What's with all the points

[JPicasso]

I am a gamer returning to the scene after a 10-year hiatus. I grew up on 3rd edition rules and never saw the 4th edition copy. I’ve been reading a lot of these forums and it occurs to me that the heroes these days tend to be a lot more points. Now, without making this a “Back in my day, we didn’t need 350 points to make an effective character” discussion, let me start with this:

Back in my day, we didn’t need 350 points to make an effective character. We got 250 points and we loved it! Our “bouncy” superheroes ran at about 250, pulp and low powered supers ran in at 200 and fantasy hero was 150. That is, if my memory is anything like it used to be. ;) .

Seriously, have the rules significantly changed to require the extra points. Or am I just running into a lot of groups that would rather play the Paladin with a +5 Holy avenger rather than the Paladin with a pointed stick. (forgive the D&D ref)

[Doc Democracy]

The iuncrease in points is there to reflect a difference in the assumptions made about character producing.

Early editions of Champions focussed on the powers and very broad brush skills and background details. You wouldn't expect to spend lots of points on contacts, knowledge skills and other background detail.

In the current version there is an expectation that the character will be fully fleshed out and detailed on the character sheet, no longer will PS: Detective 14- be enough to provide all of the necessary to get by as a PI.

And its nice not to have to compromise your design as much when looking at powers.


Doc

[Checkmate]

Let me start with there is a HUGE difference between 3rd and 5th HUGE. However, the difference between 4th, which was also 250pts, and 5th is very minimal. With that clarification in place, I'll tell you what I believe.

The original justification was that Element Controls and Multipowers were supposed to be a much tighter concept. A quick look at the "official" characters proved that to be fluff and just not true (Helpful Magics anyone?).

The real reason, in my opinion, is everyone wants the +5 Holy Avenger. The problem was (and I'm about to start a HUGE war here) everyone wants Batman to have a 7 SPD. Others looked at Batman with his 7 SPD and thought that if Batman, a normal human, has a 7 SPD then my SUPER fast hero must have a 8 SPD. And the same thing happened with DEX, STR and every other stat. So people started complaining that 250 just wasn't enough points for skills and to round out their characters, and I guess when you've base lined the slowest super with a 23 DEX and 6 SPD just to keep up, they were probably right. So instead of trying to end the stats inflation by making the official characters more reasonable in stats, they felt raising the cap was easier.

Since you did include a D&D reference, I will say Wizards of the Coast (current "owners" of the D&D franchise) did pretty much the same thing with 3rd edition and beyond. Catered to the "power gamer" for lack of a better word. Any race can be any class and go as high as they want as any class and can multiclass as much as they want. There are pretty much no limitations (yes, yes an XP penalty if you multiclass TOO much, but there are even ways around that).

In an attempt to stem the flow of fire I will inevitably receive, let me clarify that this is simiply my view of things. It is MY opinion. I am in NO WAY saying any of this is absloulte, irrefutable fact.

There, now they can't say I didn't try.

[Supreme Serpent]

My unscientific answer is that it's about:

15% power increase
10% some things more expensive
50% skill/etc. explosion
10% some new options available
15% rounding out

Some 250pt 3rd ed characters could be built for around the same points. Some to meet the current standards would probably be more expensive.

If you have access to a copy of Sidekick or 5th ed HERO, you could convert some of your old 250pt characters, tack on some of the things they "should" have based on concept, and see where you stand point wise. If you don't have access, perhaps you could post up the stats/etc. for one of them here along with a bit of concept/etc. and someone could update for you to give you an idea.

[Hyper-Man]

Another reason not exactly mentioned so far is that 350 points for Supers helps differentiate them from Heroic characters. Some Heroic characters might cost 150-200+ pts to build but when factoring in the 'free' equipment they get to carry they can outclass many 250 pt supers. To be truly Super in a world with semi-realistic agents the average Superhero needs to be at least as good as a top 'normal' agent imho.

[BoneDaddy]

A lot of it is simple point inflation. I do find that my 350 point characters are more well rounded than my 250s were, but only on paper. I haven't used a background skill yet, but man I have 'em!

[Eosin]

Back in my day, we didn’t need 350 points to make an effective character. We got 250 points and we loved it! Our “bouncy” superheroes ran at about 250, pulp and low powered supers ran in at 200 and fantasy hero was 150. That is, if my memory is anything like it used to be. ;)

You can make an effective character for 10 points or 1,000 points - it is the genre, settings, and inherent expectations that determine what "effective" really means. Most novel, comic, movie or other media central characters tend to hedge out into the upper echelon of points (500+ points). Players want something more like the "central character" but IME when you give them the points, they just make bigger combat monsters. :nonp:

Something of a conundrum.

In our rare X-men game we build to match the established character and all builds are done by the GM and a few of the more rules versed players. What this comes out like on the character sheet is that some X-men come in at 200-300 points and some approach 1,000 points. It is all a matter of getting the build right rather than playing with the points when you run a game like that.... It might be fun to model more games like that?

[Sean Waters]

Even now I'll build a character, then add up the points and find I've still got 100 to go. So I'll have 120 pd, shall I? I mean it's got to go somewhere.

My understanding of the points inflation was simply that a lot of games had been going long enough that very high point characters were common in both the general gaming community and in published books and scenarios, so a higher starting point was appropriate.

Mind you a cynic might think that it was all just a way to get people to think the game was now churning out a superer sort of super. I'm sure none of you fell for that one. :whistle:

[pinecone]

My impression is that at 250 Skill intensive chars got the shaft, and so seldom were ever seen...at 350 a skill maven becomes totally viable...the hope is that the other more blessed concepts (like say Bricks) will add in some skills instead of boosting power.

The second reason is that at 250 framework mastery was a high art. at 350 it's now reasonable to rein in that sort of rules manipulation. And that helps narrow the gap between Hero mavens and "new guys", and that helps the game....

[gojira]

Welcome Valkyrie... er, JPicasso!

Like you I'm a returning 3rd. edition player. I was also shocked at the points starting superheroes get. Gamers nowadays have gone soft, I tell you!

Back when I was playing Champions, we only got 250 points and we were happy to get that. There were starving children in Africa who didn't get any character points at all, so we weren't complaining, no sir, not us. Plus, we had to walk uphill in the snow to get to the game store. Both ways.

:D

I'm pretty much down with Doc Democracy. Characters have got more expressive these days. There's more skills and background skills and Perks and Talents to buy. Gone are the days when 3 points in City Knowledge and 2 points in Professional Skill: News Reporter represented a serious commitment to roleplaying. New characters should probably have at least around 20 to 30 points in non-combat skills, contacts, wealth, items and what not.

Likewise, comic book characters have gotten more powerful, and new players expect to be able to make starting characters closer to what they read in the comics. Fifty to eighty points is a lot of flexibility and powers that can be used to simulate all the different things a PC can do.


Also, you probably don't know this yet: END costs have been reduced. It's now Active Points divided by 10, not divided by 5 like it used to be. All powers start with a base 1/2 END cost. Plus, there's no repeated halving to get to 0 END. It's a +1/4 Advantage to halve the base END cost, and +1/2 to get to 0 END.

Talk about gamers wimping out!! ;)

[Lucius]

There was a thread on this not long ago called, I think, Point Inflation.

There are probably several factors involved. I think the expectation of spending more on background skills and on what they call "perks" really is a major factor.

Of course, anyone can run a game at any point level they choose; the last Fantasy game I played in was 50 base pts and up to 50 disads if I remember correctly, and I was able to express my character concept in that (mind you, he only had DEX 14 and some weapon familiarities in terms of combat ability, but the concept didn't include being able to wrestle bears or take on two or more armed bandits and escape unscathed.) I've also posted a character who was built on ZERO pts plus disads. And he HAD spent points on Contacts and Professional Skills.

Lucius Alexander

Did the palindromedary eat my tagline?

[Checkmate]

If you look at a bunch of these posts it says exactly what I was saying:


Another reason not exactly mentioned so far is that 350 points for Supers helps differentiate them from Heroic characters. Some Heroic characters might cost 150-200+ pts to build but when factoring in the 'free' equipment they get to carry they can outclass many 250 pt supers. To be truly Super in a world with semi-realistic agents the average Superhero needs to be at least as good as a top 'normal' agent imho.
Why are these so close? Because people thought a normal should have a 6 SPD, that meant anyone better than a normal had to have a 7 SPD. Again it was the stat inflation that cause the problem not the lack of points.

Most novel, comic, movie or other media central characters tend to hedge out into the upper echelon of points (500+ points).
I really disagree with this statement. The only reason people in movies and comics would seem to need 500+ points is because of again stat inflation. People have set the benchmark too high. People have said that a highly trained normal human HAS to have AT LEAST a 23 DEX and 6 SPD to be effective. That's where the mark is set, so people go from there. A highly trained NORMAL HUMAN has a 6 SPD, so someone in a movie that moves faster than a normal human must have a 7 SPD. This is why people think it takes 500 points to make anyone effective.

Let's reset the benchmarks a bit and see what happens: Joe Normal that works out 20 minutes a day has an 8 STR, 8 DEX and 2 SPD. A typical Navy SEAL has a 11 STR, 13 DEX, 3 SPD. Not enough you say? Well let's take a look shall we: 11 STR, He's 1.5x as strong as Joe Normal. His is twice as dexterous and Joe Normal and his reaction time is 50% better than Joe Normal.
Now lets look at a Hollywood star:
15 STR, at this level he's 3x as strong as Joe Normal, and in a pinch, can throw a motorcycle. At an 18 DEX he's twice as fast as a Navy SEAL and 4x as fast as Joe Normal. At a 4 SPD he's reaction time is 100% better than Joe Normal.

I'd say having someone 3x as strong, 4x as fast, and a reaction time twice as good as a fit normal person accurately descibes a Hollywood movie.

My impression is that at 250 Skill intensive chars got the shaft, and so seldom were ever seen...
Again they "got the shaft" because of stat inflation. They couldn't afford the 23 DEX, 6 SPD that people were giving to a normal security guard, and suffered as a result. If the stats were brought down to a more reasonable level, things would have worked out.

Likewise, comic book characters have gotten more powerful, and new players expect to be able to make starting characters closer to what they read in the comics. Fifty to eighty points is a lot of flexibility and powers that can be used to simulate all the different things a PC can do
This is one of the arguments that I do think has a lot of merit (I DO NOT believe it was part of the consideration for raising the stat cap, just an unintended benefit). It seems in the comics today, supers get their powers one day, the next day they're masters of them. Gone are the days when it took Iceman 30 issues to realize he could cover himself with ice instead of snow, or it taking Mr. Fantastic years to realize he could stretch parts of his face to make him look completely different.

[zornwil]

I have never seen "a normal security guard" or the like being given 23 DEX and/or 6 SPD. Just stating my experience.

PS - I do think that the bump to 350 was in part a specific response to people wanting more powerful supers such as they see in today's comics, and many players' expectations to START playing Spiderman as he appeared by 1975 (for example) or Superman as he appeared by 1945 (again, for example) as opposed to those same characters in 1963 and 1938 (or whatever years, you get the idea I hope) and work their way up.

[zornwil]

And to expand on another point, 4th Edition really set the stage for skill and perk differentiation. It begged for more detail in character building, and removed big vague lump skills (actually, maybe 3rd did that, I'd have to look but am too lazy at the moment) such as "Detective Works" and began replacing them with several discreet skills. This pushed players more and more towards very detailed builds with attempts to stat everything out. This also begged, dramatically, attention to the "are you really roleplaying if you don't buy a bunch of background and other real-world useful skills?" versus "background and other real-world useful skills are color (or otherwise not so detailed a level of being points-driven) and don't need extensive statting" argument, provoking many to feel a sheet with 90% combat stuff was no longer a good thing.

4th did not give more points, though, while clearly players who stat every detail out (compared to how it had been done in earlier days) began losing out to those who did not, at least by some perceptions, and this was happening with single play groups, not just a matter of one play group doing it one way and being happy while another play group does its own thing and is happy.

So in 5th more points have been added, I believe, in some part to address this, as mentioned above in order to support more background and perk and similar stuff.

[Psylint]

I, like you am returning from the fond olden days of 250 and love it. There does seem to be some Stat inflation. I am regularly seeing Bricks with Speed 6, Martial Artists with 20 pd, etc. Sometimes you even see Pyrokinetics with 60 Strength.

And there is a lot of points to be paid on skills, one of my favorite 200 pt. characters has 70 pts. in skills 32 just on sciences. I'll admit, if the campaign had been appropriate, I could have easily spent another 30 points on Contacts and Perqs (character was a former Navy Aviator and NASA astronaught, who's flight to Mars was abruptly cancelled when they showed up in orbit) old war and Navy buddies, a military flight officer pension (wealth), more points for the lab. My problem with it is that yeah he's really, really smart and fast on his feet and really fit for an old guy (Normal Characteristic Maxima), but by buying all these sciences and have a reasonably high INT, I get a 14- in almost all of the hard sciences including Quantum Mechanics, when what I really wanted was a guy who is a preeminent Asto-physicist, and kinda Bachelor of Science level with the rest of it. Not an option really with a 3 pt. skill.

The other problem is with your average young adult who wakes up one day and warps Newton's Laws (e.g. Kinetic), what perqs or contacts or skills would such a character have? He still needs disadvantages, Social Lim. Legal Minor, maybe a DNPC in the name of Mom, a Secret ID, Psych. Lim's to represent his immaturity, all seem appropriate to me.

100+150 forced you to make a tight build, most of the time. You were generally really good at one or two things, really vulnerable to one or two things and made do with the rest. A generalist was a true Jack of All Trades master of none. Seemed like a fair trade off. Now, with the "defense is always massively cheaper" you end up forcing folks to be at the cap to effect another Super. And because defenses are so cheap, everyone can have mental defense, power defense, flash defense, and resistant pd/ed.

Bummer really.

[ghost-angel]

When I moved up to 5th from 4th I found I did a few things:

Diversified my powers a bit, but the point levels didn't increase much more than 20-50.

My Skills, Perks and Talents on the other hand exploded. Easily taking 40+ Points between the three of the extra 100.

Characteristics, I put them where I wanted them I found, and not always on point breaks (though that's still common practice in most cases). But in 5th I'm more willing to simply sink more points into Characteristics than I was under 4th. Instead of 70pts I usually get around 100pts in that section.

It just allows, for me, a more interesting an full character. I get to fullfill my vision of the character better under the higher point ceiling of 5th edition.

[Robyn]

I, like you am returning from the fond olden days of 250 and love it. There does seem to be some Stat inflation. I am regularly seeing Bricks with Speed 6, Martial Artists with 20 pd, etc. Sometimes you even see Pyrokinetics with 60 Strength.

Point of curiosity - are you seeing these characters in official HERO products, or do your players bring them to you?

[zornwil]

I was trying to find my old posts when I was bemoaning the 250 to 350 change, but I couldn't. I found posts from late '03 and '04 indicating by then I had already changed my mind and felt 350 was okay. I wanted to go back and remind myself of my objections; I may have posted those on the champs-l listserv, it was a while back. But, anyway, while I did have objections to the change for reasons related to inflation, where the sweet spot is to grow a character from, and concerns over too-granular builds, as I recall, I decided that the 350, from the posts I saw from newer members over time, was making people more comfortable they could play the supers they wanted from the comic book, and this is about fun so I changed my mind for that. Also, I realized that it doesn't mean all that much ultimately - inflation does tend to occur regardless (at least until systems get heavy rewrites, and 5th was not that) and it's apparent it's not doing any major harm from what I can see, my own earlier fears not seeing substantial realization.

[Eosin]

I really disagree with this statement. The only reason people in movies and comics would seem to need 500+ points is because of again stat inflation. People have set the benchmark too high. People have said that a highly trained normal human HAS to have AT LEAST a 23 DEX and 6 SPD to be effective. That's where the mark is set, so people go from there. A highly trained NORMAL HUMAN has a 6 SPD, so someone in a movie that moves faster than a normal human must have a 7 SPD. This is why people think it takes 500 points to make anyone effective.

Taking a gander at my fantasy characters (that are viewable to public scrutiny) puts a damper on this from where I (as in me personally) am coming from...

There are dozens of characters but I picked four who are "stars" - Druss, Waylander, Aragorn, and Boromir. The points in stats average around a measly 120-130 character points out of 500-600 point totals.

Again, going back to the X-men (http://www.killershrike.com/misccharacters/PublishedSupers.htm)that we use shows your assumption to be incorrect (again, at least where I am coming from). Take a look through the X-men and you note that the average SPD and DEX fall far short of your 6 & 23. In fact, our X-men generally start with a idea that these are all highly trained normals running anywhere from a 15/3 for Strongman upto a 28/6 for Beast.

Our version of Capt America (also on the site) has a 7 SPD and 25 Dex but again totals in at over 800 points. Our key to building characters is to design for effect rather than points. They should mimic what the character can do in media and that means some characters are going to have some suprizingly expensive dinks such as Beast spending 150 points on languages. It also means that as fast and deadly as the Beast may be, he isn't a match for Captain America in a stand up fight - he is more agile and can cover more ground but when the rubber meets the pavement and they are down to hand to hand Cappy has the edge and will take 4 of 5 match ups.

There isn't a right way or a wrong way to build characters in the Hero System. No amount of points is "too many" nor "too little," it all boils down to genre, expectations, and the design of the surrounding setting. We play zombie games at 0/25 points and have a blast running redneck farmers but we can also bust out the 800 point version of Cappy and his amazing friends and run a game just as fun battling Hydra.

If you like running games where every movie star or comic book character needs to be 250 points, bully for you. It doesn't cause any grief at my table and I hope that your games are a fun filled riot. On the other hand, if I want to build a 750 point Jack Bauer (with a 120 points in stats), I don't see where I need to be told that I am the unknowning victim of "stat inflation." You don't have to agree with my builds and you can think that they are too for your games but that just means that they aren't right for you. There is no "grand concensus" of a unified power structure* for Hero players. One mans 25 Strength titan is another mans scrawny weakling.

[I]*I'd kinda like to see a unified power structure imposed on Herodom. A great big list of hundreds of popular characters from various genres, noting where each character falls in respect to the various stats. Then all of our builds would be equally usable in all games across genres. But that statement is enough to make many howl like rabid dogs and claw their eyes out.

[Mike W]

I think that the big difference between 250 and 350 comes in the way you can flesh the character out. If the GM has firm control, the point caps on powers and such are the same, but you can add a couple more of the "extra" powers(for example, enhanced senses) to round the character's abilities out more. It also gives you room for more skills and perks. In 4th, we often had so much trouble rounding out the skills beyond a bare minimum 6 or 7 that we basically upped the starting characters to 275 and slapped on a requirement that the character spend at least 40 points on skills and perks, just so the characters would be more well rounded.

I would also suspect that it is a reflection of the change in the comics themselves. Characters are more powerful, both beginning characters and more experienced ones have increased a lot in power. You need the extra points to keep up. Just compare, let's say, Iron Man and Steel when they first started. Iron Man had a suit with armor, a basic energy blast, and some enhanced STR(maybe 40). Skill wise, he was a playboy with a couple of technical skills(you really only needed mechanics, electronics and inventor to build the original Iron Man armor). When Steel came around, the power level was much higher. The guy started as a replacement for Superman and while he wasn't as powerful as Supes, his suit probably put him on par with the Iron Man of the time(whose armor, of course, was much more powerful than the original). Steel also had a far more sophisticated suit that required a lot more skills to build and maintain. 250 point champs characters felt like Silver Age heroes out of the 60s or maybe 70s. They were competent but beginners were almost always in need of developing their powers to flesh out what they could do and get the most out of it. Characters of the 1990s often burst onto the scene with fully developed power sets, as if they had been developing and practicing somewhere before getting turned loose on an unsuspecting world. That requires more points, hence the extra 100.

[Robyn]

I was trying to find my old posts when I was bemoaning the 250 to 350 change, but I couldn't.

Couldn't have anything to do with the effort of trying to sift through over 10,000 posts, could it? :p ;)

[TheUnknown]

If you look at a bunch of these posts it says exactly what I was saying:

Why are these so close? Because people thought a normal should have a 6 SPD, that meant anyone better than a normal had to have a 7 SPD. Again it was the stat inflation that cause the problem not the lack of points.

I really disagree with this statement. The only reason people in movies and comics would seem to need 500+ points is because of again stat inflation. People have set the benchmark too high. People have said that a highly trained normal human HAS to have AT LEAST a 23 DEX and 6 SPD to be effective. That's where the mark is set, so people go from there. A highly trained NORMAL HUMAN has a 6 SPD, so someone in a movie that moves faster than a normal human must have a 7 SPD. This is why people think it takes 500 points to make anyone effective.

Let's reset the benchmarks a bit and see what happens: Joe Normal that works out 20 minutes a day has an 8 STR, 8 DEX and 2 SPD. A typical Navy SEAL has a 11 STR, 13 DEX, 3 SPD. Not enough you say? Well let's take a look shall we: 11 STR, He's 1.5x as strong as Joe Normal. His is twice as dexterous and Joe Normal and his reaction time is 50% better than Joe Normal.
Now lets look at a Hollywood star:
15 STR, at this level he's 3x as strong as Joe Normal, and in a pinch, can throw a motorcycle. At an 18 DEX he's twice as fast as a Navy SEAL and 4x as fast as Joe Normal. At a 4 SPD he's reaction time is 100% better than Joe Normal.

I'd say having someone 3x as strong, 4x as fast, and a reaction time twice as good as a fit normal person accurately descibes a Hollywood movie.

Again they "got the shaft" because of stat inflation. They couldn't afford the 23 DEX, 6 SPD that people were giving to a normal security guard, and suffered as a result. If the stats were brought down to a more reasonable level, things would have worked out.

This is one of the arguments that I do think has a lot of merit (I DO NOT believe it was part of the consideration for raising the stat cap, just an unintended benefit). It seems in the comics today, supers get their powers one day, the next day they're masters of them. Gone are the days when it took Iceman 30 issues to realize he could cover himself with ice instead of snow, or it taking Mr. Fantastic years to realize he could stretch parts of his face to make him look completely different.

The seal is not 2x more dexterous than joe 8 gives 3 CV and 11 Gives 4 CV to close for confort in a fight but hey the great part about hero system is perspective so have at it what works in your world may not work for mine and vice versa!

[JPicasso]

Well, I'm a little embarrassed. While I DO have 3rd edition rules, it's apparent that we used my copy of 4th edition rules to play the majority of my characters. :) I hadn't dug down deep enough into that dusty box of RPG games that has survived three moves and my wife's rolling eyes. :p

Also, I'm noticing that most of my characters are 50 active points in most of their powers, and yes, about 10-15 pts in skills if you don't count combat levels.

I do know we played with a lot of "tweakers" (to be polite) so I'm thinking 350 points would have been too much trouble for most of us to contnrol when we GM'd. I do like the idea of requireing an amount of points to be spent on skills to round out the characters to avoid 350 pts from being abused.

Anyways, I think I'll still stick to 250 pts for a while, lower-powered supers tend to make for more fun games, for me anyways.

Happy Villian stomping in 2007!

[Checkmate]

The seal is not 2x more dexterous than joe 8 gives 3 CV and 11 Gives 4 CV to close for confort in a fight but hey the great part about hero system is perspective so have at it what works in your world may not work for mine and vice versa!
Actually he is. Every 5points is twice as effective. 10 is twice as much a 5, 15 is twice as much as 10 and 20 is twice as much a 15, etc.

In everyone's attempt to discredit my post, you've forgotten what the original topic is about: Why is it 350 instead 250. The simple reason (and most of you have actually proven it) is stat inflation.

Eosin,
The reason you think Cap needs a 7 SPD to simulate the comics is because of the level you've put everone else. You've given Marvel Girl a 4 SPD, in my world, you've just made Marvel Girl as fast as Bruce Lee. I can give Cap a 4 SPD and simulate what he does in the comics just as well as you. I don't see any reason for you to get defensive, we all live in our own campaign world if it works for you great. I'm explaining why there was an increase is points from 250 to 350. My system, 350 points isn't needed, you disagree great, I won't and am not trying to convince anyone my way is better, or your way is wrong. I have NEVER said it was, and is in fact the way the majority of people play. I'm just trying to answer the question in the original post.

[Shaft]

I'm inclined to agree with you on the lamenting of stat inflation, Checkmate.

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52448

However, I think 350 pts is fair if you are charging for contacts/other perks. Also, skills have been expanded, and I find that even my non "skills expert" character tend to want a lot of skills.

[TheUnknown]

Actually he is. Every 5points is twice as effective. 10 is twice as much a 5, 15 is twice as much as 10 and 20 is twice as much a 15, etc.

In everyone's attempt to discredit my post, you've forgotten what the original topic is about: Why is it 350 instead 250. The simple reason (and most of you have actually proven it) is stat inflation.

Eosin,
The reason you think Cap needs a 7 SPD to simulate the comics is because of the level you've put everone else. You've given Marvel Girl a 4 SPD, in my world, you've just made Marvel Girl as fast as Bruce Lee. I can give Cap a 4 SPD and simulate what he does in the comics just as well as you. I don't see any reason for you to get defensive, we all live in our own campaign world if it works for you great. I'm explaining why there was an increase is points from 250 to 350. My system, 350 points isn't needed, you disagree great, I won't and am not trying to convince anyone my way is better, or your way is wrong. I have NEVER said it was, and is in fact the way the majority of people play. I'm just trying to answer the question in the original post.

That.s not true sir the only stat that says double for every 5 pts is str and that's it. Now you can take the arrogant stand of everyone has proven your point but that makes you a legend in your own mind not in application of rule to balance effective builds from source conversions. But I respect your opinion none the less because we are all allowed to have them.

[TheUnknown]

In addtion to why more points because
By the by the whole def AND damage thing is broken anyway and its up to the GM to moderate it into balance. Example normal tanks having 16-19 Def making it impossible under normal conditions for the old 100 ton (60 STR 12d6 by system) hulk to trash them at all unless he roles extremely well. so unless you bring the real world damage and def down to heroic level the characters from comic books will never be able to dish out or effectivelt take what they are suppose to.

[Psylint]

I don't know if a 16pd is really going to completely shrug off a 12d6 attack, but I know where you're going. I have been toying with the idea of setting lower absolute caps, like 10 to 12 rpd, and then requiring Damage Reduction. Under such a system, Bob the Brick can mostly, all but not entirely ignore small arms, but machine guns, artillery and explosives are at least somewhat dangerous. At 50% damage reduction he can still take quite a few 12d6 punches, but it'll eventually where him down. At 75% it takes an awfully long time.

Personally, I really don't like the idea of even Super hard Supers ignoring artillery shells.

[TheUnknown]

I don't know if a 16pd is really going to completely shrug off a 12d6 attack, but I know where you're going. I have been toying with the idea of setting lower absolute caps, like 10 to 12 rpd, and then requiring Damage Reduction. Under such a system, Bob the Brick can mostly, all but not entirely ignore small arms, but machine guns, artillery and explosives are at least somewhat dangerous. At 50% damage reduction he can still take quite a few 12d6 punches, but it'll eventually where him down. At 75% it takes an awfully long time.

Personally, I really don't like the idea of even Super hard Supers ignoring artillery shells.

12d6 average is 12 body good is 16 body you rolled 4 6's and no 1's to get that a tank is impenetrable to hulk's 60 str 12d6!

[TheUnknown]

So depending on what level brick you're trying to do you need points just to break things you should be able to by physics and worse yet be immune to things that really shouldnt fade you.

The original blue eyed Thing 50 ton 55 would and should be immune to any martial artist/wrestler/boxer ect who's damage is well within extremely exception humans but by game mechanics most batman types could do him some damage and though it may take a lot of attack to put him down they could with time and if you had a gang of martial artist than ooh boy!

I dnt mind martial artist thats suppose to be doing super damage because that's their concept affect the Thing or any brick for that matter like DC's Karate KId or even other sfx and chi mastery of martial skills but a human perfect or not martial artist putting down bricks well again its up to the GM to create balance.

[Lord Mhoram]

In everyone's attempt to discredit my post, you've forgotten what the original topic is about: Why is it 350 instead 250. The simple reason (and most of you have actually proven it) is stat inflation.


As for the concept of stat inlfation, it could also be campaign tone and style. I my champions games I don't want a basic trained character (go with your 8 dex, WF and maybe a 2 pt level) to have, on average a better than an 8- chance to hit the average superhero in my game. I don't want normals to be a credible threat - the tone I am running is that superheroes are beyond that. So his CV is 3/4; that would me the average DCV I'm looking at (and this is ever for bricks) is 6 to 7. 18 to 20 Dex. Fits right in with published characters.

And that isn't stat inflation, it is a concious design choice. Many people see supers are super in everything including stats, even if the SFX don't call for it. That is just style and tone. One you don't agree with.

[TheUnknown]

As for the concept of stat inlfation, it could also be campaign tone and style. I my champions games I don't want a basic trained character (go with your 8 dex, WF and maybe a 2 pt level) to have, on average a better than an 8- chance to hit the average superhero in my game. I don't want normals to be a credible threat - the tone I am running is that superheroes are beyond that. So his CV is 3/4; that would me the average DCV I'm looking at (and this is ever for bricks) is 6 to 7. 18 to 20 Dex. Fits right in with published characters.

And that isn't stat inflation, it is a concious design choice. Many people see supers are super in everything including stats, even if the SFX don't call for it. That is just style and tone. One you don't agree with.

Well put rep to you!

[zornwil]

Couldn't have anything to do with the effort of trying to sift through over 10,000 posts, could it? :p ;)
Ha, well, surely, that doesn't help. But I think also my original anti- posts were before the last reboot of these boards (and therefore part of my pre-10K legacy!).

[zornwil]

The seal is not 2x more dexterous than joe 8 gives 3 CV and 11 Gives 4 CV to close for confort in a fight but hey the great part about hero system is perspective so have at it what works in your world may not work for mine and vice versa!
Exactly. Speaking of which, here are my thoughts on the specifics, and I do NOT mean anyone should accept them, but to illustrate how very differently I saw it from that post -

A guy who works out 20 minutes a day is NOT average (and this, btw, I think I can say as an outright fact IF we mean not that we average workout time across all people but average whether people work out or not). Remember, something like 60% of Americans are overweight. That is your 8 DEX/8 STR person - a slob (like me, though I'm no longer overweight or at least not more than a few pounds now, now HWP). I work at a place that makes athleticwear and there the average of course is much higher here, but the average person, anyway, I'd say is somewhat overweight and not toned. So that's the 8 guy.

The guy who works out everyday for 20 minutes but isn't otherwise doing anything rigorous, let's say works either in an office or a factory, and let's add his workout routine pumps up his DEX (just to bring parity for DEX and STR), that's the 10 STR/10 DEX guy.

The Navy Seal, whom I personally take as someone nearing the top of human physical abilities, is about 2-4 times as dextrous as the average person, IMHO, and similarly stronger. So that's going to put him at 15-20 in the stats (if we use the +5 = double - which I think is not really true, but it's a good general guideline).

An athlete specializing might be around double the Seal in STR OR (but probably not "and") DEX, in an EXTREME case let's say 4x, such as the world's greatest weight-lifter, perhaps he's 4x as strong, which is 16x as strong as the average guy, and while way out there, if we're talking about something like 10 people in the world that seems okay to me. So at most we're talking 30 for a stat.

Oddly, that seems to hook up not too badly with the HERO book guidelines even though I'm using my own personal logic.

[zornwil]

Well, I'm a little embarrassed. While I DO have 3rd edition rules, it's apparent that we used my copy of 4th edition rules to play the majority of my characters. :) I hadn't dug down deep enough into that dusty box of RPG games that has survived three moves and my wife's rolling eyes. :p

Also, I'm noticing that most of my characters are 50 active points in most of their powers, and yes, about 10-15 pts in skills if you don't count combat levels.

I do know we played with a lot of "tweakers" (to be polite) so I'm thinking 350 points would have been too much trouble for most of us to contnrol when we GM'd. I do like the idea of requireing an amount of points to be spent on skills to round out the characters to avoid 350 pts from being abused.

Anyways, I think I'll still stick to 250 pts for a while, lower-powered supers tend to make for more fun games, for me anyways.

Happy Villian stomping in 2007!
Your comment about tweakers and not wanting to go over 250, which is entirely fair, raises a question to me - are you not giving any or much XP or not gaming enough that XP bumps mean much? Because otherwise I'd assume you'd hit the 350 point issue on your own across somewhere between 50 (at 2 XP per session) and 20 (at 5 XP per session) sessions

[zornwil]

Actually he is. Every 5points is twice as effective. 10 is twice as much a 5, 15 is twice as much as 10 and 20 is twice as much a 15, etc.

In everyone's attempt to discredit my post, you've forgotten what the original topic is about: Why is it 350 instead 250. The simple reason (and most of you have actually proven it) is stat inflation.

Eosin,
The reason you think Cap needs a 7 SPD to simulate the comics is because of the level you've put everone else. You've given Marvel Girl a 4 SPD, in my world, you've just made Marvel Girl as fast as Bruce Lee. I can give Cap a 4 SPD and simulate what he does in the comics just as well as you. I don't see any reason for you to get defensive, we all live in our own campaign world if it works for you great. I'm explaining why there was an increase is points from 250 to 350. My system, 350 points isn't needed, you disagree great, I won't and am not trying to convince anyone my way is better, or your way is wrong. I have NEVER said it was, and is in fact the way the majority of people play. I'm just trying to answer the question in the original post.

I think people can agree to disagree. Obviously, you don't believe that increased granularity in build plus the desire of players to play characters more advanced than early on in Champions were the heavy contributors. Some do. Shrug. (PS - of course, someone is right, but Steve wishes not to explain the reasoning for these decisions, so we'll never know (which, while I don't really agree with the approach because I think to use a game BEST you need to understand the philosophy underlying it, but I also understand why he does this, fans are so argumentative it can drive designers crazy).

[zornwil]

That.s not true sir the only stat that says double for every 5 pts is str and that's it. Now you can take the arrogant stand of everyone has proven your point but that makes you a legend in your own mind not in application of rule to balance effective builds from source conversions. But I respect your opinion none the less because we are all allowed to have them.
I would say that there is a semi-accepted convention that +5 is double "power" (note the small "p") in general. This is somewhat reinforced by, throughout the book, we see that +5 doubles things in many instances (though of course +1/4 Advantages do the same sometimes!). I do NOT know the genesis of this but I BELIEVE it was due to some comments from the designers early on in published materials, but not the core book. But, anyway, many believe this is an underlying system mechanical basis, and I tend to buy this as well based on the popular usage by the most experienced and connected (I mean to the original designers) users.

Does anyone know the genesis of +5 = double?

But we should never confuse 2x power with 2x EFFECT! The actual effect of Active Points is a very different thing, and rather complicated. Even +5 STR and doubling lift and so on is not really 2x the actual effect on other characters and the world - it depends on defensive values and so on.

[Spence]

Well everything said and done. For four color supers games I play/run we still play at the 270 point starting level. But then we tend to use broad skills and be much less gritty. For instance rather than buy surveillance, forensics, law, deduction ad infinity.... We will just buy Detective skill as an overall umbrella covering all of them. Since we don't use skills to replace the players ability to think but rather as a way to get hard data. A successful detective roll may tell the PC that the man was killed 6 hours ago, strangled by someone taller than him, but what the players does with the info is up to the player. This is mostly because skills in a supers game support the superpower aspect of the game, rather than drive the game.

If we are playing a different genre we do get more detailed. Heroic games are more driven buy a PC's skills, so they are much more important. Plus PC occupations tend to be much more specialized.

[zornwil]

As for the concept of stat inlfation, it could also be campaign tone and style. I my champions games I don't want a basic trained character (go with your 8 dex, WF and maybe a 2 pt level) to have, on average a better than an 8- chance to hit the average superhero in my game. I don't want normals to be a credible threat - the tone I am running is that superheroes are beyond that. So his CV is 3/4; that would me the average DCV I'm looking at (and this is ever for bricks) is 6 to 7. 18 to 20 Dex. Fits right in with published characters.

And that isn't stat inflation, it is a concious design choice. Many people see supers are super in everything including stats, even if the SFX don't call for it. That is just style and tone. One you don't agree with.
I would add another point - we keep discussing stat inflation, but I wonder how many gamers have really kept expanding their points for starting campaigns where those campaigns are basically the same over the years? I certainly have not - in fact, I went the other way with my current supers campaign (although the goal was also for very fast growth, so we started at 155+60, and now those same PCs are around 600+ XP).

Ooh, I'm going to start a thread/poll...

[zornwil]

I thought it might be interesting to hearken back to 2e (I don't have 1e) and its advice on values for stats - it says:


If you start your campaign at a beginning power level of 225 pts. per character, some general guidelines on characters are possible. Most of the characteristics can be at their base value, but some should have larger than minimum values. The following are good beginning ranges of charateristics, with approximate costs. Obviously, you can't be at the maximum for all of the characteristics. You should decide what area to concentrate on, in accordance with your character conception.

DEX: Range 18-30. Centering on 20-23, cost 40 pts.

CON: Range 18-33. Centering on 18-23, cost 20 pts.

PD: Range 8-28. Centering on 12-18, cost 10 pts.

ED: Range 8-28. Centering on 12-18, cost 10 pts.

SPD: Range 4-6. Centering on 5, cost 20 pts.

A character's capabilities should also fall into certain ranges. The beginning character will probably have a smaller range of different powers than more experienced characters, but should have some ability in each of the following areas:

Attacks: 40-60 pts.
(STR, Damage Powers, Find WEakness, Entangle, etc.)

Defenses: 20-40 pts.
(extra PD and ED, Skill Levels, extra DEX, Force Fields, etc.)

Movement: 10-40 pts.
(Running, Flight, Swimming, extra SPD, etc.)

Spending points as above will give a character a basic set of Powers and/or SKills for about 200 pts. Any extra capabilities that the player wants the character to have could be purchased with the remaining 25 pts. Most skills need not start better than their basic level for beginning heroes. Thus a character could have three skills and still buy a higher INT, or PRE.

Bear in mind that this was before most Perks existed in any form, and back when the COMPLETE skill list (with the basic investment cost below) was:

Acrobatics, 10 points
Climbing, 5 points
Computer Programming, 5 points
Detective Work, 5 points
Disguise, 5 points
Find Weakness, 10 points
Luck, 5 points per d6
Martial Arts, the old style cost in STR
Security Systems, 5 points
Skill Levels, 3/5/8/10 points
Stealth, 5 points
Swinging, 5 points

[Lord Mhoram]

I thought it might be interesting to hearken back to 2e (I don't have 1e) and its advice on values for stats - it says:

A quick run through of 1st I didn't see anything like that, but the example "normal human trained to fight - no superpowers" character Crusader has a 25 Dex and a 6 speed. :)

[zornwil]

A quick run through of 1st I didn't see anything like that, but the example "normal human trained to fight with supers - no superpowers" character Crusader has a 25 Dex and a 6 speed. :)
I don't have a copy of 1st. Where do you live? Do you lock your doors?

:D

[zornwil]

PS - didn't want to edit my last post as I saw you (LM) were in the thread and figured you might miss it if I did - in 2nd, this listing was in the back in the "Notes on Playing" section, page 71 in that edition.

[Lord Mhoram]

PS - didn't want to edit my last post as I saw you (LM) were in the thread and figured you might miss it if I did - in 2nd, this listing was in the back in the "Notes on Playing" section, page 71 in that edition.

Cool.
The notes on playing in 1st is only about a page long. Nothing on building characters or stat ranges.

[Robyn]

I don't have a copy of 1st. Where do you live? Do you lock your doors?

:D

According to the Location entry, Mhoram is in Ogden Utah ;)

[zornwil]

Ha, well, he has feared the Zornwil beast and we have struck a deal in order to spare his abode the dreaded attack of the giant radioactive lizard... :sneaky:

(something about villain mode requires one to speak of oneself in the third person)

[Lord Mhoram]

dreaded attack of the giant radioactive lizard... :sneaky:



heh.
My avatar can beat up your avatar. :eek:

[Robyn]

heh.
My avatar can beat up your avatar. :eek:

Not yet, she needs to settle her identity crisis first ;)

[zornwil]

heh.
My avatar can beat up your avatar. :eek:
If this were NGD I would so drag this out... :D

[Checkmate]

*snip*And that isn't stat inflation, it is a concious design choice. *snip*
Reguardless of your reasoning, it IS stat inflation. You seem to think I've attached some sort of negative connotiation to the phrase "stat inflation", and believe me I haven't. You have inflated the stats to make your supers more super, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing nor have I accused you of any crime. Like you've said it is the accepted method, which is why I beileve stat inflation was the major contributing factor to going from 250 to 350.

TheUnknown,
I don't know why you think I'm acting arogant, but you may want to watch the condensention in your own post if you're going to accuse someone else of it. In LM's post she said she prefered more super, supers so used higher stats to get the feel she wants, I called (and still call) that design philosophy Stat Inflation. Eosin said he gives Cap a 7 SPD, which goes a LONG way to proving my point about stat inflation, hence my comment, "A lot of you are proving my point". If you took some offense to that, please explain why, and I'll see if I can clear up any misunderstandings.

Zornwil,
"...the desire of players to play characters more advanced than early on in Champions..." I think there is a direct relation to this and stat inflation (which I will expand to cover power inflation also. No longer is 12d6 good enough), so yes I do believe this was a contributing factor.

As far as more granularity (which I assume you mean more background skills) I believe it was probably a reason the designers did it, but I don't believe it's why it was so universally accepted by the players. I look at a lot of the player made characters, and will never be convinced this is THE reason the majority of the players like the increase.

[assault]

As far as stat inflation goes:

My 4th edition, 250 point "template" character was:
Chars: 125 points
Skills & Perks: 25 points
Powers: 100 points

My 5th edition, 350 point "template" characters is"
Chars: 125 points
Skills & Perks: 50 points
Powers: 175 points

By "template" character, I mean 'these are more or less the number of points I usually allocate to each category'.

As far as my characters go, the inflation is predominantly in powers. Usually, this goes on stuff like Life Support and other "neat things to have", plus a few options to increase the character's flexibility.

Not coincidentally, I still build a lot of 250 point characters. I sometimes lower my benchmarks for them, but a lot of the time I build them with similar attacks, defences, CVs and SPDs to my 350 pointers.

FWIW, my 5th edition benchmarks are based on the random character generator in the Champions Genre book. My 4th and earlier standards are based on the notes in the back of the 2nd edition rules, plus an extra allocation for skills to fill the 250 point total.

[Lord Mhoram]

You seem to think I've attached some sort of negative connotiation to the phrase "stat inflation", and believe me I haven't.

Ah. Usually when that term is thrown around it is used in a judgemental negative sense. Thanks for the clarification. Although Zorn's posts shows the recomended stats for 2nd to be right around the same for 5th - the 5th suggestions for 350 pt characters are a little wider, but they center pretty much the same.

[Robyn]

I look at a lot of the player made characters, and will never be convinced this is THE reason the majority of the players like the increase.

To repeat (part of) my question (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1244823&postcount=17) from earlier, was this increase only from player-made characters or did HERO officially pave the way?

If it was only the player-made characters, I could see how this was all caused by escalation from the munchkins submitting 350-point characters, and everyone else just trying to keep up :(

[Psylint]

A quick run through of 1st I didn't see anything like that, but the example "normal human trained to fight - no superpowers" character Crusader has a 25 Dex and a 6 speed. :)

Then again, if I recall correctly you were limited to one attack per phase. No rapid fire, sweeps or the like.

With Sweeps, it's a lot easier to see Bruce Lee as being speed 4, I mean it's still 9-12 attacks in 12 seconds.

[zornwil]

Reguardless of your reasoning, it IS stat inflation. You seem to think I've attached some sort of negative connotiation to the phrase "stat inflation", and believe me I haven't. You have inflated the stats to make your supers more super, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing nor have I accused you of any crime. Like you've said it is the accepted method, which is why I beileve stat inflation was the major contributing factor to going from 250 to 350.

TheUnknown,
I don't know why you think I'm acting arogant, but you may want to watch the condensention in your own post if you're going to accuse someone else of it. In LM's post she said she prefered more super, supers so used higher stats to get the feel she wants, I called (and still call) that design philosophy Stat Inflation. Eosin said he gives Cap a 7 SPD, which goes a LONG way to proving my point about stat inflation, hence my comment, "A lot of you are proving my point". If you took some offense to that, please explain why, and I'll see if I can clear up any misunderstandings.

Zornwil,
"...the desire of players to play characters more advanced than early on in Champions..." I think there is a direct relation to this and stat inflation (which I will expand to cover power inflation also. No longer is 12d6 good enough), so yes I do believe this was a contributing factor.

As far as more granularity (which I assume you mean more background skills) I believe it was probably a reason the designers did it, but I don't believe it's why it was so universally accepted by the players. I look at a lot of the player made characters, and will never be convinced this is THE reason the majority of the players like the increase.
Why players like it and why it was designed are two different things. I didn't think we were discussing why people like having more points. I think in every game (given it is a game), people like "more" until that "more" breaks the game.

But I really think you dismiss this granular approach way too easily. While I do say part of the increase to 350 is to make more powerful supers (though I am not really sure it's stats per se that are getting exaggerated, looking back on earlier editions, I think it's more a general powering up which may or may not be reflected in stats), when we look back in prior editions we had nowhere near the options for Perks and Skills, and the expectation, as this board evidences, is in many games (certainly not all, no idea if it's a majority) has grown accordingly with the explosion of these options for more detail.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Then again, if I recall correctly you were limited to one attack per phase. No rapid fire, sweeps or the like.

With Sweeps, it's a lot easier to see Bruce Lee as being speed 4, I mean it's still 9-12 attacks in 12 seconds.

Exactly. With all the many varied options available, it's much easier to run a combat effective "Super-normal" with NCM-range stats these days than it was back in the olden days. In fact, Blackjack, my gadgeteer/martial artist/leader archtype was originally built with a 23 Dex, 5 Speed and only around 20-30 points in Non Combat skills back in the pre 4th edition days. When I rewrote him for 4th edition, I added NCM, about 80 points worth of skills, around 20 additional points in Martial arts, rearrainged and added levels, and dropped all his stats down to high human levels (I kept the 23 INT even with the double cost).

As I recall, the first campaign I got involved in way back in 1st-2nd edition days had averages of 14dc attacks, 24 Dex and 6 Speed.

In my case its Stat Deflation, I guess. I attribute it to playing a lot more Heroic level games and thus both desiring the same complexity in my characters, and increased ability to function to the dramatic level desired with lower stats due to a better understanding of the system and the greater avialable options.

[gojira]

I thought it might be interesting to hearken back to 2e (I don't have 1e) and its advice on values for stats - it says:

Third edition has almost the same text, word for word. They only change "character" to "hero" in places, and of course the point count goes from 225 to 250. It's on page 96.

It's interesting, I'm reading through 5th edition Champions for the third time. I always find a little bit I missed or skimmed over before. It has the following:


...the higher the point total is, the comparatively more powerful gadget-based heroes can become. If a 200 Base Point superhero has 100 of his points invested in an OIF powered armor suit, he functions at the level of a character with 250 points. He's not so much more powerful than his confederates that it more than makes up for the occasional difficulties he faces for having his Focus break down or temporarily lost. But if a 400 Base Point superhero has 300 of his points in an OIF,he functions as a 550 point character, a more significant difference in power levels.

(Love that indent tag. :D)

So this might be part of the problem with "point inflation." A game that was pretty well balanced at 225 points becomes unwieldy at 350 points, with out some additional GM imposed restrictions. It's a matter of adjusting to the new levels, for both GM and players.

I used to be very against the current paradigm of requiring "no figured characteristics" on primary stats bought with OIF. We never used to do that before. However, after running some numbers, I can sure see why one would do this. The amount of points that can be squeezed out of a 350 point character with a big OIF is quite impressive, and certainly bears some scrutiny. Requiring "no figured characteristics" for his primary stats is a pretty small deal.

I've been really impressed with my 5th edition Champions book. If you don't have it, I'd recommend it. It really does have a decent list of ideas for keeping things in check, points-wise, with superheroes, as well as tonnes of advice in other areas too.

[zornwil]

Although I think 350 is still a generally balanced area without too much GM work, I think the game generally doesn't scale up quite so well the more and more up you go. And part of the problem is inherent - the level of granularity in the system also makes character sheets more difficult to read when you're purchasing 800 points' worth of stuff (assuming you are fairly diverse).

That said, I saw a great high-powered game that was well-balanced and well-run by Gamerz123 at a con.

[Eosin]

Eosin,
The reason you think Cap needs a 7 SPD to simulate the comics is because of the level you've put everone else. You've given Marvel Girl a 4 SPD, in my world, you've just made Marvel Girl as fast as Bruce Lee. I can give Cap a 4 SPD and simulate what he does in the comics just as well as you. I don't see any reason for you to get defensive, we all live in our own campaign world if it works for you great. I'm explaining why there was an increase is points from 250 to 350. My system, 350 points isn't needed, you disagree great, I won't and am not trying to convince anyone my way is better, or your way is wrong. I have NEVER said it was, and is in fact the way the majority of people play. I'm just trying to answer the question in the original post.


Not defensive, I just dislike being told why I am subconsciously doing something and you did quote my post in specificlly as being in "disagreement." We all play a bit differently and have different expectations but I don't try to presume why you would run Cappy at a 4 SPD and if you were to tell me why I wouldn't say "well, you only think that is why he has a 4 SPD. The real reason is ...." which is what you said in both of your posts to me. I know why he is built the way he is and I can compare him with any of our dozens of Marvel characters and he works just like he does in the comics. I can also say that it is not because we were building him in 5th edition with stat inflation exerting it unnoted influence on us.

On an related note, these X-men & Cappy were built under the assumption of a 250 point base compaign under 4th Edition rules and recently updated to 5th ED but the stats didn't change.

I also agree that Marvel Girl can be argued as a 3 SPD or 4 SPD and work. However, I'd place Bruce as a 5 SPD --- he was the fastest man alive. :bmk:

[Starwolf]

While I agree there is some stat inflation, the main thing I have experienced is skill explosion. And there is official "canon" precedent. If I take a base starting character and add just the packages "required" in Dark Champions pages 51 through 55, to make a Delta Force soldier, it costs 215 points as listed in the book. This is supposedly a "normal" human and I have already spent more than the usual number of allowed points for character construction, never mind customizing my stats, or adding any personal touches to the skills. And to make matters worse, my starting stats with this cookie cutter delta soldier would be 15 Str, 15 DEX, 17 CON, 10 BODY, 13 INT, 10 EGO, 15 PRE, 10 COM, 3 PD, 3 ED, 2 SPD, 6 REC, 34 STUN, & 27 END. While these stats are generally satisfactory, I would like to be able to bump SPD to at least 3, but as listed I am already out of points for a standard heroic level game EVEN with the new rules. Plus my super soldier starts with a base of 10" of running and 4" of swimming :D

[bigdamnhero]

Reguardless of your reasoning, it IS stat inflation.
“Stat inflation” means that stats have crept upwards over time, but I don't believe that is the case. (It also implies power gaming and other negative attitudes, regardless of how you say you intend it.) The first Hero book I have is 1Ed FH (ie 3Ed Hero), which states:

(p97) "The range from 8-12 is considered normal. Characteristics from 13-15 are notable; people will remark on your Strength or your Dexterity to describe you -- he's strong, he's quick. Characteristics from 16-20 are remarkable (one in a thousand), and characters with such stats are unusual; they're described as very strong, incredibly tough, unusually smart. Characteristics over 20 are very rare (one in a million); songs are sung and stories told of heroes with a 25 STR, or the woman with a Comeliness of 24."
Looking at the Characteristic Comparison Table in 5ER (p40), those categories don't seem to have changed at all in the last 20 years.

Going back at your “benchmark:”

Let's reset the benchmarks a bit and see what happens: Joe Normal that works out 20 minutes a day has an 8 STR, 8 DEX and 2 SPD. A typical Navy SEAL has a 11 STR, 13 DEX, 3 SPD. Not enough you say? Well let's take a look shall we: 11 STR, He's 1.5x as strong as Joe Normal. His is twice as dexterous and Joe Normal and his reaction time is 50% better than Joe Normal.
The Navy SEALS and other special forces types I've known have, for the most part, been among the most physically fit human beings I've ever met. Saying they are one in a thousand is probably underestimating them. (I don't believe there are 280,000 individuals in the US that could pass SEAL school.) They are only “normal” in the context of They’re Not Superheroes.

Now you’re perfectly free to put all their stats in the 8-12 range if you want. But then they’re only going to be marginally more combat effective than Joe Normal. I don’t believe that accurately models reality, let alone Heroic Genre Fiction.


You've given Marvel Girl a 4 SPD, in my world, you've just made Marvel Girl as fast as Bruce Lee. I can give Cap a 4 SPD and simulate what he does in the comics just as well as you.
Unfair comparison: Bruce Lee was a real person, living in the real world, with NCMs and all else that implies. Transfer him to a superhero world as-is, and he’d be a mook. (Sorry, Bruce.) He wouldn’t/shouldn’t/couldn’t last 5 seconds against Cap as he’s portrayed in the comics; heck, even Marvel Girl could probably give him a run for his money. Now if that’s not how you want to run you game, fine, that’s your choice. But the assumption in most superhero comics is that superheroes can wipe the floor with any roomful of “normals.” And when the normals are built on 150-200 points (the range I’ve been using for Heroic characters for 20+ years), your superheroes have to be correspondingly tougher to take them on. When Champions and FH were seperate games, maybe it didn’t matter as much. But when they merged heroic & superheroic into one system, it became necessary to power up the supers accordingly.

That is a conscious design choice, not “stat inflation” in any meaningful sense of the phrase. Unless you just mean "the number of points went up," which is factually accurate, but does nothing to address why. ;)

[Shaft]

Unfair comparison: Bruce Lee was a real person, living in the real world, with NCMs and all else that implies. Transfer him to a superhero world as-is, and he’d be a mook. (Sorry, Bruce.) He wouldn’t/shouldn’t/couldn’t last 5 seconds against Cap as he’s portrayed in the comics; heck, even Marvel Girl could probably give him a run for his money.

Marvel Girl with her impressive ~40 STR TK would have an edge over Bruce Lee, but that's because of her powers. If you deactivate her TK, do you maintain that her physical capabilities are up there with Bruce Lee's, who you classify as a "mook" the same as any other Viper thug?

[Hyper-Man]

I find it interresting that Captain America is now considered 'super' when I seem to recal that the original Handbook to the MU listed him as having the maximum human potential*.

If a character in a Champions game takes the NCM* disadvantage he has a hard characteristic cap of 30 DEX and 6 SPD (and pays x2 for anything higher than 20 and 4 respectively). Anything higher therefore must be considered powers which Cap does not have.

Bruce Lee is an interresting comparison as well since he had to slow down many of his fight scenes in his movies so the camera could catch them. He was too fast for the the audience to follow at his normal speed.

One of the best write ups for Bruce Lee I have ever seen was done by Michael Surbrook (Susano on this board) and can be found here:

http://surbrook.devermore.net/adaptationshkaction/brucelee.html

And he just happens to be built with a 30 DEX and 6 SPD.

[assault]

But the assumption in most superhero comics is that superheroes can wipe the floor with any roomful of “normals.” And when the normals are built on 150-200 points (the range I’ve been using for Heroic characters for 20+ years), your superheroes have to be correspondingly tougher to take them on.

"Normals" built on 150-200 points aren't exactly "normal", in my book. Some of them at least should be able to give lower powered supers a hard time.

I don't generally use them as mooks, but rather as leaders of mooks.

Yes, I know about the packages in Dark Champions.

[Tech]

I don't have a copy of 1st. Where do you live? Do you lock your doors?

:D

I also have a copy of the very 1st edition and yes, I keep my doors locked. :p

[Tech]

"Normals" built on 150-200 points aren't exactly "normal", in my book. Some of them at least should be able to give lower powered supers a hard time.

I don't generally use them as mooks, but rather as leaders of mooks.

Yes, I know about the packages in Dark Champions.

Normals, by the name itself, refers to your average, ordinary guy/girl in the world. As people become skilled, extremely skilled, top best trained people in their field, they are still normals but skilled, not superpowered.

For myself in my campaign, many bankrobbers or thugs the heroes meet are at 11 or 12 Dex with 2 or 3 speed tops, some still at base stats of 10 Dex with 2 SPD.

However, this digresses from the forum topic. ;)

[bigdamnhero]

Marvel Girl with her impressive ~40 STR TK would have an edge over Bruce Lee, but that's because of her powers. If you deactivate her TK, do you maintain that her physical capabilities are up there with Bruce Lee's, who you classify as a "mook" the same as any other Viper thug?
Bruce Lee was, by definition, a non-superpowered martial-artist. Good as he was, he was not able to leap 50' in the air, dodge bullets, or ram his fists repeatedly into solid steel without injuring himself. Yet mooks do that all the time in the Marvel or DC universes, and still get trounced by even "depowered" superheroes. (Remember when Storm lost her powers and suddenly became the world's greatest HtH fighter?) Now I never was enough of an X-Fan to talk specifically about Marvel Girl's physical powers, but non-powered heroes routinely walk over any martial artist who is below Iron Fist level. Not saying it's realistic or remotely believable, but it is genre. Which, again, doesn't mean you have to play it that way. But I'm kinda surprised that you're surprised that other people might.

And yes, calling Bruce a "mook" is a deliberate exaggeration on my part to make a point. But honestly, it's not that far off when you compare the kind of stuff "normals" can do in comics compared to what even the world's best martial artists can do in reality.


"Normals" built on 150-200 points aren't exactly "normal", in my book. Some of them at least should be able to give lower powered supers a hard time.

I don't generally use them as mooks, but rather as leaders of mooks.
Point taken. And if they had to pay points for their gear, you've essentially got Nick Fury et. al. OK, I revise my statement: Bruce would've been a Mook Leader. ;) Still, I think the idea that superheroes are a step above is not an uncommon one.

[bigdamnhero]

I also have a copy of the very 1st edition and yes, I keep my doors locked. :p
They auctioned off copies of 1st Ed & 2nd Ed Champions at a recent con...and I missed the auction because my game ran late! None of my friends bid on them for me because, and I quote "You're such a Hero fanatic, we figured you already owned copies." :(

[assault]

Normals, by the name itself, refers to your average, ordinary guy/girl in the world. As people become skilled, extremely skilled, top best trained people in their field, they are still normals but skilled, not superpowered.

True, but they can be better combatants, be built on more points, and have higher characteristics.

"Boxer in a mask" is a very old "superhero" origin. I reject the notion that Wildcat or the Atom should inherently have lower characteristics than Marvel Girl. Ego? Sure, she's a mentalist. Com? Sure, she's hot. :D Int? Possibly, although the Atom was a college student. Pre? Nope. Speed? Nope. Dex? Nope...

To put it simply, there is not a hard and fast separation between "normal" and "superpowered" people. Rather, there is a broad spectrum, with plenty of grey areas.

The Atom and Wildcat could take out a roomful of "normals". Then again, they could also take out a roomful of "superhumans", in many cases. Maybe not the Spectre or Dr Fate, and they would have to get the drop on the Flash, but they could take out the rest of the JSA well enough. And vice versa.

[radioKAOS]

I find it interresting that Captain America is now considered 'super' when I seem to recal that the original Handbook to the MU listed him as having the maximum human potential*.

If a character in a Champions game takes the NCM* disadvantage he has a hard characteristic cap of 30 DEX and 6 SPD (and pays x2 for anything higher than 20 and 4 respectively). Anything higher therefore must be considered powers which Cap does not have.

Bruce Lee is an interresting comparison as well since he had to slow down many of his fight scenes in his movies so the camera could catch them. He was too fast for the the audience to follow at his normal speed.

One of the best write ups for Bruce Lee I have ever seen was done by Michael Surbrook (Susano on this board) and can be found here:

http://surbrook.devermore.net/adaptationshkaction/brucelee.html

And he just happens to be built with a 30 DEX and 6 SPD.

And 20STR. This is obviously a romantisized version of Bruce. I like it mind you, but it's not realistic.

[bigdamnhero]

"Boxer in a mask" is a very old "superhero" origin. I reject the notion that Wildcat or the Atom should inherently have lower characteristics than Marvel Girl. Ego? Sure, she's a mentalist. Com? Sure, she's hot. :D Int? Possibly, although the Atom was a college student. Pre? Nope. Speed? Nope. Dex? Nope...

To put it simply, there is not a hard and fast separation between "normal" and "superpowered" people. Rather, there is a broad spectrum, with plenty of grey areas.
I could argue there is a seperation: it's just not one based on any kind of logic known to our reality. Boxers who decide to put on spandex and fight crime are superpowered; those who don't are "normal." Like I said, not logical, but it does reflect the source material. However, your points are still well taken.

Regarding poor Jean, as someone pointed out to me awhile back when I was dissing Cyclops: "The guy has been working out in the Danger Room almost every day since the 1960s."

[Shaft]

Bruce Lee was, by definition, a non-superpowered martial-artist. Good as he was, he was not able to leap 50' in the air, dodge bullets, or ram his fists repeatedly into solid steel without injuring himself. Yet mooks do that all the time in the Marvel or DC universes, and still get trounced by even "depowered" superheroes.

You have a point. But not every mook can do that, and the mooks that do that are still relatively rare.

Unfortunately, comic writers don't have absolute metrics to compare characters to one another the way a character sheet allows a GM to gauge his PCs and NPCs. Also, there can be decades of different experiences.


Not saying it's realistic or remotely believable, but it is genre. Which, again, doesn't mean you have to play it that way. But I'm kinda surprised that you're surprised that other people might.

I was surprised by you calling Bruce Lee a mook. Sorry if it came off as sounding more abrasive than it was meant to be. ;)



And yes, calling Bruce a "mook" is a deliberate exaggeration on my part to make a point. But honestly, it's not that far off when you compare the kind of stuff "normals" can do in comics compared to what even the world's best martial artists can do in reality.

Point made. ;) It seems like writers can't even agree on what a mook's abilities should be. It's no wonder that the fans on this board who seek to emulate their work through a different medium, don't agree either. ;) Trying to create metrics from different sources is messy.

[Shaft]

I could argue there is a seperation: it's just not one based on any kind of logic known to our reality.

Well put.

[Checkmate]

Sorry nothing to see here. More argumentative than it needed to be and trying to keep a New Year resolution.

[assault]

I could argue there is a seperation: it's just not one based on any kind of logic known to our reality.

I like it. :D