Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

[Manic Typist]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

Perfectly fair, provided that the disadvantages actually come up in play. After all, the point of the game is not just to design the characters, but to play the characters you design. Nonhuman packages are, just like any other package deal, provided to create a short cut through the maze of character design and there's no reason to penalise players for using simple rather than complex character design methods.

 

 

 

And to me, this is the crux of the matter.

 

Perhaps I should state MY issue like this: I find it difficult to enforce "elven" Disads in a meaningful way. One part of it is a common thing: a bunch of minor, 5 point Disads don't amount to much, even if they technically equal 75. More importantly, when I do enforce such things, it is either of no importance (the entire common room scowls as you walk in) and nothing else comes of it, or it ends up being blown out of proportion.

 

I'm trying to find a way to accurately reflect the value of these Disads. I have trouble walking the line on a few of them, since I want to create a definite tension, not have the effects ignored or turn into a huge social incident/fight because of "xenophobia." This, obviously, is a me thing, and I'm trying to find a solution.

 

So, far, this is the best I can come up with. While I don't approve of elves essentially having less personality because they are elves, I can deal with that. Everyone knows they are pricks anyway. I freely admit my solution isn't ideal, as a matter of fact it is flawed, but it is the best I have so far.

 

Any ideas?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

There isn't a good solution for the package deal issue that doesn't in some way mess with game balance. It's been discussed many times before. Killer Shrike has some good ideas on his website that address these exact issues.

 

For my part... I gave up on balance, and put in the hands of the GM (i.e. ME) to make sure that everyone isn't going to exploit the Elf syndrome. My approach I finally settled on for my "main" FH campaign (as oppsed to various one offs, which might have radically different ground rules) was to charge the PC's the net cost of the package deal, and not consider the Package Disads against the various disad categories ( I also consider Racial/Environmental Package Stats to be Powers, thus effectively altering the starting & max characteristics for various races). I try and make most of my packages 10 net points or less.

 

So, f'rinstance...

My Sidhe (high elf) package is fairly HUGE... around 80 points. It also comes with around 75 points worth of disads. So a Sidhe PCwill have an effective total value of 325 point, versus a (basic) Human PC who will have a starting value of 250 points. This is somewhat balanced by having considerable sub-racial packages available for Humans (high man being one, to use the classic Tolkien/MERP/Rolemaster name) as well as a lot of diffferent Environmental Packages to serve the same purpose (My highlanders take a version of either ther Hill or Mountain environmenal packages).

I also won't let Disads from Racial or Environmental packages be bought off

 

Does this mean a starting Sidhe will be more powerful?

Heck yeah. But only in very specific ways, common to all members of the race. It also means that they all have the same crippling Vunerablity and Susceptibility to Iron that Humans don't.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

Perhaps I should state MY issue like this: I find it difficult to enforce "elven" Disads in a meaningful way. One part of it is a common thing: a bunch of minor' date=' 5 point Disads don't amount to much, even if they technically equal 75. More importantly, when I do enforce such things, it is either of no importance (the entire common room scowls as you walk in) and nothing else comes of it, or it ends up being blown out of proportion.[/quote']

 

Sounds like your problem is with the value of the disad's, which is moving away from charactre diversity. I like characters to have a few low point disad's that may not come up often or mean a lot if they come up, but which are disadvantageous and probably different from the disad's of others.

 

BTW, the Elf package in FH has no disad's in the basic package and an optional hatred of orcs and goblins. Dwarves get -1" running, and some optional psych's. If you have a Social Limitation: Elf, then it should indicate there are areas (how common depending on frequency of the disad) where elves are not liked. This could be a strong limitation (bounty on pointy ears), a weak one (scowls in the common room; penalties on interaction skills) or something in between (maybe the elf, and those associated with him, gets charged more - double? - for services, goods and supplies, and certain things are just not available). But it needs to actually disadvantage the elf in some cases.

 

I suspect these disad's were removed to say "Not every game will feature a prejudice against this race".

 

They don't even have distinctive features. The book doesn't presume to say how common or rare the race is.

 

What generally bugs me more that a "typical elf" is players choosing a race known for certain traits, then ignoring those traits (neither possessing them nor providing any reason why their charactre deviates from the norm, and what impact that has had in the character's life), usually just "to be different".

[Manic Typist]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

Sounds like your problem is with the value of the disad's, which is moving away from charactre diversity. I like characters to have a few low point disad's that may not come up often or mean a lot if they come up, but which are disadvantageous and probably different from the disad's of others.

 

 

 

What generally bugs me more that a "typical elf" is players choosing a race known for certain traits, then ignoring those traits (neither possessing them nor providing any reason why their charactre deviates from the norm, and what impact that has had in the character's life), usually just "to be different".

 

No, my problem is with diversity too.

 

Just, if the player has diversity problems while being an elf, well, he will probably have the same ones being anything else, so at that point it is kinda moot.

 

Believe me, I have a player just like that. He ignores everything in the background of his people and his backstory. What kind of spy/firebrand goes around spouting off racist remarks against humans, in a human city, where he is trying to ferment a secret elven rebellion?

 

One that might not last much longer, that's the answer.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

I handle Disadvantages in Race Package deals as offsets for the cost for this very reason -- it does not make sense to me that a character from a particular race would be less of an individual just because their Race Package uses up a lot of their max Disads.

 

Here's how it works out in practice in my High Fantasy HERO campaigns:

 

Less base points (50 instead of 75)

Max PERSONAL Disadvantage points = 75

 

Race Package Disadvantages offset the cost of Race Packages; Race Packages must cost at least 0 points.

 

All Race Packages have NCM for 20 points and a Distinctive Feature: Member of Race worth 5 or more points (typically 5 but some Races qualify for more if they are universally disliked).

 

The net effect is a 150 point character plus any points in their Race Pacakge paid for with extra Disadvantage points required by the Race Package. *

 

With the exception of specifically indicated Options and "Choose" groups a Player has no ability to alter or cannibalize a Race Package; they must take the good with the bad.

 

Alternate NCM is also handled directly in the Package; any Characteristics taken from a Race Package are bought as Powers and thus are immune to NCM doubling -- the net effect is they increase both the starting and the NCM levels of that characteristic. Thus if a Race Package grants +3 STR then a character of that Race starts with 13 STR and has an effective Maxima of 23 STR.

 

Similarly any Characteristic penalties taken in a Package modify both the starting and maxima values. Thus if a Race Package imposed a -2 DEX then a character of that Race starts with an 8 DEX and has an effective Maxima of 18 DEX.

 

 

Works like a charm.

 

*In HERO Designer this is easily accomodated by setting the Disadvantage limit equal to 75 + the cost of Disadvantages in the Race Package.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

As far as extending Enraged to be more than just Enraged, I do that all the time. I use both Accidental Change and Enraged as a model for a wide variety of compulsory behaviors depending on whether its an instant or constant effect.

[Zed-F]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

Here's another approach that a GM could take as far as 'racial packages' go:

 

Go from a meta-gaming perspective, and take only those racial abilities and limitations which will be important to your character and to the stories you want to craft with the GM about your character.

 

So you're making an elf, but you expect that most of the time he's going to be living in a pretty cosmopolitan place, and his pointy ears won't really stand out or disadvantage him in any way. If so, they aren't worth points. And all elves are supposedly natural archers, but your character uses a big 2-handed mace instead, and hasn't touched a bow in years. So you don't bother with any package deal that says you should have levels in archery, and just buy levels with the mace.

 

In short, build the character *you* want to play. Pay points for stuff that's important to your character, don't pay points for window dressing that's not important to your character and will never be relevant to the game. If it doesn't disadvantage, it's not worth points; similarly, if it's something that will never be helpful, it doesn't cost points. Just because the book says 'all elves are XXX' doesn't mean that a character should have to pay for that if it's not relevant to the character's role in the group or his interests in life.

[Mike W]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

The number one complaint that I have as a GM when in the PC-creation period is about 'not having enough ideas to get 75 pts in disads'. (Please note that this discussion below is geared to Heroic Level games.)

 

What usually happens is that package deals, even though only suggestions, take up the majority of a Heroic-level hero's Disads. Customization, therefore, is limited to make an individual character leading one to think that most races are rather clone-ish.

 

So if you stick by the suggested rules and allow 25-30 pts max per Disad type, you usually come up with the max points in Psych Lims pretty easily. Things like Vulnerability/Susceptability/Accidental Change are pretty much chucked out all together, and hard to justify even if proposed. Phys/Psych/Soc Lims are applied in more or less a 1:10:5 ratio (I'm making that ratio up, but you get the picture), and Age is mostly applied to mystics for some reason. Dependance and Beserk/Enraged get an honorable mention but aren't all that common, but Unluck is usually selected by at least one character in the group.

 

How do you expand your Disad options? I've been toying with expanding "Beserk/Enraged" (see accompanying post in this board) to cover triggered obsessive passions (lust, duty, dispair, etc). What kind of other ideas are out there to get players out of the Disadvantage Trap?

 

I understand that some GMs shrug at a full compliment of Disads, but look at it from the 'character definition' side and not as 'point justification' for this discussion.

 

First, I don't worry too much about the "category" limits. I just want the disads that best define the character. If the guy is a hopeless neurotic with massive psychological problems, he can take all the Psych Lims he wants. If he's managed to tick off everyone he meets and has half the country hunting him down, fine.

 

Second, I think that Hunted/Watched/Enemy is pretty easy to come up with if you have characters with well developed backgrounds and histories, though you as a GM need a well-developed world with lots of people in it to help this along. It's much easier to give a character a hunted if you can look at the character and immediately say "You might have had a run in with so-and-so, how about a hunted?"

 

Age is hard to take in any genre because it really limits your physical abilities, which most characters depend on. Plus, most people don't think of heroes as "old"(the ancient mystic stereotype aside). They think of them as young, often "just starting out". Characters who are "just starting out" aren't usually over 40. But if you encourage people to play "experienced" campaigners(and open up the perks you'll let them have as well as let them buy an extra skill level or two) you might find it more common.

 

Vulnerability/Susceptibility/Accidental Change are for things that aren't human. They work ok for mystics and magical creatures(e.g. - werewolves) and of course, superheroes, but not so well for normal folk who have gone out and picked up a sword.

 

I think that people look at Physical Limitations a little too narrowly too. We tend to think of having a Physical Limitation as having a permanent injury or deformity(missing a hand or an eye, for example). But a Physical Limit is really just the inability to do something. You can take "poor depth perception" or "needs reading glasses" for 5 points if your GM will enforce it. Or you can take "cannot read" in a campaign where literacy is common. I could also see things like "mechanically inept" to represent a character who, not only isn't well trained but has the knack for making things worse. The guy that when you say "When I say, Now, turn this hard right" somehow manages to turn it so far that he opens the valve up too much, or inexplicably manages to break the control off.

 

Unluck is always fun. One die doesn't do much more than keep things interesting.

 

As for racial package deals, I treat them as suggestions of things to buy, but I never consider it a requirement that you buy everything in the package. You have to pay points out of your 150 for anything you buy and the disads you take count toward your 75, but you pick and choose whatever is appropriate and ignore the rest(with GM approval of course).

[David Johnston]

Re: Lets Talk Disads: The Point Trap

 

Here's another approach that a GM could take as far as 'racial packages' go:

 

Go from a meta-gaming perspective, and take only those racial abilities and limitations which will be important to your character and to the stories you want to craft with the GM about your character.

 

So you're making an elf, but you expect that most of the time he's going to be living in a pretty cosmopolitan place, and his pointy ears won't really stand out or disadvantage him in any way.

 

Well in the first place the GM should be designing any racial packages he makes available to take into account realities like that. If pointy ears aren't distinctive but just a meaningless and common morphological variation in his campaign then distinctive looks should have been left out of an elf package deal in the first place. Similarly if package deals are leaving characters too little room for variation in the GM's opinion, the GM has nobody but himself to blame for sticking too much junk into the deal.

 

Even so, since they don't give any benefits except a shortcut to finishing your character design, there's no reason now for deals to be binding. While if the GM says that pointy ears are distinctive in his campaign then by Glorfindel they're distinctive, obviously Bob The Peg Legged Elf isn't going to get the running bonus that some GMs might stick into an Elf package deal and neither will Carp The Elf That All His Classmates Laugh At For Being Such A Stumbler.