Schmucks?

[Gary]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Here's my 350 pt version of Lariat. Nice, clean, nothing cheesy, and with very few weaknesses and limitations. She only does 14d6 damage, but if you add Passing Strike or Charge, she can do 19d6 or 21d6 damage.

 

Lariat

Ann Bowen

 

60 Str 50

30 Dex 60

33 Con 46

10 Body 0

18 Int 8

14 Ego 8

15 Pre 5

22 Com 6

12 PD 0

12 ED 5

6 SPD 20

15 Rec -8

66 End 0

57 Stun 0

 

200 characteristics cost

 

5 Extra limbs (force tendrils)

 

15 EC force tendrils

15 12/12 force field 1/2 end

11 5" stretching 1/2 end no noncombat stretching (-1/4) limited body parts (-1/4)

15 24" leap 1/2 end (36" total)

10 missile deflection all adjacent hexes cost end (-1/2)

9 360 degree spatial awareness +3 to perception roll cost end (-1/2) range limited to stretching (-1/4) touch sense group

 

16 8/8 armor OIF costume

 

7 explosion on 60 str personal immunity on explosion X10 end cost (-4) (emergency power)

 

103 powers cost

 

Martial arts

4 Martial Strike 14d6

3 Martial Grab 70 str

3 Martial Throw 12d6 + v/5

6 2 levels with MA

 

3 Acrobatics

3 Breakfall

 

22 pts combat skills

 

10 Very Wealthy

3 PS CEO 13-

3 PS Fashion Design 13-

3 KS Business World 13-

3 KS Textiles 13-

3 Bureaucratics 12-

 

25 pts perks and noncombat skills

 

350 total points

 

Total OCV/DCV of 10 with 2 levels. 32/32 def, 20 resistent.

 

Ann Bowen is a mutant who is superstrong, agile, and fast. She has the mutant power to convert her internal str into energy tendrils that can be used for a wide variety of effects. These energy tendrils can be manipulated by her as if they were an extension of herself. She can use them to cover her body (FF), push against the ground to travel far distances (superleap), make attacks and use fine manipulation at up to 10 meters away (stretching), block attacks (missile deflection), and she can use them to "feel" around her in a 10 meter radius (spatial awareness).

 

In emergencies, she can crack these tendrils almost like a whip, causing a massive sonic boom. She rarely does this as it is extremely debilitating (40 end for the explosion, 6 end for str, and 1 end for stretching for a total of 47 end spent!) and the property damage that is certain to arise from its use. However if pressed to use the attack, she normally tries to find a way to haymaker it. (18d6 explosion under 4th edition rules, 16d6 explosion under 5th edition). She can crack her sonic boom up to 10 meters away from herself.

 

In combat, she usually uses her martial strike or grab. She can grab or strike from 10 meters away. She has also been known to use tough grabbed opponents as shields with her missile deflection.

 

Appearance:

 

She is a beautiful woman in her late 20's with shoulder length dark hair (the actress I used for her was Mitzi Kapture from the show Silk Stalkings). She usually wears a mask when she appears as Lariat to hide her secret ID.

 

Profession:

 

She is the owner and CEO of Bowen Industries, a huge conglomerate that specializes in fashion. A very lucrative part of her business is making protective clothing of a special patented nature that feels like regular clothing, but protects like kevlar.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Aid is also an attack action, so the character would have to spend 18 turns on average doing nothing but this to get maximum effect.

 

Yes, that's straight from the Apollo character in Authority; he had to fly around in full sunlight for some time to become more powerful, and could gain incredible increases in his powers that way.

 

The Aid not increasing figured characteristics isn't a problem; he can just add a slot to Aid them as well.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

No' date=' because it destroys any utility that point values have as a way to judge, roughly, the relative power levels of different characters.[/quote']

 

Point values aren't that useful as a tool to judge the power levels of characters now, which is why we also look at DCs, Dex, Speed, Active Point Totals, etc.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Here's my 350 pt version of Lariat. Nice, clean, nothing cheesy, and with very few weaknesses and limitations. She only does 14d6 damage, but if you add Passing Strike or Charge, she can do 19d6 or 21d6 damage.

SNIP

 

Nice character.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Schmucks?

 

A couple of problems with Solarian. Only Body powers can take Only Costs End to Activate. So the EC and Enhanced Senses in the EC are quasi-illegal. And Aid is an Adjustment power, so it's effect on defenses are halved. Also, Aiding a primary characteristic does not increase any of the figured characteristics based upon it.

 

Aid is also an attack action, so the character would have to spend 18 turns on average doing nothing but this to get maximum effect.

 

Still, he's a nice character who would be very playable if you got rid of the Aid multipower, the only truly abusive part about him.

 

Try Uncontrolled and Triggered on the aids.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Here's a suggestion: if it's possible for a GM to "ignore" uber-powerful villains like Dr. D, why not publish some iconic heroes at the 450, 600, and 700+ point levels, and any group that doesn't feel secure enough to have NPC heroes running around built on more points than them can just "ignore" them.

 

I wonder how steady some of these campaigns are(and how often they meet, how much xp per session) where people talk about theire 250 point or 350 point heros. It seems to me:

 

If you meet weekly, and earn 2xp per session, then after 2 years, you have gained 200 xp, giving you a 450 or 550 point PC.

If you meet twice a week, and earn 2xp per session, then after 2 years, you have gained 100 xp, giving you a 350 or 450 point PC.

If you meet once a month, and earn 2 xp per session, then after 2 years, you have gained 50 xp, giving you a 300 or 400 point PC.

 

If you meet once a month, and earn 1 xp per session--MY GOD, MAN, WHAT KIND OF SICK MASOCHIST ARE YOU?

 

 

seriously, though, my point is that power creep is inevitable, unless you just keep ending campaigns before it happens. PCs gain experience--eventually they gain enough that it just makes sense that they're far more capable than when they started.

 

there are ways to play at the higher level faster--start out at 450 or 600 or 700+ points, or award 3-5xp per session instead of 2xp per session, and award bonus xp for between session bluebooking and player contributions to the game.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Me, I'd prefer that any character I use not merely "look and feel" powerful, but actually *be* powerful.

 

Edit: *WITHOUT* mercilessly exploiting disadvantages

 

If your 350 point Superman can blow out the sun, he is powerful.

 

If you want to put limits on what legal constructs you'll permit to allow him to do that, cool. On a personal note, I do that as well. However, I wouldn't claim that it was impossible to do something in a system just because I'd set personal conditions that prevented me from doing it.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Schmucks?

 

No' date=' because it destroys any utility that point values have as a way to judge, roughly, the relative power levels of different characters.[/quote']

 

That's it? That's the reason you get so uptight about it? Because you want a power level yardstick? That's _it_?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Schmucks?

 

 

I wonder how steady some of these campaigns are(and how often they meet, how much xp per session) where people talk about theire 250 point or 350 point heros. It seems to me:

 

 

seriously, though, my point is that power creep is inevitable, unless you just keep ending campaigns before it happens. PCs gain experience--eventually they gain enough that it just makes sense that they're far more capable than when they started.

 

there are ways to play at the higher level faster--start out at 450 or 600 or 700+ points, or award 3-5xp per session instead of 2xp per session, and award bonus xp for between session bluebooking and player contributions to the game.

 

Try PBeM. Flip has been 350 (okay, now 354) points for over a year. I think over two years now.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Try PBeM. Flip has been 350 (okay' date=' now 354) points for over a year. I think over two years now.[/quote']

 

So, you wanted to play a character that would progress emotionally, but not in any physical sense?

 

If it works for you, great.

[Reneshat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

I had to push to allow my GM to allow us 300 point characters as compared to 4ed 250 point characters in the champions game we are about to start. To top it off, there is a 60 active point power limit on all offensive and defensive powers. Do I feel insecure about the fact that everyone in CU is more powerful than my character? Darn skippy I do. Actually, my character is a starting out superhero. Starting out a little weaker than others, but starting out just the same. There is some advantages to "growing into" your role as a galactic defender. I'm crossing my fingers for 5xp missions though. I don't want to remain at 300 for long.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

This really should be split into the main arguments:

 

1) Should there be powerful NPC Heros active in the Champions world?

 

My Personal Answer: Yes, just be careful not to let them take over the story.

 

2) Should PCs be allowed to start at high point totals?

 

MPA: Sure, so long as that's how the GM wants to run his world.

 

3) Is it mechanically possible to build characters who feel like their Comic Book inspirations on 350 points?

 

MPA: Yes, the designer just has to be willing to think about it, and the GM has to permit and plan for it.

 

4) Should you permit point efficient designs?

 

MPA: Within the limits set by the GM, yes. It's a matter of personal taste.

 

5) Should point totals be used to measure character power?

 

MPA: Well, they are one factor, but they're not very useful by themselves. Many official CU charaters and (especially) monsters are very weak in combat considering their point totals, and high skill characters will rarely measure up to combat optimized characters. Point totals in isolation from campaign guidelines mean very little.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Schmucks?

 

So, you wanted to play a character that would progress emotionally, but not in any physical sense?

 

If it works for you, great.

 

Who said anything about any of that?

 

We've only gone through 1.5 "adventures".

 

Nature of the beast. PBeM is sloooow.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Who said anything about any of that?

 

We've only gone through 1.5 "adventures".

 

Nature of the beast. PBeM is sloooow.

 

Uh, yeah, I guess that wouldn't fit the definition of frequent sessions

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Uh' date=' yeah, I guess that wouldn't fit the definition of frequent sessions [/quote']

 

Oh, they're frequent.

 

It just takes a while to get anything done.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

I find the "you can build so and so on x points by using points efficiently" argument to be more than a tad disingenuous. If you apply a -1\4 to -1 limitation on 40% or more of a character's points, you are in effect building a character on more points. If you use hyper-efficient power frameworks, ditto. It just sounds to me like, "if you chip off a few edges, and use some grease, you can hammer a square peg into a round hole".

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Oh, they're frequent.

 

It just takes a while to get anything done.

 

you might want to suggest upping the xp just a tad, since you have to wait so long to get them

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

I find the "you can build so and so on x points by using points efficiently" argument to be more than a tad disingenuous. If you apply a -1\4 to -1 limitation on 40% or more of a character's points' date=' you [b']are[/b] in effect building a character on more points. If you use hyper-efficient power frameworks, ditto. It just sounds to me like, "if you chip off a few edges, and use some grease, you can hammer a square peg into a round hole".

 

Limits get you a discount on powers under the rules; Defender gets a discount for his armor, and can have it taken away. Witchcraft gets a discount on her MP, EC, and VPP, is in trouble if she runs into an anti-magic field and can't quite bring out all of her spells at once. You can get rid of all power frameworks and limits if you'd like, but that would no longer be the game we are discussing here and now.

 

If you accept the use of limits and power frame works, then we're just back to discussing what is reasonable, and that depends on the campaign.

 

"We have established what kind of a woman you are. Now we're arguing over price."

[megaplayboy]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Limits get you a discount on powers under the rules; Defender gets a discount for his armor, and can have it taken away. Witchcraft gets a discount on her MP, EC, and VPP, is in trouble if she runs into an anti-magic field and can't quite bring out all of her spells at once. You can get rid of all power frameworks and limits if you'd like, but that would no longer be the game we are discussing here and now.

 

If you accept the use of limits and power frame works, then we're just back to discussing what is reasonable, and that depends on the campaign.

 

"We have established what kind of a woman you are. Now we're arguing over price."

 

fair enough--but what I'm pointing out is that it's not really a matter of building characters on X points, then, since in all circumstances where the limits don't apply, that character will effectively be more powerful than the characters built on fewer total "active points". what usually happens is you wind up with the 250 point "thor" who's no more combat effective than the 250 point "daredevil", so that all the players are mollified and no one complains about anyone being too much better than anyone else.

 

Of course, one could point out that some of the "low-end" comic book characters or their equivalents could be written up in their "self-actualized" versions at hundreds of points more than starting level. And that would be just as valid a solution as writing the more powerful concepts "down" to starting points.

[Pendaran]

Re: Schmucks?

 

what bothers me on these "I can shoehorn anything into 350 points, take gleeful pride in it, and go on and on about how I'm just fine capturing the 'core feel' of the character, and derogatorily talk about Kewl points or whatever that is" is...

 

Champions, a superhero rpg designed to let one feel like one is playing in the comics, doing the things one sees in the comics being done, doing the things those characters do, having some sense of doing so. To be able to have a player come cold into the game, and use the system as given to feel like they're approximating their favourite trope/character of choice. Not to tell that player "well, if you horribly damn mangle everything, and drastically weaken the standard stats of everything around you, and custom rule, custom rule, custom rule, and dismiss at least 1/3rd of everything the hero does as 'well, they're just the main character in their title' or 'well, their power changes all the time with different writers, it's just this core notion I've decided on that matters', you can sure play whatever concept you like!"

 

I've created 350-400 point chars, and not particularly twinked, or point hacked or whatever. There's just only a certain number of things they can do without, like for example that guy talking how he could do 300 point Iron Fist because he had a homebrew system that let him pull random powers out of his ass when needed, massively hacking apart things. Why is it that just using the system as given to create or approximate a character is somehow inferior to thoroughly min maxing and point hacking and custom building for every last dreg of power you can squeeze out of the system? What precisely as people like Worldmaker have liked to deride the notion of doing it the former way, makes one twinking and "kewl" and the other not? One way is just as desperately mangling a system for power as another.

 

The Hero rules system itself calls 350 point characters, /starting characters/, the system intends thus, to me, to have such people be types around the beginning of their careers and not, say, experienced members of the JLA, or Avengers, or higher end veteran X-Men.

 

I mean here's my question, why use Hero at all if all heroes should be able to be expressed by a flat set of stats that they never or just reaaalllly slowly advance from?

 

Why not just use something like hero quest, that indeed completely simplifies everything to a few multipurpose sets of stats that don't change much overly overtime, and you just roll against your "fill in the blank power name" here to do whatever you can get away with justifying with it.

 

As for 250 point Thor and Daredevil being equal? Man, that's not the comics. They /aren't/ equal, they don't have anything to do with each other and don't run in the same circles. The adventures someone expecting to play "Thor" and someone expecting to play "Daredevil" should rarely have anything to do with each other. It feels like the attitude here is "make the comics fit Champions" and not "make Champions fit the comics". Why is one approach better than the other particularly? In a game who's stated purpose is a superhero rpg, starting with a full comic book portrayal and making the system work for it and not the other way around is bad now?

 

It's, again, why not use hero quest? Thor will just roll his Thunder God 8 stat, and Daredevil will roll his blind ninja 8 stat for whenever anything comes up.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Schmucks?

 

They may not be equal to the challenge' date=' but that does not make them 'foolish or contemptible persons', which is what schmucks/chumps means.[/quote']

What it means to you. Words have different meanings for different people, and even for the same people in different contexts.

[Titan59]

Re: Schmucks?

 

On having really high-powered NPC superheroes in a campaign:

 

I say, why not! As long as they are kept off stage/in a different city/ nowhere near the PCs except for those special crossover issues.

 

Somebody has to be able to keep the Dr Destroyers of this world from taking it over and if your PCs are all 250-350 point starting characters its NOT going to be them at least not on a regular basis unless there's something very strange going on with your house rules. Of course there will be the issue where Destroyer has captured his arch-foes, and put them in the death trap and your poor underpowered players are going to have to sneak into Chez Destroyer and save the day. That will be a day when your players are very, very scared. Which is no bad thing.

 

I've been involved in a multi-GM Champs game thats been on the go for over 20 years now and there's never been a problem with having big NPC super-teams existing-these were sometimes even teams of retired gross PC's. I think its who your players face on the day that counts. You can always find reasons for not having them bailed out by the local equivalent of the JLA/Avengers/whatever but it does at least make sense to have such a team be there. (Unless, of course, you're players are that local equivalent!)

[Katherine]

Re: Schmucks?

 

I suppose its possible, but I can't think of anyone I know off hand that wouldn't be insulted by being called a schmuck, a jobber, or any of the other titles I've seen lobbed at 350 point characters.

 

The big so called issue here seems to be there are a few ways of handling things. One side has a problem with the way the other side does things, some on either side can't seem to accept that someone else might do things differently than them and desperately needs to be right because the other side is having "Wrong Bad Fun" . Both sides have displayed these attitudes but I have seen it more from one side than the other, to be frank. Its almost political.

 

Points really aren't that great a measure for relative character power. Two characters can be made up on the same amount of points and be very different in capability in different areas depending on focus. I'm practically a newb and I've seen than. Everyone talks about "point efficency" and that can have a MAJOR effect. Is there a point where efficency becomes "cheese". Yes, but its different for every single player in Champions. YOUR particular line in the sand is not the Universal One. Point totals are a good guideline but you have to look at entire characters before fully judging their "power level". Just look at the reaction Pinnacle got when I posted her. She was 350 (375 with exp) and I got a complaint that she was too powerful because she could with effort throw 25d6 attack. She wasn't particularly tweaked or no House Rules were used in her construction. She just set off one person particular cheese sensor.

 

The whole character adaptations thing I just don't get. Comic characters are different from rpg characters. Comic characters have writers not players and are heavily controlled by author fiat. Narrative games like Heroquest emulate that with a looser style than Hero. I don't think you have to get every niggling thing you ever saw a character do down cold to have an accurate and playable adaptation (Note I use the world adaptation, not conversion. The character has been adapted to fit the new medium like how comic characters are ususally "depowered" when they move from comics to television). Sometimes character in comics, novels, etc do things just to preserve the plot and they lose that ability the instant the writer changes or the story ends.

 

To answer a question posed, though I favor a more narrative style to things, I use Hero because I like having specifity when I need it. The more rules lite system have always tended to leave me hanging during a session when I need guidelines. And I always wonder why I just paid 20 or so bucks for a book that can be basically summed up with: Just make it up as you go along.

 

I don't think other ways of doing things wrong. If you are enjoying yourself, go for it.

[Vorsch]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Has anyone noticed that in the comics the main character is usually the best in his field ie the strongest, most potent EB in his area.

 

Superman strongest toughest

Thor strongest

spiderman most agile

Cap A , most skilled

Batman most nuts

Wolverine most deadly

 

Its where the character shines, and the hero ususly ends up pounding the mastervilian into dirt By himself.

 

What im saying is that the heroes are the high point characters with the vilains being tricked out/one trick ponies that can chalange the heros.

[OddHat]

Re: Schmucks?

 

Has anyone noticed that in the comics the main character is usually the best in his field ie the strongest, most potent EB in his area.

 

Superman strongest toughest

Thor strongest

spiderman most agile

Cap A , most skilled

Batman most nuts

Wolverine most deadly

 

Its where the character shines, and the hero ususly ends up pounding the mastervilian into dirt By himself.

 

What im saying is that the heroes are the high point characters with the vilains being tricked out/one trick ponies that can chalange the heros.

 

Yes, that's standard in solo titles; I also often run things that way in solo games. In group games I try not to let the villains stomp directly on the players areas of specialization if it can be avoided.

 

Group titles on the other hand bring in the uber-master villains that can take on the entire group, even if it means having high powered characters like Superman and Green Lantern "forget" half of their powers to make the story work.