Jump to content

How do you balance Complications with Storyline?


Echo3Niner

Recommended Posts

I decided to pull this question from my other thread, to try to stay on point and get answers to this question:

 

A GM could decide that 400 CP, but only 50 or 30 points in Complications is appropriate for his game; correct?

 

I do not want to have my players have 100 points in complications, but then never have time to really use them.  I'd much rather only have an appropriate amount, that I will actually use in the campaign, even if that's lower than recommended for that scale.

 

I understand the concept of complications, but it appears to me that they are designed to go up in lock-step with CP, and that may not make sense to a game I'm planning.  If every character has 100 points in complications, it appears to me they would make up a large portion of a game (if given the appropriate level of emphasis from the GM's perspective), and I'm not sure that I want that much "disruption" to my storyline.  Basically, I'm trying to understand what your opinions are on good balance between say 4-6 players complication levels, and still being able to have a campaign focus on the main storyline?

 

I don't want the Complications to mean nothing, because as a GM I don't put enough effort into them, but I also will have little time in my game to be able to focus on them.  If they get the points, I should use them; so I'm concerned that I should only have the players have the amount of complications I can actually use in a game.

 

Let's say you have an in-depth storyline, which will leave only 10-15% of the time in a game session (e.g. out of a 6 hour game session that's +/- 45 minutes spread over the session) for EVERYONE's complications.  What level of Complications for say 6 players (using the above example, that's all of ~8 minutes per player), do GM's find you are able to actually use appropriately in play, while NOT impacting your overall story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Set the complication points to whatever you feel is appropriate. Standard Superhero (by the book) is 400 CP with 75 points in complications. But those ares still recommendations. They don't have to rule the game, and many of them have nothing to do with the main plot line of your adventure. For example, you don't have to run an entire adventure around my Code vs. Killing; situations may just come up during your normal adventures that the player then has to deal with their inability to take someone's life.

 

There are a lot of discussions in the forums about complications, using them, appropriate numbers, etc. I won't try to reiterate all of them. Feel free to look around.

 

Short version of my recommendation: Set the points to whatever level you want, but do have some complications--they add character to the characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I like them, and plan to include them; I'm just trying to determine how to manage them.

 

As an example: if each character (of 6 characters) has two or three DNPC's, it seems to me that if a GM is going to give them the attention they deserve, (to make the points matter) you're going to have a couple involved in almost every session...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the number of points needed (even using the recommended values), as GM, I would question why they need that many DNPCs (each). This gets back to character concept. Work with the players to determine what complications are going to add that touch of flavor when they're playing, and that you feel you can make use of.

 

Don't let the complications run your game. Barring Mr. Super and his Danger-Prone Family, if all of the players take a well-rounded assortment of complications, it really doesn't matter how often they come into play. Just make sure that you give every character equal treatment. Yes, they should have some effect. If a complication doesn't complicate things, it's not worth any points.

 

Again, if a lower total makes sense for the type of game you want to run. Pick a number; 400+50 sounds sounds easily doable (and they certainly won't need a bunch of DNPCs to get that number).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think running complications/disadvantages* depends on two things: the type of disadvantage and the frequency taken for a disadvantage. I consider both of these aspects in conjunction.

 

First up I should say that I think disads should not always be major road blocks to the heroes achieving adventure goals. Psych Lims especially I think should be for role playing. They add some drama or comedy or inform the particular method the hero will use to confront a situation. BA Barrackus does not like to fly. So the A-Team resort to strange lengths to get him from place to place when the situation calls for it. Remember that Disads are for fun!

 

When it comes to disads I always tell my players that by taking certain disads they are telling me they want their character to engage with the game world in a certain way. To put it another way: the game universe will morph to accommodate their peccadilloes. If they take "fear of cats" at "Very Common, Total" then they are telling me they want their character to constantly be paralysed by fear by wandering moggies. Moggies will come wandering past in all sorts of inconvenient and improbable situations. Obviously I would not allow this actual disad. In fact I think "Very Common" and "Total" = very bad in most instances. But I might allow "Fear of Cats, Total, Uncommon." (Hmmm. Probably not even that.) In fact any sort of Disad that is "Total" is usually a bad idea.

 

If someone has taken a disad as "Very Common" then it  should come up a lot. In fact "Very Common" is the equivalent of the 14> option as used by Hunted and DNPCs. That's about 85% of the time. I would recommend that you don't allow big, game controlling complications to come up that often. Little things like a Moderate Psych Lim would be fine as long as it was not the sort of thing to de-rail all situations. Things I would allow are "Is a flirt" or "Likes to showboat" or "Shy around girls" or any one of what I would call characterisation traits; those aspects that go toward defining the character as a person for role playing.

 

I would not allow "Very Common" for Psych Lims like "starts punching people at the drop of a hat" or "is a dark edgy loner who doesn't like people"  or any of the other myriad excuses that have been used for being a knobhead player. But I would allow it for "bad tempered" if it were "Moderate" (ie: the character can control it without any actual Ego rolls needed.)

 

When it comes to things like Vulnerabilities and Susceptibilities I determine frequency based on what I know of the campaign. eg: a Susceptibility to Water in an Arabian Nights game is less frequent than in a Sealab 2020 game. If the disad reflects something I have not thought about or do not consider central to the campaign I allow the player to define it. Also - the 5th ed. Champions book has a list of how Common different attack types are. I don't know if the 6th ed. Champions book does but it's a good thing for a GM to look at.

 

Hunteds and DNPCs I handle slightly differently. First up no DNPC is allowed more than 8>. I'm pretty sure no-one wants to play a game based on the Perils of Pearl Pure Heart all the time. Nor her cartoon descendant Penelope Pitstop. Secondly, and this idea came from my co-GM in my current Champions campaign, roll for DNPCs and Hunteds BEFORE designing the adventure. We usually do it at the end of the previous adventure arc. This allows you as GM to work the Hunteds into the adventure rather than just chucking them in at the last moment like a wandering monster encounter. Thirdly - if you have a more than a couple of players most Hunteds should be 8>. Any more than that and the whole thing becomes a bit of a mess. If one player has Hunted VIPER** 14> and another has Hunted Mechanon** 14> then... well I'm sure you can see how difficult it would be to make that work for something like 75% of your games.

 

Also consider HOW the DNPC and Hunted will actually interact with the scenario. Sometimes the Hunted may be behind the scenes and never seen. If you get a lot of DNPCs come up turn them into role playing situations. Maybe the DNPC, rather than being tied to train tracks, just needs the hero to do something in their secret ID when they should be out fighting injustice. How about a party where everyone's DNPCs are there and then the bat signal goes off and all the heroes have to make awkward excuses to leave? There's always the classic base invasion if you need to threaten a large number of DNPCs at one time. And don't be scared to ignore the roll. Rolled up all 6 DNPCs this adventure? Ignore them, or most of them.

 

An example - the next adventure I'm running is the culmination of a couple of little adventures that make a loose story arc. I had the general idea but before I got down to serious plotting I rolled people's Hunteds and DNPCs. I had only one come up - Hunted by the Triads. Now my plot had nothing to do with the Triads but I decided to work them in as hired security for the buyer of a stolen diamond. I then made the Triads the best lead the Heroes have to find the guys they are actually looking for (who are attempting to retrieve the stolen diamond for their own ends.) Added bonus: the Triads know the heroes and dislike them (one of the heroes in particular) so it gives a bit of added drama to the proceedings.

 

 

Cheers. :-)

 

 

* I'm playing 5th ed and I still use the word disadvantage, but they're the same as complications.

** just in case you're not familiar with Champions Universe NPCs: VIPER is Champions equivalent of Hydra and Mechanon is Champions equivalent of Ultron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the current standard for complications is 75, which is pretty easy to fill.

 

Me? I've never had a problem with ballencing one with the other...the story is "cake", the disadds are frosting... :) A lot of the backstory of my game universe was generated by complications. I had a "super- Ninja!" take hunted by the Red Banner. It is now a major part of the backstory for all ninja arts, and provides a very different mystical foe as well.

 

That's all epic win in my book. :) The way I used to do complications was I build a story line, then roll for all the side dramas that will intrude...so just maybe a hero's main squeeze has a crisis because her son is being recruited into a streetgang, that acts as a "farm team" for Viper. And maybe the biker gang recruited by the villain of the hour, are also dedicated occult cultists who often work for a certain villain. (you seldom get to use return Thugs) etc...

 

It didn't add too much, and disadds are supposed to make a simple job harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I like them, and plan to include them; I'm just trying to determine how to manage them.

 

As an example: if each character (of 6 characters) has two or three DNPC's, it seems to me that if a GM is going to give them the attention they deserve, (to make the points matter) you're going to have a couple involved in almost every session...

 

If any of your players are writers, consider blue booking as an option for "non-adventure" times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My advice is to worry less about "how many points in Complications?" and more about things like "what frequency are the Complications and what KIND are they?"

 

Given the concerns you've expressed, for instance, I'd say you should not allow points for Hunted or DNPC or Rivalry or Social Complication at all. Say "You can have a nemesis or people your character is concerned about, and I'll work them in where they fit, but it may not be often so you get no points for it."

 

It's YOUR game. You don't HAVE to allow any given Complication, nor do you HAVE to require any given minimum number of Complication points.

 

I suggest you look at each Complication on each Player Character and ask yourself how it fits in the game you plan to run. If you think it will cause too much trouble for you, or not enough trouble for the player, or if it just doesn't fit, disallow it.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I may get no points for a palindromedary,but that doesn't make it pointless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, this falls under the rule of "Let the players dig their own grave."

 

If you have fear of cats, common, total, then by god, it is your DUTY as a gamemaster to make Cat-Man show up every couple sessions or so.

 

If you have complications that are easy for other PC's to trigger, then you just leave those alone and let the chips fall where they may.

 

The reason why complications are there is to make the plot more interesting, and, if they take a dumb enough disad, to hose them. If the PC takes "Hunted by the Hookie-pookie-pookie bird, 14-, Less Powerful" and the Hookie-Pookie-Pookie Bird is only visible at the festival of the moon once every seventy four years in Bahrain, then his arch-enemies become a bunch of mental and physical illusionists, along with occasional summoners.

 

The only reason for less complications is distrust between the players and the GM. 75 is, quite frankly, an extremely low number compared to previous editions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much more to add, but...complications are supposed to make things worse for the player. So an easy task gets messed up because "it's complicated" :) And it being a comic book universe a Hunted does not have to be personal...it's just blind luck that Viper robs a bank next door to the restaurant where your having a family reunion... No whiners allowed....the player took Hunted Viper (11) that means they intrude on his/her life regular. If that interferes in saving the city from being held hostage, well...I guess that's why having a DNPC is worth points.

 

I'd suggest you limit all levels to "on ocaision" (ie: (8) ) so you don't have too many show up at once. I'm also totally at peace with the heroes failing because of complications interfering, that's Why they are worth points. Also consider that a hunted can act indirectly, by providing intel to a current foe, or they might spread rumors about the hero....

 

I prefer Not to punish people who don't play their lims, I prefer to reward those who do....I like to roll Luck/Unluck at the start of a run, and have it "set the tone" for the run, that seems to give a better "feel".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I like that.

 

I generally don't have that problem. If I did, I cut off a portion of the player's XP until the complication is bought off, and when they ask why they're receiving no experience, I tell them that it's for buying off the complication that they're not roleplaying.

 

This usually gets fixed real quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, the PCs' Complications shouldn't be at odds with the story; rather than looking at them as random elements you have to shoehorn into "your" plot, try to write the story around their Complications as much as possible. (Remember: it's the PC's story, they're the stars.) Of course, if a player wants to take a Complication that you think you'll have a hard time fitting into the campaign, then you're well within your rights to tell the player No, or reduce the points they get for it, or whatever.

 

One thing I try to do is keep a matrix of all the PCs' Complications with a record of how long it's been since they came up in play; if it's been too long since one popped up, I know it's time to write them into the next episode. That way you can just rotate through them as you can, and their Frequency is only relevant compared to each other. But it should be a narrative guide, not a set of handcuffs.

 

I understand the concept of complications, but it appears to me that they are designed to go up in lock-step with CP, and that may not make sense to a game I'm planning.

Part of the reason the numbers go up with CP is that, in general, high-point characters like superheroes tend to have more Vulnerabilities, Susceptibilities and the like. Even Physical Complications and such are often more powerful at superheroic levels because they have Powers to compensate for them. (ie Daredevil's blindness.) But if it doesn't make sense for your game, then absolutely change it!

 

Basically, I'm trying to understand what your opinions are on good balance between say 4-6 players complication levels, and still being able to have a campaign focus on the main storyline?

You seem to be mainly concerned with Complications that represent People Who Show Up Sometimes (PWSUS): Hunteds, DNPCs & Rivals. So try this on for size. (I'm totally making this up as I type, so bear with me.) If a PC has one such Complication that appears Frequently, let's call that 1 PWSUS-Equivalent; if they appear Infrequently we'll call that 1/2 PWSUSE; and if they appear Very Frequently - something I generally don't allow unless it's directly tied to the central plot - call that 2 PWSUSE. In general, if you're averaging 1 PWSUSE per PC, you shouldn't have a problem keeping them all in rotation. But if you start to average 1.5 or 2 PWSUSE per PC, then they'll either start to take over your plot, or else you'll wind up shortchanging them.

 

Does that match other GMs' experience?

 

Not much more to add, but...complications are supposed to make things worse for the player.

I'd go with "more interesting" rather than automatically "worse." But otherwise I agree.

 

I prefer Not to punish people who don't play their lims, I prefer to reward those who do...

Totally agreed! I use Hero Points/HAPs in my games, and try to tie awarding additional points to how well they play their Complications.

 

75 is, quite frankly, an extremely low number compared to previous editions.

This was one of the 6ed changes I was most skeptical of. But after a few years of playing it, I think it does tend to encourage focusing on a few important Complications, rather than several mediocre ones, which therefore tend to be easier to incorporate into the game AND more significant when they do turn up. YMMV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very fond of complications, and in my opinion, if you build a character realistically it isn't all that hard to come up with hundreds of points worth of complications. I am also of the opinion that characters tend to acquire complications through gameplay just like they accrue Experience Points, and there should be enough room in the story/plot for that to happen without unduly punishing the player of that character.

 

However if you are trying to reduce the degree to which Complications take time from your game, I recommend limiting the number of points worth of "social-context" Complications they may take, and encourage them to take "mechanical" complications to fill out remaining points with. Vulnerabilities, Susceptibilities, and Unluck all require minimal effort to ensure they come up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, and has always been the case, you do not get points for complications generated through game play.What you can do (with GM's permission), is change existing complications to reflect game play.

 

Hrmmm, not sure I like that.  If I don't have Viper as a Hunted, in fact don't have anything to do with Viper in my Complications; but, it makes sense after the game that I now get Viper as a Hunted; if I'm gonna make the roles and use them as a Complication in my game, shouldn't they get something for it?  Even if it's just some extra XP to add up to the value of the Hunted Complication?  (So, not in addition to the XP for the game, but as part of it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really...If my generic bank robbery scenario is "Viper needs cash' (add foreshadowing to taste) Then that is who you face...if you follow up, and spoil Master plan 87q, part 5... :) Well maybe the local nest leader takes a serious dislike to the Heroes. No points involved. (return Villians are a staple)

 

That cuts both ways, The local Nest can get cleaned out, after all nobody got points for Viper being around.... If somebody did take a Hunted, then a new Nest opens up....

 

I think what was said was...You can switch things up, by that you can sit down with a player and say " I'm having problems with Viper on a (11), and I want Demon to be a "thing", so can we swap out Demon for Viper? I'll add a NPC for the difference" If that gets an "OK" (and I've never gotten a No yet) run a short game where Hero X rescues a sacrifice (DNPC) and gains the eternal hatred of Demon. 8 games down the line, the Heroes can defeat Viper so hard, that they almost vanish from the city. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hrmmm, not sure I like that.  If I don't have Viper as a Hunted, in fact don't have anything to do with Viper in my Complications; but, it makes sense after the game that I now get Viper as a Hunted; if I'm gonna make the roles and use them as a Complication in my game, shouldn't they get something for it?  Even if it's just some extra XP to add up to the value of the Hunted Complication?  (So, not in addition to the XP for the game, but as part of it.)

 

Then the GM could require the players to take Mystery Complication of X points, to fill in as he chooses, so that what happens in the first couple of game sessions can be used to fill in the Complication list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My approach to Complications in any Champions game I ever run in the future will be thus:

 

1. Players get a flat number of character points to build their characters. NO points from Complications. None. Nada. Zip.

 

2. Player may take as many complications as they like, or as few, or none. As GM, I retain the right to veto a given complication if it strikes me as silly (the kind of thing that will break the mood of the game) or otherwise unworkable (a tendency to go into an indiscriminate killing frenzy at the drop of a hat, etc).

 

3. When (AND IF) the Complication comes up in play, and the player actually treats it as a problem and doesn't gloss over it, the player will get an EP bonus for it at the end of the session/adventure.

 

The end result is that players can freely take which complications they really want to play out*, ignore those they don't, and they only get an XP bonus if they actually live up to the ones they take.

 

I'm of the school of thought that taking a particular Complication means you WANT it come up. If you want to play Spider-Man and take "Complication: Secret Identity", it means you WANT to have to deal with missed dates, missed work, angry girlfriends and bosses,a reputation for being a forgetful flake and so forth. If you want to play Spider-Man but don't want to deal with those things, you don't take that complication. You can still _have_ a secret identity, but it's not going to be an issue for you. With any requirement to take complications just for the points removed, I would hope the players will only take complications that accurately reflect the sort of character they want to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...