Follow-up on Fudge Point Centric Games
I have been digesting a lot of the feedback I received on yesterday’s article, and it has helped me to decide on how I am going to revise the rules for Pudge in regards to Fudge points.
- The economy of the game has to be capped. For each player at the table 10 Fudge points are added to the pool available for distribution.
- Each player starts with 3 Fudge points. The GM starts with 2 Fudge points per player in the game. This results in 50% of the game’s currency being distributed at the beginning of the game.
- All traits are Poor unless purchased. Purchased traits are Mediocre and may be increased by one rank per Fudge point spent. This rule applies to both the players and the GM. Traits are purchased with 3 Fudge points.
- Players may not have more than 5 Fudge points at any time. The GM may have no more than 5 points per player at any time. This prevents the GM and the players from ever having more than 50 % of the game’s currency at any time. Excess player points are given to the GM. Excess GM points go into the distribution pool.
- When players spend points they are given to the GM. When the GM spends points they are put back into the distribution pool. The GM may only pay players from the distribution pool, and never from the GM’s pool.
- The GM may compel traits by offering points, but the player may refuse the compel by matching the points being offered. The GM may never reduce a player to zero points (the player is always left one Fudge point when compelled).
The idea is that by using caps and by never allowing either side to have complete control of the currency while at the same time making it possible for currency to be used to take control of the moment that this dynamic will lead to currency circulation. Players may not want to give the GM Fudge points to use against them, but the players will spend Fudge points if they are invested in the moment. This coupled with the knowledge that any Fudge points spent will eventually make their way back to the players should promote spending.
Time to play test these revised rules. What do you think about what I am proposing? Leave a comment below and let everyone know how you feel.
First, thanks for making a quick read of the 4 page FUDGE model I tend to use. I think your model works great and seems like a cousin to the token model I use for LARPS & some table top one shots.
One of the ways that I will quickly distribute tokens or FUDGE points one single events is during the “set up” & introduction” phase of the game. If the players are moving to investigate an incident or event, they will need to provide their character introduction and share their plans for preparation.
Players get points (tokens, savage world cards, whatever) as they reveal their characters & set up their initial plans. As they organize their plan & come together as a group, the points flow out pretty quickly. As the players approach the first challenge or game site, they have a bulk of points available.
Keep in mind I use a stable limit pending on the length and style of game (Fewer for Horror, more for Epic fantasy), so I can pace out the points appropriately. This model does not help with the character generation aspect of using the points.
@Nik Palmer: I am hoping to run a game using your 4 page rules. I just need to find the time to do it.
Something that I need to work out is character objectives. My Budge rules have been having some issues, but the characters having a defined goal in order to level up works really well. I’d like to include it somehow in Pudge, but I don’t know if it is a match.