Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

[mirage]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

I don't insist on NCM. It would simply be an arbitrary penalty against certain character origins.

 

More to the point, I don't regard there as being any consistent difference between "human" and "superhuman". After all, why does the ability to blow fire from your nose enhance your dexterity? It would, frankly, make as much sense to impose NCM limits on many superhuman characters as on "normal humans".

 

I've actually considered doing something along these lines. In effect, all superpowers would be bought through packages.

 

Ultimately, it's too complicated to be worth the effort.

 

It doesn't have to be a penalty, it can be a reward for designing a character that can get by without all the super-human stuff.

 

If somebody wants to buy a 75 STR and defines the SFX as "normal guy who spent a lot of time in the gym" that would be okay?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

This is exactly what I do. I've used the example that giving an Artist a magic ring doesn't suddenly give him the ability to take out a Seal team without that ring (as Green Lanter Kyle seems to be able to do). On top of that' date=' however, I've basically stated that any stat bought over the NCM (that you haven't paid double for) is considered a super power.[/quote']

 

So what's wrong with 'Super Well Trained' as an SFX?

 

It can be the SFX for dozens of other powers, why not for enhanced stats?

 

('Drain Training Powers' even makes sense as an attack - it's a curse of muscle amnesia!)

[assault]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

If somebody wants to buy a 75 STR and defines the SFX as "normal guy who spent a lot of time in the gym" that would be okay?

 

Have you ever seen such a character? It has more than a faint whiff of straw man about it.

 

I would probably allow a 30 STR. It would have to be a major feature of the character, not just something added in passing, though.

 

The problem is still: WHY does "being superhuman" give you permission to buy anything you want, while "only being human" automatically (mechanically) constrains you? It reeks of arbitrariness.

 

As I have pointed out, I would be willing to consider this kind of condition in a package oriented game. Essentially, this kind of game could be designed to ensure that normal human characters aren't being forced to be weaker than other characters. There is a world of difference between a setting in which one character has an energy blast and another doesn't, and one in which one character not only has an energy blast, but is faster, stronger and smarter than a character that doesn't.

 

Think about the Fantastic Four and most of the X-Men and Avengers. Most of them are no faster, stronger or smarter than anyone else. Those that are have it as part of their schtick. There is no blank cheque issued to "superhuman" characters that allows them to be more powerful than anybody else.

 

Some are, of course.

 

A related argument that comes up occasionally is: "why is Batman in the Justice League? He's hopelessly outclassed!". The answer to that is, of course, that he is not outclassed by the likes of Green Arrow, Black Canary, Hawkman, Aquaman, the Atom, or even Zatanna. He's actually well and truly a middle-ranking member of this extremely powerful supergroup, when it comes to actual combat capability.

 

Characteristic inflation has a bit of a history in Champions. It isn't really a problem, but it is kind of untidy. The only way to get around it in a particular campaign is to oppose it across the board. You can't deal with it in a fair way by only imposing restrictions on certain characters.

 

All you will end up doing is causing players to come up with character conceptions that evade your restrictions.

[mirage]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

Have you ever seen such a character? It has more than a faint whiff of straw man about it.

 

I would do such a thing.

 

I would probably allow a 30 STR. It would have to be a major feature of the character, not just something added in passing, though.

 

The problem is still: WHY does "being superhuman" give you permission to buy anything you want, while "only being human" automatically (mechanically) constrains you? It reeks of arbitrariness.

 

Being supererhuman means you must have a special effect to set the character above or apart from normal humans. And doing what millions of people around the world do just doesn't cut it with me.

 

As I have pointed out, I would be willing to consider this kind of condition in a package oriented game. Essentially, this kind of game could be designed to ensure that normal human characters aren't being forced to be weaker than other characters. There is a world of difference between a setting in which one character has an energy blast and another doesn't, and one in which one character not only has an energy blast, but is faster, stronger and smarter than a character that doesn't.

 

Think about the Fantastic Four and most of the X-Men and Avengers. Most of them are no faster, stronger or smarter than anyone else. Those that are have it as part of their schtick. There is no blank cheque issued to "superhuman" characters that allows them to be more powerful than anybody else.

 

Some are, of course.

 

You using the X-Men as an example to somebody who things Cyclops should have been killed off a long time ago.

 

I look at these characters and think: "If there were really mixing it up with others dealing out the same kinds of attacks as they do they would have been dead a long time ago."

 

These characters are fighting each other with attacks that blow apart buildings, yet most of them can be taken down with a bullet or 2.

 

I don't think the CU is set up that way, and I don't think that most campaigns are run that way either.

 

Why don't you have a little test and try running a few Champs games with Sam Bell's X-Men writeups? (use the villians too) Or at least read over the character sheets and think abou what you're suggesting

 

A related argument that comes up occasionally is: "why is Batman in the Justice League? He's hopelessly outclassed!". The answer to that is, of course, that he is not outclassed by the likes of Green Arrow, Black Canary, Hawkman, Aquaman, the Atom, or even Zatanna. He's actually well and truly a middle-ranking member of this extremely powerful supergroup, when it comes to actual combat capability.

 

So your point is that normal humans can hang with the supers without having superhuman stats. You can do most of that stuff with levels and gadgets. Also Aquaman used to qualify as a brick, but I have no interest in how or who is writing him now.

 

Characteristic inflation has a bit of a history in Champions. It isn't really a problem, but it is kind of untidy. The only way to get around it in a particular campaign is to oppose it across the board. You can't deal with it in a fair way by only imposing restrictions on certain characters.

 

NCM isn't a restriction, its a reward of 20 free points for comming up with a certain character concept and sticking within certain parameters. If you decide you're tired of having the NCM, just have a radiation accident, and buy it off or trade it out.

 

All you will end up doing is causing players to come up with character conceptions that evade your restrictions.

 

I don't condiser comming up with SFX a work around. All the other powers are required to have SFX, I hold buying stats that qualify as a power to that same restriction.

[OzMike]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

All you will end up doing is causing players to come up with character conceptions that evade your restrictions.

 

We, as GMs, can always say "No". Pretty powerful word that:D .

[assault]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

I would do such a thing.

 

Well, there ya go.

 

I think that is a major part of our difference. You appear to think that everything that is permitted is reasonable. It's hardly surprising that you are attracted to formal constraints on character builds.

 

These characters are fighting each other with attacks that blow apart buildings, yet most of them can be taken down with a bullet or 2.

 

I don't think the CU is set up that way, and I don't think that most campaigns are run that way either.

 

Most campaigns don't enforce NCM on "non-powered" superheroes either. The official CU certainly doesn't.

 

Incidentally, it's quite easy to build viable characters that "can be taken down with a bullet or 2". The thing is that while they "can be", they usually aren't. Just like Batman. I guess they're just lucky.

 

In fact, of course, you've just told us that not only should "non-powered" characters be hosed, their "powered" colleagues should all effectively be at least demi-bricks, thus further driving a wedge between the two types of character.

 

Why don't you have a little test and try running a few Champs games with Sam Bell's X-Men writeups? (use the villians too) Or at least read over the character sheets and think abou what you're suggesting

 

I have my own writeups for the original X-Men. They work quite well, thanks.

 

I don't condiser comming up with SFX a work around. All the other powers are required to have SFX, I hold buying stats that qualify as a power to that same restriction.

 

It's a work around because it rules out certain character origins in practice. "I can't play a viable Batman-style character, so I'm going to play a character that is built the way I want it to be, but he's a minor mutant."

 

Bravo.

 

---

 

Meh. This is the Hero System. Play the game the way you want to! Nothing is wrong.

[mirage]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

Well, there ya go.

 

I think that is a major part of our difference. You appear to think that everything that is permitted is reasonable. It's hardly surprising that you are attracted to formal constraints on character builds.

 

I expect players to take advantage of every opportunity to get an edge. there's a saying I learned from the Army: "If you're not cheating, you aren't trying hard enough". Not to say I take an advasarial attitude, but I like to make sure that if they're given 2", they don't try and take 2 yards.

 

I like to design the world as a sandbox for the players to game in. In order to make things consistant there needs to be constraints. Just take these few setups: The Boxer rebellion; under the mechanics of the CU, the Boxers would have creamed the British.

 

There have been incidents like all through history, where people who trained their entire life to be good at something were taken out by another group using moderately trained people with sligtly better technology.

 

 

Most campaigns don't enforce NCM on "non-powered" superheroes either. The official CU certainly doesn't.

 

Incidentally, it's quite easy to build viable characters that "can be taken down with a bullet or 2". The thing is that while they "can be", they usually aren't. Just like Batman. I guess they're just lucky.

 

Once again you have completely missed my point.

 

The CU generally doesn't encourage characters who are throwning around 20 DC attacks but will be taken down by a pop gun. (Actually Bora fell into that category and they killed her off for 5th.)

 

 

In fact, of course, you've just told us that not only should "non-powered" characters be hosed, their "powered" colleagues should all effectively be at least demi-bricks, thus further driving a wedge between the two types of character.

 

Nope, never said that. You're the one who picked the examples.

 

 

 

 

I have my own writeups for the original X-Men. They work quite well, thanks.

 

 

Whatever, the're probably designed to work well in your campaign.

 

It's a work around because it rules out certain character origins in practice. "I can't play a viable Batman-style character, so I'm going to play a character that is built the way I want it to be, but he's a minor mutant."

 

Or here's a novel idea, use something other than superhuman stats! Its possible.

 

Of course if you do decide to go with the minor mutant you have to deal with the mutant issues as well. TANSTAAFL, in some respects Normal Humans get away with a lot, but that have that little issue of only being human. They usually don't have terrorist oranizations or secret government agencies trying to hunt them down and enslave or kill them.

[assault]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

Whatever' date=' the're probably designed to work well in your campaign.[/quote']

 

Actually, they are designed against standard benchmarks like weapons stats, construction material stats, vehicle stats and so on, as well as the standard power level guidelines for their point totals. They also use entirely standard, non-munchkinised construction techniques. In short, they are as generic as I could get them.

 

Why? Because if I feel like it, I could submit them as PCs in other GM's campaigns, with the minimum probability of being rejected.

 

Or here's a novel idea, use something other than superhuman stats! Its possible.

 

The whole point is that this applies to many/most "superpowered" characters too! Why should an Energy Blaster, for example, necessarily have ANY superhuman stats?

 

TANSTAAFL, in some respects Normal Humans get away with a lot, but that have that little issue of only being human. They usually don't have terrorist oranizations or secret government agencies trying to hunt them down and enslave or kill them.

 

Really? What game are you playing? I thought we were talking about Champions!

[bwdemon]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

The whole point is that this applies to many/most "superpowered" characters too! Why should an Energy Blaster' date=' for example, necessarily have ANY superhuman stats?[/quote']

 

This I wholly agree with and it formed a large part of my basis for my original arguments. Just because a character is a mutant or whatever doesn't mean they should get free reign when it comes to charcteristics. They should be subject to NCM unless the character concept calls for something more in that particular characteristic. In other words, just because the character is superhumanly strong doesn't mean he should be superhumanly fast, so he should pay double for exceeding NCM where appropriate.

 

That said, the CU does not adhere to this philosophy. Pretty much every character gets superheroic characteristics of one sort or another. This is what I've called inflation, because it gives almost every character - regardless of concept - superhuman characteristics by setting the baseline at a superhuman 23 DEX & 5 SPD.

 

This works when every character is based along those inflated guidelines. If you try to limit superhuman characteristics to those characteristics the character's concept allows, then the CU characters must be adapted to fit the new baseline (e.g. 14 DEX & 3 SPD).

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

There is NO level of stat which is going to be 'superhuman' in all possible campaigns. Period.

 

There are, however, supernormal stats. People tend to call it superhuman, especially people who don't know their precise origins, but often what is commonly termed 'superhuman' isn't.

 

In real life, people have accomplished feats that people would - and did at the time - term superhuman.

 

 

We don't actually know the hard limits on human performance. We're _probably_ approaching them, but if the right genetics, the right diet, and the right training coincide? Who knows?

 

 

And that's reality, where there's no possibility of someone being a superhumanly capable physical therapist/martial arts instructor, or whatever.

 

A world where you could have hired someone to flush your system of fatigue toxins so you could keep training longer and build more muscle.

 

A thousand and one other things could have taken place in that training...

 

 

And supernormal training is pretty much the most common SFX for being quick and skilled - and that's at essentially any level of being quick, and in both comics and gaming - although it isn't always the _sole_ sfx.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

I expect players to take advantage of every opportunity to get an edge. there's a saying I learned from the Army: "If you're not cheating' date=' you aren't trying hard enough". Not to say I take an advasarial attitude, but I like to make sure that if they're given 2", they don't try and take 2 yards.[/quote']

 

My players are considerably more co-operative. They try to create balanced characters, neither overpowered nor underpowered, for the game. The play of the characters is the enjoyment of the game, not being tougher than the other character(s). YMMV (YPMV?)

 

I like to design the world as a sandbox for the players to game in. In order to make things consistant there needs to be constraints. Just take these few setups: The Boxer rebellion; under the mechanics of the CU' date=' the Boxers would have creamed the British.[/quote']

 

Assuming all the Boxers were 350 point characters, and the British received no powerups, I suppose you would be correct. I don't think the CU claims they were, nor does it say that every guy who works out at the gym can eventually be Captain America/Batman.

 

There have been incidents like all through history' date=' where people who trained their entire life to be good at something were taken out by another group using moderately trained people with sligtly better technology.[/quote']

 

That would seem to be an appropriate genre convention in Historically Accurate Hero. History also shows that people exposed to high doses of radiation generally sicken and die, and perfomance-augmenting drugs have negative side effects. Are your games also realistic in this regard?

 

Given this is posted in the Champions forum, I had assumed we were discussing Champions, the four-colour supers genre based on superhero comic books. In superhero comic books, the Wakandans (for example), using tribal level technology, resisted the colonial powers quite successfully for centuries, despite the latter's far superior technology.

 

The CU generally doesn't encourage characters who are throwning around 20 DC attacks but will be taken down by a pop gun. (Actually Bora fell into that category and they killed her off for 5th.)

 

Most RPG's aren't set up to have major characters drop like flies. In this regard, they deliberately sacrifice realism (that we sometimes slip, fall under 6', hit our heads and die) for fun/playability. For example, your D&D or Fantasy Hero characters don't need to roll an infant mortality check to survive to reach adulthood.

 

Or here's a novel idea' date=' use something other than superhuman stats! Its possible.[/quote']

 

This has already been discussed to death. If the character has the equivalent of a 30 DEX (10 OCV and DCV, moves at 30 in the combat order, DEX rolls 15-), why would we not reason from effect [NOTE: Hallmark phrase of the Hero system, that] and give the character a 30 DEX?

 

As Whammewhamme points out, it seems a Supers genre convention that the DEX/SPD heirarchy tends to be Super fast Supers first, followed closely (and in some cases overalpped by) trained normal human supers, with other Supers lagging a ways behind and non-trained or powered humans bringing up the rear.

 

Of course if you do decide to go with the minor mutant you have to deal with the mutant issues as well. TANSTAAFL' date=' in some respects Normal Humans get away with a lot, but that have that little issue of only being human. They usually don't have terrorist oranizations or secret government agencies trying to hunt them down and enslave or kill them.[/quote']

 

The mutant gets disad points for that Hunted, so it's all good

[JmOz]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

Actualy I would say overlaps with Martial artists (Including weapon masters) instead of trained normal humans. Reason for change: There are a couple of martial artists with powers (such as Iron Fist) who would be in the same catagory

[OddHat]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

 

Assuming all the Boxers were 350 point characters, and the British received no powerups, I suppose you would be correct. I don't think the CU claims they were, nor does it say that every guy who works out at the gym can eventually be Captain America/Batman.

 

That would seem to be an appropriate genre convention in Historically Accurate Hero.

 

The Boxers were 25 point Martial artists with a couple of maneuvers going up against 50 point soldiers with free equipment. If the Chinese Masters (who were busy at the time fighting English Hermetic Mages) had paid for higher point value followers, things would have been very different.

 

[OzMike]

Re: Normals w/Abilities vs Supers [Offshoot of CSL vs MA]

 

THe Boxers wer 25 point Martial artists with a couple of maneuvers going up against 50 point soldiers with free equipment. If the Chinese Masters (who were busy at the time fighting English Hermetic Mages) had paid for higher point value followers, things would have been very different.

 

 

Or if they had spent 100 pts to have 1 million more of them....