A new system of disadvantages

[tesuji]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

Potentially the best way to deal with all disadvantages is to award a bonus when they hinder you in play and have no 'up front' bonus at all. I feel that some disadvanatges suit that approach better than others though.

 

I tend to agree... in a previous game where i used this tho, one point of emphasis needs to be "what constitutes a hindrance?"

 

The example and gauge i used was "how many actions did it cost you?" and by cost i included total wastes and ones with significant reductions in capability.

 

So for example, TAKES TRIPLE END would not count as "hindrance" in a scenario where even tho you spent triple end you never ran out of end and never "took an extra recovery" (lost a phase). if it was just a short dust up so that all the lim did was cause you to do more accounting, no bonus payback.

 

If you could not use your firebolt because your bat guana was out BUT you instead used your silk to throw lightning bolt, again, no big whoop so no bonus. But if this occurred while fighting the ice demons against who the firebolt would have rocked the world... then ok, bonus.

 

The big advantage of this is it is using HINDSIGHT. We can look at the session and see "i did not do well..." and see why and make the call then, as opposed to guestimating impacts before a scene takes place.

 

also, in this scheme, changing or removing a disads is simple, no math or point balance required. the fear of spider can just vanish once the player and gm agree it isn't fun anymore or should go away. no muss no fuss no "well maybe now he is afraid of turnips?

[Utech]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

Realsitically if one team member takes HUNTED: VIPER' date=' then they are foisting it on the whole team AND they are getting the benefit of a team to soften the effect on them.[/quote']

 

It doesn't have to be that way. VIPER need not be so stupid as to attack the entire team...

[Sean Waters]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

It doesn't have to be that way. VIPER need not be so stupid as to attack the entire team...

 

 

...agreed, but then, if they attack just the character with the Hunted, then they are rewarded doubly: more points and more face time.

 

One way I have found to point out the problems that a Hunted can cause that doesn't, in effect, benefit the character with the 'disadvantage' is this:

 

Hunted: VIPER.

 

Character is a pain in the neck to VIPER, so VIPER poisons the character, which causes a loss of character points: STR, perhaps, or whatever the main attack relies on. They don't like that. In addition there is a slow CON drain that will eventually flatten the character, unless they get the cure (which involves THEM going after VIPER, enlisting, ideally, the help of the team). That way the character is suffering, but in a way that is strangely appropriate for a VIPER hunted, below par and has to ask for help.

 

It is not punishing the character or player, it is just running the disadvantage.

 

Mind you there are a lot of Hunteds that the subtle approach does not work for, and for the ones it does, you can't do that all the time.

 

That leads me to another problem I perceive with disadvantages: they are often a real pain for the poor GM.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

...agreed' date=' but then, if they attack just the character with the Hunted, then they are rewarded doubly: more points and more face time.[/quote']

 

I suppose one could attack the character with overwhelming force, and take him captive. Once his teammates notice he's missing, investigate and battle their way through several blind leads, and finally arrive at the main conflict to find the character is, due to his energy powers, being used as a battery for their latest scheme, and fight a climactic battle to free the deeply unconscious character, the player who sat and watched the game for three weeks because his character wasn't there may feel he has been disadvantaged. Especially when you tell him he gets no xp since his character didn't participate.

 

Probably not the approach I'd want to take, but certainly an approach that would emphasize that Hunted as not only a disadvantage, but YOUR disadvantage.

 

Now let's check the other character Hunteds and see what my next scenario will be...

[prestidigitator]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

Sean, not to be snide but seriously, of course everyone being at 200+150 seems artificial. It is. Someone picked a number out of thin air and told everyone "in this game this is the most you can have" and because of that decision everyone winds up at that score.

 

if you want more variety dont tell them "200+150" but instead say "200 base pts with whatever reasonable disads you get me to say yes to" and establish the "combat scope" of the game with dcv, ocv, dc, rule of x or whatever.

 

But as long as the gm for a game picks a "hard figure" for "most you can spend" people will go for that max. Most people dont want to be the weakest guy. As long as the gm emphasizes "total cp matters" by giving them a score to reach, they will follow his lead most of the time.

 

disadvantages dont make the final result seem artificial, its that the gm set an artificial score for the players.

 

That's one big reason why I like the idea of just giving everyone 350 Base Points and having in-game complications (which I DO prefer being situational/temporary rather than Character-Point-affecting) rather than traditional Disadvantages.

 

I think giving everyone the same number of points without the headache of Disadvantages will produce different power levels. If I just have 350 straight points to play with, I might well decide to buy some interesting Perks and Background Skills and such. Whereas if I have to really work at coming up with Disadvantages for those points, I might feel like they are mint gold and shouldn't be wasted on anything that's not going to help me overcome those Disadvantages. LOL. Hello, I could build one HECK of a supporting character with all those points if I don't want to be on the front line all the time...

[tesuji]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

That's one big reason why I like the idea of just giving everyone 350 Base Points and having in-game complications (which I DO prefer being situational/temporary rather than Character-Point-affecting) rather than traditional Disadvantages.

 

I think giving everyone the same number of points without the headache of Disadvantages will produce different power levels. If I just have 350 straight points to play with, I might well decide to buy some interesting Perks and Background Skills and such. Whereas if I have to really work at coming up with Disadvantages for those points, I might feel like they are mint gold and shouldn't be wasted on anything that's not going to help me overcome those Disadvantages. LOL. Hello, I could build one HECK of a supporting character with all those points if I don't want to be on the front line all the time...

 

 

Well, part of me based on my gaming history with disads etc is that the key element is MAKING DISADS FUN!! Make it so that it becomes a lot less about balancing out points and achieving power level and so forth in terms of "disads" and instead about "what do you want to happen and be interesting." When disads become about "more fun" and not about problems and power, you dont have to worry about "he didn't take any disads". The ones who take more disads simply have more personal stories and get more of what they wanted out of the game.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

...

That leads me to another problem I perceive with disadvantages: they are often a real pain for the poor GM.

 

 

For some maybe, to me they are the bread and butter of plot and ways to make the players personally connected and invested with what's going on. Hoozah forever!!! ( I really really really like them just so you understand:D)

[Sean Waters]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

For some maybe' date=' to me they are the bread and butter of plot and ways to make the players personally connected and invested with what's going on. Hoozah forever!!! ( I really really really like them just so you understand:D)[/quote']

 

I tend to write scenarios ahead of seeing the characters - unless I am creating the characters for the scenario too. Working all these plot aspects in that were not part of the original plan is often a pain.

 

I tend to play/run games in intensive bursts - my most regular group meets for a weekend every few months rather than a few hours a week, so my priorities may be different.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

I tend to write scenarios ahead of seeing the characters - unless I am creating the characters for the scenario too. Working all these plot aspects in that were not part of the original plan is often a pain.

 

I tend to play/run games in intensive bursts - my most regular group meets for a weekend every few months rather than a few hours a week, so my priorities may be different.

 

 

I think you're right. I've switched between running the same 3 campaigns in a massive shared Multiverse for well over 20 years with some players playing their own grand kids of older or retired players by now. I run every Saturday and switch between the fantasy, SF and Supers universes with relatively frequent crossovers. My group is very invested in the worlds and npcs and backgrounds so I work all that into my storylines. One story often almost writes the next.

[Sean Waters]

Re: A new system of disadvantages

 

I think you're right. I've switched between running the same 3 campaigns in a massive shared Multiverse for well over 20 years with some players playing their own grand kids of older or retired players by now. I run every Saturday and switch between the fantasy' date=' SF and Supers universes with relatively frequent crossovers. My group is very invested in the worlds and npcs and backgrounds so I work all that into my storylines. One story often almost writes the next.[/quote']

 

Vive la difference!