Indirect discussion

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Indirect discussion

 

I would have higher requirements than mere "expenditure of XP". Otherwise' date=' we could [i']all[/i] get anything we wanted merely by "choosing how to spend our XP", and obviously we - or at least many people in the game worlds - don't, so it is unrealistic to our world and (for many genres) the canon.

 

Magnetism Master might logically begin the game with the ability to manipulate magnetic fields. It seems a reasonable ability for a character based on magnetism to possess. As to spending xp, I'm generally open to reasonable character development. Here in the real world, we don't get to choose our physical or mental statistics, economic strata or disadvantages either, yet in Hero we select each for our characters.

 

These are commonly not what our CHARACTERS would select. Much though RockMan would love the ability to change to his original human form, his player has no intention of spending XP on a power enabling him to do so. And, of course, XP spending should be guided by the same principals which guided the spending of starting points.

 

Presumably, it isn't your intent to grant with one hand the automatic and point-free benefits which common sense dictates the character's existing powers and SFX ought to grant, and with the other hand deny that same character the ability to purchase powers his sfx would logically accommodate, if not demand, using his points. I trust you will correct me if my presumption in this regard is inaccurate.

 

For instance' date=' any "global" effect (that lasted) might need to satisfy "The Powers That Be", and maybe even strike some sort of bargain (to pay them off). Primarily, though, things get [i']really[/i] confusing with all sorts of global effects all over the place, and it makes sense that some group of cosmic forces would have come together and agreed that they should pool their efforts to keep things simple.

 

This presumes a setting where such cosmic forces hold some form or sentience or proto-sentience, and where their desires are incapable of beong frustrated by those of the player characters. This will not encompass every setting.

 

Or is that borrowing too heavily from realism again?

 

That depends on the reader's personal philosophies and religion.

 

Since it justifies an in-character enforcement (is this a word?) of a balance of power' date=' it may serve that purpose too. But then again, an in-character evaluation of "a balance of power" may not be the same as the GM's [i']or[/i] the players'. But then again, if properly objective it may not matter

 

So we have merely traded one variety of common sense (where nothing is free, but you may purchase those abilities your SFX logically make available) for another (where some SFX get some abilities for free, based on common sense, but cannot purchase certain abilities reasonably justified by their SFX). I'm not seeing a huge improvement in a global sense.

 

He would not be required to pay' date=' but standard GM rules about "power level of characters joining the group" would apply. The player could certainly [i']make[/i] a character that was advantageously positioned with the new magnetic field, but the GM would be within her rights to say "This character exists, but isn't anywhere near the PC group." and deny the player any right to play that character.

 

How is that any different than repricing these excessively powerful abilities such that they could not be paid for by a character at the power level appropriate for the character? The only difference I perceive is that a character who lucks into such an enhancement in play is permitted to become, and remain at, an inappropriate power level for the group. I don't see that as an improvement.

 

If desired' date=' the GM could use this to maintain a roughly equal level of power among the player characters, by ruling that those who previously [i']were[/i] powerful enough to join the group, but were made more powerful by the changes (i.e., were built on the same points+XP but had additional power through the magnetic field), were now powerful enough to join another group, and that they did that instead.

 

"Sorry, old chaps - I know we've guarded each other's lives these past months, but now that I'm more powerful, I'm joining a group of strangers who are tougher than you. Oh, and don't forget to kick out our friend whose powers have been reduced. I'm sure you'll coincidentally bump into a couple of new colleagues who are more at your level. Pip Pip!"

 

My, that's the kind of characters I want to play as "heroes".

 

Part of the rewards are to characters in the world' date=' and part is to [i']players[/i]; if you were involved, you reap the whirlwind, but if you jump in later, you haven't earned the right (via, for example, experience) to alter a given balance of power (such comparisons can be made so many ways, though).

 

I don't see a character being luckily in the right place at the right time having earned much of anything. Then again, I also never liked the various D&D "randomly power you up or doom you" items either. I guess it comes back to playstyle once again.

[Robyn]

Re: Indirect discussion

 

As to spending xp' date=' I'm generally open to reasonable character development.[/quote']

 

Hrm . . . back to what the criteria of "reasonable" are, then.

 

Presumably' date=' it isn't your intent to grant with one hand the automatic and point-free benefits which common sense dictates the character's existing powers and SFX ought to grant, and with the other hand deny that same character the ability to purchase powers his sfx would logically accommodate, if not demand, using his points. I trust you will correct me if my presumption in this regard is inaccurate.[/quote']

 

With the other hand, yes. Not with the same hand. It's not part of the same principle; it's a different principle. Kind of, you know, like any system that involves compromise. With a system that contains multiple elements, you have to evaluate their balance with a combination of them. With a system that only contains a single element, you can't contradict or go outside that element: your freedom, and flexibility, is restricted.

 

A character can think to himself, "I'm capable of firing laser blasts from my fingertips, and I have figured out from this that I must be able to control light, so maybe I can suck all the light out of this area, instead of emitting it!", but maybe his reasoning led him to a false conclusion. Maybe his level of control over his powers just isn't enough to master that particular trick yet. Maybe there's still something else he needs to figure out first (not necessarily another power, but not reflective of control either). There are all sorts of possibilities, but the fact remains that an ability can be appropriate to SFX, without that SFX alone assuring the player that such an ability can be taken (if that were the case, the PC should take a VPP for "all such effects"! or use the Power Skill skill).

 

The only difference I perceive is that a character who lucks into such an enhancement in play is permitted to become' date=' and remain at, an inappropriate power level for the group. I don't see that as an improvement.[/quote']

 

Or, if they become weaker, they remain there. Until such time as such things change, of course. Do you expect that the PC's would be totally unmotivated to investigate such changes and reverse them? The world is not merely a painted stage, for the players to trample all over; it is a living, breathing entity in its own right, and it will trample all over them if they treat it as something that cannot change on its own and will only react to whatever the PC's do.

 

"Sorry, old chaps - I know we've guarded each other's lives these past months, but now that I'm more powerful, I'm joining a group of strangers who are tougher than you. Oh, and don't forget to kick out our friend whose powers have been reduced. I'm sure you'll coincidentally bump into a couple of new colleagues who are more at your level. Pip Pip!"

 

My, that's the kind of characters I want to play as "heroes".

 

Those who were already part of the group, would not have to re-justify their position. It is the independents, loners, and freelance agents who, looking to join a group, would pick one of their own power level (or, failing that, the group might decide to reject new applicants, based on not wanting to be overshadowed by their new sidekicks).

 

Of course, if the other players are comfortable with the idea, and their characters are too, the GM can consider whether this satisfies any other elements in their personal meta-system.

 

I don't see a character being luckily in the right place at the right time having earned much of anything.

 

This isn't about characters, actually; as I said, part is to characters.

 

But part is to players.

 

The players were involved with the game; their (character's) rewards, and consequences, are justified.

 

I guess it comes back to playstyle once again.

 

True, and as I said, HERO could use more flexibility in that respect.

[zornwil]

Re: Point-Counterpoint

 

Glad we could entertain!

 

I suspect that I'm the one with a sense of humor, unless Hugh has been slyly interjecting wry comments into the exchange all along and I merely missed them, in which case I'm the one with no sense of humor

I think he's had a few but that doesn't mean you don't alos have a sense of humor.

 

I would say you're Jane and he's Dan.

[zornwil]

Re: Point-Counterpoint

 

I just have no idea where they find the time!

At a quick glance, for a second, I thought your avatar was John Travolta.

[zornwil]

Re: Point-Counterpoint

 

I just have no idea where they find the time!

PS - now, think about this, a lot of us will be, God willing, retiring not only someday but around the same time. So just imagine these exchanges among a whole bunch of us sitting at home with NOTHING to do but surf the net (and play games)!?

[Robyn]

Re: Point-Counterpoint

 

At a quick glance' date=' for a second, I thought your avatar was John Travolta. [/quote']

 

It is moments like these that I regret turning avatars off by default in my forum viewing preferences