Is Iron Man a power gamer type character?

[Nightmask]

Back in the days of 4th Edition, I remember a section on Power Gamers, which by the way I wish it was put into FrEd. Anyways, Tony Stark has a damaged heart, spinal injury, neural damage and a recovering alcohlic. No GM I know would allow me to make a character with those Disads. Although, he did let me use some of his Hunteds, etc. and make the powered armor as a vehicle at the time.

NOTE: I still see that they still are at 1/5th Active Cost. He he he. Not that my GM will allow it anymore.

[Killer Shrike]

On the contrary, Stark took Disads that actually limited him. Its all the other heroes that took Disads that had no net impact on their story lines that were powergaming.

In fact, Stark is a perfect example of overcoming ones limitations to be a hero. Thats why Stark is more heroic than Thor or Vision or Captain America. Unlike them, he has real problems that he overcomes everytime he takes the field. Its easy for Cappy or Thor to be superheroic -- but Stark has to work at it constantly.

Its even what Iron Man represents as a character; the triumph over ones own limitations thru intelligence and perseverance.



Now if you wanted to take all those Disads and not actually PLAY them, then that would be powergaming.

[assault]

Anyways, Tony Stark has a damaged heart, spinal injury, neural damage and a recovering alcohlic. No GM I know would allow me to make a character with those Disads. Although, he did let me use some of his Hunteds, etc. and make the powered armor as a vehicle at the time.

A lot of these disads were acquired during play. Most weren't really there in the original version of the character. Just the heart thing, IIRC, but I don't know what else showed up in the first couple of years.

In any case, Disadvantages are Disadvantages, and if they are worth the points they will limit the character. So there's no balance problem, necessarily.

On the other hand, of course, Disads should really be handles for roleplaying, rather than some kind of golf handicap. Having too many Disads that are too similar too each other can be a bit of a pain. It's a bit like having five DNPCs, all of whom have identical personalities.

So Stark's limitations could be a bit of a nuisance for the GM, but aren't inherently unbalancing. I personally wouldn't let a character take the full set, but taking a couple of them would be OK.

Building his suit as a vehicle is another story. :)

I'd take a good hard look at a character constructed along those lines. The kind of "good hard look" that involves lots of red ink.

In any case, power armour characters are tough enough without resorting to munchkin builds. Buying a lot of your stuff through an OIF is very efficient.

So: Is Iron Man a power gamer type character?

Not necessarily, although he's one of the kinds of character power gamers are likely to be attracted to.

Of course, dumb power gamers who play this kind of character are easy to hose. It's the smart ones you have to look out for. But they, at least, have the potential to become some other kind of player.

Just take away his armour, and see what happens.

[Killer Shrike]

Building Power Armor as a Vehicle is not necessarily munchkin. There are cons involved, and it closely models some types of Power Armor very well. Yes, it can be very powerful if left unchecked, but a GM that enforces the ups as well as the downs shouldnt have any problems. The key thing is finding a good balance point for DEF and not letting the player creep above it.

[Duke Bushido]

Agreed---

depending a lot on genre, concept, and points, Vehicle rules work well for building armor, particularly 'giant' armor or mecha. Work out in advance with your GM if he will subject you to vehicle movement and combat rules, however, as this may or may not be contrary to your conception of the armor itself and how it works.

[Matt Frisbee]

This situation happens all the time in superheroic campaigns, especially ones that attempt to balance the good with the bad with characters. The Hero System tends to front-load the problem during the character creation process while other systems tend to make it a "during play" situation where the player and GM negotiate (to a certain extent) how and where the powers and limitations will work in that campaign.

The situation here becomes an issue of play balance for a particular campaign and whether it fits the tone the GM is trying to establish. Back in an earlier edition of these rules, it used to be that the first disadvantage of a category was allowed for the base number of points, and subsequent disadvantages of the same type were discounted by half and then a quarter of the base value. Imagine trying on an Iron Man with those sorts of limitations! It is possible, it's just not easy.

While I don't have problems with the current system of simply limiting the points from each individual category, the original incarnation of these rules I mentioned above (IMHO) was more effective in getting players to think about their characters, since piling on more of the same had limited benefits. Unfortunately, this also tended to create characters who had crippling disadvantages since power gamers wanted to get the most points from that first disadvantage.

Presuming I don't make the characters for the players, which is a rare thing these days since they don't have copies of the rules I run, I usually insist that the character concept be developed first. Most players simply have a laundry list of skills and powers they want their character to have without any consideration as to who the character is as a person. That's the genuine telling feature of most power gamers, they know what they want their character to do but have no idea who the character really is or what problems they might have.

I have taken to the idea of allowing disadvantages at twice their normal points, because I (as a GM) have a hard time keeping track of all the characters' issues and giving them adequate importance during game play. Otherwise, I suppose I could always bump up the base points and simply not require so many disadvantages, whatever.

Ultimately, it boils down to the campaign. If all the characters are doing is meeting at the TroubAlert and busting down the villain of the week, then disadvantages which are combat related mean more than ones which have to be role-played. If your group is doing a take on To Save The World, then the roleplaying-oriented disadvantages will be more prominent.

Is Iron Man a power-gaming character? Not really. He's got a nice mix of (high-end) powers for a combat-oriented character. Tony's an inventor with a lot of money and a lot of issues -- very balanced from a Champions standpoint. You want a power gamer? Try Batman with the cheap as all bleep utility belt multipower with 20 slots and a variable power pool for vehicles and base equipment! And all he's got for problems are an obession with justice (which he can mask with his wealth) and a sidekick who serves as an occasional plot complication. Okay, I'm sorry, he also has a humanitarian streak that would shame Mother Teresa, which disappears when he's battling crime...

Anyway, that's my take on it. Hopefully, I haven't stepped on too many toes. :)

Matt "Wiping-the-rant-foam-from-the-corners-of-my-mouth" Frisbee

[Edsel]

It depends on the gamer and the build as to whether or not Iron Man is a munchkin character. I played in a long-term Marvel Hero game in which I played Tony Stark/Iron Man. In that campaign all of the characters were built by the player and the GM working together. Mainly this allowed the GM to be sure that none of the characters were overly, or underly, powered.

We had great success in runing a very Marvel-feeling universe despite huge disparities in the point values of individual characters. That campaign was not a limited by points type of set-up. We attempted to simulate the characters from the comics regardless what the point totals ended up being.

The campagin worked very well and I still have copies of a lot of those character write-ups. Sadly most are on paper only and I am too lazy to get around to converting them to 5th Ed. in Hero Designer.

[Chimpira]

I would not have a problem with you taking those disads but we would have to have a serious sit down first. I would tell you what could be in store for you as a player and that this would be extremely difficult but it would be a great roleplaying opportunity. I would have laughed full in your face about making your suit using the vehicle rules though.

[MisterBaldy]

The main thing about Marvel Comics in the early days, many of the characters that Stan Lee created were "tragic heroes". They rose above their adversity to to take on the mantle and become heroes.

Here are some examples...

Spiderman, The Fantastic Four, The Hulk, Daredevil, Doctor Strange...and Iron Man.

Most of the signatures that separated Marvel from DC (and other comic companies as well) was the fact that these characters had real life "angst", and they used their abilities to rise above it all, to motivate them to help others...and become true heroes.

Thank You Stan "The Man" Lee...you've brought us some of the most beloved characters in comic history, and helped show the "real life" problems of the fictional hero.

POW Entertainment is Stan Lee's latest business venture...check it out here...http://www.powentertainment.com/.

[Trebuchet]

It depends on the gamer and the build as to whether or not Iron Man is a munchkin character. I played in a long-term Marvel Hero game in which I played Tony Stark/Iron Man. In that campaign all of the characters were built by the player and the GM working together. Mainly this allowed the GM to be sure that none of the characters were overly, or underly, powered.

We had great success in runing a very Marvel-feeling universe despite huge disparities in the point values of individual characters. That campaign was not a limited by points type of set-up. We attempted to simulate the characters from the comics regardless what the point totals ended up being.

The campagin worked very well and I still have copies of a lot of those character write-ups. Sadly most are on paper only and I am too lazy to get around to converting them to 5th Ed. in Hero Designer.Slacker! Get to work! :whip:

[Killer Shrike]

It depends on the gamer and the build as to whether or not Iron Man is a munchkin character. I played in a long-term Marvel Hero game in which I played Tony Stark/Iron Man. In that campaign all of the characters were built by the player and the GM working together. Mainly this allowed the GM to be sure that none of the characters were overly, or underly, powered.

The best way to do it, in my opinion. Thats SOP for my campaigns; I get directly involved in character creation with the players. Solves a lot of problems.


We had great success in runing a very Marvel-feeling universe despite huge disparities in the point values of individual characters. That campaign was not a limited by points type of set-up. We attempted to simulate the characters from the comics regardless what the point totals ended up being.
Yeah, Ive experimented with mixed power levels in a number of groups as more of a plot device. Some groups are ok with it, some arent. It also depends on the player(s) allowed to have a higher powered character.


The campagin worked very well and I still have copies of a lot of those character write-ups. Sadly most are on paper only and I am too lazy to get around to converting them to 5th Ed. in Hero Designer.
What if I flew to OK and held a gun to your head? If you ever get around to writing them up send them over and Ill post them with the rest of your writeups. http://www.killershrike.com/misccharacters/PublishedSupers.htm ;)

[Killer Shrike]

The main thing about Marvel Comics in the early days, many of the characters that Stan Lee created were "tragic heroes". They rose above their adversity to to take on the mantle and become heroes.

Here are some examples...

Spiderman, The Fantastic Four, The Hulk, Daredevil, Doctor Strange...and Iron Man.

Most of the signatures that separated Marvel from DC (and other comic companies as well) was the fact that these characters had real life "angst", and they used their abilities to rise above it all, to motivate them to help others...and become true heroes.



Thats the main reason I always preferred Marvel to DC -- I never could get into DC's uber and one-note characters. I liked heroes that had limits and overcame them. It was when Marvel started to escalate power levels and lose internal consistency that I stopped collecting them.

[CrosshairCollie]

Back in the days of 4th Edition, I remember a section on Power Gamers, which by the way I wish it was put into FrEd. Anyways, Tony Stark has a damaged heart, spinal injury, neural damage and a recovering alcohlic. No GM I know would allow me to make a character with those Disads. Although, he did let me use some of his Hunteds, etc. and make the powered armor as a vehicle at the time.

NOTE: I still see that they still are at 1/5th Active Cost. He he he. Not that my GM will allow it anymore.

Well, I file that more as a Multiple Writer Syndrome issue, myself. He started with an artificial heart, then some writer decided he didn't want Stark reliant on the chestplate of the armor, so he got him a more reliable artificial one, but then the NEXT writer wanted to give him a crippling flaw, so he make him an alcoholic, then the NEXT writer didn't want to deal with alcoholism so he recovered him, then the NEXT writer broke his back ... etc etc etc.

I wouldn't let him build the armor as a vehicle, though, myself; it'd be OIF. My general guideline for a human-shaped suit is: If your limbs fit in the suit's limbs and control them directly, it's an OIF battlesuit. If the limbs aren't controlled directly like that (see: 99 percent of mecha), then you can call it a vehicle. This is my game, of course, Your Mileage May Vary.