Packages

[CUnknown]

I have noticed that the use of packages is fairly widespread. I don't exactly understand what packages do, though.. What are the advantages of using packages, do you think? If the package includes a "package bonus," I can understand why a player would want to buy them for his/her character, but many packages I've seen don't have a package bonus. Why do you think players would pay much attention to packages that don't have a "bonus" to them?

[Curufea]

There are no package bonuses any more.

The purpose of a package is to simplify character creation by giving you some standard archetypes to go by.

Player- "I want to start with an ordinary farmer, who joined the army. What is the average farmer like? What is a soldier like?"
GM - "look at the packages of what average farmers and soldiers get"

[Lord Liaden]

Curufea has it, essentially. Packages are templates that you can quickly build a character from, greatly simplifying the chargen process. They also allow the GM to establish the parameters for what sort of character abilities are appropriate to his or her campaign. I know that some gamers who come to HERO from other systems use Packages in a manner similar to Character Classes with predefined sets of abilities, if they're used to that style of game.

[austenandrews]

I do have a problem with the way Packages are presented in the source books. They sum the costs of skills & powers, then subtract Disads and label the result "Total Cost Of Package." Highly misleading - in reality that "Total Cost" doesn't mean anything.

[Vondy]

There are no packages, just lists of required buys for various races, cultures, groups, professions, and the like. I don't know why they bothered to keep them when they dropped the package bonus. They could have just as easily said: it is useful to write-up lists of common abilities and limitations for various types of characters.... and left it at that.

[tkdguy]

The only thing I didn't like was adding Characteristics in the professional packages. Now every martial artist has a DEX of at least 18. Same goes for other packages. I can see that for races, since they are compared to humans. But for professions? It makes them so cookie cutter.

[Labrat]

The only thing I didn't like was adding Characteristics in the professional packages. Now every martial artist has a DEX of at least 18. Same goes for other packages. I can see that for races, since they are compared to humans. But for professions? It makes them so cookie cutter.

Well, after all, they are just intended to be suggestions. I find that they inspire the taking of skills, perks, etc. that would normally be overlooked. I think that without Packages there would be more cookie-cutter character concepts. If you want a Martial Artist who has PS: Game Show Host, what GM is going to stop you? They're just suggestions to give the feel for the archetype...

[Curufea]

The purpose of packages is to make cookie cutter characters. Hence my reference to archetypes.

Otherwise how else will a player or a GM making an NPC know what an average farmer, warrior, priest or whater is like?

They are guidelines.

I have never yet encountered a Hero game were everyone believes "things are as they are and must never be changed" either. It is an odd (and almost D&Dish/non-Hero) concept that packages can't be modified - or that the rules are always right/canon even when it ruins play.

[tkdguy]

Good point. Even in 4th Edition, my gaming group never used Packages verbatim; they were just guidelines.

[Lezentauw]

I think that for professions, packages is a bad term. "Templates" would better describe what they represent now.

I include stats as powers for races, so that makes them feel more like a package to me. Not only that, the racial packages are less often altered.

[Flames]

I think that for professions, packages is a bad term. "Templates" would better describe what they represent now.

I include stats as powers for races, so that makes them feel more like a package to me. Not only that, the racial packages are less often altered.
You're right about that; the old term was 'Package Deal,' and the character would get a nominal bonus for buying all the Skills, Perks, Disads, and whatever else the package called for, but that was back when Disads for non-superpowered characters had smaller values that didn't usually end in five or zero, so a 2-pt Package Bonus actually made a difference on a character sheet.

OTOH, the term "Templates" might be confusing, since we use Templates in Hero Designer to mean something a bit different. I think that the term "Package" is going to stick for quite some time.

[Curufea]

After all, we still use "Energy Blast" for Ranged Normal Attack :)

[teh bunneh]

I do have a problem with the way Packages are presented in the source books. They sum the costs of skills & powers, then subtract Disads and label the result "Total Cost Of Package." Highly misleading - in reality that "Total Cost" doesn't mean anything.

That's exactly how I use them in my game. If a package gives you 20 points of skills/talents/powers and 10 points of disads, you pay 10 points total and get the whole schmear.

Bill.
(In some games, this would probably prove unbalancing, but I've never noticed a problem in my game). :)

[sbarron]

That's exactly how I use them in my game. If a package gives you 20 points of skills/talents/powers and 10 points of disads, you pay 10 points total and get the whole schmear.

Bill.
(In some games, this would probably prove unbalancing, but I've never noticed a problem in my game). :)I played with some guys...wow...12 years ago that did packages this way, and I found it to be highly unbalancing. The racial packages basically afforded non-humans with between 5-30 extra points worth of stuff, which is very significant in a 125 pt fantasy setting. The arguments we used to have about how to interpret the package deal rules were legendary. But we've all covered this ground before, and Steve fixed it anyway.

Ah, I long for the good old days...

[Capt JT Kohonez]

I think packages are a great way of simplyfying character generation.

I also think it'd be a great idea to create a Book of Packages in pdf format to which we all could contribute.

:)

[Curufea]

That is a good idea - unfortunately all the packages I use for Western Shores are only slight variations on the published packages, and so it infringes on copyright if I typed them completely up.
I could, however, just compile the variations "This package is the same as this one, on page such and such of book so and so, but with these listed changes"

Mind you, none of my PCs wanted to use the packages...
Typical, really.

[prestidigitator]

That's exactly how I use them in my game. If a package gives you 20 points of skills/talents/powers and 10 points of disads, you pay 10 points total and get the whole schmear.
That's typically the way I handle it for racial packages. I do, however place some restrictions on the packages themselves (such as the positive costs being no greater than the campaign's Base Points and the Disadvantages being no greater than the typical maximum from one Disadvantage category--even when I don't stick to that category maximum for straight Disadvantages) as well as overseeing the creation of new packages rather carefully. My racial packages also buy Characteristic adjustments, "as Powers," so they in effect influence the Normal Characteristic Maxima. Another reason to carefully monitor packages as a GM (but that's kind of what packages are there for, isn't it?).