Starting Point Totals

[CTaylor]

Reading through the 6th edition revelations thread I've been struck by people posting over and over again about the proposed increase in suggested point totals for character builds.

 

Do people think that little chart in the front of the book is mandatory or something? Do people start a campaign by cross referencing their genre:

OK lets see, superheros game, says here 200 plus 150 disads... ok there we go

 

The section plainly says these are optional, they are suggested guidelines. Just because 4th edition said 250 total points doesn't mean every game has to be that; just because 5th edition increased that to 350 doesn't mean you're compelled to use that point total. Maybe your characters are long time experienced cosmic characters who start at 400 points +50 points of disads, because they are not flawed any more. Maybe you want a really messed up bunch of misfits so you say 100 points +200 in disads. Maybe they're kids just starting out, so you have 75+75.

 

These suggestions are just that: suggestions. Some of the language in the forums makes it seem like just because the 6th edition might suggest more points, well its time to break out the calculator and build bigger! Some people are complaining about finding 150 points in disads for their characters: so don't require that many.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Optional Guidelines do a few things:

 

1) They help new players who have no idea what a good or useful total for a given power level is.

 

2) They provide a starting point for new and old players to jump off of common ground from

 

3) They help gauge a suggestion rough idea of what a given level of power is capable of by the resources it has to work with (though this is by far the most nebulous of the three).

 

So, it is important in th respect that new players and a couple hundred people on a gaming message board have some idea of what to use as a Baseline Standard.

 

It's not critical, but it is supremely helpful.

 

 

And yes - there are a large number of groups that use th guidelines in the book As Is. Upping their importance a little.

[jtelson]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

As a GM, when I'm starting a new campaign, I make the call about starting points, disads, caps, ranges and limits - I don't think I've consulted the chart since 4th other than to note -hmmm they're suggesting more points.

 

I decide based on the needs of the campaign and input from my players but I only run my own stuff or heavily me-ified versions of other peoples stuff so for someone playing straight out of the Champions Book or other Codex the suggested values may well be very important for balance.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

I can't believe you felt compelled to start a thread on this. Do you really think that the people who frequent this board don't already know how the point totals work? Do you really not understand everything that Ghost Angel just pointed out above?

 

Look, most of us are middle aged gamers. For a lot of us, that means that we game when we get a chance. Maybe we get to go to a con, or we get into an online game. In those circumstances, many GMs simply tell people to create characters based on the published guidelines. This is one reason why the published guidelines are important.

[CTaylor]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

You know, Pattern Ghost, if I was referring to you, I'd have said so. I was simply responding to the multiple posts as I said above, where people were commenting about how they had to change everything now.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

You know, CTaylor, you were still acting like everyone who said that they'd like the defaults changed was some sort of idiot. You were still being condescending. I'm in that group you were just condescending to.

 

Just because you don't understand why the defaults in the published rules have value for some people in some situations, does not mean that the rest of us are idiots who don't know that we're free to change those numbers if we want to. Your post was utterly pointless.

[CTaylor]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

I'm sorry you took my post to be saying that, it wasn't meant to be. Try reading it as if your best friend was saying something you agreed with and see how it sounds.

 

Is it just me or is everyone super touchy these days on the boards?

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Well, you're the one who started the thread preaching to the choir, one based on the assumption that the people you were speaking about were ignorant of a very basic tenant of a game system they are intimately familiar with. So, are people touchy?

 

What compelled you to start this thread, if not a bit of touchiness?

 

Anyway, I think you're probably a swell guy, and didn't mean to be offensive. I'm only pointing out that you sound that way.

 

So, I'll beg off this thread, with apologies back to you, and yours accepted.

[CTaylor]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

See that's just it. I sounded preachy to you, but was I really? I'm sorry if asking the question the way I did set you on edge, I didn't mean to, as I said. There just seems a presumption of Calumny here that isn't justified.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

it's the rolleyes icon - it comes off as condescending more often than not.

 

Rolling your eyes is a dismissive gesture.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

See that's just it. I sounded preachy to you' date=' but was I really? I'm sorry if asking the question the way I did set you on edge, I didn't mean to, as I said. There just seems a presumption of Calumny here that isn't justified.[/quote']

 

OK, since you asked me a direct question: I didn't say you sounded preachy. "Preaching to the choir" is a figure of speech.

 

The rolleyes icon on the post and the tone of the original post were both condescending. If you didn't mean that, then that's OK, I'll take your word for it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Hoo boy...

[CTaylor]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

it's the rolleyes icon - it comes off as condescending more often than not.

 

Well when I saw the icon in the choices it didn't look like that, it looked like a guy with big wide eyes :/ I can't change that now.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

This guy - ?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Besides everything ghost-angel said you also need to look at the reason the suggested starting points are changing. It seems the primary reason the point levels are changing is to accommodate the fact that Characteristics will cost more since Secondary Characteristics are going to be decoupled. Secondly some powers are changing and who knows what other things are affecting the price change.

 

Now, if you want to convert a character from 5th to 6th and are concerned about points there is a bit of work since the same character will inevitably cost a different amount of points. If you want to convert an active campaign from 5th to 6th, regardless of how many points you are currently using, you will need more. So to play what would otherwise be the exact same game you will have to adjust points even if you are not using the suggested starting points .

 

People are always complaining about point inflation between editions. They don’t complain about it because they have to use the suggested points, but because regardless of how many points you are using you now need more to do the same or similar as you were before.

[Tasha]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Reading through the 6th edition revelations thread I've been struck by people posting over and over again about the proposed increase in suggested point totals for character builds.

 

Do people think that little chart in the front of the book is mandatory or something? Do people start a campaign by cross referencing their genre:

 

Actually I do take a look at the little chart at the front of the book. I can use that as shorthand to tell my players the powerlevel that I want. Esp if I am running a mini-series as opposed to a real campaign.

 

When 5th came out I read the chart at the front. I learned in the 4th edition change over to do so. Because whenever a new edition comes out it seems like it takes more points to write up old characters. So it's helpful to see if the totals changed. Now before you get on me for being such a robot. I played Champions for years in a group with a rotating GM and Player roster. So it was VERY helpful that we had built the characters using the same guildelines.

 

Later when we started to play with a more exclusive group then we started to do other things with the point totals (ususally to give more points for Skills)

 

So when 6th edition comes out it will be interesting to find out how many points characters at all levels will be built on.

[Tasha]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Besides everything ghost-angel said you also need to look at the reason the suggested starting points are changing. It seems the primary reason the point levels are changing is to accommodate the fact that Characteristics will cost more since Secondary Characteristics are going to be decoupled. Secondly some powers are changing and who knows what other things are affecting the price change.

 

Now, if you want to convert a character from 5th to 6th and are concerned about points there is a bit of work since the same character will inevitably cost a different amount of points. If you want to convert an active campaign from 5th to 6th, regardless of how many points you are currently using, you will need more. So to play what would otherwise be the exact same game you will have to adjust points even if you are not using the suggested starting points .

 

People are always complaining about point inflation between editions. They don’t complain about it because they have to use the suggested points, but because regardless of how many points you are using you now need more to do the same or similar as you were before.

 

Dont forget that Elemental Controls are going away and that will probably mean that characters will be more expensive to make.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Dont forget that Elemental Controls are going away and that will probably mean that characters will be more expensive to make.

:slap:Anyway, you get my point...

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

well, back in 4th edition when I did the vast majority of my actual playing and running, rather than my sort of "keeping my toes wet" present day, we seldom played at the commonly recommended levels, averaging 100+150 for most of our Heroic level games, (with an extra 25 points in our Star Hero game that could only be spent on "Special Abilities") and 100+300 for Champions, which we felt allowed for more powerful starting characters at a noticeable cost (300 is a lot of disads...).

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

And would those same characters in 5th have cost more points? If yes, would the change in recommended point values tip you off to the major difference in points, and possibly even give a rough idea of how many more points it would take to do something similar in the new edition?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

................

 

People are always complaining about point inflation between editions. They don’t complain about it because they have to use the suggested points, but because regardless of how many points you are using you now need more to do the same or similar as you were before.

 

 

I'm not sure how much of a difference the point totals will actually make in terms of 5e to 6e because whilst it is true that we will be spending more on what are currently figured characteristics, bear in mind that (I expect0 there will be a discount on what are currently primary characteristics - it si unlikely that CON will stay at 2 points, or DEX at 3, and they are some of the biggest spends. We may be spending more but it may not be that much - same applies to ECs - can't be sure yet what point difference the changes will make.

 

In terms of 4e to 5e there was very little cost inflaction (if any for most characters) in terms of actual builds, but the 'standard' superhero went from 250 to 350 points. What that jump did IMO was make room to make starting characters more interesting. We could have done it anyway - of course we could - but having it written in the book has a lot of power, and maybe we should be wary of that.

 

That was more to reflect a more mature fanbase (or at elast one that had been playing longer ) who were used to more expensive characters. I STILL build heroes, tot up the points and find that I've built to a 250 point base

 

Now as time goes by I'm less and less in need of points. I don't think they necessarily balance characters in themselves, and they can, at worst, be a horrible constraint on creativity. I've built characters to concept that cost 400 or 500 points but wouldn't last a turn in a 350 points 'standard build' combat. Moreover I'm confident that I could build a 250 point character (as could anyone) that could take down most 350 point characters.

 

OTOH they are an excellent way - perhaps the only way to start with - of educating new players as to the concept of character building, and the issues you shoudl take into account. Whilst I agree that they are necessary for the game, I agree with CTaylor that more experienced players probably can ignore them completely with relative impunity. Cost doesn't matter anywhere near as much as balance does. Point totals are important but must be kept in perspective - they are just one more tool you can use, or not, as you wish.

 

Anyway, we're all friends here...

 

...which means I get to say and do things to you lot I'd never get away with saying or doing to strangers

[rjcurrie]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

In terms of 4e to 5e there was very little cost inflaction (if any for most characters) in terms of actual builds, but the 'standard' superhero went from 250 to 350 points. What that jump did IMO was make room to make starting characters more interesting. We could have done it anyway - of course we could - but having it written in the book has a lot of power, and maybe we should be wary of that.

 

That was more to reflect a more mature fanbase (or at elast one that had been playing longer ) who were used to more expensive characters. I STILL build heroes, tot up the points and find that I've built to a 250 point base

 

To be honest, I thought the increase in points was because while a lot of individual items did not change in cost. There were more Skills, Perks and Talents that you could spend those points on which frankly is where a lot of my points always went when I updated characters from 3e to 4e.

 

Now as time goes by I'm less and less in need of points. I don't think they necessarily balance characters in themselves, and they can, at worst, be a horrible constraint on creativity. I've built characters to concept that cost 400 or 500 points but wouldn't last a turn in a 350 points 'standard build' combat. Moreover I'm confident that I could build a 250 point character (as could anyone) that could take down most 350 point characters.

 

OTOH they are an excellent way - perhaps the only way to start with - of educating new players as to the concept of character building, and the issues you shoudl take into account. Whilst I agree that they are necessary for the game, I agree with CTaylor that more experienced players probably can ignore them completely with relative impunity. Cost doesn't matter anywhere near as much as balance does. Point totals are important but must be kept in perspective - they are just one more tool you can use, or not, as you wish.

 

Anyway, we're all friends here...

 

...which means I get to say and do things to you lot I'd never get away with saying or doing to strangers

 

And balance, in my mind, has a lot to do with player skill as well. You can hand exactly the same character sheet to two different players and get two different levels of effectivenes.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

To be honest' date=' I thought the increase in points was because while a lot of individual items did not change in cost. There were more Skills, Perks and Talents that you could spend those points on which frankly is where a lot of my points always went when I updated characters from 3e to 4e.[/quote']

 

I do not know about the intention, but I think you are right in effect - there was certainly more of a willingness to spend points on skills and such with more points to spend - although, of course, some players had ALWAYS seen that as a priority and spent points there even if it made the 'powers' of the character weaker. Having said that, very few players spent 100 points - or anything like that much - on skills and perks.

 

 

 

And balance' date=' in my mind, has a lot to do with player skill as well. You can hand exactly the same character sheet to two different players and get two different levels of effectivenes.[/quote']

 

I agree with that completely - another example for why points will never effectively balance characters. They are one control mechanism, but should not be seen as the only one.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

Besides everything ghost-angel said you also need to look at the reason the suggested starting points are changing. It seems the primary reason the point levels are changing is to accommodate the fact that Characteristics will cost more since Secondary Characteristics are going to be decoupled. Secondly some powers are changing and who knows what other things are affecting the price change.

 

Now, if you want to convert a character from 5th to 6th and are concerned about points there is a bit of work since the same character will inevitably cost a different amount of points. If you want to convert an active campaign from 5th to 6th, regardless of how many points you are currently using, you will need more. So to play what would otherwise be the exact same game you will have to adjust points even if you are not using the suggested starting points .

 

People are always complaining about point inflation between editions. They don’t complain about it because they have to use the suggested points, but because regardless of how many points you are using you now need more to do the same or similar as you were before.

I think the intent of the Standard point increase from 4th to 5th was to increase character granularity, not to make the characters more powerful (even though I'm sure there were plenty of players who used that extra 100 CP to make their Champions PCs more powerful). I'm sure that's what Steve has in mind for the 5ER - 6E transition as well. Since as yet we don't know what the new base number will be nor what the costs on revised and/or new Powers and Characteristics will be, it's a bit premature to guess at this point. If I had to guess, I'd say the baseline Champions character in 6E will probably be around 400 points.

 

I must say that in our group the extra 100 CP between 4th and 5th Editions was mostly used to flesh out the characters rather than to buy up combat power. My PC (known as Flash Dancer at the time; now known as Zl'f) at the time went from being an almost pure combat machine to a better rounded character with multiple professional skills for her Secret ID, hobbies, and interests. In fact, her combat power decreased slightly because I reduced her CON by 5, her PD and ED each by 1, and her max DC's by 1. And she became a better character for it. Other players followed similar paths to character improvement.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Starting Point Totals

 

None of which negates my point. does it?