What genre is Champions really about?

[Guest bblackmoor]

There is some heated discussion in the Code vs. Killing thread about what a "superhero" game is really about. Personally, I find that argument annoying.

 

The Champions book itself devotes several pages to the different kinds of Champions games one can play, without even leaving the metaphorical box, so I'm not sure why this would even be a bone of contention, or why anyone would claim that there's only one particular style of superhero game Champions is supposed to be. Yet, unless I have misunderstood them (which is possible) a few people have done just that.

 

If the genre conventions vary in the comicbooks (they do), and the game book acknowleges that there are different sub-genres of the superhero genre (it does), then what's the big deal? Do we really need to tell each other things like, "Your game isn't a superhero game: only my game is a superhero game. Your game is merely a story about little tin gods/vigilantes/transhumans/philosophers/super-intelligent dogs who play poker." ?

 

Can we all agree not to do that anymore? I'll agree to it right now. This is me agreeing to it.

 

[edit: corrected grammar]

[TheImperialKhan]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

There is some heated discussion in the Code vs. Killing thread about what a "superhero" game is really about. Personally, I find that argument annoying.

 

The Champions book itself devotes several pages to the different kinds of Champions games one can play, without even leaving the metaphorical box, so I'm not sure why this would even be a bone of contention, or why anyone would claim that there's only one particular style of superhero game Champions is supposed to be. Yet, unless I have misunderstood them (which is possible) a few people have done just that.

 

If the genre conventions vary in the comicbooks (they do), and the game book acknowleges that there are different sub-genres of the superhero genre (it does), then what's the big deal? Do we really need to tell each other things like, "Your game isn't a superhero game: only my game is a superhero game. Your game is merely a story about little tin gods/vigilantes/transhumans/philosophers/super-intelligent dogs who play poker." ?

 

Can we all agree not to do that anymore? I'll agree to it right now. This is me agreeing to it.

 

[edit: corrected grammar]

 

The way I see it if the hero is running around in a skintight costume (even if he wears a trenchcoat over it) or the villian is and they have "Powers and Abilities Beyond Those of Mortal Men" as shown in the comics - then it's a Superhero game.

 

Note the use of the word "Hero" not PC or Story Protagonist. That means a person who is genuinelly making the world a better place and yes that can mean killing the villian. Example: As much as I think the Joker is a great villian I truly believe that Batman should have killed him long ago and by refusing to he is partly responsible for every murder the Joker has committed. That is a case where killing the villian is in fact the lesser by far of the two evils. Keep in mind though that this is only after repeated failures to: a.) hold the Joker and b.) rehabilitate him.

 

Does this make the CvK any less valid? Hell no! The decision to kill the villian or let him die rather than save him is a very dificult one and that is as it should be. But there are times when the correct call is death and that doesn't make the Hero any less of a Hero for having made it.

 

In my novel The Frigate Captain when the hero Captain Sinclair found his lady Miss Tara Mason about to be gang-raped, he promptly shot dead two of the rapists and his companions Colonel Therrien and Ian MacGregor shot two more. When they reached Tara's side he curtly ordered his friends to "Kill them all." regarding the remaining four. It did not make him any less the hero for having done so or them for obeying the command.

 

That's my take on it.

 

BTW, bblackmoor, I love your sig and avatar. It pretty much says it all as far as I'm concerned.

[JMcL63]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

There is some heated discussion in the Code vs. Killing thread about what a "superhero" game is really about. Personally, I find that argument annoying.

 

The Champions book itself devotes several pages to the different kinds of Champions games one can play, without even leaving the metaphorical box, so I'm not sure why this would even be a bone of contention, or why anyone would claim that there's only one particular style of superhero game Champions is supposed to be. Yet, unless I have misunderstood them (which is possible) a few people have done just that.

 

If the genre conventions vary in the comicbooks (they do), and the game book acknowleges that there are different sub-genres of the superhero genre (it does), then what's the big deal? Do we really need to tell each other things like, "Your game isn't a superhero game: only my game is a superhero game. Your game is merely a story about little tin gods/vigilantes/transhumans/philosophers/super-intelligent dogs who play poker." ?

 

Can we all agree not to do that anymore? I'll agree to it right now. This is me agreeing to it.

 

[edit: corrected grammar]

Heh. I've been considering going into minor rant mode on precisely this aspect of said debate bblackmoor (especially since I'm one who has been told that his favourite PC is not a superhero really). I think you have covered pretty much all the bases on why this attitude is so... unpleasant. So your proposition has my vote, that's for sure.

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Superhero does convey a certain definition. If you say "Superhero" to 5 different people you'll likely get 5 slightly different, but similar images forming in their minds. Sort of like you said "Car". Superhuman powers, trying to do the right thing would be pretty standard, less univeral would be flashy costumes and code names and so on. Champions, at is core, seems to cater to the idea of the more color "shallow" concept of Superhero. Look at the sourcebooks, after all. You can do other things with it and still be in the superhero genre, of couse, but after a point you aren't playing superheroes anymore. Where that point is varies for different people that's all the come up.

 

I feel that when you've thrown out 90% of the genre conventions and there is no heroism you're aren't playing a superhero game/pc/npc anymore. What are you playing can be highly entertaining and interesting though. I've been running Aberrant for years and I'm starting a Transhuman Space game. But they aren't Superhero game, but setting and genres all their own. I don't seen why that's an insult.

 

Heck, I've had what I consider a Superhero to be called shallow, childish, a cariacture and morally weak during this thing so its been pretty even on both "sides" I think.

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

In other words, lets be fair here. There's been more than a little "What? You play a mere four color game? How could you be simpleminded?" action going on too. Neither side is the innocent party being picked on.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Note the use of the word "Hero" not PC or Story Protagonist. That means a person who is genuinelly making the world a better place and yes that can mean killing the villian. Example: As much as I think the Joker is a great villian I truly believe that Batman should have killed him long ago and by refusing to he is partly responsible for every murder the Joker has committed.

 

Okay, I can accept that: I am sure there are superheroes who would sincerely hold that conviction. Just for a moment, though, think about it another way:

 

There are superheroes who see their actions not only in terms of immediate consequences, but in how those actions will inspire or influence others. It's my opinion that at least part of the "boy scout" routine that Superman is so famous for is at least partly because he is aware that if he does flout the law, or puts himself in the position of judge, jury, and executioner, that other supers -- perhaps ones not quite so powerful as Superman, and who are in greater danger than he is, and thus may suffer greater temptation to cut corners -- might follow his example.

 

That's a really long sentence.

 

What I am saying is that some superheroes may consider the "greater good" to be working within the system, because they think the evil caused by the Joker is less damaging than the damage which would be caused if superheroes as a whole ceased to respect the laws and morals of society.

 

I am not saying that all supers do or should think this way, but I do think it's a valid superheroic point of view.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

There's been more than a little "What? You play a mere four color game? How could you be simpleminded?" action going on too.

 

I won't dispute that. Can we agree it's poor form, regardless of which sub-genres are being discussed?

[RDU Neil]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Should I just cut and paste my long winded rants over here now?

 

I don't really want to rewrite all that... really I don't...

[JMcL63]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

In other words' date=' lets be fair here. There's been more than a little "What? You play a mere four color game? How could you be simpleminded?" action going on too. Neither side is the innocent party being picked on.[/quote']True, but I will repeat here what I have consistently said on the other thread: the point at issue is and has never been to ridicule classic 4-colour; rather it has been to point out that the genre is now, and long has been wider than that; and to get people to stop asserting an objectivity to their tastes and opinions which has no foundation in reality. If people putting forward their tastes and opinions about these alternative aspects of the genre got a bit nippy, then I have to say that this is hardly surprising, given the obdurate stonewalling in the face of both evidence and repeated pleas for tolerance of diversity based on this evidence. That's it really.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Can we just start fresh, then? Common ground? Mutual respect? All the colors of the rainbow? A thousand points of light?

 

Please?

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

I honestly don't think so. We geeks are feirce about who's pet obsession is better.

[JMcL63]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

I honestly don't think so. We geeks are feirce about who's pet obsession is better.

That's not good enough nexus. There have been plenty of calls to respect other people's defintion of hero' date=' and even those who have cast slurs on classic 4-colour have been willing to step back and agree that taste and personal opinion is just that. Why is it that the 4-colour crew just won't do this? Why? No-one's asking you to change your games. No one's asking you to redefine your own heroes. All that is being asked is that you recognise that the genre has changed in the past generation, to accept that, and to stop telling people whose tastes and games reflect those changes that they have somehow stepped outside of the box. We'll all happily accept that we're not in [i']your[/i] box anymore, but why oh why must you insist that we have gone somewhere completely different just because we like the post 4-colour stuff? Hmm?

[Theron]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Geek will eat itself.

 

One-true-way-ism has been an unfortunate byblow of RPGs since the earliest home-brews. As the rules became more sophisticated and people gravitated towards fandom of a particular system, system snobbery gave way to genre snobbery.

 

Such snobbery is bad form, though, IMHO.

[TheImperialKhan]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Okay, I can accept that: I am sure there are superheroes who would sincerely hold that conviction. Just for a moment, though, think about it another way:

 

There are superheroes who see their actions not only in terms of immediate consequences, but in how those actions will inspire or influence others. It's my opinion that at least part of the "boy scout" routine that Superman is so famous for is at least partly because he is aware that if he does flout the law, or puts himself in the position of judge, jury, and executioner, that other supers -- perhaps ones not quite so powerful as Superman, and who are in greater danger than he is, and thus may suffer greater temptation to cut corners -- might follow his example.

 

That's a really long sentence.

 

What I am saying is that some superheroes may consider the "greater good" to be working within the system, because they think the evil caused by the Joker is less damaging than the damage which would be caused if superheroes as a whole ceased to respect the laws and morals of society.

 

I am not saying that all supers do or should think this way, but I do think it's a valid superheroic point of view.

 

Absolutely. It's very valid. But by the same token what does such a hero do when the consequences of locking the villian up in what amounts to a sieve from which he keeps escaping to kill again come up and bite him on the ass?

 

I think that having face this kind of moral quandry is what makes the genre interesting and the decision a character makes regarding them helps the player examine his own attitudes and preconceptions, learning a bit more about himself in the long run.

[Acroyear]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

There is some heated discussion in the Code vs. Killing thread about what a "superhero" game is really about. Personally' date=' I find that argument annoying.[/quote']

 

lol. I knew that would happen. Happens every time. Remember when all those people flipped out because some guys around here said their heroes would happily bump off the members of CLOWN? Hell, one guy who I won't name went through and edited a ton of his posts on the entire board with like "I hate you all! I'm leaving" or something totally out of whack like that and then disappeared. The entire basis for flipping out: "but you're HEROES!"

 

Someone probably tried to come along and sling all kinds of terms. "No, you're super protagonists. He's an anti hero. And that guy is really more like a super selfish everyman." Puhleeez.

 

Superheroes are a genre term for people who dress up in costumes (usually), may or may not have super powers, and go on adventures while being the basic "good guys" in the equation/opposing the supervillains/threat.

 

Meriam Webster says a superhero is: a fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers; also : an exceptionally skillful or successful person

 

That's it.

 

Anyone who tries to impose their little bubble definition on someone else is a jerk and an idiot. You can quote me on that. I mean it 100%. Any post where someone tries to tell someone else they are wrong not playing milk drinking, grin wearing guys who help ladies across the street all day... just reply with "Acroyear says you're a jerk and an idiot. He means it, too."

 

Now, some campaigns focus on narrower time periods/themes of the overall genre, so you may or may not be a "superhero" in that game... similarly, the guys in that game might be nothing more than fairy princesses in your own... but if you're not in that game nobody really gives a flying fig.

 

"Only mutants can be superheroes... guys who use magic are wizards and they can be white wizards or black wizards. Guys with gadgets... they're just thugs. Morble morble morble." It's silly.

 

And I say that, currently, having a very strong preference for the silver age/four color style.

[RDU Neil]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

That's not good enough nexus. There have been plenty of calls to respect other people's defintion of hero' date=' and even those who have cast slurs on classic 4-colour have been willing to step back and agree that taste and personal opinion is just that. Why is it that the 4-colour crew just won't do this? Why? No-one's asking you to change your games. No one's asking you to redefine your own heroes. All that is being asked is that you recognise that the genre has changed in the past generation, to accept that, and to stop telling people whose tastes and games reflect those changes that they have somehow stepped outside of the box. We'll all happily accept that we're not in [i']your[/i] box anymore, but why oh why must you insist that we have gone somewhere completely different just because we like the post 4-colour stuff? Hmm?

 

At the risk of turning things up a notch and taking them beyond civility, here's my take on this.

 

I have experienced this same "absolutism" on the part of four color adherents (for lack of a better term) myself... and it surprised me. While there is a great deal of obsession with a variety of pop culture and artistic expression (from tv shows to classical music, whatever) I've only really encountered this almost religious fanaticism with the "Four Color Superhero Genre Adherents" whether gamers or just comic fans. It strikes me as an almost fanatical personal investment of self-worth into the concept of "the stalwart, upstanding, forthright iconical four color hero." Not just a preference... almost a personal faith in the "rightness" of that concept.

 

As with any true faith, it leaves no place for unbelievers. (Faith, as a concept, is so intellectually corrupt, I can't even go there, personally...)

 

Now, one can surmise all kinds of pop psycho-babble as to why they feel this way, but I had a friend who explained his obsession to me. To him, it was his inspiration and hope. He'd had a crap childhood, dysfunctional in almost all the ways that word can be used... and found solace in comics. Here was a place where that kind of bad shit didn't happen, where good was rewarded, where innocents were protected and evil vanquished. He had to believe that this was "the way things should be" because reality was unbearable. As an adult, those emotional attachments were still very strong, if tempered by reality some... and his passions still lay in creating such a world through RPGs, and he couldn't ever do superheroes differently.

 

His take on this... made sense to me... likely doesn't apply to anyone else... but it's one reason why the four-color adherents might be less flexible than others.

 

FWIW

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

(sigh)

 

[Evil Toki]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Why can't we be friends?

[GestaltBennie]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Geek will eat itself.

 

One-true-way-ism has been an unfortunate byblow of RPGs since the earliest home-brews. As the rules became more sophisticated and people gravitated towards fandom of a particular system, system snobbery gave way to genre snobbery.

 

Such snobbery is bad form, though, IMHO.

 

Absolutely.

 

The Hero System is a toolkit. Initially, Champions reflected the style of the 1970s Marvel team books that George MacDonald and his friends loved (X-Men, Avengers, Defenders) and will always have trace elements of that style imbedded in the system. But it's very easy to tweak Champions to reflect a lot of widely variant genre styles, and that's one of the great things about the system.

 

Scott Bennie

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

but I had a friend who explained his obsession to me. To him' date=' it was his inspiration and hope. [/quote']

 

That puts things nicely, and describes me and my attitude well. I relaized this when thinking about the punisher. I hate the comic character, but put alone in an action movie, it doesn't bug me at all, even if the character is absolutely no different, just a different setting. For me once the tights go on the rules change; and what you said is likely a large part of that for me. Thank you for expressing it.

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

That's not good enough nexus. There have been plenty of calls to respect other people's defintion of hero' date=' and even those who have cast slurs on classic 4-colour have been willing to step back and agree that taste and personal opinion is just that. Why is it that the 4-colour crew just won't do this? Why? No-one's asking you to change your games. No one's asking you to redefine your own heroes. All that is being asked is that you recognise that the genre has changed in the past generation, to accept that, and to stop telling people whose tastes and games reflect those changes that they have somehow stepped outside of the box. We'll all happily accept that we're not in [i']your[/i] box anymore, but why oh why must you insist that we have gone somewhere completely different just because we like the post 4-colour stuff? Hmm?

 

The last I checked I haven't been. And there has been a few "slips" from both sides. I think they're pretty much inevitable. They're almost unconsious. Both sides, no matter how much they smile and make nice, secretly think the other side is somewhat silly for liking what they like. Its just human nature, I suppose.

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

At the risk of turning things up a notch and taking them beyond civility, here's my take on this.

 

I have experienced this same "absolutism" on the part of four color adherents (for lack of a better term) myself... and it surprised me. While there is a great deal of obsession with a variety of pop culture and artistic expression (from tv shows to classical music, whatever) I've only really encountered this almost religious fanaticism with the "Four Color Superhero Genre Adherents" whether gamers or just comic fans. It strikes me as an almost fanatical personal investment of self-worth into the concept of "the stalwart, upstanding, forthright iconical four color hero." Not just a preference... almost a personal faith in the "rightness" of that concept.

 

As with any true faith, it leaves no place for unbelievers. (Faith, as a concept, is so intellectually corrupt, I can't even go there, personally...)

 

Now, one can surmise all kinds of pop psycho-babble as to why they feel this way, but I had a friend who explained his obsession to me. To him, it was his inspiration and hope. He'd had a crap childhood, dysfunctional in almost all the ways that word can be used... and found solace in comics. Here was a place where that kind of bad shit didn't happen, where good was rewarded, where innocents were protected and evil vanquished. He had to believe that this was "the way things should be" because reality was unbearable. As an adult, those emotional attachments were still very strong, if tempered by reality some... and his passions still lay in creating such a world through RPGs, and he couldn't ever do superheroes differently.

 

His take on this... made sense to me... likely doesn't apply to anyone else... but it's one reason why the four-color adherents might be less flexible than others.

 

FWIW

 

I think its like any two groups really. I would claim to have met many more "fanatical" aderents to the "Gritty/Realistic/Iron Age style is so much totally better than that four color tripe" school of thought. I've gotten rather long and pointed lectures about how "childish' was for reading and enjoying and how superior it was. The characters are silly, the situations irrealistic, etc etc... Often from people that hadn't cracked a comic outside of Stormwatch in 5 years. Any attempt to explain or show examples was ignored or dismissed out of hand.

 

I'm sure that's not the typical way these fans behave or even the majority of them. Most of them will likely claim they've never met anyone like in their circle. The reason is simple. If you are the target of it, you see it more. Its the loudmouths that draw all the attention and color peoples opinions of a group.

[Enforcer84]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Wow.

I really have nothing to add, but its a surprise that this kind of thing can cause such ill will.

[nexus]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

Wow.

I really have nothing to add, but its a surprise that this kind of thing can cause such ill will.

 

Its the dark and seamy underbelly of the Hero Dicussion boards. A turgid (that's just a fun word) roiling ocean of hatred and malice.

[RDU Neil]

Re: What genre is Champions really about?

 

And in this corner, supporting my point...

 

A turgid (that's just a fun word) roiling ocean of hatred and malice.