Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Yoshiyahu

Rehabilitating Murder-Hobos

Recommended Posts

To go back to the original post. For me, this game is about getting together with friends to have fun and tell a good story. If the fun is not there, then something is amiss. Sometimes it's the guys not liking the way I GM, or I don't really get along with a player, or player conflicts. For me I would rather not game than play in a game that makes me miserable. It took me along time to find a group out here in Germany. When one of my players threw his tantrum and stormed away from the table and left the game for awhile, I knew that was not someone I could keep gaming with. That was our last game together. I had a lot more fun after he was out of the group. We had already had a couple of times that were kind of rough. I had explained my position on gaming, on group dynamics and my code of conduct, so when he broke that I did not feel bad at all. I look back at the last few games I had with my group and feel we were better off with out that conflict. I would recommend sitting down with your group and outlining what it is that everyone wants from the game. Let the group know what you will tolerate and what you won't, in game and out of game. Profanity being one example. Some people find bad words to be horribly offensive, other can't say three words without F*&$ being  one of them. Lay down the ground rules for everyone. Also, let them know that what comes around goes around. These characters are not the only people in the galaxy, and there is always a bigger fish. So if your murderous, rampaging, ship stealing gang acts that way, they may run into another group that is worse, much worse. They can just make new characters for every game. But first, see if the players will change, if they won't, then either play their game, or not. From the way you described the game, I would not enjoy that at all and would much rather play SWToR. As far as Obligation goes, I agree that a truly heinous action can lead to gaining more Obligation. In the games that I ran, Obligation was never really a big issue. I have seen about a million house rules on this forum, so handing out some obligation for some wicked acts is not that unreasonable. On the same token, doing some great acts of heroism may actually bring some Obligation down in an unexpected way. Anyway, I think of it as a good suggestion, we can't give advice strictly in accordance with the CRB all the time. (and the devs and the book says change what you want!) So good luck with this, and let us know how it turns out! 

Edited by R2builder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how about you? Have you been in games with murder-hobos? Have you been one yourself? Have you GMed for a group like that? How did you deal with it? Is their behavior a reflection of how I run my games? If so, what can I change so that "Kill them, take their stuff, kill the witnesses, and burn down the building so there was no evidence that we were ever here." isn't the solution to every encounter? Is this just a natural phase in the development of an RPGer? Your thoughts, opinions, and even criticism are welcome.

 

I think its fairly much time to lay out what 'you would like to run' to the players before anyone goes near character creation.

Explain to them explicitly, you know they've had some fun being murderous bastards for a while now, but in the case of this game you're going to run something which is heroic space opera and adventure where players are the good guys.

Not the 'shady grey' guys

Not the 'doing it for the greater good' guys

Not just 'a little bit of torture' guys

Not 'even once' guys

 

Just lay it out how it is. If they don't want to play it that way, then stop running. That may sound harsh but remember its your game and for your enjoyment as well as theirs.

I guess if they started being murderhobos again, start whacking on the Obligation for heinous activities so its always going off and increasing until they can no longer spend xp, unless they reduce it to below 100.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really, really glad to say I've never run parties of murder-hobos. I chalk this up to my players being intelligent, socially aware people who are there to have fun with their friends. I'll take a little bit of credit myself for always having been upfront about their actions having consequences, but mostly it's down to my players being good people.

 

And I think MKX (and several others) have hit on the best way to handle this. Sit down with them, explain what sort of campaign you want to run and what sort of campaign they want to play, and see if you can reach a compromise that everyone can live with. And if they insist on keeping up their murder spree, let them know that someone else will have to write the adventures and run the sessions, because you don't want to do it anymore. You can't make it more fair than that.

Edited by Krieger22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I see some gross misinterpretations of what I have been saying in some replies here...

@Bull30548; I did not advocate handing out arbitrary obligation, I advocated having the player actively asses the risk/reward of a certain action and determine whether or not they want to take on an obligation by going through with a certain action. In this case the whole "bargaining" remark makes a heck of a lot more sense as well. Sure it can be used as a player resource but it doesn't state that it is a PLAYER resource exclusively as others suggested.

I also never advocated to use obligation as a "stick to beat players with" as some one else wrote and I cannot understand why anyone would take that away from what I wrote.

Furthermore I don't understand why we are going so far as to point out that other people might have written supplementes than the ones who wrote the CRB since the do not(!) contradict the original rule.

If a Jawa wanted to kill a cab driver in broad daylight in front of many witnesses, as described in the OP, then I would let him do so but I would tell him before he pulls the trigger that while this would mean a quick gettaway indeed it would also mean 10 points of obligation Criminal. Is it worth the risk? He/she decides but it is absolutely a valid way to deal with it and as far as I understand obligation and how it is written in the CRB this is perfectly RAW.

If not then I echo the words of others who posted in stating that there would be no use for a lot of the obligation in the chart after character creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore I don't understand why we are going so far as to point out that other people might have written supplementes than the ones who wrote the CRB since the do not(!) contradict the original rule.

Two statements in the CRB are contradictory to each other to a degree. It's not surprising then that how modules handle it contradicts at least one of those CRB statements.

 

 

I also never advocated to use obligation as a "stick to beat players with" as some one else wrote and I cannot understand why anyone would take that away from what I wrote.

I did not take that away from what YOU wrote. I have seen suggestions on these boards from people, where to me it appeared that the solution to a GM's problem with his players was frequently "correct their behavior with increased Obligation" and that is not something I can get behind.

 

 

If a Jawa wanted to kill a cab driver in broad daylight in front of many witnesses, as described in the OP, then I would let him do so but I would tell him before he pulls the trigger that while this would mean a quick gettaway indeed it would also mean 10 points of obligation Criminal. Is it worth the risk? He/she decides but it is absolutely a valid way to deal with it and as far as I understand obligation and how it is written in the CRB this is perfectly RAW.

Unfortunately I also see this example as representing a player utterly lacking imagination or quick thinking in problem-solving. Let alone considering consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and I think a sensible player would never take on the obligation in that example so it might be helpful to steer them away from such actions and give them a sense of consequences that come with certain actions. The perfect way to use obligation if you ask me, and a lot more fun than the "we need more money"-schtick it would otherwise be mainly used for.

Sorry for misreading you I thought you did mean my post and I stand correct (relieved to be!)

On the supposed contradiction in the CRB; I don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

However, unless the characters frequently ignore opportunities to reduce their Obligation, the GM cannot normally force the players to take on additional Obligation beyond the start. The choice must be theirs as an exercise in risk vs. reward. - EotE Core Rulebook, page 309.

 

 

While that line is there, stealing from a crime lord or committing wonton acts of violence is going to get you more obligation. It's not forced their chosen actions are what are bring on more obligation. Though you could say before they make the roll or maybe even as things are getting bad that if they follow through they will probably gain obligation for doing said actions.

 

Also the Dev on the podcast that was talking about handing out obligation for actions was actually the dev that wrote the rules for obligation.

 

As for specific rules about adding it there are a few lines that can be taken either way but I don't feel like typing them all up.

As for GMs using it to control their group and make the PCs conform. Well there are always GMs that are inexperienced it takes some skill to be a decent GM. I was horrible at it when I was younger but I have gotten much better as time went on. There are also GMs that are just bad and their story is more important then the PCs fun. It will happen. I don't think telling my player that if they steal that cargo container from Jabba that they will get a bounty obligation goes against any rule. Whether there is something of actual value in said crate has no real baring on them gaining the obligation. The GM I play under lets our actions dictate the story not the other way around and when I GM I follow suit. The consequences to actions that you talk about can just as easily be or not be an obligation. And actually works better as an obligation unless there is a relatively immediate consequence. I'll give an example.

 

"You have been working for a crime boss the goal was to steal a cargo crate you steal the ship its on too. You suceeded but didn't get away as clean as you had hoped. You left your real name at the space port where you were docked and you were seen entering the ship moments before it took off.  You gain we will say a bounty obligation because you were seen stealing the ship. That story arc is over I don't want to have to have immediate consequences and really no one knows where you went. I start the next story you complete it and we move on to the next one. Normally I may have forgotten that I put a bounty on you, which was the consequence(whether it was obligation or not that was the consquence of your actions) This way though I don't forget and neither do you. I roll that obligation and now a gand findsman who has been searching for that ship and you approaches you while you are refueling and looking for supplies. It's fairly easy to deal with no one forgets. And it randomly comes back with out a lot of preplanning just like a 5 point obligation should be dealth with.

 

I realize the specific act wasn't the best example but it made for a better story on the spot. Insert you killed the customs officer while in a panic when he mearly asked you what your destination was, and it was caught on a holorecorder.  If that makes it more palatable. In the latter instance I would tell the PC it was being recorded and that the blaster shot would draw attention and he would gain some obligation if he went through with it.

Edited by Tanarri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go back to using strain to help break them of the murder hobo mentality.  Especially if they have taken motivations/obligation/duty that would specifically be contradicted by their actions.  It is one of the reasons I like the system so much because it doesn't backhand you across the universe if you make a minor mistake.  Also strain is one of those things that often explained as stress or mental/physical exertion your character has gone through.  To break with your motivation would be a great example of exerting strain on yourself.  If you do it over and over you will eventually exhaust yourself and pass out.  If it ever got that bad I would recommend sitting down with the player and talking about changing whatever it was causing the strain to something else.  Look at it as accepting a mindset or compartmentalizing to better endure the harshness of the universe.  The trigger is still there it just got a callous protecting it.  For example your motivation is to return to the life of luxury you knew as a child that was taken away by the Empire.  Well now you 'take away' from the Empire but you might do so more violently then you first set out on this journey.  After a while you accepted this course (the elimination of suffering strain), however, if for example you decide to kill a planetary official in league with the Empire in his home you may encounter his kid.  That strain would resurface because your character remembers something similar like men in dark clothing hustling you out of your home in the middle of the night.  You are now one of those 'men in dark clothing' come in the night to take something away.  The strain occurs again and then the character will have to live with the decision of killing or not leaving a witness or not and that could invoke a whole new set of mental anguish for the character.

 

Honestly I think it will come down to a trial and error type of rp for a little while.  I know this might drive some folks nuts but leave all the really big stuff like motivation/obligation/duty even characteristics and skills really flexible until the players get their bearings in this new setting.  Communication verbally might be a lot more important here then just expecting people to pick up stuff from the book.  Personally when I sit down with my group  to do this I am planning on a nothing but character creation discussion meeting.  We might not even put pencil to paper to make characters until the next time because I want the point to come across.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is wrong. Obligation is not intended to be used like that:

However, unless the characters frequently ignore opportunities to reduce their Obligation, the GM cannot normally force the players to take on additional Obligation beyond the start. The choice must be theirs as an exercise in risk vs. reward. - EotE Core Rulebook, page 309.

I might be reading too much or not enough into it but I don't see how that paragraph says the GM giviing out Obligation as a consequence is wrong. Telling a person that they risk Obligation if they take a course of action lets them measure the risk/reward. I don't think that "reward" needs to imply anything more than success. Generally, where you're willing to accept Obligation, you're happier to do it than not so the reward is already there.

In our game, we've bullied NPC's into doing things, for example, and found shortcuts in an adventure. The GM warned us we could take Obligation but we thought it was worth it because it saved us a lot of trouble. Similarly, if we became murder hobos, he'd give us the same warning and we'd decide if being murder hobos was reward enough to take on the Obligation we'd receive. That's not forcing it on us, by any measure.

I also see a "cannot normally" in that citation and that means there's built-in exceptions. That leads me to believe it's purposely vague enough that each group can decide what the limits need to be.

Obligation is a powerful resource that may be spent and bargained with during the course of play. It gives the players an option beyond credits to obtain equipment or services they might otherwise be unable to acquire. - EotE Core Rulebook, page 309.

This would only support the idea that the GM could not give Obligation as a consequence if it is taken as the limit of Obligation's use and not just as examples of some of if its uses. Considering many others seem to have gotten another impression and they have been running their games otherwise (including my GM) and, as others posted here, even the authors play with Obligation as a consequence and have published an adventure where it is specifically used that way, there has to be at least enough intentional wiggle room to interpret it either way.

And... OMG, this post took me an hour to format!

In my usual attempt to at least contribute to the thread's subject, my GM has said that the only thing that stopped the murder hobos from continuing to be murder hobos was adding a girl to the group! I'd offer my services but my list of requirements are Diva Level!!

Edited by PrettyHaley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how about you? Have you been in games with murder-hobos? Have you been one yourself? Have you GMed for a group like that? How did you deal with it? Is their behavior a reflection of how I run my games? If so, what can I change so that "Kill them, take their stuff, kill the witnesses, and burn down the building so there was no evidence that we were ever here." isn't the solution to every encounter? Is this just a natural phase in the development of an RPGer? Your thoughts, opinions, and even criticism are welcome.

 

I have been in games with murder-hobos (love that phrase).  It's why I'll never run a d20 game again* - a couple of my players just started seeing XP and GP counters floating above the heads of every character they met.  Really uncomfortable, unfriendly, competitive way to play.  No fun at all.

 

I'm a player in EotE and there's plenty of violence been done, and the GM has been pretty frustrated with us because of it.  To my mind it's always been for valid reasons - and these have been explained - but that hasn't stopped the GM lecturing about it (and tossing the oh-so-dull Obligation rules at us) to an eye-rolling degree.

 

What to do about it?  Some possibilities:

  • If you throw mechanics at your players, it's a disincentive to roleplay.  "I can't do this because my bad crap meter will get too high" is boring and isn't what the character is thinking.  "I can't do this because the guy's got Clan Anjilliac tattoos and I want to do business with those guys" is better.  Roleplay the repercussions of their actions.  A contact of theirs can't help them because they're busy investigating the brutal murder of their cousin - a security guard the PCs have killed.
  • If they're scrabbling for every last credit, killing a guy for his kit seems like a valid option.  So what do you do?  Get rid of money. They're as rich as the story says they are until the story says they've gambled or drank it away. Is that going too far? Okay, okay - you could try to make money less important. If they're paid what they need, then you can make affording the gear they want less important than having the contacts to be able to find it.  When a superior attachment for Pash's gun isn't available off the rack, he'll have to be nice the people who can hunt down the parts he wants, if nobody else.
  • Cheap-ass psychology.  Have them meet someone nice.  Have that person be super helpful.  Every time they deal with that person, the NPC gives a little extra (information on their rivals, leads on new business opportunities, news from relatives on distant worlds, etc.)  Then the NPC needs a favour.  They look nervous.  They need to hire Murder Hobo, Inc. for a job.  It's something personal to them that they have to tag along for.  Are your murder hobos going to go full brutal in front of this nice, helpful NPC who they rely upon?

 

 

*Okay, I would.  But I'd ditch the XP system entirely - you'd level at certain points in whatever story we were telling.

Edited by Col. Orange

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one thing a lot of people are missing is that the op's player apparently want to dial it back, but keep falling back to old habits, gentle prodding when they cross the line might actually be fine, They know there's a line and OOC they don't want to cross it, but once they start playing they can't see it anymore.

 

Another option might be start them as shady types, hunting down and murdering gang leaders and serial killers, but a strict code against innocents, once they've accepted they can't kill the dock workers that saw the and have to bribe, sweet talk, or just lay low instead move on to a campaign that's less innately shady, so on and so forth until everyone is happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one thing a lot of people are missing is that the op's player apparently want to dial it back, but keep falling back to old habits, gentle prodding when they cross the line might actually be fine, They know there's a line and OOC they don't want to cross it, but once they start playing they can't see it anymore.

 

For some reason I get the feeling this isn't the case for his complete group... Or at least I can't imagine the guy wanting to carve his initials in a woman's forehead to be swayed by gentle prodding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think one thing a lot of people are missing is that the op's player apparently want to dial it back, but keep falling back to old habits, gentle prodding when they cross the line might actually be fine, They know there's a line and OOC they don't want to cross it, but once they start playing they can't see it anymore.

 

For some reason I get the feeling this isn't the case for his complete group... Or at least I can't imagine the guy wanting to carve his initials in a woman's forehead to be swayed by gentle prodding.

 

 

Depends. I have seen the nicest, most mild mannered guy in real life use pinning shot (I was running warhammer 3rd) on a doctor they suspected of being a chaos cultist then wiggle the arrow around inside his ankle to get him to talk, same guy in a different system flirted with a guard to get his armor off then stab him in the unmentionables.

 

Again, nicest guy ever and was actually kind surprised at himself by doing those things. Sometimes people just get carried away. Admittedly the guy never crossed into murder hobo territory, just coldly pragmatic to a scary extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your group needs more consequences. Burn down a village and suddenly nobody wants to deal with you anymore. You can't dock at reputable planets. Bounty hunters are always chasing you. Like... always! If you do enough damage, wreak enough havoc, it should get to the point where you're running all the time with barely a spare moment to heal your wounds from the last ambush before you're ambushed again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just have to make them feel stupid.  Had a game where a player shoots one of 3 captured thugs in the face for telling him off when interrogation begins.  He gets to the next guy and asks about the com and gets told they have a code word to let the others know what is up.  Player asks guard what the code word is and is told he doesn't have it.  Player asks who does and the guard motions to the guy with the hole in his head.  Look on player's face was priceless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my usual attempt to at least contribute to the thread's subject, my GM has said that the only thing that stopped the murder hobos from continuing to be murder hobos was adding a girl to the group! I'd offer my services but my list of requirements are Diva Level!!

 

Conventional wisdom says the same thing- a DM I knew wouldn't allow his son's girlfriend to play in an evil D&D 3.5 campaign he was running because he was concerned that the players would artificially modify their behavior because of the presence of a female. (She played in different group that I happened to be a part of- with the same DM.)

 

That being said, my group has had as many as three or four females in it at varying times, and the women have been among the murdery-est of the hobos.

 

*Okay, I would.  But I'd ditch the XP system entirely - you'd level at certain points in whatever story we were telling.

 

I ended up doing that towards the end of the Saga Edition campaign I was running because the XP system began to get burdensome. I still use XP in our current Pathfinder game, but no XP is awarded for killing innocents, and fortunately they haven't reached the point (yet) where they're killing ally NPCs for the sake of loot or XP. In fact, they usually get very attached to at least one NPC. It's the bystanders, possible enemies, and people that haven't been revealed as unquestionably loyal friends who end up facing their wrath...

 

Great suggestions, by the way. Thank you.

 

I think one thing a lot of people are missing is that the op's player apparently want to dial it back, but keep falling back to old habits, gentle prodding when they cross the line might actually be fine, They know there's a line and OOC they don't want to cross it, but once they start playing they can't see it anymore.

 

Another option might be start them as shady types, hunting down and murdering gang leaders and serial killers, but a strict code against innocents, once they've accepted they can't kill the dock workers that saw the and have to bribe, sweet talk, or just lay low instead move on to a campaign that's less innately shady, so on and so forth until everyone is happy.

 

Correct. I've already talked to some of my players about it, and they're very amenable to the idea. I'm mostly looking for non-punitive ways that I can (from my end of the table) help them keep from going full 8-bit Theater on innocent towns. Again, awesome ideas. Thank you.

 

For some reason I get the feeling this isn't the case for his complete group... Or at least I can't imagine the guy wanting to carve his initials in a woman's forehead to be swayed by gentle prodding.

 

Gal, actually. That player is a female.

 

Depends. I have seen the nicest, most mild mannered guy in real life use pinning shot (I was running warhammer 3rd) on a doctor they suspected of being a chaos cultist then wiggle the arrow around inside his ankle to get him to talk, same guy in a different system flirted with a guard to get his armor off then stab him in the unmentionables.

 

Again, nicest guy ever and was actually kind surprised at himself by doing those things. Sometimes people just get carried away. Admittedly the guy never crossed into murder hobo territory, just coldly pragmatic to a scary extreme.

 

This. Some of my players have their real-world issues, but they're generally well-adjusted people whose in-game actions are not a very good reflection of their real-world personalities or attitudes.

 

In game, I've seen a snowball effect where one player takes things a little further, then another player takes things even further, and before you know it, they're talking about amputating a prisoner's legs and using healing magic to stop the bleeding so it can't run away when they make camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't read the whole thread so if I've missed some salient points forgive me. If you don't want to deal with them if they're going to repeat there modis operandi, ask someone else to GM. Otherwise sit down and explain what you want. if they are not receptive either move on or put up with it. I play with an eclectic group, from my son who is a "Kill'em and collect their heads to hang from his belt" type to a buddy that likes playing bards and other Talky characters to everything in between. Sometimes you ignore it, sometimes you can use it. Just don't overdo the stick in hopes they will change. They either will or they won't. They definitely won't if you're throughing consequences at them all the time. That will, in all likelihood, lead to a war of escalation. A war which the players ultimately just can not win given their resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my usual attempt to at least contribute to the thread's subject, my GM has said that the only thing that stopped the murder hobos from continuing to be murder hobos was adding a girl to the group! I'd offer my services but my list of requirements are Diva Level!!

 

 

This is kind of something that I wanted to touch upon while reading this thread. The OP's group sounds like it needs a player that is passionate about changing the tone of the game. Based on his comments, they all agree that they need to dial it back, but  they lose sight of that partly through the game. There is no PC there to remind them how horrible the acts they are committing truly are.

 

Sure the GM could add a Sir Osric* to the group, but that character will always be an NPC in the player's eyes, so it would be just as expendable. I suspect the OP's players will listen to another player's character when they suggest a less murderous solution, or the character expresses horror and shock at their acts. Finding players is a task in of itself and you may not have room for it, but if the planets align, I suggest finding some fresh blood to add to your game. Find a player who is experienced and enjoys roleplaying. Although, if you were honest with this player you may just scare him or her away.

 

Alternatively, pick the player that is most passionate about making the game just a bit more passive. Really work hard with this player and help him build a character with a fun an interesting backstory. Make sure this player's character is something the player will want to play and will want to play right. The character should have a reason to want to be more passive and the player will want to have a reason to play that character as a more passive person. Ideally would want to do this with ever player, but the group needs at least one good cheerleader.

 

I completely agree with the advice that you need to be explicit with the players when they are about to commit a heinous and uncalled for act. You don't have to dish out obligation. The consequences can be handled without the use of the obligation mechanic, but they do need an out-of-game reminder that this is the kind of behavior that they are wanting to step away from. Out-of-game, explain to them all their obvious options, both the combat-oriented and the non-combat oriented options. There's nothing wrong with laying it out on the table. It breaks immersion a bit, but it puts everyone on the page so a rational decision could potentially be made.

 

One final trick is to explicitly reward non-combat with an extra few points of XP. Have some loose change sitting around and a little cup in front of you. Anytime the players find an interesting solution to a problem that doesn't involve murdering everything insight, drop a penny into the cup. At the end of the session the total amount of change could be bonus XP. I suggest using money instead of keeping up in your head because they can actually see their creativity being rewarded at the time.

 

 

*In fact, as part of your Session 0, order some pizza and have them all watch Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising with you (it's on youtube). One of the PCs is a murder hobo and it gets called out quite a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my usual attempt to at least contribute to the thread's subject, my GM has said that the only thing that stopped the murder hobos from continuing to be murder hobos was adding a girl to the group! I'd offer my services but my list of requirements are Diva Level!!

 

Just by the by, anyone saying the game needs a girl I can tell you that the darkest most evil ideas in our party usually come from one of the girl players. The rest mostly rail her in though...

 

My Pathfinder Council of Thieves campaign is comprised of 3 women and 1 guy and is one hilariously murderous, vengeful group. They once cremated an evil sect of evil murder-nuns (no, seriously!) and sealed away their remains just to make it harder for them to be resurrected. My Reign of Winter campaign (3 women and 2 guys) is equally unforgiving but then again, they are agents of Baba Yaga so it kinda goes with the flavor of the campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One final trick is to explicitly reward non-combat with an extra few points of XP. Have some loose change sitting around and a little cup in front of you. Anytime the players find an interesting solution to a problem that doesn't involve murdering everything insight, drop a penny into the cup. At the end of the session the total amount of change could be bonus XP. I suggest using money instead of keeping up in your head because they can actually see their creativity being rewarded at the time.

 

I really, really like this idea!  Thank you so much!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...