planning the system cannot prevent that from happening. In this case it might be advisable to actually impose a time limit on the players - since details can be avoided, the flash-backs can be more vague, and hence quicker to work out. Also, if there are two competing plans, then a method to choose either should be found - perhaps as simple as a die roll.

Saving up planning points:
Once a certain run is done, and points are left over, these are usually null and void – representing over-planning which should often occur by careful characters. However, there are situations where one team might operate against the same corporation, or in the same area, or against the same individual a second time within a certain (usually short) time frame – perhaps even very suddenly without new preparation time. In this case, half the saved points can be carried over to the next run. Of course, if the first run ended in a bloodbath, likely as not the security systems of the target corp were changed significantly enough to render old preparation moot. In this case, the GM can deny carrying over points, and also in other cases where the situation at the target may change significantly.
Another case to consider is when a certain job is over, but the team is caught up in some directly following actions, causing events to continue without interruption. In this case, half the left-over planning points may be used for the follow-up, as long as there is enough connection between the planned job and the followup action. For example, breaking into a corporate building and then being stalked by that corporation’s security forces has enough connection, but being chased by the local mafia for fencing off some stolen goods in their territory does not.
A final problem is Plan B: When the original “loose” plan fails for any reason, it must be carefully examined whether the stock of left-over points remains the same. For instance, if the PCs trigger the alarm on a failed lock-picking, because they did not use points, will this mean that previous planning is still good, or will it go to waste? This should most probably be examined on a case-by-case basis, since a firm rule would seem either overly harsh or permissive. In above example, after raising an alarm, the characters might well have pre-conceived a plan which uses just that alarm to divert security forces, while they use a secret passage or some air-ducts to go somewhere else entirely. In that case they should be able to keep all their points. In another case, a run might require that nothing goes wrong, that they go in and out without leaving a single trace. In that case a significant failure might put everything at risk. I would still recommend that players can use remaining points for a getaway, or other backup plan, if they can think of one.

Final notes:
Planning points as presented here, both by the original inventors, and by me, are designed to the PCs back in the action as opposed to spending hours of out-of-character planning. Legwork done for the acquisition of points should offer roleplaying opportunities, and generally be interesting for the players and the GM. Only in extreme cases should game groups (by consensus) be able to say “ok, we just cover all our bases, do a few rolls and go”.
Planning points offer the opportunity to overcome obstacles retroactively WHEN THEY ARISE, rather than planning for all contingencies – and hence should save a lot of time. They do not absolve the players from coming up with a creative solution. Even WITH planning points a situation might arise where no one has a good idea – in this case, just wing it, play it out, and don’t spend points. Runs can STILL fail, or at least fail partially. Plan B can still be necessary. After all, if nothing went wrong anymore, when would we get to use all our fancy weapons?

I'm hoping to implement this tonight.

Legwork is going to be broken up into 2 phases. In both phases we will go around the table, player by player, and they will get a chance to contribute. I'm not sure how rigid I am going to be in terms of follow up questions (leaning towards not rigid until the last player is finished).

The first phase is going to be straight up legwork. This is where they learn the why of the run and are able to uncover the "challenges/encounters" that I am planning for them. I will tell them how many set pieces there are, where they occur, and how many discreet encounters they will face before/after. This phase they can learn about what they are and the order in which they occur. This phase will largely be contacts and Knowledge skills.

The second phase will be the planning phase and will be where the players decide on style and generate planning points. Again, we go around the table and each player has a chance to have their character generate points. I think I am only going to tell them how many points they have generated as a team after the last player is finished. After they have finished generating points I am going to tell them how many points each encounter costs. They do not have to spend them now -- instead they can wait until I describe the encounter during play and then decide if they will spend points or not. I am hoping that there will be some discussion of points allocation at this phase amonst my players but it isn't set in stone until the run starts.

Next post will have the run specifics.

Without getting into the story too much -- the characters and the "talent scout" who first brought them together have been caught up in some fighting between two corps which culminated in one corp extracting a magical researcher from the other. The targeted corp is POed at the team/fixer and is coming at them. The fixer will be paying the team to re-extract the researcher and return him in an attempt at appeasement. As such the run is on a "should have been done yesterday" timeline.

This means that I am only going to let the players have 1 go around the table in both the legwork and planning phases. If they had more time to prepare I would have given them more time. They will be able to earn up to 5 planning points.

The encounters are: gain access to the compound (1 pt), access the elevator down to the lab (1 pt), overcoming the security override puzzle to access the lab (3 pts), set piece combat, escaping from security with the target (5 pts). There is also an optional encounter in the first half of the run to gain access to their network (completely wired) which is worth 2 pts.

The only 2 encounters I've really fleshed out have been the puzzle, the set piece, and the story. This has really cut down on my preparation time.

My players got caught up in some plot holes that I didn't even realize were there so we didn't get to the planned run. Grrr. Next game is in 1 month so no update until then.

Thanks. That's absolutely my goal -- to add as little as possible, and keep the system intact as much as possible.


Dresden Files RPG is FATE.

Cheers, -- N

I really like how this house rule emulates heist movie "reveals", where the protagonists (and the viewers) are drawn towards a catastrophe, only to be saved by deft bit of legwork. I too have been a frustrated player/GM who has seen 6 hour planning sessions for every possible contingency only to walk into a run and see all of that work come to nothing. This could be a useful tool for those games, as it encourages proactive RP from the players, offering them the possibility of a safety net.

Ok, we've had the first test of the planning pool today. The GM awarded a flat 10 points for legwork done last session, before introduction of the system - just to get us started. We earned two more points by some legwork this session.

We then started, and... well, planning points don't stop people from doing stupid things. Like cutting the rails sentinel drones move on, and hence raise an alarm. And I was going to spend points to either a) undo this, or b) make the consequences go away, but the group decided that stupid action done was done, and we would go with it.

We used five of our points to basically have had a hacker disable the security backbone connection of the house we were breaking into, so no reinforcements would come quickly.

And then the point aspect somehow got lost, as noone wanted to spend points anymore. Well... we haven't yet finished the whole run, and we'll see how things go next time.

I think the legwork is essential to the game, half the fun of the run and a great way to demonstrate teamwork and roleplaying. That said, after the tenth mission or so of a team working together glossing over the actual planning could be a good idea. Should the planning points allow a PC an auto success - no way, no how. Should it add a pool of extra dice for them to dip into to aid them in the hacking/social/infiltrate rolls - maybe, but lowering the threshold required to achieve successes seems more in the spirit of the rules/game.

IMHO

I might actually link this to our GM. I like the idea of bringing in some Ocean's Eleven or Leverage style and he was pretty pissed off when we needed a few sessions to break into a low security "top secret" toy factory (stupid "top secret laser prototype" -.-).

I got a few questions about all this. What exactly gives points and what doesn't? Is everyone limited to do just a few things in preparation, like 2 actions? And what about teamwork?
Otherwise some characters might not be allowed to do much while others farm their 10 contacts and seduce 90% of the target location's staff. I am especially thinking about the muscle and hackers/pornomancers here.
In Leverage the muscle guy might have helped someone else do his job. E.g. in the flashback the hacker was attacked (doesn't have enough points) so the muscle guy helped him (with a few points)? So how does the hacker gain his points? Well, I guess he says "I hack into the place", rolls a few times and probably hacks something nearby in addition. How does the muscle gain his points? He should probably have a few less than the hacker but still a few that he can use to support the others. I like the idea (in my head) of the muscle supporting the others while in combat it is the other way around