250 character points vs 350 character points

[CaptainOne]

Hi all. I'm coming back from a decade long hiatus from Champions. I've tried to search through the forums, but couldn't find an answer to this one. I'm simply wondering why the suggested point cost for a superhero has gone from 250 (4th edition) to 350 (5th edition)? It does not seem like power costs have changed much (I noticed drain increased and flash decreased). So is it just a different philosophy in creation, or is there a reason I am missing? I wanted to run my campaign on 250 points, since all of the characters I currently have created (over 100) are based on that 4th edition number. Now that my current players see that 250 is suggested for Low-Powered supers, they don't feel it fits my campaign concept of Avengers/Justice League like heroes.

Any feedback on why the extra 100 points in 5th would be greatly appreciated.

[Silbeg]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

Any feedback on why the extra 100 points in 5th would be greatly appreciated.

 

Having the extra 100 points certainly makes it easier to balance out the "extras" that any good hero should have.

 

Things like non-combat skills, PRE, COM...

 

Also, the typical attacks have increased to 12DC/60 AP, rather than the 10DC/50AP of previous editions.

 

You also may tend to see rampant use of limitations decrease, since you don't need to make all of your powers OIF just to have the points to build your concept!

[ghost-angel]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

I've found that 350pts definitely allows for more rounded characters.

 

No more 2-6 skills on a sheet. In fact most Supers games I'm in try and aim for 20% non-combat related purchases these days. It's worked very well.

[CTaylor]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

I strongly advise going for fewer points in every single instance unless you specifically are trying to run a high end, high cost game. Even lower than your low range.

 

Why? Well by having fewer points, characters tend to be built on tight concepts and grow rather than "I can buy anything I want" jumbles. Characters tend to be beginning heroes that build powers to concept and need rather than just buying stuff because you can afford it but don't necessarily have any value. A character that starts with 100 points and built to 250 will be better built and usually more effective than a character that started at 250 in my experience (I've read others who point out the same thing, too).

 

Starting low gives you far more scenario and enemy opportunities than starting high, when a bunch of thugs with baseball bats is a genuine threat, you've got a lot of options. When you have to throw a platoon of Godzillas after the PCs, having the mafia mad at them makes them giggle.

[Flames]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

A lot of powers have adders available that customize the way they work. These adders get expensive. There's also a wider variety of skills and talents than there used to be.

[CaptainOne]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

Maybe I will just split it down the middle and go with 300. The skills comment is correct. Many of my 250 point build characters are pretty skills-lite.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

One thing a current campaign did was start at 250 but very quickly (in 4-5 sessions) built up to 350 points.

 

It was done through acquiring in game Disadvantages for points and fast XP granting. Once we reached 350 we slowed to a much more normal progression of XP.

[pinecone]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

One thing a current campaign did was start at 250 but very quickly (in 4-5 sessions) built up to 350 points.

 

It was done through acquiring in game Disadvantages for points and fast XP granting. Once we reached 350 we slowed to a much more normal progression of XP.

 

I've also set aside a chunk of points that could be permanantly spent in play for something....so "I am an expert on middle eastern history!" means you spend points for KS: MEH at (11)+ that way skilz and contacts are more game centric...it's been good sometimes, and munchinized madness sometimes....

[Trebuchet]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

We found the extra 100 points made for much better rounded characters with a wide range of Skills and Powers. Our 250-point level characters tended to be straight combat machines; the 350 pointers were much more effective out of combat and had a lot more individuality.

[CTaylor]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

You can get the skills and background stuff on characters easier by dedicating points to it. Tell the players "you have x points to work with, plus 20 for skills and background." That makes them spend the points in the area you want, without just throwing extra points at them in the hopes they take the hint. But seriously, I encourage you to consider a lower level game.

[Teflon Billy]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

Hi all. I'm coming back from a decade long hiatus from Champions. I've tried to search through the forums, but couldn't find an answer to this one. I'm simply wondering why the suggested point cost for a superhero has gone from 250 (4th edition) to 350 (5th edition)? It does not seem like power costs have changed much (I noticed drain increased and flash decreased). So is it just a different philosophy in creation, or is there a reason I am missing? I wanted to run my campaign on 250 points, since all of the characters I currently have created (over 100) are based on that 4th edition number. Now that my current players see that 250 is suggested for Low-Powered supers, they don't feel it fits my campaign concept of Avengers/Justice League like heroes.

Any feedback on why the extra 100 points in 5th would be greatly appreciated.

My feedback? There is absolutely no way that you are going to accurately fit a Avengers/Justice League concept in a 250pt supers world. You will get a nerfed version of that concept.

 

I would just use the NPCs you have as is and add 350pt NPCs as you come up with them.

 

TB

[braincraft]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

'Power Level' depends more on DC, CV, SPD, and DEF values than point totals. I have 500-point heroes written up who would have trouble against gangs of normals; I have 350-pointers written up who could stomp the Champions singlehandedly.

 

It's nice to be able to include contacts, background skills, and even some vehicles or bases without having to scale back your effectiveness. A lot of my characters have more points in skills than in powers, or even characteristics. It's also great to have little side powers that lend some individuality; hard to fit those in on a budget.

 

Also, when you look at many characters, they seem to be less effective than their 'super' status would suggest. Grond, one of the most powerful villains in the setting, would take minutes to wreck a tank, assuming he did nothing but haymaker. Raising points a bit keeps you from having strongmen who can't toss a car, or speedsters who can't outrun one.

[incrdbil]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

I recall the 250 poitn days..and it seemed that p[layer went to far more creative (read, rules-twisting) ways to concoct up builds to squeeze out every point they could, and skills got a short shift, and really skill heavy characters were hosed. Adding the extra points just seemed to take that pressure off. For example I saw more HIDO type power armor instead of Focus based on another focus with a 1 turn activation one a day not effective on alternate wenesdays due to maintenance....and trying to add HIDO on there as well.

[CTaylor]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

While it is likely true that in some campaigns fewer points results in greater number crunching, it also is likely that in some campaigns more points means sloppy builds and random stuff bought just because you can afford it.

 

However, if you as a GM are careful to point out that these are beginning characters which will grow into having more power, if you help them build the characters,then you can avoid the problem at the low end. Plus you have a greater variety of encounters and adventures available to you.

 

Run the game you want to and have ideas for, I'm just trying to point out that the push for ever more points misses out on a lot. There's a reason Daredevil is a popular comic as well as Justice League.

[McCoy]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

It does not seem like power costs have changed much (I noticed drain increased and flash decreased).

Full Life Support went from 30 points to 50 points.

 

Most defenses can no longer be put in Elemental Controls.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

I strongly advise going for fewer points in every single instance unless you specifically are trying to run a high end, high cost game. Even lower than your low range.

 

Why? Well by having fewer points, characters tend to be built on tight concepts and grow rather than "I can buy anything I want" jumbles. Characters tend to be beginning heroes that build powers to concept and need rather than just buying stuff because you can afford it but don't necessarily have any value. A character that starts with 100 points and built to 250 will be better built and usually more effective than a character that started at 250 in my experience (I've read others who point out the same thing, too).

 

Starting low gives you far more scenario and enemy opportunities than starting high, when a bunch of thugs with baseball bats is a genuine threat, you've got a lot of options. When you have to throw a platoon of Godzillas after the PCs, having the mafia mad at them makes them giggle.

 

Um... well, I used to agree with this. I don't now. i submit that 250 point characters are POTENT, yes, but they're supposed to be by that point. However, the potency comes from tightness of concept. FREX, of my PCs at 250:

 

The Druid is most assuredly a Druid. Almost ALL of his points are in either his VPP, the skills to control said VPP, racial abilities or his nature-based skills, including tracking, herbalism, etc.

 

The Ninja is most definitely a ninja. One of the strongest ninja concepts I've ever seen. 250 points. Tighter than a damn drum.

 

For leadership, they turn to their trusty Paladin who at 250 has his core powers, his mount (Follower), and a smattering of very solid, very cool Paladin Powers, but he is by no means "over the top" in terms of power level or anywhere near out of control. With very little design effort I can crush the entire party (and almost did, were it not for the Overconfidence Flaw in the last Demon they fought).

 

That leaves us with the Rogue, Zeb, whose entire focus is split into two halves, but the player behind him epitomizes 'crafty' so while he isn't combat effective, he's still "darn efficient." Basically he has an NCC VPP with the SFX "Follower," -- at least that's how it's worked out, since he's paid for the Follower as an AI, and the Follower gets turns like anyone else. But at least once per combat he heaves some massive Evocation that gets Zeb's fat out of the fire.

 

Wile_E01 plays the Ranger/Cleric split class, which means in HERO you pay a bit more points-wise, but you have a much broader array of spells you can cast per day because of the total amount of freedom afforded you in the design. I think he casts... what, 10 1st Level Spells per day right now? So he's far from the unfortunate one, but they're only 1st Lev., so he isn't anywhere near game breaking.

 

Ultimately, the point is that these characters are all well rounded, balanced, have good disads, and everyone loves the game. Loves it. But don't go hanging your hat on point cost claiming that 250 = Super Heroic. They are FAR from Super Heroic. They're terrified of anything Huge or larger.

[CTaylor]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

But don't go hanging your hat on point cost claiming that 250 = Super Heroic.

 

I don't. I simply am pointing out that the inflation of point values does not actually mean a better game. I think people should at least consider thinking low, because low gives the GM more opportunities and options. Superheroes with godlike powers can fight godlike foes, but they're missing out on hundreds of potential adventures at the lower level. Street crime becomes meaningless when you can singlehandedly take on the entire street gang population of the city at once.

 

For me, superheroic means "has powers and abilities far above the normal human being" not "can take on bad guys of cosmic power." My comparison starts from the low end, yours starts from the high end.

[mayapuppies]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

The characters in my Fantasy campaign are based on 150 and are very much considered skilled but not powerful by any means. They most likely wouldn't stand up to most Turakian Age characters of the same point value. Having the Skill Maxima in place and running a very diverse skill intensive campaign makes the points spreadout a lot more.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

I don't. I simply am pointing out that the inflation of point values does not actually mean a better game. I think people should at least consider thinking low, because low gives the GM more opportunities and options. Superheroes with godlike powers can fight godlike foes, but they're missing out on hundreds of potential adventures at the lower level. Street crime becomes meaningless when you can singlehandedly take on the entire street gang population of the city at once.

 

For me, superheroic means "has powers and abilities far above the normal human being" not "can take on bad guys of cosmic power." My comparison starts from the low end, yours starts from the high end.

 

Wow. No, it doesn't. I've had PCs built on 100, 200, 250. And IMO you get much more better defined characters in higher point ranges.

 

But you know. YMMV.

[Vondy]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

The characters in my Fantasy campaign are based on 150 and are very much considered skilled but not powerful by any means. They most likely wouldn't stand up to most Turakian Age characters of the same point value. Having the Skill Maxima in place and running a very diverse skill intensive campaign makes the points spreadout a lot more.

 

This is my experience, too. If you run a game where breadth is important (skills, perks, etc) then you end up with higher point totals without overpowering power levels. This is true of my heroic and superheroic games. For me, more points is more comfortable not in terms of ramping up power, but filling the character out. This is doubly true when you take into account the additional cost granularity has added to some powers and even skills. If you use sub-categories for skills like animal handler, survival, and the like you get inflation there too.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

Wow. No, it doesn't. I've had PCs built on 100, 200, 250. And IMO you get much more better defined characters in higher point ranges.

 

But you know. YMMV.

 

I have to agree here.

 

I've built Heroic level on everything from 50 to 175 points (and played them - I have built others on more) and the higher point characters were much more solid concepts, I was able to really define the kind of Character/Person I wanted to play.

[jtelson]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

It's not how many points you have but how many points in relation to campaign expectations (Upper AP limits, Stat/DC ranges, etc).

[CTaylor]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

Wow. No, it doesn't. I've had PCs built on 100, 200, 250. And IMO you get much more better defined characters in higher point ranges.

 

Depends what you mean by "better defined," I'm pointing out that lower point values mean you grow into the character, higher point values means you start with everything. Lower point values means you have to let things go or get a minimal value of something with a plan of building up more later. Higher power means you get what you want immediately and have points for other stuff.

 

There's room for both types of games... it's just that everyone seems to be leaning toward high power and ignoring the benefits of lower powered games. Since this guy asked I wanted to make sure he had that perspective too

[mayapuppies]

Re: 250 character points vs 350 character points

 

And this is why I love HERO.

 

There is no such thing as "The RIGHT Way".

[braincraft]

Don't forget to carry the four

 

And this is why I love HERO.

 

There is no such thing as "The RIGHT Way".

 

Sure there is. My way is right, and everyone else is wrong.

 

It's true! I can prove it, with science!