Number Crunching Vs Roleplaying

[BlacKlily]

I run a large group of 9, I have both my number Crunchers, and my Role-players, for this reason I do story driven campaigns with high action. But occasionally usually after one of my number crunchers do a mighty stunt in combat, the rolplayers get peeved and start whining about character power.

So over the years I have put caps on starting powers and stats and even taking the time to tell the role-players how do some of the basic number crunching tricks.

From this I have learned that building the character properly in the first place to follow or grow into your hero's concept is actually far more powerful then a cool concept.

Opinions?

[Doug McCrae]

I don't like the big power imbalance you get in Champions between players that know the char gen system inside out and those that don't. Or as you put it - number crunchers and roleplayers.

 

One solution our last GM used was to get plain English character descriptions from the players then do all the stats himself. This works pretty well IMO.

[Tamashii2000]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

I don't like the big power imbalance you get in Champions between players that know the char gen system inside out and those that don't. Or as you put it - number crunchers and roleplayers.

 

One solution our last GM used was to get plain English character descriptions from the players then do all the stats himself. This works pretty well IMO.

 

I did that once, got discriptions of all the characters and tried to create them for them. worked pretty good except in one case.

[Tech]

Re: Number Crunching Vs Roleplaying

 

Originally posted by BlacKlily

I run a large group of 9, I have both my number Crunchers, and my Role-players, for this reason I do story driven campaigns with high action. But occasionally usually after one of my number crunchers do a mighty stunt in combat, the rolplayers get peeved and start whining about character power.

So over the years I have put caps on starting powers and stats and even taking the time to tell the role-players how do some of the basic number crunching tricks.

From this I have learned that building the character properly in the first place to follow or grow into your hero's concept is actually far more powerful then a cool concept. Opinions?

 

I see so many valid points that you've brought up but have mixed reactions, but not due to me disagreeing. I certainly agree with you: a well-founded and sound concept can certainly allow more character growth that one that isn't. A cool concept on the other hand, can also allow a great deal of growth because the player has a character he or she enjoys. In both cases however, the character must be well-built and in concept. I suppose this means I agree with caps that they're a good idea. However, I have no such hard limits in my campaign and it still works. I should say I have all veteran players except for one teenager, who's the daughter of the veteran player.

 

I have a character who would probably cause some howling among some of you because a couple of her powers are well over 100 and 200 active points, though greatly limited, approved by the GM. No, I didn't try to sneak it through - I was quite open about it. Still, there are a lot of players out there who aren't veteran players and play bags-of-points and not concepts, players who care only to smash the villain and rake in the experience, players who think that their characters shouldn't be limited by the GM and I feel for those who have those players in their campaigns. (I ran into one, once... for which I still regret it.)

 

Whether a high-powered character or low-powered, a well thought-out concept beats points anyday.

[Killer Shrike]

Tech: Many players see thier characters as bag-o-points, and most of them are veterans. I bounce them right out of the group or screen them before they see play. I've found that 1 rabid power monger can ruin the game for everyone else in the past and just dont permit it anymore.

 

 

General Topic: As the GM I screen all characters for playability, considering both RP and combat effectiveness. This helps to minimize the OMG character who outstrips the other characters. It still occasionally happens, usually once a character has had the opportunity to take a basically balanced suite of powers, and optimize the character to accentuate their strengths and/or minimize weaknesses, pushing the character into the red zone in the process.

[bwdemon]

My opinion on this is that players can be both number crunchers & roleplayers... the two aren't mutually excludable and some people will truly be neither. Competency (or a lack thereof) does not define the depth of a role or the ability of a player to execute it.

 

That said, I agree that caps on power levels will help somewhat. However, this will allow the number crunchers to diversify, creating characters with fewer deficiencies. So there'll still be a difference, it'll just be in the number of ways that a given character will be useful.

 

One of the things I've toyed with is setting aside points at character generation that *have* to be used on noncombat/background skills. This doesn't hinder well-developed characters at all and it enforces at least a little depth on the worst of the shallow number-crunchers.

 

On the flip side of that, make sure that the roleplayers aren't making superheroes without the "super". If the average VIPER agent is a bigger combat threat than the character, then maybe they should work on that aspect a bit. If they spend all of their points on noncombat powers & skills and whine about someone who put more points into combat powers & skills, then they've got nobody to blame but themselves. They built the character the way they wanted to, after all.

 

Finally, I'd like to add that many roleplayers are as guilty of number-crunching as the worst "Hulk Smash!" brick. I can't begin to tell you how many people I've seen carrying the banner (cross?) of roleplaying while controlling a character with enough social skill to unite the world with nothing more than a smile. These are the characters with 21- skills in things like Oratory, Persuasion, and Seduction. They can get anyone to do anything so long as they can get them to look at or hear them for a couple of seconds. It's incredibly powerful, but in a sneaky way. Do the roleplayers really not know the system or are they just abusing it in a different way?

[Lord Mhoram]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

One solution our last GM used was to get plain English character descriptions from the players then do all the stats himself. This works pretty well IMO.

 

This is one I have heard before, and I just don't understand. Part of what I love about HERO is the ability to build the character exactly as I envision it. If I had a GM that insisted on building the characters himself, I would think strongly of not playing- I would not have any kind of connection to the character. My relationship with my character begins at concepts and grows to fruition during building. Sort of like a baby, if someone else builds it, there is sort of a surrigate mother feeling, the sneaking feeling that this character is not mine.

Having characters someone else builds is fine for Con games or one shots but for a continuing game I just can't understand it.

Now if the the GM is having balance problems, let me know what and where and I will be perfectly happy to stay within these guidlines. I once built a character with a medium sized cosmic pool (about 30 points). After the first adventure, it became clear that he was just too versatile for the game, and I asked the GM to let me retire the character and build a new one.

[JohnOSpencer]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

I don't like the big power imbalance you get in Champions between players that know the char gen system inside out and those that don't. Or as you put it - number crunchers and roleplayers.

 

One solution our last GM used was to get plain English character descriptions from the players then do all the stats himself. This works pretty well IMO.

 

I tried to do this with my current party. I asked them to tell me their character concept and I would help them build their characters. With the exception of the one I live with, they all handed me finished characters! I was able to help them fine-tune their characters, so I guess it ended the same.

 

My point is this: The player and the GM should co-operate to make a character. This way no-one is less powerful(unless they want to be) and no one steps on anyone elses toes.

IMO, YMMV

 

John Spencer

[Peregrine]

Player-GM cooperation? What a concept! And here I thought that it was the GM's job to put the players in their place, to keep their characters weak and mewling as the world around them proves their worthlessness.

 

\sarcasm off

[Klytus]

In our group, there are only 2 of us that really understand the ins and outs of the Hero system - both from the rules and years of RP experience. This is why we usually work with the others when they design a character. The player in question describes a character concept, and we all sit down at the computer with Creator (I don't have Hero Designer yet) and we start plugging in the numbers and using our best design tricks. It works very well for us. The only complaints we get are regarding the difference between an imagined concept, what looked good on paper, but doesn't work in game. No one ever fusses about "His character is better than mine!"

[BlacKlily]

Personally as a Gm I favor the ones who roleplay. So even the few hard core number crunchers I have now work to round out thier character more. The number crunchers often help the more Role oriented players with streamlining thier characters and using the rules...all expect one...who refuses help from anyone then gripes later.

I have found over the years that by starting limits, and asking the number crunchers to help the roleplayers with steamlining characters I get a great mix....except for the one guy who just will not accept help and is sure he knows everything. That is the player who miss quotes rules often, and wants to be the center of attention in all things.

However he coined these two phrases and started the same disscussion I started here on our groups game site...and well it got me thinking about my style as a player and GM.

To be honest he has really has forced me to keep on my toes and provide a very interactive game. Just sometimes it is so exhusting.

[Lord Mhoram]

Originally posted by JohnOSpencer

My point is this: The player and the GM should co-operate to make a character. This way no-one is less powerful(unless they want to be) and no one steps on anyone elses toes.

IMO, YMMV

 

John Spencer

 

This is what I try and do with any game I start. I work with my players in building thier characters. The experienced builders go at it, and I look over and make world specific suggestions, and the people that are a little more unfamiliar with the system and I pull up to the computer pull out FREd and fire up HD.

[RadeFox]

Im in the GM should help out Pool. It is after the GM who knows best what the game world is like, and how the story line is planned to go (which I know usually changes, but still!). If you see all the characters sitting before you before you play, and you damn well better as the GM! You should KNOW which ones are good, solid, and do-able, and which ones are likely to have little to do, and be constantly overshadowed. If you had a hand in the whole creation process, then the defficiencies of a character are likely minor and easily redone with some points crunching to bring them up to par with the rest of the group, and of course, in line with their foes.

[Tech]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

Tech: Many players see thier characters as bag-o-points, and most of them are veterans. I bounce them right out of the group or screen them before they see play. I've found that 1 rabid power monger can ruin the game for everyone else in the past and just dont permit it anymore.

 

I would have to disagree with you based only on my experience, although I will add that my veteran players are also good roleplaying veterans. Perhaps my experience is rare but I've found that those players who understand roleplaying and stop grabbing for the points become the very best. Based on my experience alone, good roleplayers can handle powerful, low-point, simple and complex characters. The GM (me, in this case) doesn't have to worry about a point war or worry about raving players because someone pulled off an incredibly heroic act with a big power.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Tech

I would have to disagree with you based only on my experience, although I will add that my veteran players are also good roleplaying veterans. Perhaps my experience is rare but I've found that those players who understand roleplaying and stop grabbing for the points become the very best. Based on my experience alone, good roleplayers can handle powerful, low-point, simple and complex characters. The GM (me, in this case) doesn't have to worry about a point war or worry about raving players because someone pulled off an incredibly heroic act with a big power.

What I mean is that you are more likely to run into point-whores among those who are familiar with the HERO System than among those who are not, because the very concept of point-whoring is outside the ken of gamers that have never played a point-based game before.

 

IME, having dealt with dozens of players in the context of HERO's campaigns, is that players new to the system, even if they are powergamers, are much less likely to catch on to the various "heroisms" that are exploitable within the system than veteran HEROs players.

 

The guy thats never played HEROs might try to cheese out a Disadvantage or Limitation here or there, but it takes an old-skool Champions grog to sit down and build an Elemental Control abusing min-maxed collection of random abilities right off the bat.

[Tech]

Killer Shrike, you'll hear no disagreement from me here. You are so correct. Thanks for the clarification! Yeah, those who know the system well can really pull some horrible rabbits out of the ol' magic hat, so to speak. Y'know something, it's kinda sad, too.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Tech

Killer Shrike, you'll hear no disagreement from me here. You are so correct. Thanks for the clarification! Yeah, those who know the system well can really pull some horrible rabbits out of the ol' magic hat, so to speak. Y'know something, it's kinda sad, too.

Its unfortunate, and short sighted.

 

What people like that seem incapable of understanding is that when they "cheat the system" they are really just cheating themselves. If they make unbalanced characters they just unbalance the game and ultimately ruin the fun for everyone.

 

I think it stems from adversarial mentalities; they are out to "win" or "beat the game", totally missing the point that the game is just cooperative storytelling. There is no winner or loser in the competitive sense. Ultimately everyone "wins" or "loses" together -- if the game was fun then everyone wins, else everyone loses.

[Doug McCrae]

Originally posted by Lord Mhoram

This is one I have heard before, and I just don't understand. Part of what I love about HERO is the ability to build the character exactly as I envision it.

...

After the first adventure, it became clear that he was just too versatile for the game, and I asked the GM to let me retire the character and build a new one.

You're a good player, Lord Mhoram.

 

I see where you're coming from here, but what other solution is there? Few players have your sensitivity. What's the GM to do about the gross-out monster that doesn't realise he's hurting the game?

[Doug McCrae]

Just to play Devil's Advocate here, is a big power imbalance necessarily a bad thing? I mean what if player A is a rabid min-maxer but players B, C and D don't care?

 

Now, myself, if I was player B-D, I'd have a big big problem if player A was, in addition to being a power gamer, an asshole. If he used his power to bully the other PCs and give them less game time (the worst thing you can do to another player, whatever method you use) I would have a problem. But if player A was a nice guy and used his power with a strong measure of sensitivity, then I wouldn't mind.

 

It all depends who you play with.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

Just to play Devil's Advocate here, is a big power imbalance necessarily a bad thing? I mean what if player A is a rabid min-maxer but players B, C and D don't care?

 

Now, myself, if I was player B-D, I'd have a big big problem if player A was, in addition to being a power gamer, an asshole. If he used his power to bully the other PCs and give them less game time (the worst thing you can do to another player, whatever method you use) I would have a problem. But if player A was a nice guy and used his power with a strong measure of sensitivity, then I wouldn't mind.

 

It all depends who you play with.

 

Since I am beginning to suspect I have Psych Lim: Devil's Advocate...:

 

Totally. I mean, look at a(ny) classic team: there is always power imbalance. As long as everyone is treated fairly, there's no hard feelings. Ifthere's a spot-hog, in source or replication, there's a problem.

 

Rule of thumb: If you talk more than the GM, SHUT UP!

[Agent X]

Sometimes, numbers crunching is necessary just to get close to what you are trying to build... for role playing reasons.

[Guest zarglif69]

What all this? this too complicated for me. me brick. me not know what roleplay is. All I know is throw truck, smash bad guy.

[Vondy]

A persons ability to role play isn't impacted by whether or not they are a number cruncher.

 

The two skills are mutually exclusive and can be present or absent in an individual simultaneously or indivudiually.

 

Its what you do with the character after the numbers have been crunched that matters.

 

Number crunching is a design time funtion. Role playing is a run time function.

[Insaniac99]

agreed D-man, I myself try to come up with fun concepts but at the same time, whenever i look at a character sheet, I can just sense potential and eak out a few more points and tighten that nut a tiny bit more, but then in games I role play (though for me, it take a little bit for me to REALLY get in character) and don't care about shining in battle.

[Gary]

The trouble with severe character imbalance is what it forces the GM to do. If he scales the villains to the weaker heroes, the stronger heroes will crush them. It he scales the villains to the stronger ones, the weaker ones get knocked out or killed in the first 2 phases.