question for gm

[steph]

what do you do when one of your player got a new disadvantage in the middle of a campain........................ you give him immidiately the point for? Thorjel get shot by a dart with a infection he take a permanent illness .........when exactly he gets is point for this physical limitation?

stef

hope i am clear english not my first language

[John Desmarais]

Re: question for gm

 

what do you do when one of your player got a new disadvantage in the middle of a campain........................ you give him immidiately the point for? Thorjel get shot by a dart with a infection he take a permanent illness .........when exactly he gets is point for this physical limitation?

stef

hope i am clear english not my first language

 

Typically, disadvantages aquired in game play do not grant points.

[ideasmith]

Re: question for gm

 

By the rules as written, no points are gained. Depending on the genre, disadvantages gained in play are usually temporary.

 

I would suggest having the Disadvantage last 1-6 games, then either just have the Disadvantage go away, or letting the player choose between losing the Disadvantage or gaining the points.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: question for gm

 

Typically' date=' disadvantages aquired in game play do not grant points.[/quote']True. However, I think most GMs would probably allow a character in this kind of situation to trade one Disadvantage for another (as long as this was adequately explained during play).

 

For example, perhaps Thorjel had a Rivalry with a team member, but that team member really helped Thorjel out after he was shot with the dart. Thorjel might gain a 10-point Physical Limitation for the permanent effects of the dart, but lose the 10-point Rivalry as he makes friends with his teammate, etc.

[Silbeg]

Re: question for gm

 

I agree with John.

 

In addition, I would also say that it would be (potentially) easier to get rid of the "permanent" disease than it would be to get rid of a PhysLim that the character starts with.

 

While Thorjel is inflicted, he could be looking for the super-physician with the ability to cure his disease. Or maybe what he thought was permanent recovers at REC/year, instead of the "normal" REC/month (assuming the disease was caused by a Transform power).

 

Or, even, perhaps the disease is granting him some additional abilities that he doesn't currently realize he has.

 

All are possiblities, but the overriding rule would be that he wouldn't be getting extra disadvantage points for the in-game disease.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: question for gm

 

I like the idea of trading disad's gained in play for old disad's which have outlived their usefulness. Hunted's are especially appropriate in this regard. Look to the source material - how many long-running characters are still Hunted by the same people they were in their origin? Old enemies are defeated, made peace with or just fade from the spotlight, and new enemies arise to take their places. DNPC's can also trade off as supporting cast moves in and out. There's no reason other disad's can't trade off as well.

[Dust Raven]

Re: question for gm

 

Yes, Disads gained in play are worth no points. But like many others, I think there is nothing wrong with trading out an old Disad for a new one. Ideally, this should be something planned by the GM, there the loss of the old Disad is role-played out through the same adventure the new one is gained.

[Mike W]

Re: question for gm

 

I don't give out points for new Disads you acquire in the campaign. It's part of roleplaying. Of course, I also give out free perks for roleplaying too(like free Contacts).

[oryanfactor]

Re: question for gm

 

You could give out points for an aqquired disadvantage (that old GM discretion rule). The most important thing is to maintain game balance.

 

It isn't fair to other players that one character is suddenly 15 points ahead of everyone else. However, it isn't fair to the player whose character is effectively 15 points behind everyone else, either.

 

A good rule of thumb might be to stick to the maximum points from disadvantages rule, which may range from 20-200, depending on game level.

 

oryan

[Mike W]

Re: question for gm

 

You could give out points for an aqquired disadvantage (that old GM discretion rule). The most important thing is to maintain game balance.

 

It isn't fair to other players that one character is suddenly 15 points ahead of everyone else. However, it isn't fair to the player whose character is effectively 15 points behind everyone else, either.

 

A good rule of thumb might be to stick to the maximum points from disadvantages rule, which may range from 20-200, depending on game level.

 

oryan

 

Not everyone will end up with the same point totals anyway, once the campaign gets going. Some players get an extra point during the session, some players make more sessions, and so on. I don't think the point totals should be a factor in the decisions, especially since points are not equal to power(we tend to think that way, but at the same time, not all 400 point characters are built as well or as effective as the next 400 point character).

[Frenchman]

Re: question for gm

 

I tend to agree with Hugh & Derek - The best way for a character to aquire new disads is to 'trade' them for older ones - However, I am also not opposed to letting a character gain disadvantages, and gain points for them, as long as it doesn't upset the balance of power.

 

For example, one of our players had terrible attendance, and he couldn't (or wouldn't, it varied) show up to many sessions, and most of the ones he did make it to he only stayed for half the session. When this cleared up and he started showing up every week, he was, not surprisingly, around 30 xp behind everyone else. One session, the character was badly wounded (his arm was cut off by a stone golem:eek:). We talked it over and decided that instead of getting it magically reattached, he would stump it and get extra points for his disad (15 for a phys lim, and I think also 10 for a social lim - people look down on the disabled and all that).

 

Now he has 25 points of disads more than everyone else, but he was still 5 points behind (he's more than caught up since then with bonus for rp) in total. He's a great rper, and he came up with a really good ic reason for not having it magically healed - his character and the priest are both notoriously stubborn, and they got into an argument. Priest refused to heal him unless he took back some nasty stuff he said 'bout the priests orcish heritage, and he refused to apologize. Since then relationship between the two has normalized, but the priest is too proud to offer to heal his arm (doesn't know if he can, anymore) and the other player isn't going to ask for it.

 

I'll also allow a player to take a disad on a temporary basis in order to gain some advance xp to pay for something expensive - this usually happens in the beggining of the game when someone forgets to buy something intrinsic to their character, like perks or rounding their speed up to 3. The player then has to dedicate some fraction of his xp (either 1/2 or 2/3) towards buying it off. Of course, this has to be something that I, or whoever is GMing, approves of and agrees that it can't wait, and there needs to be some in character roleplaying to get the disad and get rid of it later. In games where we pay points for magic items, this happens a lot - the item has a 'curse' associated with it that an experienced wielder is able to suppress or overcome.

 

Edit: Need formatting...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: question for gm

 

I think there's a judgement call here. Take two characters. StagnantMan has the same disadvantages he's had since the start of the game, all 150 points worth. Same DNPC, same Hunteds, etc.

 

DynamicMan has grown and changed through the course of the campaign. His 20 point Hunted: Police has been resolved as the false charges against him were cleared up in a great story arc, but in the process, he earned the enmity of the Superteam that framed him, and is now Hunted by them.

 

His Secret ID (15 points) was revealed on national television, and there's now nowhere he can escape the limelight, so he has a Public ID now. He also has a 5 point Social limitation because, in the same arc, he was outed as a practicing bisexual.

 

His DNPC (Wife) 15 points left him due to the strains on their marriage resulting from the whole Bi Super issue, above. However, he has taken responsibility for a close friend who was injured in a Supers battle, and for whom he feels responsible.

 

Should DynamicMan be penalized 50 points from his character, as compared to StagnantMan, by being forced to buy off the disad's he started with, when he still has the same equivalent disadvantages now? If you want a pure episodic game, where everything's back to the status quo at the end of each story arc, I guess StagnantMan is the way to go. But if you want a game where the PC's change and grow - where their in-game experiences influence them - then don't penalize DynamicMan. Let him replace his old, stale disad's resolved in gameplay with his new disad's acquired in gameplay and move on.

[prestidigitator]

Re: question for gm

 

I don't like the state of a character being very dependent upon whether that character was built in his or her current state or acquired some of that state through being played. So I typically give characters the points for (significant) Disadvantages gained during play, but I don't let such points bring the character above their Maximum Total Points, which for this purpose are calculated as:

Base Points + Max Disadvantages + Earned Experience

Note that I may increase the Max Disadvantages over the course of a campaign. If so, it usually still stays the same for all characters, no matter how much of the campaign they have been involved in.

 

So if a character has bought off Disadvantages or didn't start with the Max Disadvantage points at character creation (or I have raised that value since their character was created), they can gain points from new Disadvantages.

 

Now I won't allow everything that could conceivably be thought of as a Disadvantage to be put down as one. For example, enemies and expectations gained during story aren't necessarily appropriate to have as Hunteds or Social Limitations. In order for it to count as a true Disadvantage, it often has to be pretty personal, and usually the player has to put a bit of effort into developing the story around it.

[Dust Raven]

Re: question for gm

 

I'm also for the point balance thing. You shouldn't be forced to buy off Disads when you are getting more for free. Trading in Disads is fine and even encouraged by the game. There are guidelines for it in the rules.

 

But what if nothing happened in game that would remove an old Disad at the same time the character gains a new one? Say he's just gotten a lucky shot in on some lone villain with a vengance complex who will now hunt the hero until he gets even. But in the course of that adventure, or any previous or immediately following, nothing else happens to resolve/remove any of his current Disads.

 

Like I said, I'm all for point balance. One of the things I do is give such a character some Perks (like a reputation, or a contact or such) in addition to the new Disad. I try my best to make it as closely related as possible. In the example above, the character might have earned a Rep for being tough, skilled, lucky, or maybe just for having beat this particular villain. He may gain a Skill related to the villain as well. Maybe something as simple as KS: [this villain] or a +1 Overall Skill Level that only applies against the villain (defining the edge he may have agaist him with game mechanics).

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that a Disad that worth 0 points is phenomenally easy to buy off. By definition, at least to me, such things are temporary, usually lasting no longer than a story or two before they resolve themselves automatically in game or else replace an existing Disad.

[prestidigitator]

Re: question for gm

 

The way I see it, it isn't actually, "worth 0 points;" it's that the total points after its value have been added in are then capped by the character's Total Points. That being said, I don't really like to make them very permanent Disadvantages either (or at least I like to look for an opportunity for the character to get rid of some Disadvantage so that they are again balanced). Providing some (temporary?) Perks along with the Disadvantage seems like a good approach as well.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: question for gm

 

I've occasionally had characters whose disad's total more than their total points available from disad's, as they were all germane to the character and reflect the way the character will be played. It does mean you have a bit more flexibility should you want to buy a disad down/off in the course of gameplay.

[Guyon]

Re: question for gm

 

Agreed that disadvantages acquired because of his actions does not give him extra points. Also if he added a disadvantage that was not directly involved with that scenario I would not give him the points immediately.

 

I think that also adding a new disadvantage by the player many times need to be incorporated into a story to explain it. I also have saved 100 experience points to buy a new power or generally improve my character and worked a story around it.

[Alibear]

Re: question for gm

 

I had this idea that I used in a campaign. Players, if they wanted, could leave a 20 point disadvantage to be determined in play. The GM, me, would then decide after play had started how and what triggered the disadvantage.

 

One character got into a 'spot of bother' in a fight and decided to play dead and wake himself later. The character was dragged off with the other dead bodies and buried. Alive.

 

He had to dig himself out before he ran out of end.. then stun, it was a close thing and the drama at the time was excellent. A truely memorable moment in the campaign.

 

Afterward I decided to give him A Psych Lim: Claustraphobia.

[Guyon]

Re: question for gm

 

Well GM imposed disadvantages are different than player blunders that turn into a disadvantage. If a player makes big enough mistake that turns into a disadvantage then he gets it without any build points.