On balance...when no one else follows it.

[Rerednaw]

Hi all.

 

A new GM just began running her first Champions game. It's pretty much standard (350), but slightly more serious/dark.

 

For example she didn't want anyone to take a code versus killing.

 

Since she did not want to worry about min-maxing, I suggested that we run a 'straight-rules' game. Nothing with STOP, ! or a magnifying glass. She agreed and so did everyone else.

 

Well, I'm the only character that doesn't have a power framework(s) or an advantage/limitation/power that falls under that category. The GM just gave in and allowed them.

 

In addition, she (the GM) plans on using NPCs from the official sourcebooks without any changes. As you folks know, most of the NPCs automatically use frameworks or have powers like Extra-dimensional movement powers usuable against others, and so forth.

 

As long as we stay out of combat, my character will be okay. I took a bunch of detective-CSI skills and contacts. He's basically a martial artist/brick. I am enjoying the roleplaying portion of the game so far. My worry is once we start fighting.

 

In combat I am probably going to get splattered. Not that it matters that much to me, I'm thinking that it may help drive my point about disparate balance home.

 

I was debating on jumping on the bandwagon, but I'd rather stick to my principles...even if it means I'm about 60% as effective as everyone else.

 

Suggestions?

[Mark Taylor]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Hmmm. I'd be very wary of a GM who just caves in to whatever the players want.

[Constantine]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Go ahead and join the dark side. Its already effecting your enjoyment to a point. Just go ahead, take the extra points, as long as what you do is still in character concept...

[Vanguard00]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Well, you could always talk to the GM. Ask her why she told y'all not to do certain things, then allowed them anyway. And if she did that, why didn't she let you know it was okay to do that, too? Ask if you should change your character (if you really want to).

 

Open a dialogue with her first and foremost. It doesn't do you any good to fume when it might be a simple misunderstanding.

 

By the same token, you could try and rise to the challenge and make your character as effective as everyone else's. For example, when not in combat it sounds like you might have some seriously useful skills to utilize. Play 'em to the hilt.

 

In combat, take a more supportive role. Don't try and go toe-to-toe with the baddies. Skirt around the edges, dodge a bit, and wait for the right moment to strike. Even a simple distraction might benefit one your heavy-hitting coplayers. Do crowd control, or try and use your skills while in combat (pick a pocket, steal a focus, etc). Look for ways to make your character shine.

 

G'luck to ya.

[Phil]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Well, if it isnt too late, I'd say let it be, but buy yourself a bit of extra DCV, get some extra PRE and some low cost utility powers like Aid or cumulative Mind Control. That way, you contribute to every fight, even if you're not the directly involved.

[Sean Waters]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

You could throw a hissy-fit then demand extra GM bonus points for free because you stuck to the rules and they didn't, so you're better than they are and deserve it. Use the points to but a drain v. frameworks, stop and magnifying glass powers then drain your team mates of those powers completely. Watch them get eaten by Grond. Laugh raucously, then go and join a team that can stick to it's word.

 

All in a spirit of friendship and cooperation, you understand.

[Barton]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

My character, a robot, was for a long time was very weak in combat. So what I did was attack the flanks of our enemies. I would also attack at range and NOT get in hand to hand combat.

[fbdaury]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

"IT'S A TRICK, GET A ROPE!" Sorry, I just love saying that...

However, I did have a point- stick with your principals if for no other reason than that your GM may be planning on making them pay for all those bonuses they got- drainers against ECs, optimized villains, etc. By not buying into the whole thing, you may not get hit as hard if she drops the hammer.

[OddHat]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

If you feel underpowered, ask if you can re-write and add a framework. It can be a pisser when you don't know how a game will be run before designing your character, and most GMs will be reasonable and let you re-work the character. However, she's the GM. You are not. When it comes to game balance, her call goes.

[Publius]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

I agree, re-submit a character design that you tell her is "more in keeping with the new tone of your campaign". That way you can control the level of contraryness you want to use. If you still wanted to make that point, you could always show her how these things you can do now are so much more powerful since she adopted her "let it all hang out" attitude. Sticking to your principles is fine, but getting splattered or running for cover (by necessity) in games is not fun.

 

On the GM's side, it might just be that some of the abilities that other characters developed were appealing to her and so she allowed them, and then sort of painted herself in the corner. Hey, I don't know anything at all about the situation, I'm just putting out something reasonable that may just seem like "caving in". You would know better how this applies in your situation.

 

I have been in a situation where I asked the players to design characters that would have fit into a particular genre (Dark Champions) and most of the PCs came out with four-color superheroes (flight, frickin' lasers coming out of their eyes, etc). I just came to the conclusion that 'Hey, this is for the enjoyment of all of us' and steered the Dark Champions setting into 4-color-ville. One fellows character was good for the original DC tone and when we went Full-Color I gave him leave to re-allocate his characters points. When it comes to ceilings, Factor of X, and disallowed areas however I am quite firm (although I also try to give players leeway to be 'special' and let each bend them slightly in one single area to give them that unique speciality). Of course it helps that I (normally, not in that case) shape their characters after they make them so I will just tone something down that violates the standards provided. Here you are talking powers and abilities and so that is squarely between the tone-issue and the hard number issue (at least for me). A line-call. Still, as many others have said, it is her game now and her rule.

[Sean Waters]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

I'd stick to my principles, largely because I think that would get more laughs, but I like this approach:

 

I agree' date=' re-submit a character design that you tell her is "more in keeping with the new tone of your campaign". [/quote']

 

Start with 'new', work up through 'new and different' and then move on to 'unrecogniseable'. Mention how she's ruined your life. Really turn the screws. Have some stickers made up with little looking glass symbols and STOP symbols on them and attach them to practically everything at your gaming sessions. Become increasingly withdrawn, hum, hug your knees and rock back and forth and when called on to do anything wail, 'I CAN'T, I'M USELESS!'

 

Now I'm thinking she'll get the hint eventually that she's done something you are not happy with.

 

Of course you could always post the character here and we'll work our magic for you. I warn you though, it might end up unrecogniseable.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Use the points to buy a drain v. frameworks, stop and magnifying glass powers then drain your team mates of those powers completely. Watch them get eaten by Grond. Laugh raucously, then go and join a team that can stick to it's word.

 

All in a spirit of friendship and cooperation, you understand.

 

1d6 Drain (10), all Framework, Stop Sign and Maginfying Glass powers at once (+2), AE 1 hex (+1/2) Megascale (+1/2 - 10km radius), Fade Rate 5 pts per month (+2? Whatever duration +2 is, anyway) 0 END (+1/2) Persistent (+1/2) IPE (+1) Penetrating 2x (+1) = 90 AP. Limitations: Always on (-1/2), maybe some Gradual Effect so the powers drain away slowly (say 1d6 every day - sholuld be -1 at least) is 36 points. Add this and 10 levels of Combat Luck on to a Crow, and buy it as a Follower. That should be pretty inexpensive. "Everyone else got to use frameworks and stop sign powers and magnifying glass powers. All I'm asking for is a tiny little follower!"

[Victim]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

What power framework or stop sign power is MA/Brick/Detective going to have anyway? How could you afford one? You can't put the stats and skills you were buying into a framework anyway.

 

In theory, a brick MA seems pretty good in combat. High CV, attacks, and conventional defenses all seem like decent combat ability, although you might be lacking in movement. STR, CON, and DEX are all very efficient buys, and you'll be buying all of them to a high level. If you think about it, a 3 power EC saves about 60 points. STR provides benefits roughly equal to twice its cost, so with a high STR you come out even.

 

If you want to save some points without using a framework, just talk to the GM about consolidating some of your background knowledge skills. Then get Analyze and Find Weakness or more stats.

[Dust Raven]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Assuming all of the players and the GM are friends of yours (I no longer play with people I don't consider friends, except at conventions of course), talk to them. Sometimes a simple question can solve all the problems for you. If the GM is not just fair, but also a friend, she'll let you know what your options are and make sure you have plenty of them.

 

If you're just playing in a group so you can play... Do whatever sounds the most for for you. If that means reading a book during combats while your character runs away and hides, do it. If that means using the contacts you bought and paid for to get NPC to interfere in all of the interaction of the other characters, do it. If that means re-writing your character according the the apparently "updated" guidelines but not telling the other players (tell the GM of course, just keep it a secret) and then surprise them every once in a while with something they didn't expect you could do (like save their ass one day instead of hiding behind that dumpster), definately do it!

 

And if finding some other group sounds like more fun... do that.

[Bleys]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

This isnt realy valid advice(because its Competive and adverserial) but it may amuse you.

 

1)Ask to restructure the character.

 

2)Stick to your guns with the new design

 

3)Sleaze the hell outta the new design without violating the original rules.

I sugest things like BODY SUPPRESS in place of martiial arts, mosquito followers with AID bites, Use CONTINUING CHARGES and place all your detective skills in a FOCUS like a fedora or trench coat.

 

4)Gloat insufferably about how you followed the original rules and your still better then all the other PCs.

 

As said, this is NOT actual advice, but it might be a fun character builing exercise.

[etherio]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

1) Play with friends.

2) Your friends will give a crap if you're not having fun, regardless of relative ideas of fairness.

3) Avoid soap-opera drama in your gaming relationships...this is supposed to be escapist fun, after all.

[tesuji]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

 

Since she did not want to worry about min-maxing, I suggested that we run a 'straight-rules' game. Nothing with STOP, ! or a magnifying glass. She agreed and so did everyone else.

Hmmm... sounds pretty limited. HERo is pretty liberal with these warning things, as they simply represent cautions to the GM, not an indication of "imbalance." I can see a great many fine and balanced characters who would be illegal under this restriction.

 

Well, I'm the only character that doesn't have a power framework(s) or an advantage/limitation/power that falls under that category. The GM just gave in and allowed them.

I am not surprised. The game system more or less uses frameworks all the time. Anyone buying the core books and any of the supplements is going to expect to use those, and certainly if they use the published characters as "examples" would think them fine.

 

But, of course, its the GM who sets the rules for a given campaign.

 

Sounds like you made an initial suggestion which she liked, then the others in practice changed their minds, and she went with the majority opinion.

 

So, most of the players in the game do not agree with your restriction and she decided to go that way for her game.

 

nothing wrong with a GM setting campaign specs to meet the expectations of the majority of her players, instead of only one, right?

In addition, she (the GM) plans on using NPCs from the official sourcebooks without any changes. As you folks know, most of the NPCs automatically use frameworks or have powers like Extra-dimensional movement powers usuable against others, and so forth.

Which may well indicate she realized the workload your restitrction would put on her.

 

By not using your restriction, and using more "like the game" campaign specs, she gets to use a whole trove of characters without a lot of work.

 

That sounds like a very reasonable decision to me. Generating characters for a game is not quick and easy.

 

So, so far she has decided against, changed her mind about using, your restriction because the majority of players did not want to follow it (in practice) and so she can use published characters as adversaries without needing to generate them all from scratch.

 

These sound like very reasonable decisions to me.

As long as we stay out of combat, my character will be okay. I took a bunch of detective-CSI skills and contacts. He's basically a martial artist/brick. I am enjoying the roleplaying portion of the game so far. My worry is once we start fighting.

uhhh.. both bricks and martial artists are among the most efficient character designs without frameworks under the normal rules. Many a case has been made that blaste4rs using ECs and multipowers is designed to keep them competitive with bricks who get all the bonus figured stats without frameworks.

 

So, i would suggest that just because you did not use these things for that character concept should not worry you. Certainly, if you spoent disproportionally more points on non-combat investigative stuff than the others, you might feel a combat pinch, but typically my bricks had more pts for "other skills" than the blasters and psychics and such because bricks are cheap to build for similar combat effectiveness.

In combat I am probably going to get splattered. Not that it matters that much to me, I'm thinking that it may help drive my point about disparate balance home.

or it might just show differences in character focus... more pts "non-combat" might lead to "less combat capable."

I was debating on jumping on the bandwagon, but I'd rather stick to my principles...even if it means I'm about 60% as effective as everyone else.

 

Suggestions?

 

if your character is built to that low an efficiency, if thats a real accurate assessment, then i would say you are building for a different game than the one the Gm and the other players plan on playing.

 

Rather than ride the "i am on pinciples" high horse into "disruptive gamer land" until it blows up or starts to impact everyone else's fun, you might really want to consider finding a game where the way you want to do things is not contradicting every other player/GM in the game.

 

There is no "right" and no "wrong" gaming style. A game that doesn't use "frameworks, stop signs and mag glasses" is not "better" than one that isn't, nor is it even necessarily more balanced.

 

Your principle seems to be in practice " i want everyone to play the game my way, even though i am not the Gm making the decisions, and regardless of whether thats what they want." and that principle is not usually going to produce "better" gaming.

 

Summary: go find a game that suits you better and let them play the game they want to play without trying to imply they are "unprincipled" or wrong for doing so.

[The Hyborian]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

I'm not sure that I have ever made a character without some kind of of power framework, at least for a champions campagin.

 

Im not sure how the other players are acting. Do you think that they are building abusive, unbalance characters, or do you think that when they got into the nuts and bolts of charcter creation they found they really couldn't build the characters they wanted with the suggested limitions on character design? No frameworks is a bugger of a setback on what you can do with your points, and the powers with stop, !, and the mag glass are not necessary unbalanced, they just need DM oversight to make sure everything is ok for the campagin in mind. It may be your fellow gamers agreed without thinking through the effects of what they were agreeing too.

 

My advice to to rebuild your character to be on par combat wise with the rest of the group. Dont min/max your character, dont come up with anything that pushes the spirit of the rules, don't build something "abusive", but make sure your character competes in terms of speed, attacks, CV, defense, etc. It's hard to feel super if you get you tail handed to you in every combat.

 

And just because your character is less effective doesn't mean that the other characters are abusive. You can build characters for the same point base that work radically differently. I played in a champions champaign once where I built a Shadow-esq crimefighter, with stealth, guns, gadgets, tons of skills, and a normal stats maxima. He was a great character, but was out of place in the campaign. Everyone else had built Avengers style conventional supers, and while they had less depth and skills than I did, their basic attacks and defenses were so far beyond mine that I just couldn't compete. I would struggle to take out agents that the others just smashed in one phase, and when the supervillians showed up my attacks pretty much bounced off.

 

This didn't mean my character was broken, just misplaced. I had make a great character for a Dark Champions street level supers campaign, but was playing in a conventinal four color supers campaign. The result? My character was turned into a NPC ally of the group who went off to scour the shadows of the night for evildoers, and I built a new character based on a power ring with lots of shiny energy blasts and forcefields. He melded much better with the campaign and I had a better time.

 

And please note that the change in character theme was not really necessary. I could have built my dark detective over at a higher powerlevel, I just chose to go in a really new direction. It would have been just a viable to drop the stats maxima, edit his skills down a bit, give hime a combat exoskeleton that enhanced his stats, some bigger guns, a force field belt maybe, and there you go, dark detective than can smack superpowered foes.

[Mentor]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

1) Play with friends.

2) Your friends will give a crap if you're not having fun, regardless of relative ideas of fairness.

3) Avoid soap-opera drama in your gaming relationships...this is supposed to be escapist fun, after all.

So elegantly stated, etherio.

 

Rep to you.

[etherio]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

danke.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

And please note that the change in character theme was not really necessary. I could have built my dark detective over at a higher powerlevel, I just chose to go in a really new direction. It would have been just a viable to drop the stats maxima, edit his skills down a bit, give hime a combat exoskeleton that enhanced his stats, some bigger guns, a force field belt maybe, and there you go, dark detective than can smack superpowered foes.

 

Bravo. All that rather spurious Rep you just gained doesn't dilute the fact that your post is dead on. When, in our Champs campaign, the time came to make a Team, it was mostly assembled from existing characters. Mine, Blackjack, was a "dark detective" as well. And once we got the resources together as a team, he morphed his Gaget VPP almost literally the way you mentioned, and became not only one of the "front line" combatants, but the de facto Team leader as well, because he had all the nifty skills to back up the job.

[zornwil]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

To stick up for the GM, I have started out with one direction and, as someone earlier in the thread mentioned, found some concepts so desirable that I went against my original direction to allow for them. Because this often happens in a one-on-one conversation over characters, it's sometimes easy to forget/not notice that one player didn't get the benefit of such a change, particularly if the player seems content. So I wouldn't take it as anything deliberate against the one player left out, and as that player I'd speak up and say what you'd like to change about your character to create a better balance.

 

Just letting it happen in combat may have unintended consequences - in particular, if it is frustrating to you as a player then both you and the game are being given a disservice. Just proving a point is not worth that. Worse, the one thing you might have intended won't happen at all - the GM may remain oblivious to your character being regularly plastered and just assume you actually want it that way (some rare people do, after all, I've built characters that weren't intended to do well in combat). If you grin and bear it but are unhappy deep down, that will just fester and get worse, not better. Or the GM might notice the problem and just give your character more points; if she doesn't really pay attention to why and there's no explanation to the group but they hear about it, then they will start to ask for the same when weaknesses occur and the base problem remains unresolved.

 

So I strongly encourage talking to her. If she then resists it just for your character and this bothers you, I'd say just politely, nicely walk away. That one-time pain of going through that is better than sitting through every session feeling disadvantaged and not really either knowing or agreeing as to why. And you'll just send out a bad vibe that may infect the game.

[Sean Waters]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

Oh will you lot stop being so darned reasonable about all this?

 

I am not a fan of frameworks. You may have noticed me ranting against VPPs, ECs and even the humble MP.

 

Actually that ain't quite right, I am a fan, I think they are great, but I think they are used far, far too much, and very often by rote.

 

I build characters all the time without a power framework in sight. More, perhaps, to the point I think a lot of the source characters (the comic book heroes) probably don't use them much. Let's look at the X-Men. Storm probably has one, and Iceman. Maybe Prof X (although he probably shouldn't), maybe Jean Grey (although she shouldn't either). Wolverine, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, Beast, ShadowCat, Angel/Archangel/Death (whatever he is called now), Colossus - none of these characters need a framework, and shouldn't have one, although you could probably lever one into every character design. Superman? Wonder Woman? Even Batman probably only has a multipower.

 

I'm going off on one here, but...

 

Ever feel we over-design? I mean 'The Ultimate Gamer's Toolkit' kind of invites it, doesn't it, and we have so much time free we post books worth of text to these boards.

 

I found a folder of characters the other day, I'd drafted over the years, most of them unfinished. I tend to design quite low powered characters as heroes and villains, very often one trick ponies, and virtually the only framework I use is the multipower because, well, how else do you do two different types of bullet and still come in under budget?

 

I look with awe on some of the characters I see people post. I mean, they must have taken days. I rarely spend more than about twenty minutes blank page to finished character. I'll spend more time drawing the character than designing it.

 

I'm not saying my way right, every other way wrong (well, there might be a sub-text ), but all those characters were perfectly playable, and there was fun involved in the play. Bonus!

 

I have no idea what's come over me, but Rerednaw, buddy, the only problem with the character is if there's another one who can do the same stuff only better. I can see that getting old quickly. If you have stuff to do, even if it isn't winning the day from the central limelight position every time, I'd try playing the character 'as is' for a while and see how it goes.

 

I'm playing a character: Monster Girl at present. As is usual, whoever is running our games tends to make the characters for us, and I wasn't that impressed by the design: I could think of any number of ways to make her far more powerful (she's a shapeshifter, but all her forms are 'monstrous'.)

 

Not great in combat (especially as I tend to be the biggest protagonist on the field and we have someone who's better at being a brick: strionger and tougher), not really geared for any of the traditional shapeshifter stuff (I can turn into mini-Godzilla, or a giant serpent or a sort of hobgoblin, so not much secret infiltration work), but she's no slouch, and I'm finding new ways to use the powers as time goes by.

 

Do you know what though? I love that character now. I think she's great. She's done some brave stuff, she almost sacrificed herself for her team mates, and she has relationships (in the non-biblical sense) with other characters and various NPCs.

 

Frankly, sod the powers, the build and the design. Monster Girl rocks. And you know what, I'd never have built her like that, and I'd be missing out on something really special.

 

I'd stick with your character, and just see how it goes, not worry too much about balance and points efficiency (and those who know my opinions in posts will laugh when they read that!).

 

If you don't like the character after half a dozen sessions or so, retire him to another game somewhere and bring in a new one, but I wouldn't write him off just yet.

 

Look if any of you see my point wandering around here, y'll let me know, huh? Actually there may be several, all heading off in completely different directions....

[zornwil]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

TRL, when it comes to NPCs, I hardly design at all, that's a big reason I don't post mine. I jot down the basics, a few notes, ensure I have the right collection of powers, and that's it. The Incredibles were a special case for me, being a huge fan of the movie and doing it explicitly as something to share with people. But for gameplay, my NPCs are very "scratchy".

[Doppler]

Re: On balance...when no one else follows it.

 

It's usually the idea that matters.. the points are secondary when you're making a gamepiece for an actual game.

 

When you're making up a character as an intellectual exercise, it can go either way; you could make up a nice group of points with tight, flashy, subtle, and devine power constructs... or you could jot down a few notes for your one-trick pony (both of which I do regularly).

 

Sometimes, I only go as far as a name and a short list of major powers. I like the idea just fine, but since I'm probably never going to be interested enough in playing the character I devised, I leave it be as a background element. Should the need arise, I can always go back and put the numbers on a piece of paper.

 

I agree with TRL that we're all sometimes guilty of over-designing. One of my most rewarding PCs was Color Kid, whose one and only power was to alter the color of things. I was able to use it to good effect, by permenently altering the skin color of a vain villain and threatening to leave him that way if he didn't stop; my power stunt was to create Darkness by coloring the air pink; I could also Flash people by turning their retinae an opaque color for a short period of time. The main thing is, the character was fun. He didn't need to excel in any particular area. He was just plain fun.