Would you like some sub-plots with that?

[Richard Logue]

Preface: I definately want to run a serialized campaign (as opposed to episodic) with a strong metaplot running through it. I want the campaign to unfold and finish within, say, 22 - 25 stories. I want to start off nice and easy with some unconnected scenarios and slowly introduce the *PLOT* into the mix. Then, as the PCs play, they will uncover clues and such and the *PLOT* will eventually culminate in the heroes saving the city from anhilation/apocalypse. I have the villain and her plans already in my head, and I can see the future of the city if the heroes can't stop her.

 

Now, for this campaign, I want to try an idea that came to me over the weekend: no Disadvantages. Instead, the plan is to give the players an extra 50 points to spend. The chapter titled Disadvantages is being renamed Sub-plots. (See, I just took my sharpie and scribbled it out and wrote "sub-plots" in its place.)

 

Players can opt to spend points on Sub-plots. They cost 5, 10, or 15 points apiece and are chosen/built from the (new) Sub-plots chapter in my book. If a player opts to spend points on a sub-plot, they will earn experience points in return. When one of their sub-plots gets utilized in a story, the player will receive an extra 1, 2, or 3 experience points at the end of the story when the rest of the xp is given out. (The rewards correspond to the costs.)

 

For example, a player wants a Hunted sub-plot. He tells me the villain gunning for him is more powerful than he is, and he tells me the background of the villain's motives. I determine, after listening to my player, that the sub-plot will cost him 15 points. He agrees to that and spends his points. Now whenever I use the villain in a story, in any regard, the player will receive an extra 3 experience.

 

Also, the player doesn't necessarily have to wait for me to include his sub-plot in the story; he can pursue it himself, thus adding to the adventure.

 

Critiques? Ideas? Hates? Loves? Thanks!

 

Richard

[OctoberRaven]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

Interesting idea, hope it works out.

[bjvargas]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

It may be a bit more work than I want to go to on a regular basis personally (GM side), but other than that, I *love* it from a Player side.

[Richard Logue]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

It may be a bit more work than I want to go to on a regular basis personally (GM side)' date=' but other than that, I *love* it from a Player side.[/quote']

 

Hmmm... Do you love it as a player because its broken and unbalanced and the player really makes out, or do you love it as a player because it might promote more role-playing, interaction, a sense of being able to effect the millieu and campaign?

 

[Comic]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

I think what some of us are saying is that you're now required to report back frequently with notes on how this goes, details, and results.

 

Good work. Thanks for volunteering.

[JimLotFP]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

Now' date=' for this campaign, I want to try an idea that came to me over the weekend: no Disadvantages. Instead, the plan is to give the players an extra 50 points to spend.[/quote']

 

I've been thinking that Disadvantages are already subplots, and taking a Disadvantage is like saying "I want this character's adventures to be about this stuff."

[McManus]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

So how many points will a character be built upon? In a standard Champions game a character is 200 base points + 150 in disads. If you have the same base are you saying your characters will be built on 250pts but they have to spend points on sub-plots, if they want them. So MightyMite has 200pts of stats, powers, and skills, and spend the other 50 points on sub-plots . This makes him much weaker (and not much more interesting) than the standard hero with Disads. On the other hand, if you give them a 350 point base they can be as powerful as standard heroes, with none of the pesky weaknesses or vulnerabilities.

 

I am not sure I understand the advantage over the current standard.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

I like it... but I like it even better blended with disads.

 

Some characters *have* disadvantages. Superman has Kryptonite. Superman has a girlfriend and a buddy he constantly has to pull out of the fire. Superman has disadvantages.

 

By contrast, Spidey has subplots. He's got a girlfriend he has to keep saving from trouble, whether or not she's his girfriend... but he also has an elderly aunt to keep from learning his ID, a boss who hates his guts, several villains and organizations out for his web-slinging hide,and varying romantic troubles.

 

Are those disads? Well... maybe the orgs rate Hunteds, or JJJ does, but for the most part, nope. They're subplots.

 

And yet, should Spidey be 'penalized' compared to Supes? No, not really. Should Supes be penalized compared to Spidey? Nope.

 

Do both. That way, the guy who's deathly allergic to pumpernickel gets points for it *without* it being a subplot. Similarly, the guy who doesn't have any particular weaknesses, people he constantly has to save, or people out to kill him, *but* has a personal life that sounds like it'd make the writers of One Life to Live weep for him gets points for the fact that he's put a lot more care into his character, and given the GM more to work with.

 

That's my preference.

[Richard Logue]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

This is why I bring this stuff to you guys. Because what sounds good in my head doesn't always pan out to be a good idea. This is definately a case in point.

 

"better blended with disads"

 

I'm thinking now to use the standard rules, but add the possibility of a sub-plot. So, players will make their characters with the standard 200 + 150. I would use their Disadvantages against them as normal, but as an option, they can turn any of their disadvantages into a "sub-plot" and gain some extra xp.

 

On the other hand, it is true that disads are sub-plots anyway, and I should be using them as such. Players already get a point break for taking disads, and this idea would give them even more points down the road. And that's like getting double points.

 

So, I guess my idea is broken the way I'm trying to make it work out. I suppose the essence of what I'm trying to do is make Disadvantages not only more interesting to my players, but make them almost *want* their disads used in a scenario. And *that* I should be able to do simply as a good GM and storyteller.

 

Food for thought.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Would you like some sub-plots with that?

 

Have you considered the possibility of a "Mystery Disadvantage?" Give players the option of taking the points for a Disad, but they don't know what it is. Or they may have a general notion of what they want (Hunter, Rival, Social or the like) but not all the background details. That gives you the option of "filling it in" at an appropriate point during the adventure.