disad costs

[Lumbering Ox]

Forgive me if this has come up before.

 

 

I find it a bit bothersome [but easy to fix] that disads cost the same regardless of the starting points of a character.

 

A 25 point bonus means a lot more to a 100 point hero then a 350+ hero.

 

I seem to recall, perhaps wrongly, that inthe old days of stand alone games that the disad costs would vary, being lower in games like FH where character points were expected to be in the 100 to 150 range, then in Champs where the 250+ was the standard.

 

I find at least for the non super type things, there is too much value for disads and as such presure to come up with character concepts that can justify disads.

 

Discuss

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: disad costs

 

Discuss

I like the disad values fine the way they are.

 

 

 

Sorry... that was boring, wasn't it?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: disad costs

 

A 25 point bonus means a lot more to a 100 point hero then a 350+ hero.

Perhaps, but it's also generally easier for a 350-pt superhero to come up with 150 points worth of Disads than it is for a 150-pt hero to come up with 75 points worth. Generally fewer vulnerabilities/succeptabilities/accidental changes/secret IDs/etc in heroic games. In other words, I see it primarily as a genre thing, rather than a power-level thing.

 

I seem to recall' date=' perhaps wrongly, that inthe old days of stand alone games that the disad costs would vary, being lower in games like FH where character points were expected to be in the 100 to 150 range, then in Champs where the 250+ was the standard.[/quote']

I don't remember that, but I don't have any of my old books handy.

 

I find at least for the non super type things' date=' there is too much value for disads and as such presure to come up with character concepts that can justify disads. [/quote']

Hmm...I think you've confused me. If you're saying it's too hard for heroic-level characters to come up with 75-100 points worth of Disads, wouldn't lowering the value of those Disads make that even harder? Or are you saying that heroic characters should only have to come up with 50-75 points worth of Disads? Is it the number of Disads, or the cost of those Disads that you see as the problem?

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

I think the costing is fine ... as BigDamnHero pointed out the Supgerheroic Genre tends to open itself up to more and varied Disads by nature of the Genre.

 

and WHY is a Common, Total Psych Lim less Disadvantageous in a Heroic Game vs a Superheroic Game? Just saying "Because the Heroic Guy has less points" is silly...

 

if we take that route we may as well reduce the cost of Powers in Heroic games as well, because they can justify using less of them....

[bigdamnhero]

Re: disad costs

 

and WHY is a Common' date=' Total Psych Lim less Disadvantageous in a Heroic Game vs a Superheroic Game? Just saying "Because the Heroic Guy has less points" is silly...[/quote']

Depends on whether you look at them in absolute or relative terms. You could argue that a 25-point Disad, as 25% of a 100-pt Hero's bottom line, is more "valuable" to that character than it would be to a 350-point super.

 

I'm not necessarily making that argument. Just saying you could.

 

if we take that route we may as well reduce the cost of Powers in Heroic games as well' date=' because they can justify using less of them....[/quote']

Well, except that power costs ARE scaled, to a certain extent, by power level. In a pulp campaign, a 20-Active Point power might be a big deal; whereas in a supers campaign you might have to pump 60-80 AP into a similar power to have an effect. (Kinda playing devil's advocate here, as I have no problem with them the way they are.)

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

Depends on whether you look at them in absolute or relative terms. You could argue that a 25-point Disad' date=' as 25% of a 100-pt Hero's bottom line, is more "valuable" to that character than it would be to a 350-point super.[/quote']

I assume the points of a Disad are scaled to utility in the Campaign/Game - not relative to the Character Points.

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

It is the cost.

A 15 point say, overconfidance can make a huge difference in a heroic character, but the extra 15 points in a 350 point superhero is almost yawnsville by comparison.

 

I don't mind disads, but I find that esp for heroic caimpaigns, the push is one to get the full 75 or whatever limit you can, and if the principle that a disad/limitation should get you the same amount of points as it harms you, the drive shouldn't be there.

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

It is the cost.

A 15 point say, overconfidance can make a huge difference in a heroic character, but the extra 15 points in a 350 point superhero is almost yawnsville by comparison.

 

I don't mind disads, but I find that esp for heroic caimpaigns, the push is one to get the full 75 or whatever limit you can, and if the principle that a disad/limitation should get you the same amount of points as it harms you, the drive shouldn't be there.

We'll just have to disagree.

 

If Overconfidence has the same level of impact in the GAME and on a Characters ACTION IN THE GAME then they are worth the same points, regardless of the level of the game.

 

And as has been pointed out: Heroic characters have a much harder time justifying things like Accidental Change, Susceptability, Vulnerability and the like than Superheroic so they have few less disads to choose from than a Superheroic character normally. Meaning the % of a given Disad may be greater vs Total CP, but the number of viable disads is also much smaller.

 

Let's say they were worth 50% less in a Heroic Game, but the viable Disads were restricted, mostly Hunted, Psych lim, etc... now the poor Heroic Character is a mental cripple or has most of the planet hunting them down. Man, that'd suck big time.

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

Or the heroic character would just have less total amount of disads. Say a 75+25 build, which IIRC was not uncommon in the very old days.

 

Or a 150+25 or 50.

 

I guess my real issue is that even with what I recall [perhaps incorrectly] as being reduced cost in heroic standalones, that most players would drive real hard to get every point they could of disads. Having a lot of disads, not a problem, but when it is obvious that a character is being created just to justify the points one gets from disads, I have a problem with, more so because it is a bit munchkiny, but also in that such behavior is a reaction to what must be a too high reward for disads. Otherwise players I've seen wouldn't bother seeking them out unless it fit within the character concept.

 

The points of a disad should equal the problems, and this issue is related to the overall point total of a character.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: disad costs

 

It is the cost.

A 15 point say, overconfidance can make a huge difference in a heroic character, but the extra 15 points in a 350 point superhero is almost yawnsville by comparison.

 

I don't mind disads, but I find that esp for heroic caimpaigns, the push is one to get the full 75 or whatever limit you can, and if the principle that a disad/limitation should get you the same amount of points as it harms you, the drive shouldn't be there.

I think I'm still confused. Or at least, one of us is. Your first paragraph seems to say that you think Disads should cost less in heroic games. But your second paragraph seems to be saying that it's too hard to get 75 points worth of Disads in a heroic game. "Fixing" the first wouldn't fix the second - on the contrary, it would make it even harder. Am I misunderstanding you?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: disad costs

 

Or the heroic character would just have less total amount of disads. Say a 75+25 build, which IIRC was not uncommon in the very old days.

 

Or a 150+25 or 50.

OK, I think I understand what you're saying now. (Sorry wrote my last post before I saw your last one.) But still. Let's say you reduce the cost of all Disads by 50%. And you also halve the number of points players can take from Disads. Haven't you just wound up right back where you started?

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

the very old days also had less Disad categories and variety IIRC.

[Dust Raven]

Re: disad costs

 

Discuss

 

The proprotion works in both directions you know. Sure, those 25 points mean a bit less to the 350 total points character than they would to a 100 total points character, but so does the Disad. So the both the superhero and the Navy Seal are blind... but the superhero has plenty of points to buy his DEX impossibly high, buy a hoard of extra senses, etc. And the Overconfidence that was mentioned... well, sure, the superhero is about 250 points more overconfident than the normal hero.

[Robyn]

Re: disad costs

 

I find it a bit bothersome [but easy to fix] that disads cost the same regardless of the starting points of a character.

 

Disads are worth varying percentages of the character's base cost?

 

Wow, you're right, that was easy to fix

[CourtFool]

Re: disad costs

 

I believe what Lumbering Ox is saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that a player in a Heroic campaign will/must take all 75 points worth of disadvantages even if they are not within character concept. A player in a Super Heroic campaign does not have to take 150 points worth of disadvantages.

 

I can understand that point (if that is what you are suggesting), however, it has been my experience that players always take the max points worth of disadvantages. I have had players who take more because it was in character concept, but I do not think I have ever had a player who took less.

 

I saw it once suggested on this board, if you remember where and who please link, that characters be built on 150 for Heroic campaigns and 350 for Super Heroic campaigns and no points were granted for taking a Disadvantage. However, whenever one of the character's Disadvantage came into play during the game, then the character would be awarded an experience point or some such. I think this would be a solution to your problem. You may have to tweak exactly how it works because min/maxers will find a way to ensure their Disadvantage does not really hamper them but someone comes into play.

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

I believe what Lumbering Ox is saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that a player in a Heroic campaign will/must take all 75 points worth of disadvantages even if they are not within character concept. A player in a Super Heroic campaign does not have to take 150 points worth of disadvantages....

 

Basiclly, I can't speak for super hero caimpaigns too much, however, if I had a 350+125 instead of a 350+150 I don't think it would be too bad, as you are only down 5% vs being down almost 10% from a 150+50 vs 150+75.

 

 

As answer someone else, the issue for me isn't the difficulty or ease at which one can reach 75 points of disads, but rather the cost reward imbalance is greater at the heroic level then at the superhero level. This is not to suggest that there is an imbalance at the superhero level, I don't know.

 

I am suggesting that having the same cost disads for 75 base and 350 base caimpaigns is a bad thing, one that is done because of the generic nature of the rules.

 

 

And yes there are many solutions, I was just wondering if anyone out there might have thought the same way, or if I was just totally wrong and insane.... about this issue I mean

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

I believe what Lumbering Ox is saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that a player in a Heroic campaign will/must take all 75 points worth of disadvantages even if they are not within character concept. A player in a Super Heroic campaign does not have to take 150 points worth of disadvantages....

 

Basiclly, I can't speak for super hero caimpaigns too much, however, if I had a 350+125 instead of a 350+150 I don't think it would be too bad, as you are only down 5% vs being down almost 10% from a 150+50 vs 150+75.

 

 

As answer someone else, the issue for me isn't the difficulty or ease at which one can reach 75 points of disads, but rather the cost reward imbalance is greater at the heroic level then at the superhero level. This is not to suggest that there is an imbalance at the superhero level, I don't know.

 

I am suggesting that having the same cost disads for 75 base and 350 base caimpaigns is a bad thing, one that is done because of the generic nature of the rules.

 

 

And yes there are many solutions, I was just wondering if anyone out there might have thought the same way, or if I was just totally wrong and insane.... about this issue I mean

 

I know personally, when I make a character, I feel pushed to add disads just to keep up with the other players. If the disad bonus was equal to the harm it causes, I would not feel such a push. It is easy to come up with a character concept that has disads, but sometimes I don't want to play that way. Much like it is easy to come up with a fighter, but sometimes you want and mage or a thief. Whereas in Hero one can make the latter choises and they all come out in the end [or blaster brick etc]. It dosen't for those who play mentally stable non hated normal looking heros.

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

I personally have never run into the issues you seem to have. At the Heroic level I'm usually limited by the number of different types of Disad's I can take to begin with, especially in non-fantasy campaigns. So 75 pts of Disads is as easy or hard to come up with as the 150pts in Disads of a Superheroic Campaign.

 

I do not see the point percentage issue you do, in any case. A disad's utility is not in what percentage of the base costs its cost is, but how it gets used in Game. If it never comes up as a Disad then it has a 0% Cost Value, at 5pts or 30pts. If it comes up all the time I should hope it comes in around 15-20 (or more) points... I don't base the points off of % of Base Character Points.

 

A CvK Total is no more or less Limiting on a Heroic Character than it is on a Superheroic Character.

[Lucius]

Re: disad costs

 

Well, first of all, Lumbering Ox is remembering right: When the "Heroic" level games first came out, the disad costs were all less than they were in Champions.

 

I can see the point he is trying to make; for a character with only 150 total points, a 15 pt Disadvantage is 10% of his total points. For a character with 300 total points, that Disadvantage is only 5% of his total points.

 

When the pulled the spin-off games together and made the Hero System more truly unified, that different values for disads disappeared. I regarded that as part of the process of, well, pulling the spin-off games together and making the Hero System more unified.

 

I have a question, Lumbering Ox. Do you ever play in superhero games? Frankly, I think the tendency to try to come up with the "max" allowed Disads may be similar across the board, not limited to the heroic level.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Trying for the maximum allowed palindromedaries

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

My experience with Super Hero games are pretty much non exsistant, a few solos and one group one where the GM made the characters.

 

If the buying up the max is prevelent in Super Hero games, then perhaps it is a sign that disads give too many points even for the superhero. There could be other reasons, Genere conventions for example, so I hesitate to comment too much on the superhero side of things as I am a bit out of my league. I found at all times that some disads seemed to be more disading then others, but never bothered to change costs around.

 

I am glad to find out my memory dosen't suck. Although I do see the value in a unified system, this is one area where there are some negitive implications. But again as always, so utterly easy to solve for the GM so interested

 

 

I had an earlier edition of Hero and all the stand alones. Sold them all, but kept the FH for a while. I was finding towards to end that I prefered the standalone to the HS version [i think 4th ed].

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

I can see the point he is trying to make; for a character with only 150 total points' date=' a 15 pt Disadvantage is 10% of his total points. For a character with 300 total points, that Disadvantage is only 5% of his total points.[/quote']

The trade off there though is that the Superheroic Character has twice as many Disad points working against him.

 

Sure one Disad may be worth half as much as a % of Character Points - but they have twice as many Disad Points, which can theoretically lead to twice as many Disad's.

 

Seems to be a fair trade to me in all honesty.

 

And I don't think that Players buying up to the maximum allowable Disad's (or more) is a sign of something wrong .. I think it's a sign of the system... If people are allowed up 350pts, and the System Standard expects a number around that total you aren't getting "too many points for your Disad's" nor are you "Min Maxing" - you're simply playing to expectations.

 

I think that you're overthinking a non-existant problem there L.O. - There's only a "problem" if the game suffers. If the game is not suffering there is no problem.

[Lucius]

Re: disad costs

 

One could argue that the game is "suffering" in that -

 

People may be piling on disads that are not fully in concept, and that they wouldn't take except to get the points, and that

 

Concepts that do not readily lend themselves to lots of disads get underplayed.

 

Another thing that changed since the 1st edition: used to be that if you too multiple disads of the same category, you didn't get full value for all of them - they started getting cut in half, then quarter, etc. You rapidly reach a point of "diminishing returns."

 

ON the other hand, you had NO set limit of disads.

 

I recall characters with very few disads (I think I remember one player who didn't want any) and others with more - a greater spread than nowadays, where it seems taken for granted that you will almost always take the max allowed.

 

Didn't someone suggest that instead of getting points at start, you can get extra experience when disads come into play? How would that work?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is Vulnerable to the crab cannon....

[bigdamnhero]

Re: disad costs

 

Well' date=' first of all, Lumbering Ox is remembering right: When the "Heroic" level games first came out, the disad costs were all less than they were in Champions.[/quote']

I just unearthed my 1st Ed copy of FH, and you're right. A Very Common, Total Psych Lim was worth 13 points; Hunted 14- by a large group of as-powerful hunters only got you 16 points. I had totally forgotten that.

 

Cost-inflation aside, upon re-reading the FH character creation guidelines I think I finally understand part of what LO has been saying. (I was *really* tired yesterday, so my apologies if I was a bit slow on the uptake.) In the original FH, heroes were defined as 75-point characters, who could also take Disads "to boost their Character Point starting totals." No specific guidelines were given for how many Disads PCs could/should take, `tho the rules actually advised "It's a good idea to keep the number of Disadvantages low for starting characters." Of course, the idea of character disads/hinderances/whatever was still somewhat novel in 1985, so maybe they thought it best to err on the conservative side.

 

Nowdays a heroic-level character is defined as a 150-point character who gets half his points for free and the other half from Disads. Same end result (point inflation aside, 75+75 still equals 150), but a different philosophy. Under the old school, a 75+75 character is perceived as having gotten 75 "bonus" points for taking a lot of Disads, and might be accused of Munchkinism. Under the current philosophy, characters are expected to come up with 75 points worth of Disads. It's not a bonus you get for working the system, it's part of the system.

 

Neither view is necessarily wrong, it's more a question of expectations and campaign guidelines. If the bottom line is that you want your characters to be 150 points, then you can get that with 75+75, 100+50, or even 150+0, as long as the standard is the same for all PCs. Personally, I think a 75+75 character is going to be more well-rounded and interesting than a 125+25 character; but if you feel differently there's no reason you can't set the points guidelines wherever you think best fits your game.

 

People may be piling on disads that are not fully in concept' date=' and that they wouldn't take except to get the points, [/quote']

Well yes, but wouldn't that be equally true under either method?

 

Another thing that changed since the 1st edition: used to be that if you too multiple disads of the same category' date=' you didn't get full value for all of them - they started getting cut in half, then quarter, etc. You rapidly reach a point of "diminishing returns."[/quote']

True. But now if you enforce the "Max Points From Any One Category of Disads" guidelines, doesn't it accomplish more-or-less the same thing?

[Lumbering Ox]

Re: disad costs

 

... Under the current philosophy, characters are expected to come up with 75 points worth of Disads. It's not a bonus you get for working the system, it's part of the system.

 

Neither view is necessarily wrong, it's more a question of expectations and campaign guidelines. ...

 

I have a problem with that. One thing I like about the Hero system, a strength of it is that within the campaign guidelines you are quite free to take whatever you want. If you want to take an elf, you pay the points for the benies.

As you describe the new method, it seems the same as saying all characters must play drawves. This is fine if it is a campaign guideline, and sometimes valid, but in general there should be more choise.

 

I can see a caimpaign guideline which pushes disads, for many reasons. However making disads an assumption, a part of the system as opposed to a bonus removed the wonderous flexability of the Hero system. If there is a caimpaign where disads are up to the character and the concept and not an assumption of the background, those concepts which play "by the rules" will benifit over those who go a different path. Then we are back to the old days of D&D where low level elves were better then humans till the level limits take over, therefore just about everyone takes some flavor of elf. Except with disad selection instead of race selection

[ghost-angel]

Re: disad costs

 

I've created two characters I can think of that didn't not take the maximum allowable points of Disad's in the Game at hand.

 

Neither which suffered greatly compared to the other characters at the table.

 

One actually did better.....

 

If you want to change how it works - change it. I have yet to run into a problem with the current Base Point + Disad Point model.