350 - Does it cause "too much" diversity?

[CrosshairCollie]

Points, Counterpoints.

 

So far, I like 350. I was in a campaign ... heck, several really ... based on 250, 4th Ed. NOBODY had inherent, full-time powers. Everybody was Focussed or Hero-IDed, because you had to shave those points if you wanted to have more than six points of Background/Noncombat Skills. This was fine for people who just like playing combat wombats, but I've always had a flare for scientists, which takes a fair chunk more. This also frees up some points for appropriate perks and Senses and other things that lots of people *should* have had, but just couldn't squeeze in.

 

At 350, I recommend (I'm loosening up on 'hard requirements' for characters) 10 percent of the points to be spent on non-combat skills/perks/talents. Despite what one nimrod seems to think, Breakfall is not a noncombat skill, but that's another story.

 

Another thing to consider, though ... if someone can slap their entire character together on 250 points, let him. If he takes more than 50 points of Disads, write the excess on his sheet as 'Mystery Powers' and drop them on him when you come up with something good.

 

But, above all, make people stay in concept! In almost any point-based system, it's possible to create a character who can do anything ("What's your guy do?" "He's a Brick/Speedster/Martial Artist/Psychic/Blaster/Mystic!" "You have a Variable Power Pool, don't you?"), that's not likely to be your concept. Yes, Captain America might be better off in many cases if he carried around a laser rifle, but then it wouldn't be Cap, it'd be some guy with a shield and laser rifle.

 

Hmm ... something else that occurs to me is that Jacks Of All Trades, as it were, are the proverbial 'Masters of None' as well. Someone who focusses on particular traits/abilities/techniques will be better at them than a flyby-night wannabe. Furthermore, in honor of what happened in my first Champions campaign, there's always 'The Set Syndrome'. Set was a brick ... at first ... eventually, he worked his way up to a whopping 32 or so Dex. So he was really strong, really tough, and really *fast* ... and being the most dangerous sucka on the team, he invariably got mass-targetted and flattened first by everything the opposition could muster, usually in a Flash or Entangle followed by a gigantic Coordinated Attack.

[Trebuchet]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

I have one player for example that is really bad about this. I dont know why, but he just continues to come up with degenerate power-mongering characters that are really nothing more than exploits of broken rules or an attempt to push a questionable rule to the point of breaking. Background? Nope. Concept? Dude, what do you mean concept, I told you he does 500 damage each action on average! Power origin? Woke up like that one day. If he does come up with some background, or even a detail such as, oh I dont know, a REAL NAME, you can be sure it centeres around a lame pun or play on words. He finds a rule or mechanic that seems exploitable, then makes a character whose sole purpose in life is to apply the rules dodge in some fashion. In HEROs, he is most interested in any power that has a stop or yield sign next to it. He wants concepts that basically just semi-validate a lot of damage dealing. Its unfortunate, but there you go.

 

You can be sure that with 350 points, he will not hand in a character with 50 points of 'fluff' skills. If he has skills at all, they'll be Acrobatics, Breakfall, and/or Stealth, you can be sure. Every last ounce of pointage will be squeezed into a cup and put into a blender with a landmine. Damage will be of primary concern. With a group full of players like this, 350 wouldnt work at all unless I wanted to play a SLUGATHON and they wouldnt have fun at 250 (not enough damage after all).

 

Unless this guy is the only player whose house you can play in, I'd just tell him to hit the road. It's obvious he has no concern at all for his fellow players. Players like that lessen the enjoyment of everybody.

 

I believe it is possible to have lots of fun with almost any point total. If the players remember that "normals" have stats of 8, a CV of 2 to 4, and a point total of 25-35 points, 250 or 350 points is rather powerful. I still find it useful in my game to occasionally throw agents, thugs or soldiers against the characters. Once your 250 point martial artist has personally stomped 20 members of the Crips street gang into the pavement with his bare hands, he won't feel underpowered. (In a recent game I ran, one of our team's martial artists singlehandedly defeated a group of 100 heavily armed neo-Nazis attempting a coup in Austria. Since he took care to always be amongst them, they couldn't use hand grenades to get him because they'd kill their comrades. After he'd knocked out about 30 of them without being touched, the rest broke and ran. It was awesome.)

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

I have one player for example that is really bad about this. I dont know why, but he just continues to come up with degenerate power-mongering characters that are really nothing more than exploits of broken rules or an attempt to push a questionable rule to the point of breaking. Background? Nope. Concept? Dude, what do you mean concept, I told you he does 500 damage each action on average! Power origin? Woke up like that one day. If he does come up with some background, or even a detail such as, oh I dont know, a REAL NAME, you can be sure it centeres around a lame pun or play on words. He finds a rule or mechanic that seems exploitable, then makes a character whose sole purpose in life is to apply the rules dodge in some fashion. In HEROs, he is most interested in any power that has a stop or yield sign next to it. He wants concepts that basically just semi-validate a lot of damage dealing. Its unfortunate, but there you go.

 

You can be sure that with 350 points, he will not hand in a character with 50 points of 'fluff' skills. If he has skills at all, they'll be Acrobatics, Breakfall, and/or Stealth, you can be sure. Every last ounce of pointage will be squeezed into a cup and put into a blender with a landmine. Damage will be of primary concern.

 

I'm with Trebuchet on this one. Dump the guy. An @$$hole like that can make any game a problem, no matter what system.

 

Putting up with that type is like living in America with a right wing, dogmatic, arrogant and anti-civil rights administration in the White House. I mean... that would be miserable... right?

 

No way I'd put up with that kind of crap.

[BarryB]

My group converted experienced 4th edition characters based on 250 to 5th edition characters by simply giving everyone 100 points. Since these were not the first characters we'd ever made, all of us had pretty powerful characters in mind.

 

We were already pretty differentiated to start with, but the extra 100 points allowed us to really make characters that lived up to some of our powerful expectations. Our speedster is now a real speedster (Ah, megascale!), for example.

 

Of course, each of us, with the possible exception of the brick, wishes we had another 100 - 200 points. Since our group enjoys character growth and development, this gives us a *lot* of room for growth and development.

[Spyritwind]

350 is beautiful. No more spending hours shaving points and nearly all characters having OIHID, or FOCI. At 350 the character becomes a well rounded (within concept) and fleshed out begining, or moderately powered character.

 

Of course 350 points can be abused by players, but then again so can 250. The problem isn't the points, but the players and or the GM.

 

Part of the problem might be thinking of special powers or tricks for the character. Most of us have spent so many years just trying to squeeze out the most basic charater concept because 250 was not enough points that our brains have trouble inventing things like "brick tricks" because they were never much of an option before. Who could afford them?

 

If your players look alike at 350 then I'd sit down with all of them and work on some things. There are plenty of advantages to differintiate EB's. The look and feel of the powers can help as well. Two characters with EB's can still use them a bit differently. One may have two more dice than the other and not have flight to become a weapons platform. The other might be more agile with flight and be more of a mobile straffing unit.

 

Don't let everyone purchase flash defense, power defense, etc. Okay, if they have a danger room to practice in they could all end up with acrobatics and if they have the skills and facilities to do so they could all end up with flash defense lensed, but power defense is harder to come by.

 

As other's have pointed out fleshing out background can make a big difference as well.

 

350 is only too many points if not used in certain ways. If it's only used to build your character verticaly instead of horizontaly then it can be a problem. To me bricks pose the biggest threat in this regard, but not limited to that character type. With the additional 100 points a brick 'could' purchase an additional 40 Strength with Reduced END, an additional 10 Constitution, an additional 5 Body and an additional 10 Pd & 10 Ed. Scary!

 

Just use the veto stamp.

[Killer Shrike]

RE: Neil, Trebuchet:

 

You guys dont know the half of it. On top of his lack of characterization and role playing acumen, he also is renowned for his accidental PC-killing, and general team-screwing.

 

He's such a bullet head, he often takes out downed comrades, or downs them himself in the first place with friendly fire. When he isnt doing that, he's pissing off or killing or both the wrong NPC, making a complete hash out of whatever plan the party has cooked up, or otherwise adding pure random Chaos into any situation.

 

This is regardless of character or system mind you. His trademark manuever was breaking a fully charged staff of power in the middle of a climactic battle, killing half of the party flat out. Only 1 other PC fell in that entire battle, and sadly thier corpse was in the blast radius and subsequently vaporized along with the others. It wasnt even merely a contributing factor, all of the characters that died were at or near full hitpoints, and had not yet begun to run on fumes resource wise. He just cut straight to the breaking-of-the-staff-of-power bit after the parties halfling thief got zapped by a good old D&D save or die effect. His character got gated to another plane, and the survivors basically had to cut and run. This was the entire climactic battle of a year long campaign mind you. All told, the player was responsible for the death of 5 party members over the course of the campaign, one PC of which he killed something like 3 times (and subsequently resurrected) with area of affect spells, destroying almost all of his items in the process due to failed saves.

 

Yeah, Im not kidding. :rolleyes:

 

Thats just a notable example. The list of just random, incomprehensible things that he has done in various games with various characters to the detriment of the party is really practically endless.

 

 

In fact this past week he couldnt make it, and about midway thru the game 1 of the players commented on the fact that he couldnt believe how smooth the game was going causing the rest of the players to all look at each other and laugh, because they simultaneously realized it was due to his absense.

 

Why do I still let him play? Because, believe it or not he ADDS fun to the game. Not to encourage his more excessive monkey-wrenching, but some of it is really really funny outside of the game. He so out of touch with common sense that the crap he does and the situations that arise are hysterically funny. You are hating him in-character and rolling on the floor in real life. Plus, he's good people when he isnt aggravating the hell out of you.

 

As a GM, I can always relax a bit on the villains when he's in the game; he can be counted on to do something stupid that will give me all the plot hooks I need to drive an entire session. Give him enough rope, and he reflexively makes a noose out of it and slips it on a teammate.

 

Also, he's young yet; he just turned 21 a while ago and has not yet learned restraint. There is a lot of potential there (he's a dedicated gamer, he just isnt any good at playing a role. The phrase 'good initiative, [absurdly] poor judgement' was minted to describe him), and Im foolishly determined to shape him into a better player. Thats why.

[Trebuchet]

I can only admire your patience (and even more so the patience of your players). After such a player had killed my second character, my new characters would all be built with the sole purpose of killing his characters. I'd shove him off every high cliff we came near, or cut his throat in his sleep. (Perhaps an entire clan of assassins devoted to avenging a character slain by this imbecile...)

 

You do realize, KS, that there is also a good chance he will never improve? Sometimes a sow's ear remains so.

[Storn]

Kill shrike... have you tried talking to him outside of the game? Point out some of the role-playing the others are trying to accomplish? And listen to him about what he wants as a player.

 

Give him Robin Laws book. Tell him to read it and then go out for coffee and discuss what he has read. It might facilitate the process a bit.

 

Perhaps talk in terms of role playing creation being a bit like a TV show (what's his favorite?) and/or comic book. Going around wiping out 1/2 the main cast is not usually done in a TV show.

 

Back to the topic at hand; I think 350 has to be watched carefully by the GM. 90 pts into STR, some good movement powers and you've got a real powerhouse on your hands for the super battleground. But active pt limits that are general (can go over with GM approval for that Mass Teleport that the whole team uses and is really a plot creator power instead of plot destroyer), I think forces the players to come under a certain level. I would suggest 70 active pts.

 

But I think 350 CAN be done. Like Neil said, we are on 300 starting pts and that ain't bad. I think for most of my concepts, I can get the gist of the character for 300 pts. And my main, first character is over 500 and I'm still scrambling for points, because his concept just keeps getting larger and larger.

[Blue]

Shrike, if you convert him there could be a sainthood in it for you. Make copious notes and write a book on converting powergamers to civilized players.

 

The part about motivation does remind me of an article though. Jeff Freeman on RPGnet used to write some incredibly sarcastic, funny columns. http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/ackjun98.html

[Peregrine]

From HS5e, p. 15

Standard Superheroic Character Guidelines

Base Points: 200

Max Disad Points: 150

Total Points: 350

Char Ranges: 10-40 (some exceptions, particularly STR)

SPD Ranges: 3-10

CV Ranges: 7-13

DC Ranges: 6-14

Active Points Ranges: 40-80

Skill Points Ranges: 25-80

Skill Roll Ranges: 11-15-

DEF/rDEF: 20/10

 

Within those ranges, 350 points allows for a character who is more than a 'one-trick pony', who is capable both in and out of combat, who can explore some of the nuances of their archetype from the beginning of the campaign. All of this requires GM/player interaction before and/or during character generation. You can't let the players generate their characters 'in a vacuum', so to speak, and expect a balanced (vis-a-vis each other, or the campaign world) set of player characters, no matter what point totals you use.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Blue

Shrike, if you convert him there could be a sainthood in it for you. Make copious notes and write a book on converting powergamers to civilized players.

I've made something of a personal crusade along these lines, bringing a good number of players into the fold of actual 'role' players as opposed to dice rollers.

 

I dont mind if someone is a powergamer, so long as they are also a ROLE player. It takes all types to make a (imagined fantasy) world go around afterall.

 

Ergo, a player that has a character concept that is solid and detailed, and then stats the character with some powers that may be abusive BUT FIT THE CHARACTERS SFX and BACKGROUND will not earn my veto power if their character is legal or in case of GMs option type power constructs is self-limiting in some way that constrains them. However a player that takes a collection of abiities and splices them together (overpowered or not), and then kind of splices a half-assed character concept onto that will earn my veto power immediately. I routinely kick back entire characters whether they are balanced/legal or not if I feel that the character as a whole is lacking substance.

 

"Go back to the begining, come up with a background with some level of plausibility, and give him/her any appropriate skills, perks, and talents to match the characters history. Then, after you have spent those points on background flavor and solidly grounding the character, define a special effect(s) for your superhuman abilities, set your characteristics, and finally construct powers that are in some way validated by your special effect. Tweak as necessary after the fact to result in a polished well rounded character.", or words to that effect are my mantra on HEROs character creation.

 

 

I'm not Father Joe by any means however; I've kicked a LOT of players in my day. If they dont contribute to the group or have the potential to grow into a contributing role, then out they go, in mid session if necessary.

 

 

The part about motivation does remind me of an article though. Jeff Freeman on RPGnet used to write some incredibly sarcastic, funny columns. http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/ackjun98.html

 

Heh. Thats amusing

 

As it happens my name is Ed, like the GM in the parable. I've been there, done that. It can be a real chore dealing with die-headed munchkins like that. If they are that far gone, I usually dont even get that far with them. It's "sorry, I dont think our playing styles mesh. Buh-bye."

[Celtic Cowboy]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike I have one player for example that is really bad about this. I dont know why, but he just continues to come up with degenerate power-mongering characters that are really nothing more than exploits of broken rules or an attempt to push a questionable rule to the point of breaking. [/b]

 

Sounds like he takes a commonly used approach to playing Magic:TG and uses it for rpgs. Yikes. One of our group comes up with some twisted decks from time to time, I think I'd freak if he ever pulled that on a character though.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Trebuchet

I can only admire your patience (and even more so the patience of your players). After such a player had killed my second character, my new characters would all be built with the sole purpose of killing his characters. I'd shove him off every high cliff we came near, or cut his throat in his sleep. (Perhaps an entire clan of assassins devoted to avenging a character slain by this imbecile...)

 

See, heres the thing, I as the GM would act to prevent the classic 'Avenging Avatar' situation from developing. You would have to validate to me WHY your new character was out to get the character that killed off your old character, in game. Are you a close relative, seeking revenge, a law enforcement officer of some sort, or (my favorite) play off of the PC killer's background to be someone from his past that has finally tracked him down, often with some dark secret to reveal which will make the other PCs question thier allegiance with him. Occasionally, if you thirst for vengeance and I feel its best to let you get it out of your system and are responsible enough to handle it, I might even let you play the PC-Killers Hunted for a session if he has one (and if you do a good job, perhaps thereafter within the lifespan of the campaign), or let you design a Hunted (and subsequently play them) that I can give him as part of a periodic Disadvantages reevaluation ("Hmm....well Mr. PC-Killer, your PsyLim Code of the Hero isnt what it used to be apparantly, so we'll just subtract that off the character sheet and replace it with Reputation: Unstable and dangerous to be around, and a 10 point Mystery Disadvantage which will surely haunt you later, with interest compounded daily {trademark GMs smirk}").

 

You do realize, KS, that there is also a good chance he will never improve? Sometimes a sow's ear remains so.

Yes, I realize. Ive actually lost a couple of other players who just couldnt stand to play with him. They were inconsistent players, whereas he is extremely consistent, and the bulk of the players, when spoken to independently, did not want to see him put out of the group.

 

If he doesnt ever improve, he'll get culled. In the meantime, he's good for laughs and if nothing else, makes for memorable games. People are still talking about games from two years ago because the fallout from this players was so major or amusing that those sessions just stick in your memory indelibly.

 

I talk with the player regularly. He knows he's not a good roleplayer. All the other players rag him constantly. Its kind of become a running joke. He's trying to improve, but unfortunately he really just isnt any good at it. I think he has trouble conceptualizing, or projecting his thought patterns into a differing mindset, which are both important qualities of a roleplayer. He also is not goal or method oriented, being more of a reaction oriented sort. His mind is better at dealing with artificial structures and how they interrelate. For example, he gave up an EE major because he couldnt handle the programming aspects of the course load among other things, and switched to Economics, which is all about understanding and manipulating an artificial structure and reacting with the day to day events of it all.

 

Programming does rely on artificial structures, but you have to be able to conceptualize and project to program towards something. It requires an end goal and a consisent methodology. Making a character in many systems is similar to making a small application that inherits from base classes and can have some small amount of customization override code, but is prohibited from defining new objects or interfaces itself, particularly a HEROs character. He understands the rules system and he is able to manipulate it, but he does so to make characters that just exploit those rules. He doesnt conceptualize an end result which is a virtual person and then define that via the rules system, instead he identifies loopholes and exploitations in the rules system and then implements them with only the veneer of of a virtual person.

 

Instead of Warp {background,motivation,personality,some powers}, you have Warp {Was born and has powers, kill stuff, easily annoyed casual killer, RKA NND does Body 0 END Contin Uncontrolled usable Desolid, Desolid, Spatial Awareness Targeting, Teleport}.

[Prodical]

350 here I come

 

350 it is.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Celtic Cowboy

Sounds like he takes a commonly used approach to playing Magic:TG and uses it for rpgs. Yikes. One of our group comes up with some twisted decks from time to time, I think I'd freak if he ever pulled that on a character though.

Actually, in his case, Jyhad aka Vampire the Eternal Struggle is the CCG of choice. He's also the reason Im selling off my 6000 card collection and never playing that particular game again

[Trebuchet]

If you discussed this player with your other players and they are OK with him staying, then that is a different situation. I think player compatability is the most important thing for a good game.

 

In my current 4-color superhero campaign of 12 years, I am the primary GM. I was the one who drew up the "universe" and set the initial parameters for the characters. We now have 2 other active GMs as well. I have "override" powers, but I don't make major changes in the game without first discussing them with my co-GMs. I also solicit input from both co-GMs before I make changes to my own character. If one of them doesn't really care one way or another about a proposed change I might do it, but if one REALLY disliked the change I would not do it even if I really liked the proposed change. No change to house rules is worth aggravating one of my co-GMs/players. I have enough respect for them to realize they might see something I missed. (Like when I proposed using Long Term END rules in the campaign. Oy vey!)