Genre Conventions and Rationtionalization

[nexus]

Do you attempt to explain the genre conventions in your campaign, look at them logically and come up with a reason for them that is at least somewhat plausible? Or do yo just dispense with those that don't make sense? Or just except them as part of the settings style?

On a scale of 1 to 10 how do you rate your main campaign in this regard?

1. I really don't use conventions at all. I try to be as close to logical reality as possibe in a game

10. Its the way the genre works, deal with it.

[OddHat]

Well, the problem is that comics are more than one genre, even Super Hero comics, and we don't all agree on what the conventions actually are. A friend and I disagree over how "Silver Age" should be represented in a game, based on different ideas of what the Silver Age conventions were.

Still, using my own image of those conventions, and placing 1970s JLA as a 10 and the CU as an 8:

In most of my home Supers games, I use and rationalize only a few conventions, just enough to keep my Champions campaign a Supers game rather than weird conspiracy/Sci Fi/Horror. However, I do sometimes drift completely into those genres. Call it a 3.

However, I'm suppossed to co-GM an online game in the near future; that game uses many more of the conventions than I usually do, and so I'll be sticking around a 7 or 8 for that at least.

My 13+ year multi-genre campaign sometimes tossed allmost all of the conventions completely, and was around a 1 or 2.

My Wife's CU campaign is probably an 8 or 9, with only a few conventions dropped from classic Silver Age.

[Kristopher]

My sig quote was meant for exactly this kind of discussion.

"It is one thing to suspend your disbelief.
It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead."

[Lord Mhoram]

I go for the whole kit and kaboodle. And the things I can't rationalize, I hadwave. I read comics, if I play a superhero roleplaying game, I want to play comics. And the comics I read are the "neosilver" like JSA, Titans, Busiek's avengers, Astro City, so that is how I wan't my campaigns to feel.

Now I've played in superpowered roleplaying games, but we didn't use costumes and we didn't have codenames, we were just people with powers. That is a whole 'nother ball 'o' wax.

[TheEmerged]

I'm more of a genre fiend in some campaigns than others. For the "Emergence" campaign we operated something like a 3 on this scale; we explained away some genre bits but mercilessly mocked others. For "NeoChampions" we're at 1-2 on some issues (like Secret Identity), 5-6 on most (that is, we've felt the need to explain them or create justifications for), and a couple of 10's (like Sanctuary/Neutral Ground, which is just too fun to eliminate).

[phydaux]

Still, using my own image of those conventions, and placing 1970s JLA as a 10 and the CU as an 8:

Then I'm a six. I love comics, and I love the old Batman TV show, but some of that Silver Age stuff was total crap.

But if you're not going to use genera conventions, they why don't you just play Danger International?

Give me a nice Bronze Age, not dark but definitly overcast, and I'm a happy guy.

[Tamashii2000]

I tend to go with the Genre conventions, pretty much for one of the reasons listed above. If I am doing a superhero game, I want all the things in it that represent that genre...even if they realy don't make any sense ( costumes for instance... )

Generaly speaking I don't bother coming up with a Rationionalization( ok so I can't spell..... ) for the various genre's unless the PC's start to ask exactly why this or that situation happens..... in those cases I think about it for a few minutes...then throw the bum out of my game (JUST KIDDING!!!)

[CrosshairCollie]

I voted 9 ... I tend to stick to the conventions of the genre very strictly. Your powers don't have to obey the laws of physics, a tiny mask conceals your secret ID, all that jazz.

[OddHat]

Then I'm a six. I love comics, and I love the old Batman TV show, but some of that Silver Age stuff was total crap.

But if you're not going to use genera conventions, they why don't you just play Danger International?

Personally, the games where I used the fewest genre conventions (that were still recognizeably Supers games) were simulating comics and fiction like Watchmen and Wild Cards, or were Fantasy/Sci-Fi games with super powered humans.

I did it that way because I love comics, and stories about people with Super Powers, but some of that Silver Age stuff was absolute crap.

[RDU Neil]

I'd rate my campaign a four. Some conventions do stand... costumes, super groups... and I'll allow other conventions in place... origins through mutation, magic, etc.

What happens though, is that I play with and twist all the conventions when it makes for good story. Groups associated with governments or business or whatever, tend to have more realistic limits imposed on them... tactical, organized, long term plans work better than stand up fights... PCs aren't automatically assumed to be heroes, unless they act like it... and "hero" means something different to everyone.

Then some conventions I toss. Secret IDs are hard to keep, and not everyone has one. Villains that get caught, 99% of the time, stay in prison. Lethality in combat happens, but isn't expected... the status quo is not maintained, but constantly challenged by the PCs, etc.

What a newbie would find in my campaign is a lot of "surface" appearances of a classic supers game... but after playing a while, would see that not everything is as they expected.

(Heck, I'll even use a straight up cliche/convention as a way to surprise my players once in a while, because that is NOT what they expect! )

[Red Knight]

I generally tend to hold to the genre conventions but there are some that I throw away.

I like the Astro City feel of comic books and tend to shy away from the Image (over the top) feel.

If the convention makes sense, then I use it.... But to be honest... a lot of the old cliches and conventions of the old days sucked. I'm sorry but the entire "glasses on, nobody sees Superman" seems a little far-fetched to me. HOWEVER... If a character wants that as their schtick... so be it. I am here to play a game and have fun. As long as all the characters can except the game world.. there isn't an issue.

I forget where I saw it now... but I do know it was in the front of a gaming book. It basically said, The rules are not set in concrete and above all else have fun!

Conventions or not.... that is good advice!

[assault]

Generally speaking I'm a genre fiend, so the conventions apply. I do occasionally explore the edges of the genre, where they don't - but that just means that I'm following a different set of conventions!

I don't bother trying to rationalise conventions. Once you start doing that, they are no longer conventions.

I don't bother building big complex campaign worlds, any more. Instead, my superbeings are rare, and in fact are a grab bag of more or less completely unrelated freaks. There is no underlying logic to explain them, because there is no general phenomenon to explain.

If it wasn't for the fact that Champions is a game best played in groups, I might be tempted to only have one superhero in the whole world...

OK, and his supporting cast.

[Trebuchet]

Since we have multiple GMs our exact level of convention usage tends to vary somewhat, but I'd generally put our overall campaign at about an 8 on this scale. Let me put it this way: We're as realistic as possible as long as the realism doesn't trump the genre conventions.

Our campaign deliberately has a very Silver Age feel to it: Glasses provide an impenetrable disguise. Everyone wears costumes. Most supervillains don't kill (and the ones that do come to grisly ends) although threats to kill are common. Few actual supervillains use Killing Attacks, but agents often do (Of course, few agents have the CV to hit those heroes likely to be hurt by mere bullets). Virtually everyone on our team has CvK; and many supervillains do as well.