Templates/Packages and Complications

[Sketchpad]

I'm working on some stuff for a game and was thinking about Templates a bit. Particularly the Complication end of things. According to the books (6E1 p. 36):

 

Quote

When you note a Template on your character sheet, put any points from Complications in the Complication section (they’re part of your character’s Matching Complication amount), and write down the Skills in the Skills section. You should also write down the name(s) of the Template(s) your character has.

 

I've always seen these as "In Addition" to Complications taken by a player. And from what I've seen over at Homebrewing a HERO System 2e, I'm not the only one in the past. Does anyone run it this way in 6th edition? Has anyone had success with it in 6th edition?

Edited July 10, 2023 by Sketchpad

[Duke Bushido]

I cannot directly answer your question, as I dont play 6e, but I suspect you are not the only one doing that; that is essentially hiw Package Deals worked way back when.   Why that changed is a bit baffling, particularly in light of point 2:

 

I camnot see how it wouldn't work in 6e, seeing as how "matching complications" do lots of things except actually match something.

 

If you want 500 point characters,you build them.  Then you take your complications and build up however many >ahem< "matching" complications you are supposed to have for this particular campaign, and off you go.

 

Given that this makes points values for Complications kind of (but not completely) meaningless as any sort of points-balancing device, you have the option of declaring these Template complications either zero-point or declaring that freebie starter points are reduced by an equal amount.  They are, essentially, the in-game cost or role-playing cost of having selected a certain template.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LoneWolf]

The difference between a 6th edition complication and the disadvantages of the previous edition is that complications don’t actually give you points.  In 5th edition and earlier you got a certain amount of points for free and if you wanted more you had to take disadvantages to get the extra points.  There was usually a maximum disadvantage total that if you went over you did not gain points.  For example, you would see something like 200 points + 150 in disadvantages.  That meant you get 200 points and can take up to 150 points in disadvantages, this brought your total up to 350 points.   In 6th edition the kind of reversed how it was calculated.  Under 6th edition the same points would be listed as 350 points with 150 points of matching complications.  If you do not take the required amount of complications, you reduce your character points on a 1 to 1 basis for each point you are short.  

 

The other thing that changed is that the amounts of disadvantages/complications are greatly reduced under 6th edition.  Under 6th edition your standard superhero has 400 points with 75 points in matching complications.  Under 5th edition the standard superhero was 200 points with a maximum disadvantage of 150 points which made the character 350 points.   6th edition eliminated figured stats so the characters tend to be slightly more expensive, so they give some extra points to even it out.

 

In reality both methods end up being pretty much the same.   Personally, I think the 6th edition way is cleaner because it states up front the maximum point value of the starting character.  In earlier editions package deals gave a package bonus that reduced the cost of taking the package, so you actually got more points for taking a package deal.  They eliminated that a few editions back.  Now package deals are simply a guideline for how to build specific types of characters.   Since that is the case not counting the complications/disadvantages actually huts the characters taking them by requiring them to have more complications/disadvantages.   That is probably the reason they explicitly state they count for the required complications in 6th edition.   Why should a character who takes a package deal be required to take more complications than the character who did not, especially when they are otherwise identical.  
 

[Hugh Neilson]

All that really changed is nomenclature.  You can still choose to have less than, say, 75 points in complications, at the cost of having less than 400 points for abilities.  Maybe there should just be a power called "Less Complications" - if you spend 75 of your 400 points on that, you don't need any complications.  But then we'd get into questions of frameworks and limitations, which would create a mess (maybe it should be a fixed cost Perk?).

 

I like the 6e decision to reduce complications so they can be more central to the character, and expected to come up a lot.  When every Super on the team has 2 or 3 Hunted to pad out those 150 points, how often do those Hunteds show up?  If on one had any Hunteds, would we have no adversary at this week's game?

[Doc Democracy]

When I was running an ongoing campaign, I tried to roll for Hunteds etc between sessions and then use the Hunters (villains and organisations) to replace the ones suggested by a bought adventure or the ones I planned to use for home brewed sessions.  When I was properly prepared it actually showed the game value of the mechanics as dependents, vulnerabilities, hunteds etc came into play in less crowbarred fashions (like I did for years before I learned how to do things better).

 

I do agree that fewer is better because, when I did it, with four or five heroes, there were a LOT of returning faces.  It did mean that the hunted relationship evolved as it had to as adventures drove things to change (and sometimes be replaced as villains were imprisoned etc).

 

Doc

[Ninja-Bear]

Interestingly I believe where 6th ed got its idea for matching complications is from Champions 5th Sourcebook. Allston talks about the problems of Disadvantage Point system. And the problem is that if you start out with a higher point total then typically the Disadvantage total has to increase. But then that amount makes the character less practical for two reasons. 1) With that many points, the character is a mess. How many Hunteds or Psychological or other Disadvantages do you have to take? How many double dipping Disadvantages have you seen? 2) Then the practical part of roleplaying. With that many Disadvantages that character could be an attention hog or you really don’t play those Disadvantages. His suggestion? Increase the Base points so you can focus on the Disadvantages that are really worth roleplaying. Sounds like 6th to me.

[LoneWolf]

There is no need for a perk less complications because you can already do this.  The 6th edition rule book states that you can choose to take fewer than the matching complications, but doing so reduces your points by one for every point you are short. 

 

The fact that characters have less complications/disadvantages in 6th edition is probably one of the most overlooked improvements in the game.    The reality is that 6th edition characters are actually much better built than in the previous editions.  Every character having 150 points meant that about half of them unusually ended up being ignored.  If a GM actually used all the disadvantages of all the characters, they would be in a lot of trouble.   6th edition recognized this was happening and fixed the problem.   Even if you don’t want to use 6th edition adopting this may be worthwhile.  For a 5th edition game you could use a 350 point with 75 points in matching disadvantages.   

 

This is also a reason to allow package complications to count towards your matching complications.  Requiring a character to take extra complications beyond what is required for the campaign brings back the issue of too many complications.  In 5th edition and earlier the GM would often just have you pay the points for the package deal.  By subtracting the cost of the disadvantage from the cost of the package deal you are actually increasing the points of the character above the campaigns normal base.  For Example, if a knight package gave you 30 points in skills and abilities but came with a 20-point disadvantage your character would simply pay 10 points for the package.  This means if your character took the maximum required disadvantages, they had an extra 20 points that a character who did not take the package deal.   
 

[Sketchpad]

8 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I like the 6e decision to reduce complications so they can be more central to the character, and expected to come up a lot.  When every Super on the team has 2 or 3 Hunted to pad out those 150 points, how often do those Hunteds show up?  If on one had any Hunteds, would we have no adversary at this week's game?

 

I agree, which is why I was curious about this. I'm wondering if Template Complications should be included in the amount the player chooses. I think there's some customization lost if they count. For example:

Commander Star's player has taken a Government Template that has "Subject to Orders (15pt)" as a complication.

 

If it's added to their Matching Complications, they lose 15 points of customization, as they "have" to take this. What I'm thinking is that it's just an added Complication, and the player may customize further. Does that make sense? I should also note that I've opted to use something akin to GURPS Quirks as well, bumping Matching Complications totals up by 5. 

[Ninja-Bear]

@Sketchpad, why not just make Template Complications optional? That way the player gets tonchoose which one he prefers?

[Doc Democracy]

26 minutes ago, Sketchpad said:

 

I agree, which is why I was curious about this. I'm wondering if Template Complications should be included in the amount the player chooses. I think there's some customization lost if they count. For example:

Commander Star's player has taken a Government Template that has "Subject to Orders (15pt)" as a complication.

 

If it's added to their Matching Complications, they lose 15 points of customization, as they "have" to take this. What I'm thinking is that it's just an added Complication, and the player may customize further. Does that make sense? I should also note that I've opted to use something akin to GURPS Quirks as well, bumping Matching Complications totals up by 5. 

 

A template is simply a bundle presented as a bunch of skills/perks/powers/complications that this kind of person would usually have.

 

There are no bonus points for taking a package, so really, if you do not want all the bits of a template then you can individually buy everything you want.  I do not see having the option of taking additional complications to be an advantage 🙂 and I am sure most GMs would be fine with a character taking additional complications - the resistance would come from expecting a character with an additional 15 points of complications getting an additional 15 points of powers/skills etc over other player characters.

 

Doc

[Sketchpad]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

@Sketchpad, why not just make Template Complications optional? That way the player gets to choose which one he prefers?

 

57 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

A template is simply a bundle presented as a bunch of skills/perks/powers/complications that this kind of person would usually have.

 

There are no bonus points for taking a package, so really, if you do not want all the bits of a template then you can individually buy everything you want.  I do not see having the option of taking additional complications to be an advantage 🙂 and I am sure most GMs would be fine with a character taking additional complications - the resistance would come from expecting a character with an additional 15 points of complications getting an additional 15 points of powers/skills etc over other player characters.

 

Doc

 

Well, I guess where I'm going is that Template Complications would be considered part of the Template, but not part of the Matching Complications for the character. So in a standard 6e Champions character, for example, they need 75 Matching Complications. As per 6th ed, there are no points being gained through any Complications, just that a character should have the matching amount for the type chosen.

 

Say you take a Species Template and an Occupation Template... Skrull Infiltrator... They both come with Complications that total 45 points. That would mean someone would only have to take 30 points in Complications.

 

What I'm thinking is that the Template Complications don't count toward the 75, but rather are gained from grabbing the Templates. A character still has 75 points to take toward their Matching Complications. 

[LoneWolf]

There is nothing that says a character cannot take more complications than what is required.  The book even encourages this.  The example they give is a vampire character taking all the traditional vampire weaknesses.  The idea of matching complications is so that the character has something that the GM can work with.   

 

 

Since template complications don’t reduce the cost of the template not counting them as part of the matching complications penalizes characters taking the template.  That is going to mean that no one will take a template if they do not have to.  The only reason to take a template is if the abilities can only be acquired from a template.   In a typical champion campaign, there will be no one taking a template.  If you are running a heroic campaign and limit what powers a character can purchase to racial templates, some characters may take those.  But any other template will be ignored.  What is going to happen is the player will simply buy what they want from the template and what complications they want. 

 

 

Ignoring templates can have a negative impact on the game especially for heroic campaigns.  Many templates have things in them that characters may not want to bother with, but that are something the concept should actually have.  This is especially true with knowledge and background skills. The GM could of course require you to take templates, but that seems to go against the spirit of the Hero System.   At that point your game is closer to D&D than Fantasy Hero.  

 

Templates should be considered guidelines on how to build a character, not something that is required or that penalizes the character.   Requiring a character to take more complication than another character but not gaining any benefit is unfair.    

[Sketchpad]

29 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

There is nothing that says a character cannot take more complications than what is required.  The book even encourages this.  The example they give is a vampire character taking all the traditional vampire weaknesses.  The idea of matching complications is so that the character has something that the GM can work with.   

 

 

Since template complications don’t reduce the cost of the template not counting them as part of the matching complications penalizes characters taking the template.  That is going to mean that no one will take a template if they do not have to.  The only reason to take a template is if the abilities can only be acquired from a template.   In a typical champion campaign, there will be no one taking a template.  If you are running a heroic campaign and limit what powers a character can purchase to racial templates, some characters may take those.  But any other template will be ignored.  What is going to happen is the player will simply buy what they want from the template and what complications they want. 

 

 

Ignoring templates can have a negative impact on the game especially for heroic campaigns.  Many templates have things in them that characters may not want to bother with, but that are something the concept should actually have.  This is especially true with knowledge and background skills. The GM could of course require you to take templates, but that seems to go against the spirit of the Hero System.   At that point your game is closer to D&D than Fantasy Hero.  

 

Templates should be considered guidelines on how to build a character, not something that is required or that penalizes the character.   Requiring a character to take more complication than another character but not gaining any benefit is unfair.    

 

We have different ideas of what role Templates serve it seems. For me, Templates are a way for players to interact and create characters within a campaign structure. GMs allow what they would like to see. Want to run a fantasy game that has Elves, Dwarves, and Goblins available to players? Bingo, here's the Templates. Don't want Halflings? No problem. Don't use the Template. Could you offer every Template in Fantasy Hero? Sure. Should you? Depends on the game you're running. Want to run a Conan/Sword-n-Sorcery game? Well there goes a healthy chunk of Templates. It's all in how people play the game. 

 

As for gaining benefit from Complications... what benefit is there to gain? The whole concept is to ground the character a bit, right? It's not like you're taking 35 points of Hunteds and gaining something beyond enemies at your gate, right? 

[Doc Democracy]

2 hours ago, Sketchpad said:

What I'm thinking is that the Template Complications don't count toward the 75, but rather are gained from grabbing the Templates. A character still has 75 points to take toward their Matching Complications. 

 

The issue I see with that is GoodBoy looks at your templates and picks 2, takes the 45 points of complications, and then chooses another 75 points of complications.

Looking over his shoulder GoodMan decides he wants all the abilities in the templates but not the complications and so he builds his character with no template and takes 75 points of complications.

 

Goodman gets all the same abilities and only 60% of the complications of GoodBoy.

 

Is it worth the complications to officially be a Skrull Infiltrator?

[Sketchpad]

9 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

The issue I see with that is GoodBoy looks at your templates and picks 2, takes the 45 points of complications, and then chooses another 75 points of complications.

Looking over his shoulder GoodMan decides he wants all the abilities in the templates but not the complications and so he builds his character with no template and takes 75 points of complications.

 

Goodman gets all the same abilities and only 60% of the complications of GoodBoy.

 

Is it worth the complications to officially be a Skrull Infiltrator?

 

That is where I run things differently, I guess. When I see a Template there's the standard info for it (Skills/Powers/Complications/etc.), and then there are Options under that. Let's look at the Druid from FH6 (p.80). You have the Template with the listed info for stats, skills, powers and the like, followed by Complications, and finished with Options. If I want to play a standard Druid in Fantasy Hero, I have to take the info listed, including the Complications. If I want some of the Options, I can take them as well. All this for 79 points. The 25 point matching Complication is then also applied. If there's a Species Template, the player playing it should have everything on it, including the Complications. Anything optional is in the Options section. So one way or another, in the case of the Skrull Infiltrator, you're getting those 45 points in Complications. In my opinion, it shouldn't be added as part Matching Complications, but rather as additional due to the job/species/background/etc.

[Ninja-Bear]

@LoneWolf, FWIW, I increased Base Points to reduce Disadvantage Points for the 4th ed I just ran.

 

2 hours ago, Sketchpad said:

 

That is where I run things differently, I guess. When I see a Template there's the standard info for it (Skills/Powers/Complications/etc.), and then there are Options under that. Let's look at the Druid from FH6 (p.80). You have the Template with the listed info for stats, skills, powers and the like, followed by Complications, and finished with Options. If I want to play a standard Druid in Fantasy Hero, I have to take the info listed, including the Complications. If I want some of the Options, I can take them as well. All this for 79 points. The 25 point matching Complication is then also applied. If there's a Species Template, the player playing it should have everything on it, including the Complications. Anything optional is in the Options section. So one way or another, in the case of the Skrull Infiltrator, you're getting those 45 points in Complications. In my opinion, it shouldn't be added as part Matching Complications, but rather as additional due to the job/species/background/etc.

Perhaps but I would think its implied that those Template Complications fill in the characters Total Complications. Well that’s how I handle it in 6th. I’m sure that there has to be verbiage on it one way or the other and with the “if the GM decides….” Clause there too.  

Edited July 11, 2023 by Ninja-Bear

[Ninja-Bear]

On page 37 of the 6e v1 pg 37 it states that the Complications of a Template do count against the Total Matching Complications.

[LoneWolf]

The way I see it templates are to make it easier for a player to create their character.   It gives everyone a common reference point on what it means to be a particular race or profession.   If elves are immortal in a campaign put that in the template and all elves will be immortal.  For professional templates it gives the minimum for a character to function.   It’s kind of difficult to be a swashbuckler if you don’t know how to use swords.  What templates really are is a way for the GM to establish how things work in their campaign.  

 

Complications are supposed to be used against the character.  That is why in previous editions they were called disadvantages.  A character with an extra 45 points in complications is at a disadvantage compared to someone with fewer complications.  This is penalizing someone for taking the template, and that is unfair to the character.   
 

[Doc Democracy]

11 hours ago, Sketchpad said:

hat is where I run things differently, I guess.

I am all for folk runing things they way they want.  100%

 

I can understand, if it is your game, you say, if you want to be a skrull infiltrator, you take the template, and the complications.  No way round that.  And that is fine. I am just trying to understand what the player gets from still having to take the standard point value of complications.

 

My questions is probably, would you actively stop someone else, who bought all the same powers and did not take the complications (and did not say they were a skrull infiltrator) from playing that character? 

[Hugh Neilson]

20 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Interestingly I believe where 6th ed got its idea for matching complications is from Champions 5th Sourcebook. Allston talks about the problems of Disadvantage Point system. And the problem is that if you start out with a higher point total then typically the Disadvantage total has to increase. But then that amount makes the character less practical for two reasons. 1) With that many points, the character is a mess. How many Hunteds or Psychological or other Disadvantages do you have to take? How many double dipping Disadvantages have you seen? 2) Then the practical part of roleplaying. With that many Disadvantages that character could be an attention hog or you really don’t play those Disadvantages. His suggestion? Increase the Base points so you can focus on the Disadvantages that are really worth roleplaying. Sounds like 6th to me.

 

How many Champions characters had less than 2 Hunteds?  Now, characters can take a Hunted if it's really important to the character.  The other intended change is reflected in the nomenclature change from "disadvantages" to "complications".  As I recall, Steve's goal was to move the needle from "these are bad things your GM can hit you over the head with, and you should work to minimize their impact" to "these are a tool for player agency - they should guide the GM to the kind of challenges you want your character to face".  Disadvantages being a purely negative term, Complications being more neutral in tone.

 

17 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

There is no need for a perk less complications because you can already do this.  The 6th edition rule book states that you can choose to take fewer than the matching complications, but doing so reduces your points by one for every point you are short.

 

If it was unclear, all I was musing on was making this more consistent in presentation with "skills as powers" and "characteristics as powers".  Practically, the option is not often taken as players want those 400 points, and 75 points of complications is not bad for fleshing out a Supers character anyway.

7 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

I am all for folk runing things they way they want.  100%

 

I can understand, if it is your game, you say, if you want to be a skrull infiltrator, you take the template, and the complications.  No way round that.  And that is fine. I am just trying to understand what the player gets from still having to take the standard point value of complications.

 

My questions is probably, would you actively stop someone else, who bought all the same powers and did not take the complications (and did not say they were a skrull infiltrator) from playing that character? 

 

I'll flip that around.  Your "skrull infiltrator with no complications" has 20 less points to play around with than the Package Infiltrator, who reduced the cost of the package by 20 points.

 

Let's see how many templates I can take to get free extra abilities - if I would have paid for enough of the package to cover the net cost, and I can live with the added complications, maybe I want to bulk up.

 

In earlier editions, before there was a "maximum disadvantages" rule, we saw a lot of characters with well over 150 disadvantage points, held partially in check by the diminishing returns (first two of any category being full points, next two half, two after that only a quarter - as I recall, we relaxed that for unrelated psychological complications).

[Sketchpad]

13 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

On page 37 of the 6e v1 pg 37 it states that the Complications of a Template do count against the Total Matching Complications.

 

Hence the quote in the first post of this topic.  I'm looking for info from folks that don't use that guideline.

 

4 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

My questions is probably, would you actively stop someone else, who bought all the same powers and did not take the complications (and did not say they were a skrull infiltrator) from playing that character? 

 

Possibly. Templates exist for a reason. I see them as guidelines for a making a character in a campaign setting, but there are exceptions especially when presented with a solid concept. If someone made a shapeshifter and took everything but the Complications in order to make a Skrull Infiltrator, I would question why and expect a great concept in return. Just because they didn't want the Complications? Then why play a Skrull Infiltrator in the first place? There's a difference between Bill Changer Of Shapes and our alien spy. Did they have a great idea that they're hunted by the Skrull Empire after having a fling with the Queen? Okay... I'm intrigued, tell me more. I may swap out Complications that are "Template Oriented" with different ones, and still not count them toward the Matching Complications, as it's now a Skrull Expatriate kind of character now. 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

How many Champions characters had less than 2 Hunteds?  Now, characters can take a Hunted if it's really important to the character.  The other intended change is reflected in the nomenclature change from "disadvantages" to "complications".  As I recall, Steve's goal was to move the needle from "these are bad things your GM can hit you over the head with, and you should work to minimize their impact" to "these are a tool for player agency - they should guide the GM to the kind of challenges you want your character to face".  Disadvantages being a purely negative term, Complications being more neutral in tone.

 

 

If it was unclear, all I was musing on was making this more consistent in presentation with "skills as powers" and "characteristics as powers".  Practically, the option is not often taken as players want those 400 points, and 75 points of complications is not bad for fleshing out a Supers character anyway.

 

I'll flip that around.  Your "skrull infiltrator with no complications" has 20 less points to play around with than the Package Infiltrator, who reduced the cost of the package by 20 points.

 

Let's see how many templates I can take to get free extra abilities - if I would have paid for enough of the package to cover the net cost, and I can live with the added complications, maybe I want to bulk up.

 

In earlier editions, before there was a "maximum disadvantages" rule, we saw a lot of characters with well over 150 disadvantage points, held partially in check by the diminishing returns (first two of any category being full points, next two half, two after that only a quarter - as I recall, we relaxed that for unrelated psychological complications).

 

Except that Complications don't reduce anything. They exist only in a "Complication Zone" that have zero effect on points a character may have to use. Hence why I don't see an issue with extra Complications, as they do nothing than provide a character and campaign more flavor. That said, I do miss the old Package Deal days, as I used a ton back in the day. And don't get me started on Hunteds. Some day I'll have to tell everyone about the character that had 6 Hunteds with a 14- modifier... that was a crazy game! But we did what we did to gain points back then.

[Duke Bushido]

16 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

On page 37 of the 6e v1 pg 37 it states that the Complications of a Template do count against the Total Matching Complications.

 

That pretty much nails it down for the official answer.

 

For what it's worth, I feel like it is the most practical, at least in terms of avoiding problematic things like "why do I have do have extra complications" or "why dont I get extra points to spend?"

 

Granted, I see no reason any group cannot swap complications, if it is agreeable to everyone.  Ultimately, some are going to get biught down or bought off completely in a long-running campaign anyway, so why not swap it one for a different one if equal value right out of the gate?

 

Again- if it is agreeable to everyone at the table, of course...

[Jason Reid]

I can't imagine having success at my table in a point buy system by packaging up something with complications but then giving the characters no compensation for those complications aside from the stuff they're already paying full price for. The math behind such a package would be obvious and my players would opt to not use them and just build their own concepts. Unless I was to use force or deception I can't see them working for me.

[Hugh Neilson]

I was envisioning this as comparable to early-edition package deals.  For example, 35 points worth of skills and abilities and 15 points of Disadvantages/Complications for a net cost of 20 points.

 

If the character can pay 20 points for the package deal, then take a further 75 points of Complications, he has received 15 more points than the character who took no package deals.

 

If he has to pay 35 points for the package deal abilities, still have 75 points of other complications and suck up another 15 points of complications, I'm with Doc D - why would he take a package deal?  He can leave off one skill (can't be a Skrull Infiltrator without 3 points of AK: Skrull Throneworld - oh dear, no package deal for me...) and, should he be so inclined, pick that missing skill up later with xp.  He could even take the Skrull Infiltrator complications - just toss them on as part of his 75 points of complications.

 

To me, they should be complications just like any other complications.

[LoneWolf]

2 hours ago, Jason Reid said:

I can't imagine having success at my table in a point buy system by packaging up something with complications but then giving the characters no compensation for those complications aside from the stuff they're already paying full price for. The math behind such a package would be obvious and my players would opt to not use them and just build their own concepts. Unless I was to use force or deception I can't see them working for me.

 

This has been my point all along.  If the complications actually reduced the cost of the template, I could see them not counting, but that is not how complications work.  Forcing a character to take extra complications is unfair.