Point Efficiency vs. Concept

[David Johnston]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

You mentioned that your friend thought it was a ludicrous way to build a character, but you didn't share with us what his objection(s) was(were)...

 

I'm confused by your post because I can't understand why anyone would object to such a nice, well conceived concept.

 

-k

 

I don't think it is well conceived so much as gimmicky. A character builds a suit of power armour for himself assuming that one day he will be captured and will be able to surprise his captor by being superstrong without it? That's absurd. And while it would be cheap in point terms it's insanely profligate in terms of the actual resources required to pull off this pointless trick. He could just as easily pretend to get his strength from a suit of power armour and not bother to spend the millions (or hundreds of millions) of dollars required to put actual working motors in the thing. Just save your money for the suit's on board weaponry which would be quite genuine as would the protection.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Put it this way -- while it might seem logical' date=' in 'real world' terms for Cyclops to get himself a nifty suit of high tech armor to protect him while he's zapping away with his eyebeam, he doesn't. Why? Because superhero concepts tend towards simplicity and cohesion, not covering every contingency.[/quote']

I don't disagree with this, but OTOH Cyclops is often invoked on these boards as an example of the kind of one-trick-pony character concepts that don't really work that well in Champions. Somewhere between "I put all my points into one really big EB!" and "A little bit of everything, not terribly good at any of them" lies a happy medium.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Maybe this is part of why my friends used to say I needed an extra 25 pts "Greg's character disadvantage."

 

I was describing a character idea to a friend, and he disliked it intensely.

 

My idea was a character who was by nature a light/medium brick. He would have something like 40 strength, 50%pd 25% ed damage reduction, a little regen, and athletic normal attributes or so.

 

Because he got tired of the "STING" of getting shot, he made himself a suit of armor. He is pretty smart, and managed to build a low powered set of powered armor. Maybe + 10 str, 10pd/ED armor, IR vision, Radio, and basically conventional weapons. No plasma guns unless he took it from someone. He would probably use something like an xm25 or a barrett Light 50, and have a rocket launcher on his back. A belt fed lmg might be another good weapon.

 

Now the thing is, he tries not to let anyone know that all his powers are not based on the suit.

 

My friend felt this was a ludicrous way to build a character. I just figured it was a relatively fun idea.

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

I confess, part of the appeal is when he is captured, and considered harmless...

 

 

Another thought about a character idea: He or she wasn't born super strong. They studied martial arts, and got pretty good. Then they got stronger. Super strength and Aikido?

 

I don't see anything wrong with it (a classic concept in my games, actually) and not only is it conceptual... but it IS point efficient in that you are capitalizing on the most effecient archetype in Hero... the mini-brick fighter/martial artist with focus weapons. This character is both concept strong and munchkin-esque if you want it to be.

 

Why does your friend think it stupid?

[actingkeith]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I don't think it is well conceived so much as gimmicky. A character builds a suit of power armour for himself assuming that one day he will be captured and will be able to surprise his captor by being superstrong without it?

While I guess that that's a way to look at it, I was looking at it another way...

 

A guy who's superhuman, decides that he wants to try to pass as human and misdirect people who might seek to thwart him in his heroic activities... so he invents a persona "super-power-armor-guy" in an effort to get everyone to believe that all his powers come from the power armor.

 

That way, he can live a 'normal' life with no one suspecting that he's truly a freakin' mutant freak.

 

I remember reading one of the X-Men comics... Waaaayyy back in the foggy past... the first time that everyone learned that Wolverine's claws were not part of his suit... the team was captured and all the muties were restrained in such a way as to thwart their mutant powers... Wolvie pops his claws and slices through his and everyone else's bond... Jean says something like 'I thought those were part of your costime' (which had been removed) He answered something like 'yeah... you and everyone else... for just such an emergency' The team was saved and they conquered all.

 

So, that's what I was thinking about when I said I thought it was a good concept. I still think that it's a good concept.

 

Cheers,

 

-k

[David Johnston]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

While I guess that that's a way to look at it, I was looking at it another way...

 

A guy who's superhuman, decides that he wants to try to pass as human and misdirect people who might seek to thwart him in his heroic activities... so he invents a persona "super-power-armor-guy" in an effort to get everyone to believe that all his powers come from the power armor.

 

-k

 

That's true, but as I said, there's no need to build an actual freaking set of powered armour to do this when you're superstrong. You could build a suit of armour that looks powered but isn't with far less effort and expense and it would be as encumbering as a t-shirt and shorts.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Kind of reminds me of the hodge-podge characters that you could end up with when rolling them up in V&V.

 

As a point of order, even V&V nodded to this. In their inventing rules, I recall a statement like "Tiger-Man should invent devices that augment his tiger powers, not a flamethrower even though that would be useful in combat."

[Guest Cougar]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I don't disagree with this' date=' but OTOH Cyclops is often invoked on these boards as an example of the kind of one-trick-pony character concepts that don't really work that well in Champions. Somewhere between [i']"I put all my points into one really big EB!"[/i] and "A little bit of everything, not terribly good at any of them" lies a happy medium.

 

Except that Cyclops has more than just one big EB. He's also learned to fight and think strategically and tactically, because he knows that he's going to get his clock cleaned if he just stands around and shoots his eyebeam.

 

In game terms, having Cyke be a skilled combatant who thinks tactically and is able to Dodge and Dive for Cover really well makes good character concept sense. Those are skills (okay, manuevers) learned to help cover his weaknesses. He's remains a fairly normal guy with eyes that shoot force beams. Throw in a bunch of device-driven powers and you lose what makes him Cyclops. And, from a character concept standpoint, he also doesn't have time to become a martial arts master (as opposed to focusing on defensive skills), because he's spent his time honing his abilities with the eyebeam.

 

Paul

[Guest Cougar]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

As a point of order' date=' even V&V nodded to this. In their inventing rules, I recall a statement like "Tiger-Man should invent devices that augment his tiger powers, not a flamethrower even though that would be useful in combat."[/quote']

 

Don't get me wrong -- I played a fair chunk of V&V, ran it myself and really liked it for what it was. I never had my players roll powers randomly, though.

 

Doing so could result with a strange mish-mash of powered-plus-device or powers-that-don't-mesh characters.

 

For every Spider-Man (science geek who gets his powers BECAUSE he's a science geek -- that's why he was at the radiation demo -- and is able to invent a web-shooting device because he's a science geek) kind of character, you could also end up with a guy who had flame powers and sonic powers.

 

Some of it, of course, comes down to the backstory.

 

For example, here we're given:

 

He's a kind of super guy who doesn't like getting shot, even though it doesn't hurt him much. He develops a suit of powered armor and weapons (able to do so, not because he's a genius, but because he's a fairly smart). For me, that doesn't hold together very well.

 

On the other hand, if he was the result of a supersoldier project (for the government, a villain group, whomever) and they designed him to be superhuman then added the rest to make him into the ultimate fighting/killing machine, I think it hangs together much better.

 

Personally, I'd lean towards the "created by a villainous organization" angle and have him defect, taking his weaponry with him. That give you a solid framework to hang the powers-plus-weapons concept on and gives the GM a chance to have a bunch of goons show up wearing a version of your armor, even though they don't have the inherent powers to go with it.

 

Paul

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Except that Cyclops has more than just one big EB. He's also learned to fight and think strategically and tactically, because he knows that he's going to get his clock cleaned if he just stands around and shoots his eyebeam.

 

In game terms, having Cyke be a skilled combatant who thinks tactically and is able to Dodge and Dive for Cover really well makes good character concept sense. Those are skills (okay, manuevers) learned to help cover his weaknesses. He's remains a fairly normal guy with eyes that shoot force beams. Throw in a bunch of device-driven powers and you lose what makes him Cyclops. And, from a character concept standpoint, he also doesn't have time to become a martial arts master (as opposed to focusing on defensive skills), because he's spent his time honing his abilities with the eyebeam.

Fair enough. But if his only defenses are aborting to Dodge & DFC, he's not going to get a lot of attacks in. (Unless he's betting on the "They'll shoot Logan first" strategy, which isn't entirely w/o merit.) And he's probably going to die the first time he does get hit. I'm not dissing the character, just pointing out that one trick ponies don't tend to work nearly as well in RPGs as they do in fiction.

 

Again, I'm not saying all characters should be generalists. Just that putting all your eggs (points) in one basket can be as dangerous (and as munchkiney) as trying to cover too many bases.

[Marketeer]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

In game terms, having Cyke be a skilled combatant who thinks tactically and is able to Dodge and Dive for Cover really well makes good character concept sense. Those are skills (okay, manuevers) learned to help cover his weaknesses. He's remains a fairly normal guy with eyes that shoot force beams. Throw in a bunch of device-driven powers and you lose what makes him Cyclops. And, from a character concept standpoint, he also doesn't have time to become a martial arts master (as opposed to focusing on defensive skills), because he's spent his time honing his abilities with the eyebeam.

 

Paul

 

Conversely, somewhere along the line, he went from being named "slim" to being I-spend-hours-in-the-gym-daily buff...

 

 

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

He's a kind of super guy who doesn't like getting shot, even though it doesn't hurt him much. He develops a suit of powered armor and weapons (able to do so, not because he's a genius, but because he's a fairly smart). For me, that doesn't hold together very well.

 

On the other hand, if he was the result of a supersoldier project (for the government, a villain group, whomever) and they designed him to be superhuman then added the rest to make him into the ultimate fighting/killing machine, I think it hangs together much better.

Good points. Although the Devil's Advocate in me feels compelled to point out that in many comic-book worlds, power armor is a common enough technology that you dno't have to be a genius to build one. A +40 STR suit, maybe; but a +10 STR suit might be possible for someone who's fairly competant. (Which could actually make for some interesting RP possibilities, as his teammates assume he's a much better inventor than he really is!) And it sounds like he was using mostly commercially-available weapons systems. So depending on the campaign world, it might be more plausible than you make it sound. Still, I agree that the origin story needs a little polishing.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Hybrid concepts that are done to make a character stand out (rather than munchkin out) ARE the character's concept.

 

By and large the point costs involved will naturally prohibit the character overall and thus the character will be less bricky than a real brick and less power armory than a real power armor character. Its all about opportunity costs.

 

EDIT: Weird -- got cut off in mid sentence.

[David Johnston]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Good points. Although the Devil's Advocate in me feels compelled to point out that in many comic-book worlds' date=' power armor is a common enough technology that you dno't have to be a genius to build one. A +40 STR suit, maybe; but a +10 STR suit might be possible for someone who's fairly competant. [/quote']

 

That's where I balk. The suit is as strong as it is. It doesn't really add +10 STR to the wearer. That's just how you buy it. Really it's a STR 50 suit because that's how much its motors can lift

[Guest Cougar]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Good points. Although the Devil's Advocate in me feels compelled to point out that in many comic-book worlds' date=' power armor is a common enough technology that you dno't have to be a genius to build one. A +40 STR suit, maybe; but a +10 STR suit might be possible for someone who's fairly competant. (Which could actually make for some interesting RP possibilities, as his teammates assume he's a much better inventor than he really is!) And it sounds like he was using mostly commercially-available weapons systems. So depending on the campaign world, it might be more plausible than you make it sound. Still, I agree that the origin story needs a little polishing.[/quote']

 

I dunno. I have a hard time accepting that in any world anyone short of a serious brain can put together any kind of powered armor suit. It doesn't happen in the Marvel U, the DCU or any of the 'Verses that spun out of Image.

 

Point taken on the conventional weaponry, though.

 

For my own part, I don't like supers using conventional weapons. It just feels wrong to me.

 

I realize, though, that other people's mileage varies.

 

Paul

[JmOz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Thinking more about this I do have one problem with it:

 

Strength Augmentation in a power armor suit is the root cause of it, stepping away from mechanics for a minute

 

Take the avengers for a minute

 

Iron Man can lift lets say 400lbs out of armor (str 15), and lets say a hundred tons in armor (+45 str)

 

So what happens when Captain America (Str 20) puts on the armor? Does the armor become better and lets him lift 200 tons? Or does the armor operate at the same level (100 tons)

 

admitingly +5 str is not that big of a deal, but what happens when Thor (Str 60) decides to put it on? Does he get 10,000 tons lifting?

 

This happens in the inverse as well, what happens when Rick Jones (str 10) puts on the armor, does he go up to Str 60, or does it only go to Str 55

 

Having said all this, this character would in essence be making +40 Str armor, I think I would prefer if the characters armor did not add to his strength at all (however it might look like it does). However for the other abilities it is still cool

 

As for Cyclops...he does wear armor with HRRH built in last time I checked, and has in the past used hand held sensors...

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Fair enough. But if his only defenses are aborting to Dodge & DFC' date=' he's not going to get a lot of attacks in. (Unless he's betting on the [i']"They'll shoot Logan first"[/i] strategy, which isn't entirely w/o merit.) And he's probably going to die the first time he does get hit. I'm not dissing the character, just pointing out that one trick ponies don't tend to work nearly as well in RPGs as they do in fiction.

 

Again, I'm not saying all characters should be generalists. Just that putting all your eggs (points) in one basket can be as dangerous (and as munchkiney) as trying to cover too many bases.

Enter Combat Luck...perfect for characters like Cyclops that should get regularly pasted and arent particularly dodgy, but yet never seem to get hit cleanly.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Thinking more about this I do have one problem with it:

 

Strength Augmentation in a power armor suit is the root cause of it, stepping away from mechanics for a minute

 

Take the avengers for a minute

 

Iron Man can lift lets say 400lbs out of armor (str 15), and lets say a hundred tons in armor (+45 str)

 

So what happens when Captain America (Str 20) puts on the armor? Does the armor become better and lets him lift 200 tons? Or does the armor operate at the same level (100 tons)

 

admitingly +5 str is not that big of a deal, but what happens when Thor (Str 60) decides to put it on? Does he get 10,000 tons lifting?

 

This happens in the inverse as well, what happens when Rick Jones (str 10) puts on the armor, does he go up to Str 60, or does it only go to Str 55

 

 

This is one of the strong arguments for building Power Armor as a vehicle -- the abilities of the Armor are not based on the person in the suit, but are instead flat.

 

This makes sense for suits where the pilot is interchangeable, and does not make sense for suits like the Iron Man armor that are just an SFX for a particular character's abilities.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

That's where I balk. The suit is as strong as it is. It doesn't really add +10 STR to the wearer. That's just how you buy it. Really it's a STR 50 suit because that's how much its motors can lift

Ah, I was thinking of it as the suit provides a power-assist to my own strength, not that the suit is doing all the lifting itself. If the later, you're probably right.

 

I dunno. I have a hard time accepting that in any world anyone short of a serious brain can put together any kind of powered armor suit. It doesn't happen in the Marvel U' date=' the DCU or any of the 'Verses that spun out of Image.[/quote']

Well there's... Okay, I can't come up with any examples right now. But *if* the suit's strength is proportional to the character's, then really this would only give a normal wearer a STR in the 20-30 range. We're talking agent gear, not super gear.

 

For my own part' date=' I don't like supers using conventional weapons. It just [i']feels[/i] wrong to me.

Personally, I tend to agree.

[Mike W]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Maybe this is part of why my friends used to say I needed an extra 25 pts "Greg's character disadvantage."

 

I was describing a character idea to a friend, and he disliked it intensely.

 

My idea was a character who was by nature a light/medium brick. He would have something like 40 strength, 50%pd 25% ed damage reduction, a little regen, and athletic normal attributes or so.

 

Because he got tired of the "STING" of getting shot, he made himself a suit of armor. He is pretty smart, and managed to build a low powered set of powered armor. Maybe + 10 str, 10pd/ED armor, IR vision, Radio, and basically conventional weapons. No plasma guns unless he took it from someone. He would probably use something like an xm25 or a barrett Light 50, and have a rocket launcher on his back. A belt fed lmg might be another good weapon.

 

Now the thing is, he tries not to let anyone know that all his powers are not based on the suit.

 

My friend felt this was a ludicrous way to build a character. I just figured it was a relatively fun idea.

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

I confess, part of the appeal is when he is captured, and considered harmless...

 

 

Another thought about a character idea: He or she wasn't born super strong. They studied martial arts, and got pretty good. Then they got stronger. Super strength and Aikido?

 

Sounds good to me. Point efficiency is fine, as long as it doesn't become the defining part of a character(one way or the other). I'm a big believer in building the character as you envision them. Heck, I often make my players do the initial write up of their powers/abilities without refering to any book terms like "Energy Blast" or "Mind Scan", or whatever.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Point taken on the conventional weaponry, though.

 

For my own part, I don't like supers using conventional weapons. It just feels wrong to me.

I don't feel comfortable with it either. I get around it two ways:

 

1) If they carry a conventional weapon, then it gets the "Real Weapon" Limitation and requires maintenance in order to work reliably. If it's a large weapon such as a Barrett .50 cal or an anti-tank missile, then it is Bulky and ammo for it may be hard to get in some locations. (Most European countries forbid owning guns or ammo in "military" calibers.)

 

2) I make sure real (conventional) weapons are not nearly as effective as Powers possessed by the hero. For example, one of our PCs is a cop in his Secret ID and carries a standard 9mm police pistol. The 1d6+1 RKA damage it does is trivial compared to the damage he can do with his Powers. And guns have serial numbers which can pose serious threats to Secret IDs if dropped or taken.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

That's true' date=' but as I said, there's no need to build an actual freaking set of powered armour to do this when you're superstrong. You could build a suit of armour that looks powered but isn't with far less effort and expense and it would be as encumbering as a t-shirt and shorts.[/quote']

Personally (and, perhaps, unsurprisingly) that's not how I really look at it myself.

 

Granted, he could do that. But the way I tend to look at it is that you've got a character who's a relatively low-grade brick (as a note, I would also agree that we're looking at a character who needs to watch for stepping on toes).

 

Knowing that he's a relatively low-grade brick, more in keeping with a Teen Champions power level than a Champions one, he develops/has developed a suit of power armor that's capable of bringing him a bit closer to "true super" levels, gives him the defenses, and has a couple of relatively low-grade ranged weapons strapped on.

 

Then, not being an idiot, he doesn't go and tell people "oh, yeah, I could go toe-to-toe with Bulldozer without this thing on and barely break a sweat." He says "yep. Power armor. Woo! Go suits! Yep. All the powers are part of the suit."

 

The suit is strong enough to support a STR 50, even more. However, if a STR 10 char gets into it, he's not capable of really using it to its full extent, so he gets STR 20. Heck, if a Grond straps it on, he could get up to STR 100, simply because his massive strength allows him to put it to better use. If you want to quibble about realism for it, just say that the suit's designed to enhance the wearer's strength via "cyber-enhancements" or something like that.

 

He even cuts back on the cost by not developing vastly expensive systems that support plasma cannons and such, but by strapping conventional weaponry to the armor. Effectively, he's taken a "bargain basement" cyber-strength enhancement system, tank plating, and a machine gun, and welded them together on top of a low-grade brick.

 

What does this accomplish? From a brick scale, he's lower power than a traditional brick, and maybe more versatile (depending on how he's built compared to a similar point-scale brick). At the same time, he's less powerful/versatile than a true power armor jock.

 

On the other hand, he has benefits over both... so that's okay.

 

Is it traditional for most comics characters? Nope. But is it within the realm of reason for a comics character? I certainly think so.

 

From a concept scale... it's an interesting concept that makes him handy in a pinch, and lets him keep a "low power" gritty type feel I kinda like, myself.

 

So personally... gets the stamp of approval, from me. I definitely go for concept over efficiency, which often gets me into trouble.

[David Johnston]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

So personally... gets the stamp of approval, from me. I definitely go for concept over efficiency, which often gets me into trouble.

 

This concept isn't actually inefficient as a design. My issues with it are conceptual, not design based.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I understand that yours isn't; I was tossing in a comment on the original issue related to the fellow player complaining about it.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

The only major problem I have is the mundane weaponry aspect. File me in the 'supers don't use standard firearms' camp.

 

That said, a lot of Power Armor guys are 'cross-archetype', if you think about it. Iron Man is a Brick and an Energy Projector, and I'd have trouble arguing that he doesn't have a martial art revolving around aerial maneuvers, for example.

 

I'd say it actually sounds rather cool.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

On the "supers don't use standard weapons" issue:

 

Boy, do I have characters who'd get cringed at.

 

I'll admit, I don't often run a 'gun bunny' type outside of DC, but I've still got a soft spot for James Jonathon, AKA Razor, master gunslinger who has been known to go into battle strapped down with enough guns that his opponents decided that he simply had to be a mage in order to find a place to store all of them.