Point Efficiency vs. Concept

[CrosshairCollie]

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.

 

Heh.

 

I've told this story before, but anyway ..

One of my players, once, had a character based on the whole Energy Manipulation thing. He absorbed energy, projected energy, had forcefields, flight, the whole nine yards and then some. Generally considered to be the most powerful character on the team.

 

So, what does he spend his first XP on? 1d6 RKA, 6ch, OAF. And he starts using it in preference to every other attack power he has, despite its total uselessness. Until he's out of bullets, he won't even think about using another move, which nearly costs the team a couple of fights because the other four characters have to pick up his slack. Eventually, they all get tired of it and just ask him why he won't do something useful.

 

"Guns are cool.":rolleyes:

[Narratio]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I remember something similar. A low STR brick who made up for it with some amazing RD PD etc, who insisted on carrying 1d6+1RKA pistol. I asked why, he said that held up his character sheet and said that it just looked cool on his characters picture - he'd used a 'Nick Fury Agent of Shield' pic as a base.

 

I couldn't really argue with him. Inefficient, a tad silly, but it was his concept.

[Kristopher]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Personally, I like the concept from the OP.

 

I can't find them now, except for one, but I once built an entire team of low-level superheroes as NPCs, with the catch that the whole team -- martial artist, mentalist, brick, speedster, and energy blaster -- was also wearing decent power armor that gave them better defenses, life support, IR vision, HRRH, a small STR boost, etc.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I remember something similar. A low STR brick who made up for it with some amazing RD PD etc, who insisted on carrying 1d6+1RKA pistol. I asked why, he said that held up his character sheet and said that it just looked cool on his characters picture - he'd used a 'Nick Fury Agent of Shield' pic as a base.

 

I couldn't really argue with him. Inefficient, a tad silly, but it was his concept.

Don't knock using Fury as a base; one of the most fun Champions characters I've ever had the pleasure of gaming with was just such a character!

 

http://www.killershrike.com/MillennialMen/MillennialMen_Wrath.shtml

 

[Narratio]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

But all he took was the picture. It was a Sterenko era pic, all blue body suit and strap down holster.

[JmOz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

On the gun issue...My character carries one, but he is a highly trained human (With Legendary Dex & Speed) specilising in Ranged combat (Green Arrow/Batman ish)

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

So, what does he spend his first XP on? 1d6 RKA, 6ch, OAF. And he starts using it in preference to every other attack power he has, despite its total uselessness. Until he's out of bullets, he won't even think about using another move, which nearly costs the team a couple of fights because the other four characters have to pick up his slack. Eventually, they all get tired of it and just ask him why he won't do something useful.

 

"Guns are cool.":rolleyes:

Well, okay, there's a difference between "a gun bunny who has varied enough weapons that he can go up against your average bulletproof foe and still be useful" and "stupid."

 

He, madame, had crossed that line.

[Zed-F]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Well, okay, there's a difference between "a gun bunny who has varied enough weapons that he can go up against your average bulletproof foe and still be useful" and "stupid."

You can always build a gun bunny in Champions terms and kit him out with normal gear, and still be useful. He's just so darn good with that gun that he can do things most people can't. There are such things as superskills. E.G. he buys a MP with OIF Gun of Opportunity and a selection of attacks, ranging from a straight up nd6KA 'bullet between the eyes', to a nd6N reduced penetration 'skull crease', to autofire attacks, AoE selective attacks, and so forth. And he probably buys a bunch of movie action hero tricks to go with it. I've got more than one character constructed in such a fashion.

 

But we're getting a bit aside from the original point. This character's whole shtick is being a gunbunny. It's not something your average character who happens to carry a gun would necessarily be able to do.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I love the original concept. I played something like it once.

I had thought "There are supersuit bricks, and supersuit energy projectors, why not a supersuit martial artist".

 

She was fairly decent out of the armor, and inside it gave her some decent defenses, a little enhancment to speed and Dex (she was a techonomage so it was technomagic suit), some LS, and her weapons - it generated an energy sword, she could throw energy shuriken, it had force jo sticks...

 

And of course she implied that all the speed dex and skill were the suit.

 

Thinking about her, I never really played her enough - next champions game I may player her.

[Black Omega]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I recall a player from a game I used to play in who could be rendered useless in any combat by giving him a firearm. He'd use a 1d6+1 Uzi instead of his 15d6 attacks and not mind that he wasn't doing any damage.

 

They did have the scene with Wolverine revealing the claws were part of him, but I don't recall him saying anything more thaqn "Yes, everyone thinks they are part of the suit." They weren't implanted as part of a plan to fool people. Interestingly, originally the claws were a part of the gloves.

 

As far as the concept goes, I would not see anything wrong with it. It's a little gimmicky, and the deceptive source of power thing has been so overdone in the games I play in that it's cliched. But things might be different for his group, and I don't see anything that fishy in it rules wise. The only thing I'd really do is make sure it wasn't stepping on everyone elses toes when it comes to team role. Martial artist/gadgeteer/brick is pretty broad.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

They did have the scene with Wolverine revealing the claws were part of him' date=' but I don't recall him saying anything more thaqn "Yes, everyone thinks they are part of the suit." They weren't implanted as part of a plan to fool people. Interestingly, originally the claws were a part of the gloves.[/quote']

 

I don't recall anything more than some X-Men being surprised the claws were part of him. The original creator, as you note, envisioned the claws being in the gloves, but Claremont thought "hey, wouldn't it be cool if...". The orignal creator, BTW, designed Wolverine as a prospective X-Man, and considered him to be in the late teens age range, as the X-Men were at that time. The adamantium skeleton, age retardation, etc. all came later.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I don't recall anything more than some X-Men being surprised the claws were part of him. The original creator' date=' as you note, envisioned the claws being in the gloves, but Claremont thought "hey, wouldn't it be cool if...". The orignal creator, BTW, designed Wolverine as a prospective X-Man, and considered him to be in the late teens age range, as the X-Men were at that time. The adamantium skeleton, age retardation, etc. all came later.[/quote']

 

The sceen happend in issue #98. The X-men had been captured by Sentinels while they were out and about town. Wolverine didn't have his costume on, though oddly Storm and Banshee apparently wore theirs under thier street clothes... Anyhow, the sentinels bring Banshee, Jean Grey and Wolverine back to Dr Steven Lang. He restrains them with "cromealloy" shackles and is gloating. When he backhands Jean, Wolverine goes nuts, pops his claws and started kicking ***. In the aftermath, Banshee commented:

 

"Yer claws laddie...Lord above they're a part of you... we... I... didn't know!"

 

to which Wolverine replied: "Why should you Irish? It's none of your buisness."

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Re: the suit and the power - I usually design most of my characters like this, actually; I like to have 'layered' offense and defenses, as most of my characters don't just start out freshly mutated (or whatever). They usually have a year or two worth of experience before they start fighting crime. Thus, rather than a "why are you wearing armor", it's usually "why AREN'T you wearing armor?" Really. Most bricks in the 40+ range could easily jack their rPD/rED up by at least 10 by wearing a simple breatplate; or, they could go online and buy a suit of kevlar+inserts for a couple hundred bucks, and increase it by 14. Don't carry a gun? Well, you've got a CvK. Totally understandable. But you aren't wearing armor? What, do you have a CvA, or something?

 

Reasons I can personally see for not wearing armor:

 

1. Powers prevent it - you've got an energy field or something around your body that prevents it. Optionally, if you're a high DEX-based character, it could reasonably constrict you.

2. You're too poor - Fine if you've got the disadvantage, of course. Kevlar does cost a couple of hundred bucks.

3. Body type too strange - you're a giant lizard or something, and no one makes it in your size.

4. Secret ID prevents it - fine for a completely reactive hero, who only responds to crime if they come across it in daily life; but for someone who pro-actively seeks out crime, having a decent suit of kevlar-lined spandex is a wise investment.

5. Bad for your image, 'cuz it looks tacky - well, ok, I suppose this would work for someone who is completely narcisistic...

6. Utter confidence in your defensive powers - aka "I don't need it". Which is fine until someone comes along and blasts you, at which point the character (probably) would realize that they DO need it. But if you designed your character at or near the campaign caps, you're stuck with finding a reaons not to put on armor.

7. It doesn't work for me - I suppose a reasonable justification for some types of defensive power is assuming that if you've already got a PD/ED of 20, then you're already harder than steel; slapping on a layer of kevlar really won't do much good for what people are shooting at you with.

 

My own assumption is that, at the least, most superheroes have access to rPD8/rED8 kevlar-lined spandex, and design characters on that assumption to avoid hitting campaign caps.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

there's also...

 

8. It's not in genre for most supers to ware kevlar body armor.

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

there's also...

 

8. It's not in genre for most supers to ware kevlar body armor.

 

I'd argue that it's not in genre, because the genre started with people like Superman, who get hit with #7 - they really don't need it and/or it won't work for them due to the power of what they're getting hit with. Alternately, you have people like Batman, who originally probably had #1 (too agile) going for him, but current versions of him DO wear kevlar.

 

EDIT - and due to the fact that the genre elements were invented when decent modern body armor didn't really exist. That's kind of like arguing that superheroes shouldn't use cellphones because it's not in genre for them to either.

 

In context, I believe at least one version of the X-men uniforms were kevlar-lined; at the least, I believe unstable molecular fabric is more durable than (say) cotton. In that sense, it's another way, in addition to combat luck, to justify not having your one-trick pony get one-shotted.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

My own assumption is that' date=' at the least, most superheroes have access to rPD8/rED8 kevlar-lined spandex, and design characters on that assumption to avoid hitting campaign caps.[/quote']

 

Sure they can have access. Now let me just pull out those Focus rules.

 

Any focus that provides defenses to a character is automatically hit by any attack that hits the character based on a successful Attack Roll (or that hits the hex in which the character is standing

**********************************************************

Of course, the Focus gets its DEF or the defense it provides to the character (whichever is higher) against the attack.

 

You'll be buying a lot of 8/8 Kevlar-lined spandex suits in a capaign where the typical attack does 12d6 and wrecks the focus. A variant of #2 (I can't buy a new suit every few days) and/or #7 (it doesn't work after one solid hit anyway), or maybe #1 (its tattered remnants slow me down) or even #5 (its tattered remnants make me look uncool).

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Sure they can have access. Now let me just pull out those Focus rules.

 

(snip quote on Breakable foci)

 

Assuming you take Breakable as an aspect on the Focus, sure. That's by no means required. (I mainly design 'em as IIF, as most costumes that would provide enough coverage are essentially bodysuits, and thus impossible to get someone out of without SERIOUS effort.). To get around the "hey, it's real! It should shred!", I'd say that it shreds for dramatic pruposes (and maybe you need to make armory rolls afterwards to keep it in good condition), but doesn't loose essential protective purposes.

 

So, yes. I'm arguing both sides of the coin: kevlar is common enough that I feel most modern characters would have to justify NOT having it, but I don't feel the need to have it be particularly REALISTIC kevlar; cinematic versilimitude is just fine for me.

 

EDIT - also, if your average attadk is 12d6, you could probably justify wearing the DEF 14 version of kevlar; I was using the less-defensive version (without ceramic inserts) as a way to avoid hitting the campaign caps. The campaigns I'm currently in have an average attack of 8d6. (40 active)

[gojira]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

there's also...

 

8. It's not in genre for most supers to ware kevlar body armor.

 

I thought it was in genre for most supers to wear body armor? I thought Captain America always wore some version of chain-mail/body armor, just like many soldiers. And as others have noted at least couple of versions of the X-Men uniform had various degrees of armor and heat/fire resistance.

[David Johnston]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I thought it was in genre for most supers to wear body armor?

Just the ones who have no power that makes them bullet resistant.

[gojira]

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...

 

To me this is great. At least as a concept. The big problem with OIF is when you loose it. If your character is very competant on their own, hey, I can take that suit away from you anytime and not feel bad.

 

There are a couple of other problems, just for me personally. One, supes ain't normally allowed killing attacks. It's a CVK thing.

 

Second you have to be more than kinda smart to build a suit of power armor. Around 20 to 25 points in Inventor and various science and knowledge skills is required. This WILL soak up all the points you saved, but it does give you a more flexible character, which is fine.

 

You could acquire a power suit in other ways: buy one, get a patron to give you one, steal one, etc. But all these will restrict your OIF even more, so you don't end up gaining a lot.

 

If you go for IIF instead of OIF, a lot more options open up. (Magic, for example, or alien nanites who just happen to like you a lot.)

 

Without high Inventor skill and so forth, I'd let you make a loose fitting kevlar suit (not that hard). You could even get a hold of some military grade ceramic inserts for a vest. You could carry around a utility belt loaded with stuff (esp. if you have a gadgeteer as a contact). But none of these are really battle suit options, so again nothing for free.

 

If you really want this as a character option, a patron is the easiest way to go. Just be prepared for a few strings attached. (Hunted: Suit Designer (Watched, Less Po, Got you by the gonads.))

 

 

 

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?

 

Might be cheesey. Martial arts allows a normal strength character to compete with supers. What will it do for a super strengthed character? As long as the letter and spirit of the campaign limits are followed, and the character doesn't seem to be overshadowing other players, then fine.

 

All in my personal opinion of course.

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I thought it was in genre for most supers to wear body armor?

 

Just the ones who have no power that makes them bullet resistant.

 

Which probably falls into the "It wouldn't help against things I regularly expect to get hit with" argument, which seems fine if you don't have an abstract and linear PD/ED game mechanic to deal with. (kevlar really wouldn't help all that much if you if you got hit by a 8-ton bank vault door, but in HERO it would.)

 

So I suppose for some characters it's an issue of game mechanics being a bit too good for some things.

[Kevin Schultz]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

If you go for IIF instead of OIF, a lot more options open up. (Magic, for example, or alien nanites who just happen to like you a lot.)

 

IIF can also be considered "really hard to figure out". For example, a traditional OIF battlesuit can be removed from a character in 1 Turn, assuming the PC is unconcious; appearently, the emergency release mechanism is located where anyone can see it. In contrast, anyone wanting to remove someone from an IIF battlesuit would have to make a relevent skill roll to figure out how to get them out; probably Mechanics or PS: Battlesuit Design. Alternately, the circumstance needed to identify the focus would be "extra time", as it takes extra time to undo all the latches.

 

As such, Tony Stark's suit is probably IIF, rather than OIF - threre's no big red "EMERGENCY RELEASE" button on his back, after all.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

Assuming you take Breakable as an aspect on the Focus, sure. That's by no means required. (I mainly design 'em as IIF, as most costumes that would provide enough coverage are essentially bodysuits, and thus impossible to get someone out of without SERIOUS effort.). To get around the "hey, it's real! It should shred!", I'd say that it shreds for dramatic pruposes (and maybe you need to make armory rolls afterwards to keep it in good condition), but doesn't loose essential protective purposes.

 

So, yes. I'm arguing both sides of the coin: kevlar is common enough that I feel most modern characters would have to justify NOT having it, but I don't feel the need to have it be particularly REALISTIC kevlar; cinematic versilimitude is just fine for me.

 

It's unrealistic kevlar from the outset in defending against all types of attacks. My understanding is that kevlar is very effective against bullets, not so much against knives, fire, lightning, cold and radiation. As well, it would realistically not cover all hit locations (assuming your character can see!). All of that normally gets waived for Supers.

 

However, it seems to me the crux of your argument is that "realistically", real kevlar suits can be acquired for a limited expense, so why would Supers not wear such suits? You then throw out all the realism that indicates why they wouldn't. Under those parameters, of course they would - you're giving them all the benefits that fall from realism, with none of the drawbacks.

 

In Marvel, many heros wear suits made of unstable molecules which have been established to provide some protection to the wearer. Hero has combat luck which basically serves the same purpose of explaining why heros with no real defensive powers don't go "splat" whenever they get hit. Unstable m,olexules uniforms (clearly an IIF) could serve the same purpose in a campaign.

 

Plus, they don't rip, tear or shred, so even if you don't need the defenses, they help you look cool

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

There are a couple of other problems' date=' just for me personally. One, supes ain't normally allowed killing attacks. It's a CVK thing. [/quote']

 

Yeah, because a 15d6 Lightning Bolt is so ovbviously non-lethal compared to a 1/2d6 RKA batarang

 

Second you have to be more than kinda smart to build a suit of power armor. Around 20 to 25 points in Inventor and various science and knowledge skills is required. This WILL soak up all the points you saved' date=' but it does give you a more flexible character, which is fine.[/quote']

 

This assumes he built it himself (which is the case for this character, but need not be). As well, I think he's pointed out that the armor he's building is comparatively low tech, so he shouldn't need to be Tony Stark (or even Abner Jenkins) to build it.

 

You could acquire a power suit in other ways: buy one' date=' get a patron to give you one, steal one, etc. But all these will restrict your OIF even more, so you don't end up gaining a lot. [/quote']

 

He could be a mediocre engineer with some blueprints for fairly standard "supermerc" armor. This stuff isn't even Turtle Armor.

 

If you require powered armor characters to load up on 25 points worth of skills to justify your SFX, do you also require a magic using character to have 25 points worth of arcane lore, dead languages and magic skills to use magic spells? I dislike the idea of charging a character a lot of points for selecting one SFX versus another.

[gewing]

Re: Point Efficiency vs. Concept

 

I think the possibilities with that one are hilarious. "So, Armor Man, now I have you in my clutches, powerless! Hey, wait a minute, put me down! AAAAAAAAAH!"

 

Throw in a few quips like "Ah, you got my armor, but your forgot my secret strength-enhancing earpiece!" Keep a few baubles on your person and the villain will keep thinking they're foci. Until, of course, you wind up captured, naked in a shell, completely shaved and shorn of anything that could be considered strength-enhancing.

 

that was part of the fun of the idea, definately.