Role-playing vs. combat ratio in your game

[Harry Canyon]

Hi folks!

 

I've a question or two for you.

 

Yes, you!! Now put down that Krispy Kreme and read up maggot!

 

Sorry, I seemed to be channeling R. Lee Ermey for a moment there...

 

1) What is your guesstimate of role-playing vs. combat/action in your Champions games?

 

2) How many folks have players new to the Hero system in their games?

 

Thanks!

 

Take care,

 

Harry

[Killer Shrike]

On your face, puke! You're giving me 20!

 

 

Currently with this group its about 25/75 rp/combat

 

Past groups of stronger roleplayers were anywhere from 50/50 to 90/10 (!).

 

Currently have 1 newbie (1 session so far), 3 partial newbies (been playing HEROs now for about 6 months -- were new until I got my hands on them), 2 rustys (used to play 4th ed or previous), and 2 old salts (have used HEROs for thier primary system for a number of years, minus occasional side games; counting me) in our player pool.

[TheEmerged]

1> Our sessions tend to last anywhere from 4 to 6 hours. Of that, less than 30 minutes is usually locked up in combat. We have had mass melees that took most of the session to run, however (and by mass, I mean more than 30 participating N/PC's). In the superheroic genre, most fights last less than a full turn with fights over two turns being extraordinarily rare. Under fantasy genre they take longer, but this is primarily due to the SPD differential (usually 6 for superheroic versus 4 for fantasy).

 

This can also vary by campaign, of course, but my players tend to prefer conspiracy/investigative scenarios than "fight people, find next fight, repeat" scenarios.

 

I credit our recent decision to move to miniatures and rulers instead of hexmaps with a large part of speeding combat up -- and improved recordkeeping skills on the part of the group as a whole for the rest.

 

2> My current campaign has no HERO neophytes, in fact all but one of them has played the system for over ten years. My next one could have 3 HERO neophytes however...

[Agent X]

75/75: I find they overlap.

[BarryB]

We seem to slip into doing combat almost exclusively. We've tried time and again to introduce more RP, but we seem to do it better writing up stories for our campaign website. I know I do.

[Jhamin]

I would have to say 60% RP/40% combat. We tend to have a moderate amount of RP in combat, but players usually only have their dice out 40% of the time on average.

 

Of my three players, two had only gamed 3-4 times before the game started & they were new to Hero. That was 7 years ago (during the Hero Darkages). My third had gamed on and off for years before he joined us but was new to Hero. That was about 3 years ago. He had to get his BBB in the used bin at a dusty comic shop not often frequented by gamers.

[zornwil]

Setting aside the overlap, I'd say it's probably 60-40 RP-combat respectively, but it's hard to say. The last game had no combat (although it was really a smaller scope game with 2 players), but the one prior was mostly combat (again, setting aside any overlap and calling any combat just "combat" and no RP). I think overall though there's a little more non-combat time, and mayve it's even more than I've written here. It does vary an awful lot though.

[MarkusDark]

Depends upon the senario - sometimes there's nothing but RP, sometimes nothing but combat. I go for a 50/50 ratio.

 

As for newbies - I am currently running a game with nothing BUT new players to the Hero system. it is currently 5% RP with 95% combat. I find most new players tend to be like this as they concentrate on learning the mechanics at first.

[FTJoshua]

We're about 70% RP, 30% combat. Usually no more than 1 combat per session, and often only every other session or more, sometimes.

 

The youngest player to the game is about 2 or 3 years old now, the rest of us have 10 to 15 years of Hero System.

[Brutal]

We at least TRY to Roleplay more, and speeding up the fights. Because after all its CHAMPIONS - the roleplaying game! Not champions the tabletop game

[Yamo]

Maybe this is just because it's such a pet peeve for me, but I'm going to go ahead and be pedantic here.

 

This combat/roleplaying split has ALWAYS bugged me in a roleplaying context. Properly applied, combat is a vital part of the story and thus part of the roleplaying! A lot of valuable characterization can be drawn from how characters act and react in important conflict situations. This is particularly true if there's one-lined, oaths, curses, taunts, soliloquies and such throughout the course of the fight, as there is with every group I've played with.

 

Think about movies with important combat scenes: Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Rocky, Saving Private Ryan, Enter The Dragon. The list goes on and on. Does the story stop during the action scenes, or do the action scenes further the story in important ways? Do the characters stop emoting or evolving during combat scenes? Hardly!

 

So frankly I think it's a false distinction and I reject it uncatagorically. All combat is not mindless "rollplaying" and all standing around talking is not deep, compelling roleplaying.

[ShelleyCM]

I think I'm about 80% RP to 20% combat. Combat is important to include, I think, but it should always be related to the story being told. No, I take it back. It should be completely dependent on the story, or else it's just gratuitous violence.

 

All IMHO, of course.

 

-Shelley

[lemming]

What are we basing the percentages on?

 

Time spent by players? Energy spent? Time by GM for setting up plot lines?

[Snarf]

The combat in my game is all incredibly mindless and stupid but it's okay because it's parody of video game RPGs gotta catch em all eheheh! Yeah, completely intentional, sure, I can do a serious game any time I want...

[ShelleyCM]

I was guestimating based on the time I spend preparing/researching, as well as the time spent in-game doing whatever it is. It's much more important to me to have established the why of what's happening than how many dice of damage the baddie does. (What do the players remember when all is said and done, after all?)

 

-Shelley

[Agent333]

Originally posted by Yamo

Properly applied, combat is a vital part of the story and thus part of the roleplaying!

 

I agree with Yamo here. It's just been my experience that once my players dice go cold, so does their RP enthusiasm. It's been difficult for me to insert too many speeches that didn't involve "Look out!" or "Get behind me!". I'm gonna keep trying to get it in there, but until then my ratio is about 70/30 in favor of role-playing.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by lemming

What are we basing the percentages on?

 

Time spent by players? Energy spent? Time by GM for setting up plot lines?

 

I'm just guesstimating purely on time - lemming as you play in my game you're welcome to correct my guess, it's pretty hard to pin down.

[altamaros]

It depends on too many factors :

- the plot of your scenario

- the powers available to the PCs

- the mood of the players.

- etc...

 

In my "Suicide Squad" campaign, our last scenario had a ratio around 5% combat ( less than 1hr in a 16hr long scenario).

Most of our PCs having non-offensive powers (but we're great infiltrators)

 

im my Dark champions campaigns, it tends to go around 60% RPG/40% cbt

[Doug McCrae]

I'm with Yamo - a high percentage of time spent in non-combat is not to be taken as the sign of a superior game.

 

And what counts as combat/action? What counts as roleplaying?

 

GM: You approach the complex. It's surrounded by a 3m high metal fence. There are two guards at the gate, carrying SMGs.

Player: I'll sneak up to the fence, out of sight of the guards and make a hole with my wire cutters.

 

Is this combat? Action? Roleplaying? Does sneaking about count as action? Surely it isn't roleplaying?

[Fur Face]

Role playing vs Roll-playing

 

In the end, it all depends on the balance that is enough to satisfy the GM & players so everyone can have fun. I've always referred to this as role playing versus roll-playing. Role playing is assuming the role of your character, like an actor in a play. Roll-playing is when people want to use the dice as a substitute to playing in character. The difference can be enormous in relation to how much fun you can have. If the GM says "You see a door, but its locked". A player can say either one if two things: "I rolled my lockpicking skill 6 under" or "Hey, that lock was easy! I touch my shoulder a make a sizzeling sound, because I'm hot stuff!"

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to roleplay every time I buy a pack of gum, but I do want to have fun "in" character. The amount of "action" versus "non-action" isn't directly proportional to the quality of the game.

[BoloOfEarth]

If you strictly look at time spent in play, I'd say it's about 60% roleplay, 40% combat. If it's time that I spend as GM preparing for the game, it's the reverse. (That includes updating the NPC character sheets, making the speedsheet, etc.)

 

My players are about half role-players, half combat types, so I always try to have some combat in every session, even if it's a throwaway against thugs or agents just to lure them into a situation.

 

There is plenty of role-playing potential within combat. How the characters resolve a hostage situation, or handle stray shots putting innocents in danger, can add lots of RP fun.

[pinecone]

I aim for 50/50...but the actual split is based on the players...in recent years I really don't play or run often...but the last regular group I ran was one where we could have 2 or 3 sessions of non combat and the an orgy of violence with 2+combats a night, it just varys but I basicly formulate a run as Investigate and interaction then bust heads....that way everybody gets a cookie....

[Blue]

My old champions group: 75% RP/ 25% combat

My current gaming group (other campaigns): 60% RP, 40% Combat.

My current champions game: 80% Combat/20% RP.

 

Yup, you read that right. I've plunged my group too heavily into combat and not given them a chance to RP. It's something I plan to rectify at the next game.