Opend20: Action Points Panache
Panache[edit]
The term 'Panache' is used to describe a particular way of using Action Points in order to add more flavour to the game, and just generally make it more fun.
Panache means 'stylish elegance'. Panache means fun! In most roleplaying games, there isn't much incentive to to fun things - like being plucky enough to steal the Queen's brooch, knowing that your boyfriend the guard is watching and that he'll be impressed. The risks involved might be too high, or if you have to use up AP to do it, then they are probably better saved for the more 'meaty' parts of the game, like combat. This puts a real dampner on the social aspects of roleplaying, and stifles player's creativity.
So, Panache is a system based on the same principles as the disadvantages system, whereby the GM can grant additional AP to characters who perform particularly stylish actions. 'Style' here is determined by the style of the campaign - in a swashbuckling campaign like "The Savage Coast", style means being plucky and daring. In a game like Vampire or Werewolf, style is also defined by your character type (What is stylish for a Malkavian would probably NOT be stylish for a Ventrue!)
As a general rule of thumb, the GM should grant AP for Panache whenever the player acts purely for the sake of roleplaying, and not for anything else. If it would have been easier to just walk over to the counter instead of having to make a skill check to do a quadruple-somersault onto the bar stood, then the AP should be granted. Most of the time the bonus points will cancel out the risk taken - after all, there is always a chance that you will miss the stool!
If the player is obviously going out of their way to do something that makes the game more exicting and interesting, that is worth 1 AP.
If the player does the above in such a way as to advance the plot or open up additional possibilites for all the other characters, that is worth 2 AP.
If the player performs something exceptional, 'above and beyond the call of duty', if their action somehow smoothes out some discrepency in the plot or solves an out-of-game issue for one of the other players, that is worth 3 AP.
There is no limit to the number of times a character can benefit from Panache, however, it should be mentioned that a trick that is amazing to watch the first time 'round tends to sour pretty quickly. For example, Xena might gain Panache from doing her 'no strings attached' super-jump/yell combo while she is still a guest star on 'Hercules'. But she will no longer gain Panache if she uses the same trick every episode (she still gets her own series, though).
Copyright[edit]
The word 'Panache' is used here in reference to a related mechanic from the 2nd Ed. AD&D campaign setting, "The Savage Coast", on whose rugged shores I wasted many glorious summer breaks. Because the 'Panache' system in OpenD20 is markedly more expanded and evolved than its namesake, and because the TSR company no longer exists (as in, there is no money being made from TSR products as Wizards of the Coast is producing 3rd Ed products), I don't believe that this term is a copyright infringement. Furthermore, the mechanic is named out of respect the standard OGL D20 from which OpenD20 is evolving, so I can't see why Wizards of the Coast should take umbrage at the fact. If you have specific legal knowledge on this, please let us all know!
________________________________________________________________________
Editor's Note: I have not read through the rules for Exalted, which uses a similar system called 'stunts' (PLEASE don't call copyright on this, I came up with it myself eight years ago only to find that the "Savage Coast" version already existed). But a friend informs me that the measure for the 'three-point stunt' is the agreement of the other players. This might be a very good tool for encouraging everyone to take part in the game - or it could be a good way to start a popularity contest. Please write comments in the 'discussion page' to debate whether OpenD20 should adopt a similar protocol, or if it should just be an optional rule.
