Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' power?

[arcady]

Consider this:

 

Feeling His Age

Frequently, Slightly: 10 Points

 

Type: Physical

Description: The character is getting up in years, and doesn't quite have the endurance or resistance to disease he once did. As such, he is -1 on all Constitution Rolls.

 

Characters with this disadvantage must also have Age: 40+ or 60+.

 

Now consider this:

 

+5 Con, only for stat rolls (-2 lim - based on idea that Con affects 3 things: die rolls, stunning/combat conditions, and figured stats) Real Cost: 3 points.

 

Now, even if I make that lim less severe, even if I take it down to a '-1/4' lim, buying a +1 to con roll will always be less than 10 points. Especially if I did it not by buying a limited stat, but by buying skill levels.

 

So should this disad not be worth as much as it is?

 

 

 

Also, conceptually, should you be allowed to get multiple disads covering the same thing - in this case isn't this disad something that should be taken -instead of- age rather than with?

 

Consider for example a character who has social:secret id and psych:hides identity.

 

or Hunted:mechanon and psych:avoids mechanon.

or psych:hates orcs and enraged:at orcs.

 

Examples of this sort of issue are common in Hero system writeups - to me it seems though that not only should a disad need to be a disad to get points (thus I outlaw code v killing in four color games - because it is not a disad there, rather code of killing like wolverine is), but it should also not cover ground already covered in your other disads...

 

 

Thoughts?

 

 

I consider myself strict on disads - it needs to be something that -WILL- come up, will -HINDER- play options, and is -EXCLUSIVE-.

[Lanith]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' power?

 

Personally it seems like a munchkin way to get cheap stats. If a player wants to "feel his age", buy the age Disadvantage and don't spend points on the statistics. I would make the player "buy back" the figured characteristics, if they wanted them higher.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Yes.

 

How about in general though?

 

Should a philosophy hold that no disad can be worth more than buying the same thing as if it were a power? In other words, no disad should give more than it's opposite would cost?

 

I've been outlying a philosophy on disadvantages:

I consider myself strict on disads - it needs to be something that -WILL- come up, will -HINDER- play options, is -EXCLUSIVE-, and is -BALANCED- in the points it rewards.

 

Will: The disad cannot be structured in some manner that given our play style it will never be an issue or never come up. 'hates the moon' would not be valid in a game that took place entirely inside or underground.

 

Hinder: The disad must actually limit the options available in play, or directly hinder a character. Thus it must somehow diverge from the 'default' options in the genre. You cannot "get points for being a PC." Code v. Killing would not be acceptable in a four color supers game, and 'like to adventure' would not be acceptable in a dungeon crawl fantasy game.

 

Exclusive: The disad must not duplicate too much of the concept of any other disad you have. Each disad should be unique. You cannot have psych:hides true nature and social:secret identity, nor even psych:hates orcs and enraged:at orcs

 

Balanced: No disad can be worth more than buying the same thing as if it were a power or 'negative power' (if such were rules-legal). In other words, no disad should give more than it's opposite would cost.

 

I've articulated that here:

http://home.pacbell.net/arcady0/fahla/Gaming/index.html#disadvantages

 

And plan to use discussion in this thread to update and refine my ideas.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' power?

 

If you allow unlimited disads, sure that's a problem. However, if like many campaigns you have a limit on how many disads a character may have (eg 200+150), I don't see a problem.

[JMcL63]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' power?

 

Also' date=' conceptually, should you be allowed to get multiple disads covering the same thing - in this case isn't this disad something that should be taken -instead of- age rather than with?[/quote']In general I would agree with this, but your own examples show that the issue is more subtle than you seem to believe.

Consider for example a character who has social:secret id and psych:hides identity.

This is a correct example of the kind of abuses you seem to want to address. Hiding your secret ID is included in the notion of secret ID.

or Hunted:mechanon and psych:avoids mechanon.

or psych:hates orcs and enraged:at orcs.

These are the flies in your ointment. Avoiding your hunter is not logically necessary in the notion of being hunted in HERO. I would still have qualms about this as a GM, but it is not the outright abuse that is your secret ID example. The orc example is similar, although hating orcs does more or less seem to be included in the notion of being enraged by their presence. In both of these cases, subtle changes to the psych lim could make the combos more palatable- eg. fears Mechanon.

Examples of this sort of issue are common in Hero system writeups - to me it seems though that not only should a disad need to be a disad to get points (thus I outlaw code v killing in four color games - because it is not a disad there, rather code of killing like wolverine is), but it should also not cover ground already covered in your other disads...

I like your thoughts about CvK in a classic 4-colour game.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

If you allow unlimited disads' date=' sure that's a problem. However, if like many campaigns you have a limit on how many disads a character may have (eg 200+150), I don't see a problem.[/quote']It seems to me like that should work the other way around.

 

With a limit on disads, you need to ensure the ones taken are actually valid for play - such that the points resulting from them are backed by meaning, and the use of them in a game system is upheld as something legitimate.

 

On the other hand if you had unlimited amounts of them, you could freely let a portion of it just kind of mesh together from nowhere - no small part of it would need to hold individual weight.

[JMcL63]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

It seems to me like that should work the other way around.

 

With a limit on disads, you need to ensure the ones taken are actually valid for play - such that the points resulting from them are backed by meaning, and the use of them in a game system is upheld as something legitimate.

Indeed. Otherwise they are just an excuse for points and you might as well just do away with them and hand out the points for free.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

It seems to me like that should work the other way around.

 

With a limit on disads, you need to ensure the ones taken are actually valid for play - such that the points resulting from them are backed by meaning, and the use of them in a game system is upheld as something legitimate.

 

On the other hand if you had unlimited amounts of them, you could freely let a portion of it just kind of mesh together from nowhere - no small part of it would need to hold individual weight.

 

 

With unlimited disads, the cheapo disads directly results in increased player power. Hence the player can spend 3 pts to counteract a 10 pt disad as in your example. The character is now effectively a 357 pt character.

 

With limited disads, it really doesn't matter a whole lot. Player power is fixed, and if the player wants to spend 3 valuable points to counter a 10 pt disad, he's now effectively a 347 pt character, not a 350. He's paying a real cost to limit the disad.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

So you're saying that if I put a cap on the total amount of disads you can have, you should be allowed to have disads that have no effect on game play, or an an effect less porportionate than the amount of points they give?

 

If not that, I'm not sure what you're getting at and how it relates to the topic.

 

Either way, cap on total disads or not, a disadvantage should not, from my perspective, be worth more than it earns in play.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

So you're saying that if I put a cap on the total amount of disads you can have, you should be allowed to have disads that have no effect on game play, or an an effect less porportionate than the amount of points they give?

 

If not that, I'm not sure what you're getting at and how it relates to the topic.

 

Either way, cap on total disads or not, a disadvantage should not, from my perspective, be worth more than it earns in play.

 

 

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. Disads are already worth less than their point values. This can easily be proven because the vast majority of characters take as many disads as they can get away with. If in the players' minds disads exactly equaled their point value, then there would be a vast spectrum of disads taken. You'd get characters with 200+50, 200+75, 200+100, etc. Instead, what actually happens is that virtually everyone is 200+150. And that's because players perceive the 150 to be a good deal.

 

What allowing a cheapo disad does, is to simply make the discount explicit.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Which I cannot possibly see as in any way a valid thing to do.

 

It has the same level of legitimacy as getting, as an example, an Aid power an arbitarily saying you only have to pay 1/4th the cost of it.

 

Everything should be given what it is worth.

 

When there is a cap on total points this becomes even more important, you have put that limit there to mean something - and thus everything within it should earn its place.

 

Handwaving has no legitimate spot at the table - it is tantamount to cheating.

 

How to judge what is enough for something to be legitimate and by what means it reaches that has subjectivity, but saying that it needs to be worth what it is worth is only logical.

 

Why have disads at all if they do not function to earn their value? There's no logical answer for that - if they do not earn their value, better to simply give arbitrary boosts to point totals and do away with them - leaving them to out of game terms descriptions.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Which I cannot possibly see as in any way a valid thing to do.

 

It has the same level of legitimacy as getting an Adi power an arbitarily saying you only have to pay 1/4th the cost of it.

 

Everything should be given what it is worth.

 

 

Its "worth" varies depending on whether disads are limited or unlimited.

 

Ask yourself this. Which character would you rather play, a 250+0, or a 200+150?

 

I suspect that virtually everyone would rather choose the 200+150.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Ask yourself this. Which character would you rather play, a 250+0, or a 200+150?

 

I suspect that virtually everyone would rather choose the 200+150.

And yet you are proposing an actual third option: 350+0.

 

Disads as you have advocated them are all fakes, if they have not earned their value with play balance, they are freebies, tantamount to saying 350+0.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

And yet you are proposing an actual third option: 350+0.

 

Disads as you have advocated them are all fakes, if they have not earned their value with play balance, they are freebies, tantamount to saying 350+0.

 

 

Where did I say that? I was disputing your contention that a 10 pt disad should be worth exactly 10 pts. I think I've clearly shown that it's worth some amount less than 10 pts. At no point did I ever imply that it should be a freebie.

[KA.]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Arcady,

I have a couple of things to say about this.

Generally, I am in the "If it does not limit the character, it is not a Disadvantage and it worth no points." camp.

So I don't see any problem with paying close attention to things that are obviously abusive like:

Hunting Orcs 14 or less

Psych Lim: Hatred of Orcs

Berserk: When fighting Orcs, 14 or less, recover 8 or less

 

On the other hand, what is the point of having Disadvantages to begin with?

 

If they only exist to provide a way for Players to "pay" for more character points, then they need to be extremely well balanced, in order to help maintain system balance.

 

But they also are a way to provide "hooks" for the GM. That does not mean that I will allow any crap that the player comes up with. But if something is reasonable, I don't clamp down too hard.

Let's say that you have a campaign where the main enemy is VIPER.

At first glance it would seem like "Hunted by VIPER" would be a worthless Disadvantage, because the players are going to be fighting them all the time anyway.

But, if you look at it like a football game, the difference becomes clear.

Every game of the season is equally important, especially if you are trying to qualify for the playoffs.

But, there are some teams that are "hated" rivals, that you go out of your way to beat.

You want to beat every other team, but you really want to beat these guys.

The same thing could apply to the above Hunted.

VIPER may just want to "neutralize" the other PC's, but this guy they will go out of their way to hurt, humiliate, and inconvenience.

They may not be going out of their way to crack the Secret ID of the other players, but they will go after this guy.

They will destroy his vehicle if it is ever left unguarded, attack any known associates, etc.

And all these things can benefit the GM when he is looking for a plot or subplot to the latest adventure.

Which means that cracking down too hard can cause you as much pain as the players.

 

I do not intend the above to advocate allowing cheesy ridiculous Disadvantages that are clearly worthless into your game.

 

I am just saying that you need to look at both the value to the Player, and the value to the GM.

 

Even something like "feeling his age" could be used effectively.

Let's say that the Government sponsors the team, and an "efficiency expert" decides that "it might be better if the more senior member of the team considered retirement".

Now, it is not just a matter of a -1 to a CON roll.

Now this character is going to have to prove he is "better" than the other team members just to keep his place on the team.

 

KA.

[zornwil]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

WorldMaker did a great post on Disads. One thing he wrote that really struck me and changed the way I think about disads, and complements KA's point nicely (IMHO) is that disads limit a player's choices. That isn't intrinsically good or bad, not each time anyway, but it is a limitation in flexibility. I'll try to see if I can find his post, though, as it should be referenced in the context of this discussion, I think I have it bookmarked but my bookmarks are a mess right now...I'll edit this post in a few minutes...

 

Yup found it - http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=416793&postcount=1

 

I HIGHLY recommend it, this is one of the best posts on these boards I believe.

[SleepyDrug]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. Disads are already worth less than their point values. This can easily be proven because the vast majority of characters take as many disads as they can get away with. If in the players' minds disads exactly equaled their point value, then there would be a vast spectrum of disads taken. You'd get characters with 200+50, 200+75, 200+100, etc. Instead, what actually happens is that virtually everyone is 200+150. And that's because players perceive the 150 to be a good deal.

 

What allowing a cheapo disad does, is to simply make the discount explicit.

 

Either I did not follow this or do not agree. Everyone takes the 200+150 because that allows them 350 points. If you take 200+100 you have a 300 point character. And in my experience, few players forego Character Points just because of a perceived value to the Disadvantages.

 

On the issue of overlap. I don't mind so long as the disadvantages don't duplicate effect. A character can have multiple Disads on the same WEAKNESS if they result in different LIMITATIONS.

 

For example, Enraged by Orcs and Hatred of Orcs don't have much variety. But -- Berserks When Fighting Orcs and Psych Hatred of Orcs could be a valid combo if the character might encounter Orcs outside of combat conditions.

[arcady]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

WorldMaker did a great post on Disads. One thing he wrote that really struck me and changed the way I think about disads' date=' and complements KA's point nicely (IMHO) is that disads limit a player's choices.[/quote']His fourth point backs me up more than any of the detractors in this thread:

 

4. Make Psychological Limitations be worth their points. This piece of advice is for GM's. Basically' date=' make sure that the Psych Limits really do limit or at least guide the character in how they are played.[/quote']

 

K.A. by contrast is advocating that I only be strict if they are point freebies - which seems opposite of making them earn their way. As I see it, they need to be strictly governed if they are there for plot hooks and roleplay guides so that we can ensure they are there for VALID plot hooks and roleplay guides.

 

If they overlap - where they overlap that is that many -points- of plot hooks and roleplay not happening, not earned.

 

If they go into things I and the player know will not come up in our game style - that is that many -points- of plot hooks and roleplay not happening, not earned.

 

I do not, for example, ever bring the mix of sex and violence 'on-camera' in my games, so a player who got "psych: hunts people who make snuff videos" would be getting points that might seem to stage what kind of vigilante they are, but this is a subplot I would never let them explore - it is thus freebie points, and as this policy is discussed in our group, a player who took it would know that (making it an open abuse I have thankfully had to fabricate soley for the purpose of this post). That's an example folks, don't trip up on or try to sidetrack discussion over it. It's rough and yes, sure, someone may find an angle for it... The point is merely that if it will NEVER enter play in the life of the game it is not valid.

 

 

I completely disagree with Worldmaker on his third point (which directly conflicts his fourth point):

 

3. Don't get too worked up about Psychological Limitations being "soft": It is interesting to note that a lot of things that would be considered Quirks under GURPS are full-blown Psychological Limitations in Champions.

 

They [GURPS] only want to give points for disadvantages that actually hinder the character. (Of course, some GM's are like that as well.)

 

I am less of that mind and more of the "points for anything that hinders the character or determines how the character is going to be played for its duration".

I agree with GURPS on this one.

 

You should not 'get points for being a PC' and doing what everybody does in the genre or what every character does in an RPG. You should get points for the things that limit your character, and to the degree that they limit.

 

Disadvantages need to hold weight. To do that they have to be things that will enter play, will hinder options when they do so, are exclusive to themselves are not a rephrase of other disads on the sheet, and have meaningful effects on game balance - not something better simulated by buying down a stat or getting a limitation on a power.

[zornwil]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

I don't think WM's 4th point belays his 3rd. His comment that a disad "determines how the character is going to be played for its duration" is what lends credence to the cost for something which may not be strictly impairing a character directly. A disad can hold weight simply by a players' use, as well, and that usage may simply be something which colors how people see him and not a direct impairment day to day.

 

For example, we have a PC who has ended up as he's played him as being an utter miser re money. If he put that on his sheet for 10 points in place of some other thing, I'd be fine with it. It has affected how people see him, deflated at times his import, even though in actual "damage" it only really bit him once, when he alluded to making money with something and a wise old Chinese mage sapped his ability to take advantage of a protective flower. But what's important is that the character's attitudes and style have been irrevocably affected/directed by this characteristic. I think as to WM's point, the determination of how he'll play is worthy of points as it has limited his flexibility, even if not specifically "damaging".

 

PS/EDIT - to further clarify (I hope), this still is in stead with the "disdvantage that isn't actually a disadvantage isn't worth points". It's just that the term "disadvantage" should be viewed more broadly than "damage" or "impairment" strictly. If it still limits the player's choices, it's worth points. If it does not, it's not worth points.

 

PPS/EDIT - also, as to the point that a character shouldn't get disad points for doing what they'd do "anyway" in genre, I think this depends. If every character must be courageous and bold, then you could say that this is a genre and not player requirement. But is it not worth disad points? I'm not sold, necessarily, that it is not, as these charateristics will dog the character, and, in fact, in most comic ages even when all heroes were this way it was still a disad as the bad guys and NPCs could and would take advantage of this.

[Gary]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

Either I did not follow this or do not agree. Everyone takes the 200+150 because that allows them 350 points. If you take 200+100 you have a 300 point character. And in my experience, few players forego Character Points just because of a perceived value to the Disadvantages.

 

You follow me perfectly. Everybody takes 200+150 because they perceive it to be their advantage to do so, even though they do have the option of 200+100. Thus in practice, most players value disads at less than their face value.

[zornwil]

Re: Invalid Disads: should disads not be worth more than if bought it as a 'neg' powe

 

You follow me perfectly. Everybody takes 200+150 because they perceive it to be their advantage to do so' date=' even though they do have the option of 200+100. Thus in practice, most players value disads at less than their face value.[/quote']

I don't thnk so necessarily. I think that very (most?) often the reason is that people's concepts of their characters includes more "stuff" than can be easily afforded, and the disads are a way to get that stuff, even if there's an "even" trade-off. However, I wouldn't really argue that in practice (let alone theory, where it's more debatable) disads equal the value of CPs otherwise. I agree that in general disads are a deal, although I don't think they're so good that if you said (and I have) that players can take 200+(x) where (x) can be any value, that people will just keep loading up. In fact I say that having done it - in the old days, I always ran with "net 250", and you could take 250 points with NO disads, or add disads as your concept fit. People varied a lot, from as little as 30 (I think) points in disads to as many as 100.