So, why is longevity so expensive?

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

My own opinion is that Immortality is too expensive at 5 pts. In my gaming experience' date=' that LS very rarely comes into play. Actually, most of the LS powers are a little overpriced, for the same reason.[/quote']

I'm sort of repeating myself, but not quite, as to put it more broadly, LSes in general are often the defenses against NNDs and the like. So IMHO 5 points or such is a pretty good price for what can be a total defense along the road. But to your point, yes, if a GM never touches on the issue, it's lost points. I think any reasonable GM will gladly confer on the matter and rule according to how he sees it playing out in his game.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

So IMHO 5 points or such is a pretty good price for what can be a total defense along the road. But to your point' date=' yes, if a GM never touches on the issue, it's lost points.[/quote'] Of course, the same thing could be said about, say, Stealth.

 

The bottom line (IMO) is: if it's on the character sheet, the GM should find some way to exploit it at some time or other to make the points well spent (or, in the case of Disadvantages, well earned).

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

Of course, the same thing could be said about, say, Stealth.

 

The bottom line (IMO) is: if it's on the character sheet, the GM should find some way to exploit it at some time or other to make the points well spent (or, in the case of Disadvantages, well earned).

And to be fair, IMHO, it's also incumbent on the player to promote usage of such, and/or to discuss with the GM if he's not seeing a value.

[ghost-angel]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I personally don't think it's overpriced at all...

 

but, here's how it generally gets handled in our games.

 

If your character is very old it's a good thing to buy to justify a 100+ year old character in the game world. At least our game worlds.

 

If your character is just becoming immortal or realizing they are immortal it's more often than not "FREE" GM points, and he'll extract them out in gameplay somehow, that we can trust in. We've got one game where everyone is getting close to the point of crossing over from mere Human to something much different altogether (the power level is quickly climbing towards 1000pt characters) and we know that at some point that we will write down "LS: Immortal" on our character sheets and it will come up in gameplay in some fashion that we are now no longer mortal beings.

 

As for young characters whose concept might include LS:Immortal on it, another tactic is to write it down so the GM knows it should be there, but use future XP instead to cost it onto the character. But that's just a suggestion that may not work for all games/groups.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

It's not a huge point expenditure, but I agree with the "what do I get for my 5 point investment?" question. This isn't just a Supers issue (where 5 points is relatively small). Look at how many races in fantasy games are long-lived. That's 4 points off the top to be an Elf - the guy with a normal lifespan can use that for an extra spell, +2 DEX (after speed rebate), +2 PD and ED, +2 OCV with his main weapon or Breathe Water, costs END to activate instead. What benefit do those 4 points grant our Elf adventurer to offset these advantages available to those with a normal life span?

 

Another question. What disadvantage would you allow for "lifespan 1/2 human norm" or "Lifespan 1/4 human norm"? Some races are shorter-lived, right? I suspect most of us would conclude it's only flavour and allow no disadvantage. As I recall, this was an issue for a 3e Champion (Flare), and she got a psych lim. The explanation was that aging at twice normal rate wasn't much more than flavour, but it caused her to be very interested in any possibility of slowing her aging rate to a normal level, which was a psych.

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

It's not a huge point expenditure, but I agree with the "what do I get for my 5 point investment?" question. This isn't just a Supers issue (where 5 points is relatively small). Look at how many races in fantasy games are long-lived. That's 4 points off the top to be an Elf - the guy with a normal lifespan can use that for an extra spell, +2 DEX (after speed rebate), +2 PD and ED, +2 OCV with his main weapon or Breathe Water, costs END to activate instead. What benefit do those 4 points grant our Elf adventurer to offset these advantages available to those with a normal life span?

 

Another question. What disadvantage would you allow for "lifespan 1/2 human norm" or "Lifespan 1/4 human norm"? Some races are shorter-lived, right? I suspect most of us would conclude it's only flavour and allow no disadvantage. As I recall, this was an issue for a 3e Champion (Flare), and she got a psych lim. The explanation was that aging at twice normal rate wasn't much more than flavour, but it caused her to be very interested in any possibility of slowing her aging rate to a normal level, which was a psych.

I think extended lifespans are a different issue than immortality. To your point, I would have no problem just giving away the points or ignoring the points for races that simply live longer.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I think extended lifespans are a different issue than immortality. To your point' date=' I would have no problem just giving away the points or ignoring the points for races that simply live longer.[/quote']

 

Doesn't that greate an even more dichotomous situation? The potential to live 200, 400, or 1600 years is free? Now we have a breakpoint where this lifespan is free, but anything longer costs 5 points. Is it really worth a lot more to have a potentiallyu infinite lifespan than to have a potential lifespan of 1,000 years?

[Gary]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

It's not a huge point expenditure, but I agree with the "what do I get for my 5 point investment?" question. This isn't just a Supers issue (where 5 points is relatively small). Look at how many races in fantasy games are long-lived. That's 4 points off the top to be an Elf - the guy with a normal lifespan can use that for an extra spell, +2 DEX (after speed rebate), +2 PD and ED, +2 OCV with his main weapon or Breathe Water, costs END to activate instead. What benefit do those 4 points grant our Elf adventurer to offset these advantages available to those with a normal life span?

 

Another question. What disadvantage would you allow for "lifespan 1/2 human norm" or "Lifespan 1/4 human norm"? Some races are shorter-lived, right? I suspect most of us would conclude it's only flavour and allow no disadvantage. As I recall, this was an issue for a 3e Champion (Flare), and she got a psych lim. The explanation was that aging at twice normal rate wasn't much more than flavour, but it caused her to be very interested in any possibility of slowing her aging rate to a normal level, which was a psych.

 

 

This is all a matter of the type of campaign you're running. In 1st and 2nd edition AD&D for example, there were numerous things that could age you. Ghosts, casting certain spells, artifacts, etc all could age you. And there is also the passage of campaign time. A real world RPG generally isn't like a Balder's Gate computer game where you can gain 20 levels in a couple of months of game time. To gain 20 levels probably requires decades of gaming. It adds up, 20 years from a ghost here, 10 years from casting a couple of wish spells, 20 years from passage of campaign time, and all of a sudden your archmage becomes seriously interested in studying how to become a Lich or Shade.

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

Doesn't that greate an even more dichotomous situation? The potential to live 200' date=' 400, or 1600 years is free? Now we have a breakpoint where this lifespan is free, but anything longer costs 5 points. Is it really worth a lot more to have a potentiallyu infinite lifespan than to have a potential lifespan of 1,000 years?[/quote']

IMHO, yes (to your last question), because the application of immortality is a much larger plot driver historically in the genre. People want it, whereas knowing that the Andalusians "merely" live 1000 years is generally less regarded. Similarly, if we have characters who can make a person older, immortality provides an absolute defense whereas simply living a long time does not. Similar to and inspired by these, from a GM perspective, I think you'll see a GM take advantage of immortality in a gaming situation whereas short or long life spans seem to rarely enter into game plotting.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

And to be fair' date=' IMHO, it's also incumbent on the player to promote usage of such, and/or to discuss with the GM if he's not seeing a value.[/quote']Agreed.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

IMHO' date=' yes (to your last question), because the application of immortality is a much larger plot driver historically in the genre. People want it, whereas knowing that the Andalusians "merely" live 1000 years is generally less regarded. Similarly, if we have characters who can make a person older, immortality provides an absolute defense whereas simply living a long time does not. Similar to and inspired by these, from a GM perspective, I think you'll see a GM take advantage of immortality in a gaming situation whereas short or long life spans seem to rarely enter into game plotting.[/quote']

 

So the character should PAY 5 points to be Hunted by people who want to dissect him to figure out how to make themselves immortal?

 

Certainly, if we have characters who can make others older, absolute immortality confers an advantage. Would you rather be immune to that effect, or have 5 points of immunity to poisons or diseases? I suggest that most of the other Life Support items, even, are encountered considerably more often than something defended against by immortality.

 

For 1 point, I can be immune to alcohol. "I'll wager 10 gold sovreigns I can drink any man in the place under the table!" Can I use Immortal for 5x the in-game benefits? "I'll bet 50 gold sovreigns I'll still be here in 10,000 years"?

 

It sems to me immortality is less a game mechanic and more a background/plot device. It justifies certain things (lots of skills; knowledge of dead languages and ancient cultures, etc.) but all of those things carry their own cost in character points. We don't make a character pay for "Mutant" to justify his mutant powers - he pays for the mutant powers themselves.

 

We have an aversion to "giving a benefit for free", but is there any significant mechanical benefit to being immortal? If not - if it's just colour - why should it carry a point cost any more than piercing blue eyes or a healthy head of red hair?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

This is all a matter of the type of campaign you're running. In 1st and 2nd edition AD&D for example' date=' there were numerous things that could age you. Ghosts, casting certain spells, artifacts, etc all could age you. And there is also the passage of campaign time. A real world RPG generally isn't like a Balder's Gate computer game where you can gain 20 levels in a couple of months of game time. To gain 20 levels probably requires decades of gaming. It adds up, 20 years from a ghost here, 10 years from casting a couple of wish spells, 20 years from passage of campaign time, and all of a sudden your archmage becomes seriously interested in studying how to become a Lich or Shade.[/quote']

 

Of course, one's lifespan is immutable in D&D - no one pays points for it. And I don't recall any Fantasy Hero constructs dealing with aging people. If a spell is put in place, what happens? All the non-immortals get aged to death so the immortal can shine?

 

Has anyone out there ever played in a campaign where age ever became a serious issue? By this, I mean a campaign where the players of human characters had to drop their characters due to their dotage, while the elves and dwarves could carry on, due to their longer lifespans. And, assuming you have, were the human's players out of the game, forced to start as novices (working with the experienced non-humans) or just got to roll up a high level human from scratch (the last seeming, to me, not to be that huge a drawback).

[Zanthis]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

While not in HEROs, I have played in several campaigns where age was important. While character's never retired (permanently) as a result of old age, longer lived characters were able to take advanatge of several magical items and spells (wish for example) that aged them. Wizards engaging in researching magical spells and items tended to eat up time months in half-year blocks every two levels.

 

In one campaign, to keep the game going we ended up with a pocket dimension to research in. Time still passed inside the dimension, just at x12 normal rate. So if I needed 18 months to research new spells, the other characters only needed to justify 45 days of goofing off or sole adventuring (in which I lost out on the xp btw).

 

Ultimately, age ended up being a resource. You "spent" it to acquire more spells, items or powers. Some classes were better at this than others. No one ever ran out unless it killed them. There are several ways to reverse aging and we made as much use of them as we could. But the advantage of the elf wizard over the human wizard could become noticable around 5th-7th level.

 

And when we came back two years later and replayed old characters that had aged 20 years (with the appropriate stat reductions for old age) some characters were better off than others. But that was just a one-shot.

[lazarus]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

There's also the whole "Limitation that's not a limitation is not worth points" ... the reverse could be "Power that gives no effect is not worth points". If it is clear that there is no aging in play, why be forced to pay the points for it?

 

However, if that stipulation is not made, then pay the points ... and the GM better make it worth 5 Then again, a Hunted: People who want to figure out how immortality works could easily be worth at least 5.

 

Laz

[Mentor]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I have a PC born in the 11th century built with 5 points Longevity and I don't begrudge the expenditure at all.

 

We have a campaign with millenia of secret histories comprising the Atlanteans, Illuminati, Secret Magic Orders, Interdimensionals travelers stopping by every few thousand years, etc. My character commonly gets a good chance to roll to know background or personality info on these "anochronistic powers" that would otherwise require a KS roll.

[Dust Raven]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

It's not a huge point expenditure, but I agree with the "what do I get for my 5 point investment?" question. This isn't just a Supers issue (where 5 points is relatively small). Look at how many races in fantasy games are long-lived. That's 4 points off the top to be an Elf - the guy with a normal lifespan can use that for an extra spell, +2 DEX (after speed rebate), +2 PD and ED, +2 OCV with his main weapon or Breathe Water, costs END to activate instead. What benefit do those 4 points grant our Elf adventurer to offset these advantages available to those with a normal life span?

 

Another question. What disadvantage would you allow for "lifespan 1/2 human norm" or "Lifespan 1/4 human norm"? Some races are shorter-lived, right? I suspect most of us would conclude it's only flavour and allow no disadvantage. As I recall, this was an issue for a 3e Champion (Flare), and she got a psych lim. The explanation was that aging at twice normal rate wasn't much more than flavour, but it caused her to be very interested in any possibility of slowing her aging rate to a normal level, which was a psych.

In a fantasy game, or any Heroic level game, I'd look at Longevity (at any level) as more of a variable Perk. Some long lived races will naturally view other long lived races with respect, and/or might view humans (or races with "normal" lifespans as nothing more than pets or cute smart animals (or annoying pests). The fact the character is of a long lived race then means something. In addition, most of these long lived races tend to start their adventuring carreers after being old enough to outlive any race without Longevity. That grants them experience, knowledge and possibly reputation that can't otherwise be represented by spending points elsewhere. A character who spend over a hundred years growing up will be more familiar with his homeland's culture and geography than a character than spend less then twenty. While these are all somewhat minor, put together they can make up for the points spend even if there are no aging effects.

[Solomon]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

It's not a huge point expenditure' date=' but I agree with the "what do I get for my 5 point investment?" question. This isn't just a Supers issue (where 5 points is relatively small). Look at how many races in fantasy games are long-lived. That's 4 points off the top to be an Elf - the guy with a normal lifespan can use that for an extra spell, +2 DEX (after speed rebate), +2 PD and ED, +2 OCV with his main weapon or Breathe Water, costs END to activate instead. What benefit do those 4 points grant our Elf adventurer to offset these advantages available to those with a normal life span?[/quote']

 

In my campaigns (and in many other campaigns I think) cambat-related attributes are more strictly regulated than any other attribute, so the statement that an Elf with a 4-points LS is giwing up 2 points of DEX or somesuch doesn't compute. The Elf is going to be as combat-effective as the Human - the Human might have one more skill or a few perks insted.

 

As a side note, I've run several combat-less HERO scenarios (or sessions of a larger scenario), so I might as well ask, "what did my players get for their Stength and Constitution?"

 

Fact is, the usefulness of any system attribute depends largely on what kind of opportunities the GM offers to use the attribute, and on how the player handles those opportunities or creates his own opportunities.

Of course it's far easier to provide opportunities to use combat attributes than it is to provide opportunities to use "intangibles" like LS:Unaging, Perks and "flavor" skills. That doesn't make Unaging useless - just more difficult to handle for the GM and the players.

The HERO system needs to provide a standardized cost for any attribute, but if you feel 5 points for full unaging are too much in your campaign, either you should lower the cost or provide the players with some opportunity to use the power.

 

Another question. What disadvantage would you allow for "lifespan 1/2 human norm" or "Lifespan 1/4 human norm"? Some races are shorter-lived' date=' right? I suspect most of us would conclude it's only flavour and allow no disadvantage. As I recall, this was an issue for a 3e Champion (Flare), and she got a psych lim. The explanation was that aging at twice normal rate wasn't much more than flavour, but it caused her to be very interested in any possibility of slowing her aging rate to a normal level, which was a psych.[/quote']

 

While the cost of attributes and powers is fixed, the value for most disadvantages is already expressed as a campaign-tailored formula. I'd allow "Short life span" as a PhysLim only in a "generational" campaign or in one where there's at least some chance of being hit with an ageing attack or somesuch. Though PsychLims like the one you list seem OK to me.

[Rapier]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

Our Champions campaign had characters that retired due to old age. While some adventures etc happend within the span of a few weeks, others took place over months (and in one case years).

 

I've also had a few time-master villains that had NND vs LS: Aging and Aging Transforms. It spawned a rather lengthy mini-plot for the characters to reverse the aging, and one character in particular decided not to accept the risk for reversing the aging and stayed old. He retired shortly after.

 

I also add some side-benefits to those characters that have been around quite a while. They get bonuses to skill rolls (mostly knowledge based) simply because they have been around a lot longer. They also, on occassion, run into a new contact whose grandfather/father etc knew.

 

I make regular use of those characters with LS: Aging as plot furtherance devices, and the players seem to greatly enjoy these small side benefits.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I have a PC born in the 11th century built with 5 points Longevity and I don't begrudge the expenditure at all.

 

We have a campaign with millenia of secret histories comprising the Atlanteans, Illuminati, Secret Magic Orders, Interdimensionals travelers stopping by every few thousand years, etc. My character commonly gets a good chance to roll to know background or personality info on these "anochronistic powers" that would otherwise require a KS roll.

 

So, effectively, you receive one or more free knowledge skills for your 5 point expenditure. Why not just make immprtality free and charge points for the knowledge skills (perhaps with the SFX that the character has been around almost a millenium and picks up these skills). While I agree this makes the 5 points expended valuable, they're valuable because they have granted you skills which you could otherwise have simply paid the 5 points for (of course, if you end up with 15 points worth of skills, the penduum has now swung too far the other way, hasn't it?)

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

So the character should PAY 5 points to be Hunted by people who want to dissect him to figure out how to make themselves immortal?

 

Certainly, if we have characters who can make others older, absolute immortality confers an advantage. Would you rather be immune to that effect, or have 5 points of immunity to poisons or diseases? I suggest that most of the other Life Support items, even, are encountered considerably more often than something defended against by immortality.

 

For 1 point, I can be immune to alcohol. "I'll wager 10 gold sovreigns I can drink any man in the place under the table!" Can I use Immortal for 5x the in-game benefits? "I'll bet 50 gold sovreigns I'll still be here in 10,000 years"?

 

It sems to me immortality is less a game mechanic and more a background/plot device. It justifies certain things (lots of skills; knowledge of dead languages and ancient cultures, etc.) but all of those things carry their own cost in character points. We don't make a character pay for "Mutant" to justify his mutant powers - he pays for the mutant powers themselves.

 

We have an aversion to "giving a benefit for free", but is there any significant mechanical benefit to being immortal? If not - if it's just colour - why should it carry a point cost any more than piercing blue eyes or a healthy head of red hair?

I think your comments on the value are valid in comparing to other LS items except that I think that one could argue those 5 and less point value items smoewhat endlessly, since the system granularity in the 1-5 point range is generally questionable, IMHO.

 

And to this point, I think immortality opens other doors, although I'd agree it should probably be broken up into "LS: Immortality" for 2 or 3 points and a 2 or 3 point Perk "Immortal," to reflect the various benefits one could have.

 

To your point, and as I stated earleir, if the GM and player don't intend to use it in a way consistent with the point value, they should revisit. I don't disagree if it's only "color" that it shouldn't cost points.

[zornwil]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

In my campaigns (and in many other campaigns I think) cambat-related attributes are more strictly regulated than any other attribute, so the statement that an Elf with a 4-points LS is giwing up 2 points of DEX or somesuch doesn't compute. The Elf is going to be as combat-effective as the Human - the Human might have one more skill or a few perks insted.

 

As a side note, I've run several combat-less HERO scenarios (or sessions of a larger scenario), so I might as well ask, "what did my players get for their Stength and Constitution?"

 

Fact is, the usefulness of any system attribute depends largely on what kind of opportunities the GM offers to use the attribute, and on how the player handles those opportunities or creates his own opportunities.

Of course it's far easier to provide opportunities to use combat attributes than it is to provide opportunities to use "intangibles" like LS:Unaging, Perks and "flavor" skills. That doesn't make Unaging useless - just more difficult to handle for the GM and the players.

The HERO system needs to provide a standardized cost for any attribute, but if you feel 5 points for full unaging are too much in your campaign, either you should lower the cost or provide the players with some opportunity to use the power.

 

 

 

While the cost of attributes and powers is fixed, the value for most disadvantages is already expressed as a campaign-tailored formula. I'd allow "Short life span" as a PhysLim only in a "generational" campaign or in one where there's at least some chance of being hit with an ageing attack or somesuch. Though PsychLims like the one you list seem OK to me.

I think your good post begs a point worthy in itself of comment and not properly brought up to date - often we are paying the points for flexibility. I think we've all had characters with skills, perks, and powers that just didn't get used other than one rare but critical time. Or, heck, even if nobody intended it, an attribute that simply never got used but "could have". And since this is also a GAME, paying for flexibility is a good thing.

[Vorsch]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

Note Ageless is not the same as immortal.

 

Regen from death should be immortal but it isint , you still have to buy ageless (i would give it free, but hey im kind)

[Labrat]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I would think that the bigger problem is taking an Ancient as a 'newbie PC' built under the same constraints as, say, a twenty-something hero. But that's all semantics I guess.

[Mentor]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

So' date=' effectively, you receive one or more free knowledge skills for your 5 point expenditure. Why not just make immprtality free and charge points for the knowledge skills (perhaps with the SFX that the character has been around almost a millenium and picks up these skills). While I agree this makes the 5 points expended valuable, they're valuable because they have granted you skills which you could otherwise have simply paid the 5 points for (of course, if you end up with 15 points worth of skills, the penduum has now swung too far the other way, hasn't it?)[/quote']

Essentialy, we don't do it because we don't really want to preemptively decide in advance which circumstances or skills would apply. The use of the immortality interraction would be more akin to the Meta/catch all abilities like Tactics or Deduction, reflecting what the PC rather than the player knows. Also, at least with the GMs and players in our campaign, using the SFX of Longevity encourages "role playing" through character interraction in such circumstances rather than dice driven "roll playing" so to speak.

[Mentor]

Re: So, why is longevity so expensive?

 

I think your good post begs a point worthy in itself of comment and not properly brought up to date - often we are paying the points for flexibility. I think we've all had characters with skills' date=' perks, and powers that just didn't get used other than one rare but critical time. Or, heck, even if nobody intended it, an attribute that simply never got used but "could have". And since this is also a GAME, paying for flexibility is a good thing.[/quote']

Exactly so, Zorn. Paying for flexibility can sometimes be more cost effective than extra dice.

 

Sorry, I can't rep you again yet.