Natural Powers VS equipment question

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

1) Steve would be the first to agree that "to each his own, and ignore what you don't like."

 

2) You are taking the quote out of context. That quote was, in particular, regarding SuperHeroic campaigns. In a superheroic campaign, all powers must be paid for with points. That quote was used to explain why that is so in superheroic games. Your quote is entirely misplaced and off-point. In this thread, since you are talking about equipment allowances and money (neither of which are pertinent to superheroic games) you are talking about a heroic game.

 

You'll have to explain why the context of the style of game changes the quote:

 

A character who can naturally hear radio much spend his precious character points for the ability. It's unfair to this character for other characters to simply buy a radio with money, thus acquiring the same ability without spending any character points.

 

If it is "unfair" in a super-hero game, why is it suddenly "fair" in a heroic game?

 

The only difference I can see is that the Super-Heroic game is more about "powers" and this fact makes the situation worse in a super-heroic game. Other than that, what why is the quote more relevant to one specific sort of game?

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

I would sugest something a little radical:

 

Make it a superheroic campeign, increase the points and make people buy equipment with points. Strongly suggest VPP's for equipment

 

If you look over at my Mimm thread (in the "Other Genres" forum), I believe that I have already stated this concept as an option.

 

However, I want the world to be dark and gritty. A character (even a PC) should be swayed by a bribe of money, or the offer of some powerful artifact.

 

The problem is that in a game where everybody pays points for their equipment, this can't happen. Money is just not that useful in such a game, and you'd have to pay the points for the artifact if you wanted to get much use out of it.

[OddHat]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

If you look over at my Mimm thread (in the "Other Genres" forum), I believe that I have already stated this concept as an option.

 

However, I want the world to be dark and gritty. A character (even a PC) should be swayed by a bribe of money, or the offer of some powerful artifact.

 

The problem is that in a game where everybody pays points for their equipment, this can't happen. Money is just not that useful in such a game, and you'd have to pay the points for the artifact if you wanted to get much use out of it.

 

Again, what's stopping you from using the easy option of just letting equipment be free, without re-costing powers? Or the other easy option of letting X number of points of real equipment be free, again without having to recost anything? No player loses anything in the second case; even Night Vision Armor Skin Man can find something to spend his real equipment allowance on. Once the characters are in play, you can always let real equipment be free from there. Again, NVASM will still have plenty of other cool toys he can buy with his cash.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

1) 15 PD/15 ED Armor = 45 active points. Under the scheme you have suggested, Red Man only pays 15 points (the 15 saved by the OIF). If Ego Man wants a 15 PD/15 ED Force Field, he has to pay a full 45 points for it. Red Man just got 30 points for free.

I'm suggesting forcing the character to pay off all relevant limitations of the armor, which would be more that just OIF. He'd only be getting 20 points for free. And the bottom line is that there is no way the character would get the "free points" for the armor and also get to wear the armor, I will agree that situation would be unfair.

 

The ego guy would get to wear the armor, in addition to his force field, so he would again be on top of the situation.

 

 

2) Even talking about different powers, (Redman's Armor versus some other defensive power for Ego Man), as things are powers are meant to be balanced against one another. Your idea scraps that (imperfect) balance in favor of case by case calls on every power. There are much simpler ways to handle it.

 

3) In your third response, you add a house rule to fix a house rule, something you will be doing a lot of if you want this scheme to work. Your game and all, but when there are much cleaner, easier ways to work it, why bother?

Obviously what I'm suggesting is not perfect.

 

But allowing everybody to pick up equipment for free seems like it would be unfair to some characters.

 

And making everybody pay points for everything devalues money and material possessions in the game, which may be OK for a super-hero game, but I want me game to be darker.

 

Resource points are good to a limit. Still, I can't very well bribe your character with some artifact if it would take him beyone his limit of resource points. In the end, either I'd enforce the resource points, and limit the game as I've just described, or I'd stop using them, and then we'd be back to the problem of everybody getting their equipment for no points (which I've just described above).

 

What I'm suggesting sounds like a bit better solution to me, but it is not perfect.

[Rapier]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

You'll have to explain why the context of the style of game changes the quote:

 

A character who can naturally hear radio much spend his precious character points for the ability. It's unfair to this character for other characters to simply buy a radio with money, thus acquiring the same ability without spending any character points.

 

If it is "unfair" in a super-hero game, why is it suddenly "fair" in a heroic game?

 

The only difference I can see is that the Super-Heroic game is more about "powers" and this fact makes the situation worse in a super-heroic game. Other than that, what why is the quote more relevant to one specific sort of game?

Why don't you reread all of page 13, and not just that bit you seem so fond of quoting.

 

Genre convention is the first thing to come to mind. If Superman needs to worry about paying the rent, it makes it a lot harder for him to be selfless. It also a lot less genre for SuperMan to turn to the Governor of Missouri and expect to be paid for saving the state from flooding.

 

"Well, you see Mr Governor sir, supersuits don't grow on trees and I got a balloon payment coming on the condo."

[OddHat]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

Obviously what I'm suggesting is not perfect.

 

But allowing everybody to pick up equipment for free seems like it would be unfair to some characters.

 

And making everybody pay points for everything devalues money and material possessions in the game, which may be OK for a super-hero game, but I want me game to be darker.

 

Resource points are good to a limit. Still, I can't very well bribe your character with some artifact if it would take him beyone his limit of resource points. In the end, either I'd enforce the resource points, and limit the game as I've just described, or I'd stop using them, and then we'd be back to the problem of everybody getting their equipment for no points (which I've just described above).

 

What I'm suggesting sounds like a bit better solution to me, but it is not perfect.

 

I think there are two areas where we disagree:

1) You see "free equipment for all" as unfair to people who bought the power anyway. I don't; I think that the person who already has powers like HRRH will just find something else to spend his cash on.

 

2) You see resource points as fixed, preventing you from rewarding someone with a big artifact. Personally, I'd say that giving just one player a big artifact is going to be unfair to the others no matter what, and giving roughly equal rewards to all means that no one is being treated all that unfairly. You can always give an increase in resource points as a reward as well.

 

Edit: Also, I'm concerned about the Power A versus Power B internal balance issue. Right now, 60 Points of Armor (20 PD/20 ED), 60 Points of Force Field (20/20 O End, or 30/30 costs end), and 60 points of Desolid (Desolid 0 End) offer roughly equal value, with an edge to the Armor in some situations and an edge to the Desolid in others. If the Armor suddenly gets much cheaper, it is no longer roughly equal in value to the others. Same thing with a 2d6 RKA, a 6d6 EB, and a 3d6 Ego Attack. Make that 2d6 RKA much cheaper and it o longer balances against the others. Make all weapon-class powers cheaper (adding Explosions, NND Gas Attacks, etc) and there's even less reason to take that 3d6 Ego attack.

 

The "real stuff is free" and resource point methods avoid this problem.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

Why don't you reread all of page 13, and not just that bit you seem so fond of quoting.

 

Genre convention is the first thing to come to mind. If Superman needs to worry about paying the rent, it makes it a lot harder for him to be selfless. It also a lot less genre for SuperMan to turn to the Governor of Missouri and expect to be paid for saving the state from flooding.

 

"Well, you see Mr Governor sir, supersuits don't grow on trees and I got a balloon payment coming on the condo."

Sure, there are other reasons for making characters pay points for equipment in a super-heroic game, the genre convention is that spider-man doesn't seem to go around picking up equipment. He seems to stick to his personal items that are part of his self image. Genre represents a good argument for making characters pay points. The genre argument was covered in that section, but it was not the only argument given.

 

One of the reasons also given for making characters pay points for equipment was that one of fairness to other characters who end up paying points for natural abilities.

 

The fact that there are other reasons which may also exist in a super-hero game, doesn't discount the fairness argument. And while the genre argument may not apply to all games, I don't see the reason why the specific part I quoted shouldn't by more universally applicable.

 

Again, why would the statement below only apply to a super-hero game?

 

A character who can naturally hear radio much spend his precious character points for the ability. It's unfair to this character for other characters to simply buy a radio with money, thus acquiring the same ability without spending any character points.

 

If it is "unfair" in a super-hero game, why is it suddenly "fair" in a heroic game?

 

I can see why it would be more relevant in a super-hero game because more people have natural powers, but what makes the statement invalid for a heroic game?

[Zeropoint]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

In a superheroic game, it's unfair to get a power with cash because the characters have a limited supply of points but effectly free cash. If you say, "Choose one from column A and any number from column B", picking a Column A choice that also shows up in Column B is a really bad move.

 

In a heroic game, you can't choose between paying points or cash for most things. Cash won't buy you extra DEX. Points won't buy you a 2d6 RKA. Since cash is now significant, the supply should be controlled. In this situation, a character has a pool of points and a list of things points will buy, and a pool of cash and a list of things cash will buy. This effectively gives you, "Choose one from Column A and one from Column B," with no overlap between columns.

 

I hope this is clear; I've re-written it several times and it's still not quite where I want it.

 

Zeropoint

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

I think there are two areas where we disagree:

1) You see "free equipment for all" as unfair to people who bought the power anyway. I don't; I think that the person who already has powers like HRRH will just find something else to spend his cash on.

There are a number of issues here that this argument depend on (things like tech level and how easy it is to get items.

 

But lets say that your character has the following natural abilities:

2d6 RKA, IR Vision, Radio Perception, and UV vision.

 

My character is a mentalist how copies your character's abilities by bringing a .44 magnum, IR/UV goggles, and a radio ear-plug.

 

I'm sure that your character could spend his cash on a new MP3 player (or other non-combat items), but what would he bring to the battle field that my character couldn't also bring?

 

My character could still bring much more stuff, all the stuff I mentioned so far has very little encumbrance value, and none of that stuff would be all that expensive.

 

Maybe you could go into more detail about this concept?

 

 

 

 

 

2) You see resource points as fixed, preventing you from rewarding someone with a big artifact.

I never said that, but giving a big artifact would mean that the character would have to dump a bunch of stuff (if this did happen it should be due to weight and bulk, not points), and it would also mean that a PC could not get any artifact beyond a specific point value.

 

 

 

 

Personally, I'd say that giving just one player a big artifact is going to be unfair to the others no matter what, and giving roughly equal rewards to all means that no one is being treated all that unfairly. You can always give an increase in resource points as a reward as well.

The problem here is an in-game/out-of-game difference. A powerful merchant can tempt a PC by offering a great reward, but it is unlikely that a merchant (in the game) can "increase a PC's resource points."

 

As for the rest of your comments, there is some validity to them, but not so much for my games.

 

This is very much an issue that will vary from GM to GM, but I don't believe in railroading the PCs at all. I give them a world to play in; what they do with it is largely up to them. That doesn't mean that the characters will not have to deal with the in-game consiquences to their actions (both good and bad): A character may suffer if he steps on a giants toes, or the same guy may end up ruling the world if he is smart enough.

 

So yes, (in my games) the PCs can end up in un-equal positions depending on what they do after the game starts.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

In a superheroic game, it's unfair to get a power with cash because the characters have a limited supply of points but effectly free cash. If you say, "Choose one from column A and any number from column B", picking a Column A choice that also shows up in Column B is a really bad move.

 

In a heroic game, you can't choose between paying points or cash for most things. Cash won't buy you extra DEX. Points won't buy you a 2d6 RKA. Since cash is now significant, the supply should be controlled. In this situation, a character has a pool of points and a list of things points will buy, and a pool of cash and a list of things cash will buy. This effectively gives you, "Choose one from Column A and one from Column B," with no overlap between columns.

 

I hope this is clear; I've re-written it several times and it's still not quite where I want it.

 

Zeropoint

Those are some good points, but what happens in a heroic game where the characters can buy powers with points, but also buy similar powers with cash? Then there is an overlap between columns.

[OddHat]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

There are a number of issues here that this argument depend on (things like tech level and how easy it is to get items.

 

But lets say that your character has the following natural abilities:

2d6 RKA, IR Vision, Radio Perception, and UV vision.

 

My character is a mentalist how copies your character's abilities by bringing a .44 magnum, IR/UV goggles, and a radio ear-plug.

 

I'm sure that your character could spend his cash on a new MP3 player (or other non-combat items), but what would he bring to the battle field that my character couldn't also bring?

 

My character could still bring much more stuff, all the stuff I mentioned so far has very little encumbrance value, and none of that stuff would be all that expensive.

 

Maybe you could go into more detail about this concept?.

 

You're low-balling in the example you gave. Red Man can have his rPD and rED ready and waiting in situations where Ego Guy can't bring his body armor. If Ego Guy wants a TK Force Field for those situations, he's paying more for it than Red Man did for his protection. Red Man can go into the field with tear gas, smoke, ice, fire, poison, or nerve gas, backed by the argument that all of it is real tech equipment that an individual can carry (see the Dark Champions Exotic Weapons listings), and pay less for it on a DC per DC basis than Ego Guy has to bay for his Ego Attacks. Yes, Ego Guy might be able to get exotic arms himself, if they are available, but he still can't cart them into the Governor's Ball; Red Man doesn't have that problem. Meanwhile Red Man, who has saved all the cash that Ego Guy had to pay out for his arsenal, and has also saved points compared to Ego Guy when it comes to powers, can spend that saved cash on a nice armored van, or a bodyguard, or whatever else is available. The points can go to being more skilled than Ego Guy, or to Combat Skill Levels, or Perks, or...

 

You can make a list of what can and can't be given the "real tech power discount", but again, what is the point?

 

 

 

I never said that, but giving a big artifact would mean that the character would have to dump a bunch of stuff (if this did happen it should be due to weight and bulk, not points), and it would also mean that a PC could not get any artifact beyond a specific point value.

 

I paraphrased from one of your replies, and no it wouldn't. You're the GM. The merchant promissed and delivered the reward, the PC got it, and if you feel it's necessary you can note on his sheet that his resource points just increased, just as you would with any other reward gained in play that boosted character point value.

 

 

The problem here is an in-game/out-of-game difference. A powerful merchant can tempt a PC by offering a great reward, but it is unlikely that a merchant (in the game) can "increase a PC's resource points."

 

See above. The Merhant gave the item. You, if you feel the need to track it, change the character's resource point value accordingly, or not, as you choose. No need to muck about with power costs at all.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

You're low-balling in the example you gave. Red Man can have his rPD and rED ready and waiting in situations where Ego Guy can't bring his body armor. If Ego Guy wants a TK Force Field for those situations, he's paying more for it than Red Man did for his protection. Red Man can go into the field with tear gas, smoke, ice, fire, poison, or nerve gas, backed by the argument that all of it is real tech equipment that an individual can carry (see the Dark Champions Exotic Weapons listings), and pay less for it on a DC per DC basis than Ego Guy has to bay for his Ego Attacks. Yes, Ego Guy might be able to get exotic arms himself, if they are available, but he still can't cart them into the Governor's Ball; Red Man doesn't have that problem. Meanwhile Red Man, who has saved all the cash that Ego Guy had to pay out for his arsenal, and has also saved points compared to Ego Guy when it comes to powers, can spend that saved cash on a nice armored van, or a bodyguard, or whatever else is available. The points can go to being more skilled than Ego Guy, or to Combat Skill Levels, or Perks, or...

 

You can make a list of what can and can't be given the "real tech power discount", but again, what is the point?

In the example, I did not say "Red Man," I was hoping for a more specific list of powers.

 

But putting that aside, if a character wants to "internalize" an item, he'll have to pay from it out of his starting cash, so all Red Man's internalized equipment would still come out of his starting cash (Red Man would obviously not say that he'd actually spent the cash on his internalized items, but he'd just think that he started out the game with less cash). So, no, Red Man would not have any more money than Ego guy.

 

And there may be cases where Ego guy can't take some of equipment, but don't forget, he'll still have his own powers.

 

As far as Red Man's extra points go: remember that while Ego guy has to pay full points for his abilities, he doesn't need a large variety of powers. Ego guy can rely on his equipment for many abilities (like night vision goggles, knife, or a gas mask). So even though Red Man will get discounts, he'll be spending his own points on a large number of things (I bet I can come up with a huge list), and when you go down the sheet and total everything up, Red Man may be much more expensive that Ego guy,

 

Remember the focus limitations are not the only things Red Man must buy off, he's going to have to pay a big chunk of points for many of those items, even with his "discount."

 

 

 

 

 

I paraphrased from one of your replies, and no it wouldn't. You're the GM. The merchant promissed and delivered the reward, the PC got it, and if you feel it's necessary you can note on his sheet that his resource points just increased, just as you would with any other reward gained in play that boosted character point value.

If any other character (even other PCs) can raise my characer's resource points by giving him stuff, then how are RPs a limitation? It sounds like, in the end, resource points will be pretty much the same as letting characters get tech for free.

 

 

See above. The Merhant gave the item. You, if you feel the need to track it, change the character's resource point value accordingly, or not, as you choose. No need to muck about with power costs at all.

And again, see my reply above.

[OddHat]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

In the example, I did not say "Red Man," I was hoping for a more specific list of powers.

 

But putting that aside, if a character wants to "internalize" an item, he'll have to pay from it out of his starting cash, so all Red Man's internalized equipment would still come out of his starting cash (Red Man would obviously not say that he'd actually spent the cash on his internalized items, but he'd just think that he started out the game with less cash). So, no, Red Man would not have any more money than Ego guy.

 

And there may be cases where Ego guy can't take some of equipment, but don't forget, he'll still have his own powers.

 

As far as Red Man's extra points go: remember that while Ego guy has to pay full points for his abilities, he doesn't need a large variety of powers. Ego guy can rely on his equipment for many abilities (like night vision goggles, knife, or a gas mask). So even though Red Man will get discounts, he'll be spending his own points on a large number of things (I bet I can come up with a huge list), and when you go down the sheet and total everything up, Red Man may be much more expensive that Ego guy,

 

Remember the focus limitations are not the only things Red Man must buy off, he's going to have to pay a big chunk of points for many of those items, even with his "discount."

 

You've added some house rules to make your house rule work a little better;now the internal powers cost cash, and you'll find some way to try to charge Red Man more and even things out again. You still need to ask why the player would bother paying for an Ego Attack when a Gas Grenade NND is so much cheaper and has almost no drawbacks. Your game, your house rules, but you're making work for yourself and your players, and for a benefit that could be had with a much simpler house rule.

 

You should also plan to address the Power A = Power B = Power C issue (60 Active points of Armor is roughly equal to 60 Active Points of Force Field which is roughly equal to 60 Active Ponts of Desolid is one example) in this campaign. Your change does change that balance, and build savy players will figure out how.

 

 

 

If any other character (even other PCs) can raise my characer's resource points by giving him stuff, then how are RPs a limitation? It sounds like, in the end, resource points will be pretty much the same as letting characters get tech for free.

And again, see my reply above.

 

They are not meant to be a limitation unless you as GM choose to use them as such. They are a way of tracking how much real tech your players (and someimes NPCs) have access to. Points in general are just there to let you track and plan; as GM you can give as many points as you want to any character at any time. Within common and dramatic sense, of course.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

You've added some house rules to make your house rule work a little better;now the internal powers cost cash, and you'll find some way to try to charge Red Man more and even things out again.

I didn't include the stuff about paying the cash in my initial example, and I should have, but I did kind of think it was a logical consiquence (since I'm basing things on the relative costs of buying a tech item vs having a natural ability).

 

 

 

You still need to ask why the player would bother paying for an Ego Attack when a Gas Grenade NND is so much cheaper and has almost no drawbacks. Your game, your house rules, but you're making work for yourself and your players, and for a benefit that could be had with a much simpler house rule.

 

You should also plan to address the Power A = Power B = Power C issue (60 Active points of Armor is roughly equal to 60 Active Points of Force Field which is roughly equal to 60 Active Ponts of Desolid is one example) in this campaign. Your change does change that balance, and build savy players will figure out how.

No. The real question is why would a character pay points for any ability if he can get the same power through technology without paying points.

 

You are right, the rules are made so that 30 active points of RKA = 30 active points of Ego Attack. But in some games, I can get 30 or even more active points of RKA for free (with a gun).

 

The only really balanced method of doing things is where everybody buys everything with points:

 

Radio Perception IIF (radio ear plug) = 6 points,

2 points of DEX = 6 points,

+ 3 OCV with specific attack = 6 points

 

All those things are equal until the concept of getting "real equipment for free" comes into the picture. This concept is about trying to apply a real world concept to a already functioning game system.

 

As soon as one accepts the idea of trying to get some equipment for free, 6 points doesn't always = 6 points any more. 2 points of DEX are still 6 points, but the IIF radio is now free. So my suggested way of doing things is not in balance with the system, but it does not have any more balance problems than any other "real tech for free approach." When you start letting anybody have things without paying points then you can unbalance the system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

They are not meant to be a limitation unless you as GM choose to use them as such. They are a way of tracking how much real tech your players (and someimes NPCs) have access to. Points in general are just there to let you track and plan; as GM you can give as many points as you want to any character at any time. Within common and dramatic sense, of course.

To me, points are a more than just a means to "track and plan," the rules represent a contract between myself (as GM), and the Players. That doesn't mean that "the rules" can't be my own rules, but they should be spelled out (as much as possible within reason) for all to see. (that is why I don't like narrative based systems)

[Rapier]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

The only really balanced method of doing things is where everybody buys everything with points:

 

Radio Perception IIF (radio ear plug) = 6 points,

2 points of DEX = 6 points,

+ 3 OCV with specific attack = 6 points

 

All those things are equal until the concept of getting "real equipment for free" comes into the picture. This concept is about trying to apply a real world concept to a already functioning game system.

First, I would like to say that you might want to sit down and read through the section on GMing. I think there are some nuances that you are missing.

 

During Character Generation, all characters are built on points...an equal number of points. In heroic games the easiest, simplest and fairest way to do this is to give each player the same base points, disad points and equipment allowance points.

 

During the first game, MiracleMan picks up a better gun. Does he put it on his character sheet? Yes. Does he pay points for it? No, but it is possible that he paid cash for it. Does he have to sell back some of his other equipment to keep his total the same as it was the second he was created? No, because that would defeat the whole purpose of XP and character advancement.

 

Resource points are only a way to manage player expectations during Character Generation. Once the characters are generated and become a part of the campaign, money and the rest comes into play.

 

The important piece is making sure that all characters are balanced and "equal" when coming out of the Character Generation starting gate. After that they will advance at different levels as XP and equipment changes the relative power (in points, equip etc).

 

Trying to vary this formula to any degree, most especially in the way that points are divided during character generation is going to drastically change the balance of your game, and ultimately the enjoyment of the players.

 

But its your game, do whatever you please.

 

Peace out.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

If Ego Guy wants a TK Force Field for those situations' date=' he's paying more for it than Red Man did for his protection. [/quote']

 

This highlights the subjectivity of the proposed system. I believe the structure was that a character buying a power which could be simulated with real world tech would pay only the difference between the cost of the tech and the cost of the power.

 

So if we assume real world tech can provide +8/+8 Armor, OIF (16 points), I should be able to buy +8/+8 Armor for 8 points (it would cost 24 points normally, less 16 tech value).

 

So what should Ego Guy pay for a +8/+8 force Field, 0 END? He's getting the same effect as the armor, so reasonably, he should pay 8 points, not 24. What if it's not 0 END? Well, real world tech costs 16, and the force field would cost 16 (not fiocyused, but with a different limitation), so Ego Guy should arguably subtract 16 points from the cost of his 8/8 resistant defense and get the force field for free, as opposed to paying 8/1.5 = 5.

 

Let's moveon to The Brick. He has naturally high defenses. He wants to make 8 points of PD and ED resistant. Should he:

 

(a) Pay 8 points - that's the cost of damage resistance.

( Pay nothing - he could get the same thing for free with tech AND boost his defenses by 8 each.

© Get an 8 point rebate - he paid 8 points each for PD and ED. He would only have paid 8 to make real world tech (8/8 armor) a natural power, and he's already paid 16 for the non-resistant defenses.

 

If your answer is (a), I submit that our Brick friend should also be permitted to wear the kevlar outfit like anyone else, and boost his (already high) defenses. If it is ( or ©, what stops him from using that real world tech.

 

Note that our Brick could, instead, have bought 8 less PD and ED, and purchased 8/8 armor, and you would only have charged him 8 points based on my understanding of the proposed system.

 

Now, what if our Brick's 8/8 armor costs END and is OIHID? He''d normally pay 14 points, but could have the real world tech for free - does he get an extra 2 points to spend as he wishes? If not, is this fair? If so, how easy is it to abuse by purchasing powers that duplicate real world tech that cost 10x END, only work in an intense magnetic field, are ineffective against females, require concentration to 0 DCV, 2 handed gestures, incantations and take Extra Time - 1 year? Thanks for the exra points - I'll buy something useful with them now!

 

I'm not saying the "real world tech" approach proposed can't work. I am saying it has a lot of nuances and questions that need to be addressed. The current system (pay the points if you want the tech) is reasonably balanced, but sacrifices logic to some extent. To create a system without the logic sacrifice which remains reasonably balanced would require considerable work.

 

In heroic games, I see two common approaches. First, the players can't have powersd (how may SuperSpies do you see with armor-plated skin and 2d6 RKA eyebeams?). Second, the GM controls availability of equipment (Fantasy Hero) and characters spend points on things equipment can't duplicate (eg. higher DC's, "no range modifier:, trigger; etc.). And if the GM makes an error and allows one character to become too powerful (the Magic Item), the other players tend to get upset.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

First, I would like to say that you might want to sit down and read through the section on GMing. I think there are some nuances that you are missing.

Even on a re-read, I'd probably still miss them--so you'd better explain them to me.

 

 

 

 

During Character Generation, all characters are built on points...an equal number of points. In heroic games the easiest, simplest and fairest way to do this is to give each player the same base points, disad points and equipment allowance points.

 

During the first game, MiracleMan picks up a better gun. Does he put it on his character sheet? Yes. Does he pay points for it? No, but it is possible that he paid cash for it. Does he have to sell back some of his other equipment to keep his total the same as it was the second he was created? No, because that would defeat the whole purpose of XP and character advancement.

 

Resource points are only a way to manage player expectations during Character Generation. Once the characters are generated and become a part of the campaign, money and the rest comes into play.

I have a big problem with most rules that apply right up to the start of the game and then dissappear. Whatever rules I have would be consistent throughout the campaign.

 

If I use Resource Points, then those will be a consistent thing throughout the campaign. Rule 1: you can't ever have it (at any time during the campaign) unless you pay points for it (no exceptions). The only way to get more resource points over time will be to buy them with XP points. Just like in a super-heroic game, the advancement would be based on XPs (not cash).

 

If I'm going to allow items to be purchased with cash, then that will also be consistent throughout the campaign. If you can show me that your character could have purchased an item before the game starts, then you can have it for free (its $ cost will still come out of the starting money).

 

 

 

 

The important piece is making sure that all characters are balanced and "equal" when coming out of the Character Generation starting gate. After that they will advance at different levels as XP and equipment changes the relative power (in points, equip etc).

 

Trying to vary this formula to any degree, most especially in the way that points are divided during character generation is going to drastically change the balance of your game, and ultimately the enjoyment of the players.

As far as the balanced and equal thing goes, if I'm giving one character an ability for free (Radio Ear Plug IIF normal cost: 6) then I feel that it is important to consider giving other characters radio hearing at a discount. The rules may say that radio hearing is worth 8 points, but they also say that radio hearing IIF is worth 6 points.

 

It all comes back to that quote:

 

A character who can naturally hear radio much spend his precious character points for the ability. It's unfair to this character for other characters to simply buy a radio with money, thus acquiring the same ability without spending any character points.

 

Why shouldn't this statement apply to my game? Please explain.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

This highlights the subjectivity of the proposed system. I believe the structure was that a character buying a power which could be simulated with real world tech would pay only the difference between the cost of the tech and the cost of the power.

 

So if we assume real world tech can provide +8/+8 Armor, OIF (16 points), I should be able to buy +8/+8 Armor for 8 points (it would cost 24 points normally, less 16 tech value).

 

So what should Ego Guy pay for a +8/+8 force Field, 0 END? He's getting the same effect as the armor, so reasonably, he should pay 8 points, not 24. What if it's not 0 END? Well, real world tech costs 16, and the force field would cost 16 (not fiocyused, but with a different limitation), so Ego Guy should arguably subtract 16 points from the cost of his 8/8 resistant defense and get the force field for free, as opposed to paying 8/1.5 = 5.

 

Let's moveon to The Brick. He has naturally high defenses. He wants to make 8 points of PD and ED resistant. Should he:

 

(a) Pay 8 points - that's the cost of damage resistance.

( Pay nothing - he could get the same thing for free with tech AND boost his defenses by 8 each.

© Get an 8 point rebate - he paid 8 points each for PD and ED. He would only have paid 8 to make real world tech (8/8 armor) a natural power, and he's already paid 16 for the non-resistant defenses.

 

If your answer is (a), I submit that our Brick friend should also be permitted to wear the kevlar outfit like anyone else, and boost his (already high) defenses. If it is ( or ©, what stops him from using that real world tech.

 

Note that our Brick could, instead, have bought 8 less PD and ED, and purchased 8/8 armor, and you would only have charged him 8 points based on my understanding of the proposed system.

I've already explained this concept several times in this thread.

 

First, 8/8 Armor would have a cost of 24 real points, but OIF is not the only limitation you'd have to buy off. You'd have to buy off stuff like "Real Armor" and weight as well. The end cost to the character would be 11 points for the armor and 13 points to buy off the limitations.

 

Armor, and anything else that can stack, has some major problems with this method. A character can "have his cake and eat it too," or in this case have his armor and wear it too. Any such powers would have to be either disallowed from benifiting from this method, or otherwise limited somehow.

 

I haven't gone into this matter before, but I have some problems with layering armor in an exponential game anyway.

 

Imagine that we are looking at some inanimate object (so I can forget about STUN for this example).

 

10 PD armor protects against 10d6. (average BODY damage anyway)

 

10 PD force field protects against 10d6. (average BODY damage anyway)

 

10 PD armor + 10 PD force field protects against 20d6. (average BODY damage anyway)

 

The problem is that 20d6 is not double 10d6. On an exponential scale, 20d6 is 1000 times as much as 10d6. I don't see how that a double layer of 10 PD armor should be 1000 times as effective at preventing damage as a single layer.

 

I don't think that armor should just add together. And I don't think that SuperMan sould get any benifit from wearing kevlar; any attack that would hurt Superman, would go through the kevlar like it wasn't there. But the thing is that my views on this matter are not all that relevant to this thread, so I don't want to open that can of worms right here. (of course it may be too late for that now )

 

 

 

Now, what if our Brick's 8/8 armor costs END and is OIHID? He''d normally pay 14 points, but could have the real world tech for free - does he get an extra 2 points to spend as he wishes? If not, is this fair? If so, how easy is it to abuse by purchasing powers that duplicate real world tech that cost 10x END, only work in an intense magnetic field, are ineffective against females, require concentration to 0 DCV, 2 handed gestures, incantations and take Extra Time - 1 year? Thanks for the exra points - I'll buy something useful with them now!

Any limitations on the power are irrelevant to the discount points.

 

Radio Hearing might end up costing 2 points, but Radio Hearing Only on a Full Moon would cost 2 with a -2 limitation on them. And no matter what limitations you put on the ability, it would still cost a minimum of 1 point.

 

Finally, keep in mind that following the logic of item internalization requires other prices. It would cost cash (since we're starting with an item all costs are the same), and if the base item required a skill to use WF: Fire arms, so would the internalized item. You're not getting anything for free, you're just starting at a cash bought item and working backward from the item to an ability.

 

I'm not saying the "real world tech" approach proposed can't work. I am saying it has a lot of nuances and questions that need to be addressed. The current system (pay the points if you want the tech) is reasonably balanced, but sacrifices logic to some extent. To create a system without the logic sacrifice which remains reasonably balanced would require considerable work.

On this point we agree. I probably will not be using my method, because there are a number of complexities involved.

 

In heroic games, I see two common approaches. First, the players can't have powersd (how may SuperSpies do you see with armor-plated skin and 2d6 RKA eyebeams?). Second, the GM controls availability of equipment (Fantasy Hero) and characters spend points on things equipment can't duplicate (eg. higher DC's, "no range modifier:, trigger; etc.). And if the GM makes an error and allows one character to become too powerful (the Magic Item), the other players tend to get upset.

I don't know if my game counts of heroic or super-heroic, but the characters (at least some of them) are going to have powers. So the first approach is out.

 

The second approach has a number of problems, especially if characters also spend points on things equipment can duplicate.

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

After considering this discussion so far, I've decided that I'll probably go with resource points.

 

It seems like the whole "point discount thing" will be more trouble than it is worth, and will still not solve all the problems I wanted to solve. The only really fair solution is to do everything with points from the start of the campaign to the end of the campaign.

 

I'd like something more "realistic," but given the choices, I'm willing to go with the points method.

 

Since I don't have the Dark Champions 5th ed book (and I don't remember it being in my 4th ed DC book), I have some of my own observations on the topic.

 

I definitely want different characters to have different amounts of resource points. Some characters will be "power based" and have very little equipment, and others will be very "equipment based." And, later in the game, if characters want to increase the resource points, they'll have to spend their XPs to increase the amount of resource point available. For both these reasons, I need a conversion method between normal points and resource points.

 

Based on what I've heard, resource points sound like a VPP. It would not require a skill roll. But it could only be changed when there was access to different equipment. And it could only be changed to the equipment which was available at that point in time.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

Based on what I've heard' date=' resource points sound like a VPP. It would not require a skill roll. But it could only be changed when there was access to different equipment. And it could only be changed to the equipment which was available at that point in time.[/quote']

 

I agree with this. This is, as a consequence, the means I would use to price "resource points". hmmm...a 20 point VPP would have no skill roll (+1/2), limited to real world equipment available and only changed where equipment accessible, and must have a focus (combine that to -1) and that would be a 7.5 (so 7) point control cost. However, to really work, the VPP also needs the "AP limiuted to pool cost" restriction removed. Call that a +1/2 advantage, and you end up with the following:

 

PERK: "Resource Points" - characters may access real world equipment by purchasing resource points. A character may have real world equipment having a total real point value equal to their resource points available. This equipment may be changed as desired, but only where the desired equipment is available. Resource points cost 3 character points per 2 resource points.

 

[i use a perk to indicate limitations may not generally be taken on your Resource Points.]

[Warp9]

Re: Natural Powers VS equipment question

 

I agree with this. This is, as a consequence, the means I would use to price "resource points". hmmm...a 20 point VPP would have no skill roll (+1/2), limited to real world equipment available and only changed where equipment accessible, and must have a focus (combine that to -1) and that would be a 7.5 (so 7) point control cost. However, to really work, the VPP also needs the "AP limiuted to pool cost" restriction removed. Call that a +1/2 advantage, and you end up with the following:

 

PERK: "Resource Points" - characters may access real world equipment by purchasing resource points. A character may have real world equipment having a total real point value equal to their resource points available. This equipment may be changed as desired, but only where the desired equipment is available. Resource points cost 3 character points per 2 resource points.

 

[i use a perk to indicate limitations may not generally be taken on your Resource Points.]

That sounds pretty good.

 

As for as having the "AP limiuted to pool cost restriction removed" thing goes, it could be done either way. At first I thought that having this limit removed would be absolutely necessary, but then realized that I could live with the active points being limited to the pool value.

 

Removing the limitation would definitely make things more "realistic," but since I'm making people buy everything with points, I've already thrown real world logic out the window (at least to some extent).

 

And one good thing about the active point limitation is that it keeps people from having a resource point pool just big enough to buy that "one big piece of equipment." If you have a pool big enough to afford the active points your favorite weapon, you'll be likely to have some real points left over for other things. This situation would stop characters from carrying bazookas while running around wearing nothing but a bath towels.