Using Supervillain Psych Lims

[Manic Typist]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Ok, a few things.

 

First, I would just like to remind everyone (not that they need it, but just to be sure) that when you start throwing out phrases like "bad roleplaying" and "bad GMing" or "good way" or "right" or "wrong," these words have different meanings to different people. So, when you are advocating something that is "good," it MIGHT not be the same thing another thinks of as good. Also, when you tell someone they do something in a "bad" way, you might have meant it in a very minor way, but their perception of what is "bad" might lead to it being taken in a very BIG way.

 

Whamme- Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that HERO was actually a framework, not an actual game per se. It provides a plethora of rules to create a system, but ultimately, what rules are actually taken are up to the GM. Thus, again, if this is true, then the GM won't be breaking the rules by not enforcing something in a certain way if he never adopted that particular suggestion from the beautiful FRED, and instead institutes his own style. Yes?

 

KA- I don't think Kristopher is saying that the players will be hit with the same scenarios regardless of the PCs' disads. I think he is saying that he doesn't not feel that the Disad should reign above the flow of the game or the players'/GM's will. That is, you don't stop a major, tense story arc in which the characters are really gelling with the story to enforce a roll.

 

That said, the way I use Disads are:

A) Fun rewards, even if they aren't in the PC's favor. It's always fun to roleplay Disads.

Plot hooks. Not quite sure how to get the PCs to take the hint, progress along the arc? Are they lost or not getting it, or not suitably motivated? Have your arch villain's flunkies kidnap a DNPC. Then they give up their boss under interrogation.

 

I would not, however, EVER allow a Disad to actually REMOVE characters from the story arc. Because that goes against the very foundation of the game. This isn't to say I wouldn't throw them a red herring, but a Disad can never be allowed to actually DISRUPT the progression of the game. It is meant to enhance and enrich the playing experience, while facilitating everyone's progression.

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

KA- I don't think Kristopher is saying that the players will be hit with the same scenarios regardless of the PCs' disads. I think he is saying that he doesn't not feel that the Disad should reign above the flow of the game or the players'/GM's will. That is' date=' you don't stop a major, tense story arc in which the characters are really gelling with the story to enforce a roll.[/quote']

 

Pretty much, yeah.

 

 

I've seen plenty of posts over the last two and a half years that seem to be saying one or both of the following:

 

A) Roll every session. If the roll says the DNPC or Hunted comes up, then it comes up, no exception.

 

(And that, by the way, is where the adjective "Gygaxian" comes in. Maybe "Rollmasterian" would have been better. Whatever would sum up the approach to gaming that makes almost the entire course of things depend on ramdom rolls, down to having charts in the back of the book for determing what kind of prostitute the PCs run into. Roll-playing instead of roleplaying.)

 

If it isn't being "enforced" in a percentage of sessions equivalent to its roll, then the player is "getting away with something", "the game is unbalanced", or whatever. Some of the most vocal advocates of the "balance" position are the same people who obsess endlessly about the cost of certain Characteristics.

 

 

Disadvantages like DNPC are plot hooks, IMO, not something that has to be enforced. I'm more concerned that everyone is enjoying themselves and that there's a decent story and that characters stay in character than with establishing perfect balance or enforcing things.

 

And really, when it comes to Disads that apply all the time (certain Phys Lims, etc), or always apply in certain situations (Vulnerability, etc), then the players should be taking those into account on their own, without me looking over their shoulders. That's how I handle it with my PCs -- I "enforce" them on myself. Of course, I don't see it that way...I see it as part of playing the character.

 

If someone takes a DNPC or Hunted in a game I run, then it will come up. It just doesn't come up at the whim of the dice or the percentages. It comes up when it makes sense for it to come up. Rarely, occasionally, or often, depending on what level they took it at.

 

I'm probably opening up another can of worms here, but if a player insisted on their 14- DNPC* actually showing up that much to actually inconvenience them (and the party), I might worry that they expected a bit more than their fair share of the "spotlight".

 

* What % is that?

 

What might be another disconnect here is what exactly it means for a DNPC to "show up". Does a PC's spouse calling and asking them to pick up something on the way home from the store count as an appearance?

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

As to the original thread topic:

One classic example of a costly Villain Disadvantage can be seen in “The Running Manâ€.

All through the film, Killian, the Evil Game Show host, acts like a total jerk.

He especially seems to enjoy insulting and humiliating his employees, including his personal bodyguard.

At the end of the film, the bodyguard takes a look at the bloody, buff, and very annoyed, Arnold Schwarzenegger and decides that taking a pounding for his boss is not really worth it.

 

"I gotta go score some roids."

 

Good example.

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

From pages 211 and 212 of FRED (shortened, but anyone can look up the full text):

 

"Many Disadvantages are weighted in terms of how often they occur...For ease of reference, and to help those GMs who are more comfortable with hand-and-fast rules, these frequences are often assigned numbers indicating how often the Disadvantage arises (...). However, the GM should feel free to ignore these guidelines if he prefers. Rather than rolling at the start of every game session to, for example, find out of a character's Hunted shows up, keep the Disadvantage in mind as a potential plot element... Instead of having a Hunted show up unexpectedly to interupt a carefully planned scenario, construct a scenario in which the Hunted features as the main antagonist."

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Pretty much, yeah.

 

 

I've seen plenty of posts over the last two and a half years that seem to be saying one or both of the following:

 

A) Roll every session. If the roll says the DNPC or Hunted comes up, then it comes up, no exception.

 

(And that, by the way, is where the adjective "Gygaxian" comes in. Maybe "Rollmasterian" would have been better. Whatever would sum up the approach to gaming that makes almost the entire course of things depend on ramdom rolls, down to having charts in the back of the book for determing what kind of prostitute the PCs run into. Roll-playing instead of roleplaying.)

 

Why does this interfere with roleplaying? Having to weave an extra element in can, in the hands of someone doing it well, make for a more interesting story. One piece of advice I loved for writing was something like this "Limits make it easier to be creative; when you have the whole world to choose from it is hard to focus on something small enough to be interesting".

 

Working in failures at dramatic moments where the narrative flow should surely have you succeed can turn a good story into an excellent one; Artoo plugging himself into a wall socket by mistake, for example, is an EXCELLENT moment that could have been 'dictated by the dice'.

 

"Roll-playing" is when you don't bother to roleplay. Frankly, anyone who has read bad fiction can see that this can easily happen without any dice at all.

 

If it isn't being "enforced" in a percentage of sessions equivalent to its roll, then the player is "getting away with something", "the game is unbalanced", or whatever. Some of the most vocal advocates of the "balance" position are the same people who obsess endlessly about the cost of certain Characteristics.

 

If the character is not being inconvenienced the number of times specified on the sheet, the sheet does not accurately represent the character you are playing.

 

This goes for other things, too; if you always get to succeed at certain rolls because the GM fudges them, you effectively have higher rolls. If you never get ganked for tonnes of BODY despite no resistance defenses, you effectively DO have some defenses. Etcetera.

 

Fiat should be reserved for when it is necessary, not used willy nilly. It cheapens the PC's successes.

 

Disadvantages like DNPC are plot hooks, IMO, not something that has to be enforced. I'm more concerned that everyone is enjoying themselves and that there's a decent story and that characters stay in character than with establishing perfect balance or enforcing things.

 

Then why not play a system that's more rules lite?

 

And really, when it comes to Disads that apply all the time (certain Phys Lims, etc), or always apply in certain situations (Vulnerability, etc), then the players should be taking those into account on their own, without me looking over their shoulders. That's how I handle it with my PCs -- I "enforce" them on myself. Of course, I don't see it that way...I see it as part of playing the character.

 

If someone takes a DNPC or Hunted in a game I run, then it will come up. It just doesn't come up at the whim of the dice or the percentages. It comes up when it makes sense for it to come up. Rarely, occasionally, or often, depending on what level they took it at.

 

I'm probably opening up another can of worms here, but if a player insisted on their 14- DNPC* actually showing up that much to actually inconvenience them (and the party), I might worry that they expected a bit more than their fair share of the "spotlight".

 

* What % is that?

 

Players should absolutely take charge of making sure their disadvantages come up. That includes DNPC's and Hunteds... they should make sure that you include them at the frequency they wanted them.

 

14- is, iirc eighty-X%. And a 14- DNPC is effectively an annoying sidekick who is a part of the party and is always there, botching things up a little. (And a player can reasonably expect some spotlight every game... the DNPC doesn't have to be the FOCUS of the session).

 

Now, if you don't want an annoying sidekick, don't let them take one.

 

What might be another disconnect here is what exactly it means for a DNPC to "show up". Does a PC's spouse calling and asking them to pick up something on the way home from the store count as an appearance?

 

It can, if the pick up is a challenge. Not necessarily a huge thing; having to guard the eggs and milk throughout a supervillain fight should be enough.

 

Of course, the 'how much' is definately a GM call.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Ok, a few things.

 

First, I would just like to remind everyone (not that they need it, but just to be sure) that when you start throwing out phrases like "bad roleplaying" and "bad GMing" or "good way" or "right" or "wrong," these words have different meanings to different people. So, when you are advocating something that is "good," it MIGHT not be the same thing another thinks of as good. Also, when you tell someone they do something in a "bad" way, you might have meant it in a very minor way, but their perception of what is "bad" might lead to it being taken in a very BIG way.

 

Whamme- Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that HERO was actually a framework, not an actual game per se. It provides a plethora of rules to create a system, but ultimately, what rules are actually taken are up to the GM. Thus, again, if this is true, then the GM won't be breaking the rules by not enforcing something in a certain way if he never adopted that particular suggestion from the beautiful FRED, and instead institutes his own style. Yes?

 

If the GM does not say otherwise, you have to assume there are no house rules and that the rules not specifically listed as optional are in effect.

 

DNPC is core. It _can_ be house ruled away, but it is poor form to not tell the players about alterations to the rules that will affect their characters.

 

KA- I don't think Kristopher is saying that the players will be hit with the same scenarios regardless of the PCs' disads. I think he is saying that he doesn't not feel that the Disad should reign above the flow of the game or the players'/GM's will. That is, you don't stop a major, tense story arc in which the characters are really gelling with the story to enforce a roll.

 

That said, the way I use Disads are:

A) Fun rewards, even if they aren't in the PC's favor. It's always fun to roleplay Disads.

Plot hooks. Not quite sure how to get the PCs to take the hint, progress along the arc? Are they lost or not getting it, or not suitably motivated? Have your arch villain's flunkies kidnap a DNPC. Then they give up their boss under interrogation.

 

I would not, however, EVER allow a Disad to actually REMOVE characters from the story arc. Because that goes against the very foundation of the game. This isn't to say I wouldn't throw them a red herring, but a Disad can never be allowed to actually DISRUPT the progression of the game. It is meant to enhance and enrich the playing experience, while facilitating everyone's progression.

 

Well... disrupt, yes. Derail, no. I think that's just a matter of definition... things slowing down while you deal with a problem is _good_ for drama and suchlike.

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Since people are claiming that not rolling for Disads and not bringing them up a precentage of the time equivalent to their roll is "not playing by the rules", and since it appears to have been missed the first time I posted it...From pages 211 and 212 of FRED (shortened, but anyone can look up the full text):

 

"Many Disadvantages are weighted in terms of how often they occur...For ease of reference, and to help those GMs who are more comfortable with hand-and-fast rules, these frequences are often assigned numbers indicating how often the Disadvantage arises (...). However, the GM should feel free to ignore these guidelines if he prefers. Rather than rolling at the start of every game session to, for example, find out of a character's Hunted shows up, keep the Disadvantage in mind as a potential plot element... Instead of having a Hunted show up unexpectedly to interupt a carefully planned scenario, construct a scenario in which the Hunted features as the main antagonist."

 

In other words, using Disads the way I use them and all three HERO GMs I've played with have used them is not "ignoring the rules" -- it's doing exactly what is suggested in the rules as written.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

 

 

Well... disrupt, yes. Derail, no. I think that's just a matter of definition... things slowing down while you deal with a problem is _good_ for drama and suchlike.

 

Disrupt, no. To me. But remember, different conceptions. Disrupt is not SLOWING things down. It is somehow interfering with the grain of the game in what I would consider a negative manner. Something that breaks the mood.

[DangerousDan]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Pretty much, yeah.

Disadvantages like DNPC are plot hooks, IMO, not something that has to be enforced. I'm more concerned that everyone is enjoying themselves and that there's a decent story and that characters stay in character than with establishing perfect balance or enforcing things.

 

The big black book agrees with you. On p. 340 of the FRED, it says, "Disadvantages are storytelling tools -- nothing more, and nothing less. than handles built onto a character to help the GM work him into the story he wants to tell." This gives the GM the explicit permission to use the characters disadvantages as he sees fit. If the GM chooses to ignore the 8-, 11-, 14- rolls for DNPC or Hunted appearance and only involve DNPCs or hunteds whenever it suits his story, then they only show up when it is convenient for the GM.

 

And really, when it comes to Disads that apply all the time (certain Phys Lims, etc), or always apply in certain situations (Vulnerability, etc), then the players should be taking those into account on their own, without me looking over their shoulders. That's how I handle it with my PCs -- I "enforce" them on myself. Of course, I don't see it that way...I see it as part of playing the character.

 

If someone takes a DNPC or Hunted in a game I run, then it will come up. It just doesn't come up at the whim of the dice or the percentages. It comes up when it makes sense for it to come up. Rarely, occasionally, or often, depending on what level they took it at.

 

I'm probably opening up another can of worms here, but if a player insisted on their 14- DNPC* actually showing up that much to actually inconvenience them (and the party), I might worry that they expected a bit more than their fair share of the "spotlight".

 

* What % is that?

 

What might be another disconnect here is what exactly it means for a DNPC to "show up". Does a PC's spouse calling and asking them to pick up something on the way home from the store count as an appearance?

 

It certainly does if the GM chooses to count it that way. The rules of the game give the GM explicit permission to ignore or change them. On p. 343, the FRED says, "DON'T LET THE RULES GET IN THE WAY OF HAVING FUN" (emphasis theirs).

 

Apparently some people can only have fun if the rules are rigidly followed and every dice roll is made and none is ever arbitrarily waived by the GM. Others prefer a looser style where the GM follows the game rules where they support the story and ignores or violates them where it doesn't. Both styles of play are explicitly permitted by the rulebook. Neither one is more correct than the other.

 

If some players in a game strongly prefer strict interpretation of the rules with no exceptions to the rules and other players in the same game prefer a fluid interpretation with exceptions that make sense in terms of the story line, there is likely to be conflict, not merely between characters, but between players as well.

[DangerousDan]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Disadvantages like DNPC are plot hooks, IMO, not something that has to be enforced. I'm more concerned that everyone is enjoying themselves and that there's a decent story and that characters stay in character than with establishing perfect balance or enforcing things.

 

The big black book agrees with you. On p. 340 of the FRED, it says, "Disadvantages are storytelling tools -- nothing more, and nothing less. than handles built onto a character to help the GM work him into the story he wants to tell." This gives the GM the explicit permission to use the characters disadvantages as he sees fit. If the GM chooses to ignore the 8-, 11-, 14- rolls for DNPC or Hunted appearance and only involve DNPCs or hunteds whenever it suits his story, then they only show up when it is convenient for the GM.

 

And really, when it comes to Disads that apply all the time (certain Phys Lims, etc), or always apply in certain situations (Vulnerability, etc), then the players should be taking those into account on their own, without me looking over their shoulders. That's how I handle it with my PCs -- I "enforce" them on myself. Of course, I don't see it that way...I see it as part of playing the character.

 

If someone takes a DNPC or Hunted in a game I run, then it will come up. It just doesn't come up at the whim of the dice or the percentages. It comes up when it makes sense for it to come up. Rarely, occasionally, or often, depending on what level they took it at.

 

I'm probably opening up another can of worms here, but if a player insisted on their 14- DNPC* actually showing up that much to actually inconvenience them (and the party), I might worry that they expected a bit more than their fair share of the "spotlight".

 

* What % is that?

 

What might be another disconnect here is what exactly it means for a DNPC to "show up". Does a PC's spouse calling and asking them to pick up something on the way home from the store count as an appearance?

 

It certainly does if the GM chooses to count it that way. The rules of the game give the GM explicit permission to ignore or change them. On p. 343, the FRED says, "DON'T LET THE RULES GET IN THE WAY OF HAVING FUN" (emphasis theirs). This is the only place in the book that I recall seeing all caps in the middle of a paragraph, so it must be important.

 

Apparently some people can only have fun if the rules are rigidly followed and every dice roll is made and none is ever arbitrarily waived by the GM. Others prefer a looser style where the GM follows the game rules where they support the story and ignores or violates them where it doesn't. Both styles of play are explicitly permitted by the rulebook. Neither one is more correct than the other.

 

If some players in a game strongly prefer strict interpretation of the rules with no exceptions to the rules and other players in the same game strongly prefer a fluid interpretation with exceptions that make sense in terms of the story line, there is likely to be conflict, not merely between characters, but between players as well. If any of you are playing in a group of people that choose a similar style, then be thankfull that you are not playing in a group of those other people.

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

The big black book agrees with you. On p. 340 of the FRED' date=' it says, "Disadvantages are [i']storytelling tools[/i] -- nothing more, and nothing less. than handles built onto a character to help the GM work him into the story he wants to tell." This gives the GM the explicit permission to use the characters disadvantages as he sees fit. If the GM chooses to ignore the 8-, 11-, 14- rolls for DNPC or Hunted appearance and only involve DNPCs or hunteds whenever it suits his story, then they only show up when it is convenient for the GM.

 

It certainly does if the GM chooses to count it that way. The rules of the game give the GM explicit permission to ignore or change them. On p. 343, the FRED says, "DON'T LET THE RULES GET IN THE WAY OF HAVING FUN" (emphasis theirs). This is the only place in the book that I recall seeing all caps in the middle of a paragraph, so it must be important.

 

Apparently some people can only have fun if the rules are rigidly followed and every dice roll is made and none is ever arbitrarily waived by the GM. Others prefer a looser style where the GM follows the game rules where they support the story and ignores or violates them where it doesn't. Both styles of play are explicitly permitted by the rulebook. Neither one is more correct than the other.

 

If some players in a game strongly prefer strict interpretation of the rules with no exceptions to the rules and other players in the same game strongly prefer a fluid interpretation with exceptions that make sense in terms of the story line, there is likely to be conflict, not merely between characters, but between players as well. If any of you are playing in a group of people that choose a similar style, then be thankfull that you are not playing in a group of those other people.

 

Thank you, Dan. Page 340 is the second reference in FRED to the fact that the rolls for Disadvantages such as Hunted and DNPC are conveniences for those who want them, and not a rule that must be strictly adhered to.

 

So, having established that beyond any doubt, my next question is: why do so many people believe that the rules say otherwise, and support a roll-always and roll-controled system for the Disadvantages in question?

[Guest Lollygagger]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Well... disrupt' date=' yes. Derail, no. I think that's just a matter of definition... things slowing down while you deal with a problem is _good_ for drama and suchlike.[/quote']

 

Not of the problem is distracting from the primary storyline.

[Guest Lollygagger]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

So' date=' having established that beyond any doubt, my next question is: why do so many people believe that the rules say otherwise, and support a roll-always and roll-controled system for the Disadvantages in question?[/quote']

 

I blame d20.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

I kinda like Code of the Master Villain myself:

1. arrogant and overconfident

2. feels compelled to boast of plans

3. ruthlessly punishes subordinates who disappoint them

4. mocking and sadistic

5. vengeful and petty

 

there are variants: the Honorable Master Villain, the Ruthless Iron Age Master Villain, the Romantic Master Villain, the Noble but Misguided Master Villain, etc.

[Karmakaze]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

I was a little surprised at the level of vitriol being aimed at GMs to take a more fluid view of enforcing disads than strict numerical enforcement.

 

Ignoring a disad entirely can be a bit frustrating, but placing them at natural plot points rather than forcing them on a session by session basis doesn't seem such a crime. I'm also more likely to take that 11- to mean "this NPC is featured in every other story arc" than "every other session", since sometimes we run rather short sessions that can be wholly taken up by one or two scenes (extended combat, for example, can take multiple sessions under the right circumstances).

 

What might be another disconnect here is what exactly it means for a DNPC to "show up". Does a PC's spouse calling and asking them to pick up something on the way home from the store count as an appearance?

 

If the entire appearance is that phone call and nothing else comes of it, no. Although in that case I'd just wonder why the GM bothered to put that in at all. On the other hand, if it means the other PCs rag on him for being 'pecked, or get suspicious ("Who do you keep taking those phone calls from? How can we trust you if you're so secretive") or if the phone rings at a bad time... For that matter, if the detour to the store causes the PC to run into a stickup, it counts.

 

If Kapitän Unglaublich has to cut short his nightly patrol because it's his daughter Katie's recital, I'd say that counts as an appearance, even if you never actually show the recital scene. Katie may not have appeared "on panel" but her existence had an effect. (And if Kapitän Unglaublich's player chooses to continue the patrol rather than attend, well, there will be repercussions later...)

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Thank you' date=' Dan. Page 340 is the second reference in FRED to the fact that the rolls for Disadvantages such as Hunted and DNPC are [i']conveniences[/i] for those who want them, and not a rule that must be strictly adhered to.

 

So, having established that beyond any doubt, my next question is: why do so many people believe that the rules say otherwise, and support a roll-always and roll-controled system for the Disadvantages in question?

 

Community norms and realistic expectations.

 

For one thing, that line is a rules change. An older player who started under 4th [or possibly earlier, I don't know] (and even *I* count as one of those) might not even realize it existed, and having been told of it, and knowing how badly it contrasts with games that were excellent, might easily consider it a stupid change that should be undone.

 

For another... it either choice is optional. But a GM should make a choice between the two options... and they should choose the _better_ option... and 'GM fiat now, then, and whenever you feel secure' isn't.

 

Frankly, that line contrasts with the general philosophy of Hero (i.e. that things can be statted up in detail, and that there is a POINT to that).

 

Such a shame... my first house rule, and it comes up over a petty internet squabble.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Disrupt' date=' no. To me. But remember, different conceptions. Disrupt is not SLOWING things down. It is somehow interfering with the grain of the game in what I would consider a negative manner. Something that breaks the mood.[/quote']

 

Like I was trying to say, I think we mean the same thing... a disruption to the smooth flow of events, rather than the smooth flow of the _game_ is a good thing [you know, the interesting bits].

 

Disruption for the characters, not the players and GM.

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

From page 120 of 4th Edition Champions (DNPC):

 

"The frequency roll is given as a guideline for the GM; feel free to ignore it."

 

From page 122 of 4th Edition Champions (Hunted):

 

"This chance to show up is meant as a general guideline for the GM, not as a strict rule."

 

So that takes us back to 4th Edition, or at least that book, which has a note in the front saying it was first published in 1989 (which a google search on the ISBN number seems to confirm as the publishing date, in September that year).

 

So, almost 17 years of published HERO rules stating that the frequency rolls for Disadvantages are only guidelines, and that the GM should feel free to ignore them.

 

And since I started playing in 1993, that's exactly how every GM I've played HERO-based games with has handled them. Had a lot of fun, been in some great games, and so on...so it doesn't seem to have ruined our gaming.

 

Anyone have an older edition tucked away on their shelves, who might be able to look up an older set of rules for Disads and see what they say about the frequency rolls?

[Manic Typist]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Like I was trying to say' date=' I think we mean the same thing... a disruption to the smooth flow of events, rather than the smooth flow of the _game_ is a good thing [you know, the interesting bits'].

 

Disruption for the characters, not the players and GM.

 

 

Word.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

From page 120 of 4th Edition Champions (DNPC):

 

 

 

From page 122 of 4th Edition Champions (Hunted):

 

 

 

So that takes us back to 4th Edition, or at least that book, which has a note in the front saying it was first published in 1989 (which a google search on the ISBN number seems to confirm as the publishing date, in September that year).

 

So, almost 17 years of published HERO rules stating that the frequency rolls for Disadvantages are only guidelines, and that the GM should feel free to ignore them.

 

And since I started playing in 1993, that's exactly how every GM I've played HERO-based games with has handled them. Had a lot of fun, been in some great games, and so on...so it doesn't seem to have ruined our gaming.

 

Anyone have an older edition tucked away on their shelves, who might be able to look up an older set of rules for Disads and see what they say about the frequency rolls?

 

To quote from the book *I* learned to play from...:

 

DNPC: "The frequency roll is given as a guideline for the GM; feel free to ignore it if it doesn't fit with the evening's adventure. Just make up for it some other time".

 

Notice the line either absent in your book, or which you omitted on purpose, which agrees perfectly with what I've been saying

 

Hunted: Again, there is this line "He should make a note of it and have the Hunters show up during another session".

 

 

And I have NOT been saying a Hunter/DNPC should show up the session you roll them, I have been saying they should show up at the FREQUENCY you roll them.

 

 

And now I have my doubts you're accurately quoting from 5th edition, since you've selectively edited 4th...

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

To quote from the book *I* learned to play from...:

 

DNPC: "The frequency roll is given as a guideline for the GM; feel free to ignore it if it doesn't fit with the evening's adventure. Just make up for it some other time".

 

Notice the line either absent in your book, or which you omitted on purpose, which agrees perfectly with what I've been saying

 

Hunted: Again, there is this line "He should make a note of it and have the Hunters show up during another session".

 

And I have NOT been saying a Hunter/DNPC should show up the session you roll them, I have been saying they should show up at the FREQUENCY you roll them.

 

And now I have my doubts you're accurately quoting from 5th edition, since you've selectively edited 4th...

 

You mean where I stuck the elipses in and invited anyone to go look it up for themselves? Where someone else found a supporting reference at another spot in the book? If you want to insinuate that I'm lying about the FREd reference, please, go look it up and post the whole thing, and we'll see if anyone other than you actually thinks that I was being dishonest. Go ahead.

 

As for "selectively editing", check yourself on that one, bub. The closest I came to "editing" the reference from 4th Ed is forgetting to add an ellipses at the end of the line from DNPC. What does it tell us about the health of your position on the matter if you have to stoop accusing me of lying and misquoting the rules because I forgot an elipses?

 

The fact remains that as far back as 1989, the GM was invited to do as he saw fit with the frequency of appearances of DNPCs and Hunteds in the game.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

You mean where I stuck the elipses in and invited anyone to go look it up for themselves? Where someone else found a supporting reference at another spot in the book? If you want to insinuate that I'm lying about the FREd reference, please, go look it up and post the whole thing, and we'll see if anyone other than you actually thinks that I was being dishonest. Go ahead.

 

As for "selectively editing", check yourself on that one, bub. The closest I came to "editing" the reference from 4th Ed is forgetting to add an ellipses at the end of the line from DNPC. What does it tell us about the health of your position on the matter if you have to stoop accusing me of lying and misquoting the rules because I forgot an elipses?

 

The fact remains that as far back as 1989, the GM was invited to do as he saw fit with the frequency of appearances of DNPCs and Hunteds in the game.

 

Except, as my COMPLETE quotes show, he wasn't. He was told that it was okay to DELAY having them show up for a few sessions, not that it was okay to ignore the roll altogether.

 

Your 'selective editing' removed the qualifier; you claimed it supported the GM ignoring the roll altogether. In it's entirety, it doesn't.

 

4th _said_ the GM should roll. They may then not have them show up _that session_, but they should then have them show up in a later session. 4th did not support your viewpoint in the slightest, unless you selectively ignore part of the rules.

 

I repeat: "The frequency roll is given as a guideline for the GM; feel free to ignore it if it doesn't fit with the evening's adventure. Just make up for it some other time".

 

You are supposed to have them show up as frequently as the roll indicates. The GM doesn't have to have them show up in any given session, but every time they roll for them to show up and don't have them show up, they need to 'make up for it some other time'.

 

Which is what I do.

 

 

You lied by omission, leaving out a line that changed drastically the meaning of what you claimed the book said.

[CBikle]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

In every game I've played and GMed in, campaign disads like Hunteds and DNPCs

pretty much only showed up when the GM incorporated them into the scenario.

 

This was largely done out of necessity, especially if you start rolling for the villain's hunteds.

 

Technically, if the hunteds do show up, you're expected to roll for their hunteds and DNPCs as well...

[Kristopher]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

Except, as my COMPLETE quotes show, he wasn't. He was told that it was okay to DELAY having them show up for a few sessions, not that it was okay to ignore the roll altogether.

 

Your 'selective editing' removed the qualifier; you claimed it supported the GM ignoring the roll altogether. In it's entirety, it doesn't.

 

4th _said_ the GM should roll. They may then not have them show up _that session_, but they should then have them show up in a later session. 4th did not support your viewpoint in the slightest, unless you selectively ignore part of the rules.

 

I repeat: "The frequency roll is given as a guideline for the GM; feel free to ignore it if it doesn't fit with the evening's adventure. Just make up for it some other time".

 

"Some other time" = "whenever you feel like it". IMO.

 

Which pretty much leaves it entirely up to the GM.

 

You are supposed to have them show up as frequently as the roll indicates. The GM doesn't have to have them show up in any given session, but every time they roll for them to show up and don't have them show up, they need to 'make up for it some other time'.

 

Which is what I do.

 

 

You lied by omission, leaving out a line that changed drastically the meaning of what you claimed the book said.

 

 

By quoting from a book anyone can go look at?

 

OK...whatever.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Using Supervillain Psych Lims

 

"Some other time" = "whenever you feel like it". IMO.

 

Which pretty much leaves it entirely up to the GM.

 

But they _are_ supposed to roll it, and they _are_ supposed to match appearances and die rolls 1:1.

 

Given the sentences talk about having difficulty working it into "that night's session", and it specifies they should be made up for, it is a stretch and a leap to say that it leaves it utterly up to the GM.

 

It provides clear guidelines and says what the GM should do. And, incidently, it states in no uncertain terms that the GM should roll every sessiom - rolling is NOT presented as optional.

 

 

By quoting from a book anyone can go look at?

 

OK...whatever.

 

By selectively quoting.

 

Selective quoting is an excellent way to misrepresent someone. By pulling out the right pieces, you can reverse the meaning. Context is important.

 

And the fact that a book is acessible is unimportant. I for one tend to believe my opponents to have been quoting accurately and so see no reason to go hunt down a book (which may have even been lent out).

 

Lies (any form of misleading) that can be easily disproved is no more honest for that.

 

 

Tell me... why did you omit the sentences after the sections you quoted that I included?

 

The only answer I can think of is, to quote a moderately humourous movie... "Because it's absolutely devastating to my case!".