The Snakes Have Arrived!

[Hermit]

Originally posted by GestaltBennie

For those who haven't seen the playtest manuscript, the new Ripper (and Oculon) are rather more impressive (power level wise) than they were in previous editions. Viperia has also been reworked and has been slightly elevated in power and versatility.

 

Desperation indeed.

 

Scott Bennie

Viperia has been SLIGHTLY elevated? Isn't that like adding another kilometer radius on a tac nuke?

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by Hermit

Viperia has been SLIGHTLY elevated? Isn't that like adding another kilometer radius on a tac nuke?

 

Oh, you don't know?

 

New Viperia is 1370 points in the playtest (should be getting my real copy on friday). Slightly elevated in that everything she has/does is slightly better than the previous edition.

 

Mwahahahaha.

 

D

[ShinHakkaider]

Originally posted by Steve Long

As several folx have already mentioned, that "Thing" is Ripper. Eric L.'s illustration made him look appropriately creepy and menacing, I'd say.

 

We're vaguely considering having the UNTIL cover being the boys-in-blue-and-white recapturing Ripper. Take that, VIPER!

 

D00d I just got the book yesterday and I'm liking it quite a bit. But DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN. Ripper is no joke! I was considering putting him up agaisnt some of my PC's but I think I'll wait until they get a little stronger...

[Hermit]

Originally posted by misterdeath

Oh, you don't know?

 

New Viperia is 1370 points in the playtest (should be getting my real copy on friday). Slightly elevated in that everything she has/does is slightly better than the previous edition.

 

Mwahahahaha.

 

D

 

I repeat...

[Lord Liaden]

Y'know, after having looked over a number of the new books in the Champions line, I'm starting to like the new enhanced power levels for characters. Under 4E I always got the sense that the writers were restraining damage classes, defenses etc. so that the standard heroes could remain competitive with the villains; but the new Hero Games is willing to go near-cosmic with their characters. That's really more true to the comics, where some villains and heroes are almost untouchable against the average paranormal.

 

If I see Steve Long come out with someone who could b!tch-slap Scott Heine's "Infinite Man," then I'll go .

[Hermit]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

If I see Steve Long come out with someone who could b!tch-slap Scott Heine's "Infinite Man," then I'll go .

 

That'll be the 5E version of the "Habringer of Justice"

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

Y'know, after having looked over a number of the new books in the Champions line, I'm starting to like the new enhanced power levels for characters. Under 4E I always got the sense that the writers were restraining damage classes, defenses etc. so that the standard heroes could remain competitive with the villains; but the new Hero Games is willing to go near-cosmic with their characters. That's really more true to the comics, where some villains and heroes are almost untouchable against the average paranormal.

 

If I see Steve Long come out with someone who could b!tch-slap Scott Heine's "Infinite Man," then I'll go .

 

The characters are cool, but I have reservations about the power inflation. I'd hate to see Champions end up with White Wolf syndrome, the PCs completely inefectual in the face of unstopable NPCs. I love Takofanes from a conceptal point of view, and I'm actively using Menton; even so, Champions is a game about heroes. The occasional game where a super must sacrifice himself to save the world is fantastic and absolutely in genre; an endless stream of undefeatable foes is not. Yes, it's the GMs job to make sure that his players don't feel like they've wandered into an Aberrant pick up game by mistake (unless that's what they're aiming for) but I worry when henchmen (or women) have 1000+ points outside of a cosmic game.

 

Just a thought...

[Mastermind]

Originally posted by OddHat

The characters are cool, but I have reservations about the power inflation. I'd hate to see Champions end up with White Wolf syndrome, the PCs completely inefectual in the face of unstopable NPCs. I love Takofanes from a conceptal point of view, and I'm actively using Menton; even so, Champions is a game about heroes. The occasional game where a super must sacrifice himself to save the world is fantastic and absolutely in genre; an endless stream of undefeatable foes is not. Yes, it's the GMs job to make sure that his players don't feel like they've wandered into an Aberrant pick up game by mistake (unless that's what they're aiming for) but I worry when henchmen (or women) have 1000+ points outside of a cosmic game.

 

Just a thought...

 

I am starting to agree. The PCs in my current campaign have been a little demoralized after being beat down across several Issues (issue = session). I don' t know if they would like it if the mooks started doing it to them also.

[GestaltBennie]

Originally posted by OddHat

The characters are cool, but I have reservations about the power inflation. I'd hate to see Champions end up with White Wolf syndrome, the PCs completely inefectual in the face of unstopable NPCs. I love Takofanes from a conceptal point of view, and I'm actively using Menton; even so, Champions is a game about heroes. The occasional game where a super must sacrifice himself to save the world is fantastic and absolutely in genre; an

But if endless stream of undefeatable foes is not. Yes, it's the GMs job to make sure that his players don't feel like they've wandered into an Aberrant pick up game by mistake (unless that's what they're aiming for) but I worry when henchmen (or women) have 1000+ points outside of a cosmic game.

 

Just a thought...

 

Most of Viperia's additional points (over 4th ed) go toward a few new tricks; her base ttack is bout 5 points higher than 4th ed. She's been tweaked, not "grossified". The major change to the character is in her background, which I think is light years better (and clearer) than her 4th edition counterpart.

 

When designing combat oriented characters, the most important questions that a designer needs o ask are: what storylines can you hook the character into, what will the PCs think about fighting this character, and will they produce memorable combats?

 

In Viperia's case, she's meant to be a character whom VIPER can use as a weapon of last resort (the pissed off agency who decides they need "an ultimate superhuman weapon" *is* a staple of supervillain agencies in the comics that dates at least as far back as the first appesarance of Him/Adam Warlock - if you're thinking of Viperia as a mook you're making a *HUGE* mistake), whose powers will be respected and feared by the players before the fight, and whose combats will be extremely tough and memorable - but not insurmountable. These are the goals that I was concerned about when designing her.. "Will players be offended by the number of point totals on the character sheet" did not - and should not - enter into my thinking.

 

Bluntly, players who obsess about villain point totals will always obsess over them, players who are insecure about villain power levels will always be insecure about them. I know because I've been there, as a GM I've bent over for players in the past to try to assauge their fears; nothing I did was enough, and all it accomplished was to preclude some potentially interesting stories from the campaign.

 

Yet the insurmountable foe *is* boring, Campaigns where PCs are constantly ground into the dust are the worst games you can possibly run. Sometimes the complaint against villain point totals means "don't give my character any anxious moments" (sorry) and sometimes it means "don't bore us and make us feel useless by putting us against insurmountable foes" (legitimate). However. if your game's about superheroes and you're aspiring to say, an Avengers tone, the adversaries have got to be worthy of the heroes and vice versa. You can't feed the Avengers a straight diet of Fabian Stankowiczs and have them feel like real Avengers. Superheroes and supervillains in a comic book have a very symbiotic relationship.

 

So the problem for the designer with a character like Viperia (which trickles down, like all problems, to the GM) is creating a villain of stature who fits into the genre niche but won't be so tough that they kill the fun of the campaign for most reasonable players.

 

The best solution I think is to find the right baseline to produce the desired effects in a campaign, and then provide additional advice to the GM to customize. In Viperia's case, I nudged her power level up a wee notch to balance some of the 5th Edition character creation tendencies, but I didn't want to go too far; based on anecdotal evidence I'd heard on 4th edition games, she produced tough fights for experienced heroes but not Total Party Kills, which was about where I wanted her. I also tried to expand on her background and campaigning advice., to make her less bland and easier to use.

 

When you get the book (if you're so inclined), you'll be able to judge for yourself whether we succeeded in making her a useful character or whether she's a grotesque monstrosity with no place in your game.

 

Scott Bennie

[OddHat]

Originally posted by GestaltBennie

The best solution I think is to find the right baseline to produce the desired effects in a campaign, and then provide additional advice to the GM to customize.

 

I agree with what you've posted as far as the need to challenge PCs is concerned; I haven't looked Viperia over yet, and was voicing a concern based on several published characters, not making a direct criticism of your character.

 

Er...the character you created.

 

Originally posted by GestaltBennie

When you get the book (if you're so inclined), you'll be able to judge for yourself whether we succeeded in making her a useful character or whether she's a grotesque monstrosity with no place in your game.

 

Scott Bennie

 

I don't recall having described her as a grotesque monstrosity, but then the night is young.

[Starlord]

Also, every single 5E Champions villain comes with suggestions for making them weaker (or stronger), so I don't understand the problem with inflated power levels.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Starlord

Also, every single 5E Champions villain comes with suggestions for making them weaker (or stronger), so I don't understand the problem with inflated power levels.

 

It's something for GMs and designers to keep in mind and be wary of; nothing more or less.

 

A few 1000+ point characters running around in a 350 point campaign (or use CE rating if you feel that point costs don't accurately reflect power level) fit in the genre very well. Too many and the players start to feel that they're winning the day more through GM fiat than through personal competence; even worse, they can end up feeling useless. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't throw your characters up against much tougher foes; it does mean that you have to be aware of how well a certain high power foe (or ally) fits into the campagin, the game and the setting.

[Lupus]

Originally posted by OddHat

A few 1000+ point characters running around in a 350 point campaign (or use CE rating if you feel that point costs don't accurately reflect power level) fit in the genre very well. Too many and the players start to feel that they're winning the day more through GM fiat than through personal competence; even worse, they can end up feeling useless. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't throw your characters up against much tougher foes; it does mean that you have to be aware of how well a certain high power foe (or ally) fits into the campagin, the game and the setting.

Yes, exactly. If you're the X-Men, you can't expect to take Magneto on head-to-head. He'll wipe you out. If you do have to fight him (and you want to fight him only as a last resort), then you need to do something sneaky to get an advantage over him. Negate some of his powers, something like that.

 

Similarly for, say, Gravitar. She's designed to take on whole PC teams and win - unless they can get an advantage over her somehow. Dr Destroyer, on the other hand, takes on the full might of assembled herodom. He has to be on that power level, or he's just not believable.

 

I remember in one game, we fought a guy who had, reputedly, beat down two teams and a whole army division. He ended up being only a few points more than us. It was an incredible let-down for me - the character we fought was not mechanically capable of doing what he had done. If a character is meant to be a world-spanning threat, then they should be more than 350 points. They should possibly be more than 800. Unless, of course, those 350 points are spent real smart on things not easily countered.

 

And the characters can be heroes without defeating every threat they come up against. Sometimes things are jsut too big for them and they have to call in the big guns. Other times, you get Nighthawk vs Mechanon... dude better pull something serious out of his arse or he's paste.

 

So, I'm happy to see points inflation. 350 point characters feel like comic book superheroes (the lower-powered kind, anyway). 350 point ones never did, to me. They could reach certain power levels in a few powers, but they didn't have the breadth that I've associated with the heroes I like. Especially in skills. So viva FREd!

 

On the other hand, I do feel there are a few too many villains who are willing and/or eager to kill. If villains kill, the heroes are a lot more likely to want to. In my games, I'm revising some of that.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Lupus

On the other hand, I do feel there are a few too many villains who are willing and/or eager to kill. If villains kill, the heroes are a lot more likely to want to. In my games, I'm revising some of that.

 

This is another problem the GM has to take on at the start of a campaign. If you're running a true silver age game where the worst thing the Joker is going to do is pull pranks on the heroes or try to freeze dry the UN (a few drops of water sets things right), fine, code versus killing all around and let him out of prison once a month. No worries.

 

If he's the Dark Knight Returns Joker, murdering hundreds of people on live TV, the PCs would be insane to turn him back over to Arkham for another short rest between killing sprees.

 

Alternative write ups for "Darker" and "Lighter" versions of foes were very useful in some of the old enemies books, even if it is something the GM could do for himself; I'd like to see them come back again.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by OddHat

The characters are cool, but I have reservations about the power inflation. I'd hate to see Champions end up with White Wolf syndrome, the PCs completely inefectual in the face of unstopable NPCs. I love Takofanes from a conceptal point of view, and I'm actively using Menton; even so, Champions is a game about heroes.

It should also be remember that you are discussing the Master Villains in your examples above. You are naming the earth shakers, but they are not the common villains most of the heroes will fight on a regular basis. Dr. Destroyer is probably a once in the campaign villain, and Takofanes and Mentor are probably not encountered much more often then that in a standard 350 point game.

 

My own observations of the game is that a large percentage of the villains are actually too weak, not too powerful. My group's 350 point heroes are walking all over the 350 point villains in a one-on-one battle; and my group is built using the 5E guidelines of 12d6, 20 DEF, and 5 SPD. So when I see a write-up for Ripper that shows him capable of standing up to 2-4 heroes I am happy not sad. Unless you want every session to be 5 heroes against 5 villains you need "inflated" villains like Ripper to stop from running exact match-up sessions. Personally I would like to see more villains at Ripper's power level. I would much rather have my team going up against 2 Rippers than 7 Bulldozers. Less villains make the combats faster.

[Lupus]

Originally posted by OddHat

This is another problem the GM has to take on at the start of a campaign. If you're running a true silver age game where the worst thing the Joker is going to do is pull pranks on the heroes or try to freeze dry the UN (a few drops of water sets things right), fine, code versus killing all around and let him out of prison once a month. No worries.

 

If he's the Dark Knight Returns Joker, murdering hundreds of people on live TV, the PCs would be insane to turn him back over to Arkham for another short rest between killing sprees.

 

Alternative write ups for "Darker" and "Lighter" versions of foes were very useful in some of the old enemies books, even if it is something the GM could do for himself; I'd like to see them come back again.

Of course, there's a step between 'silver age happiness' and 'dark age horror.' The Joker's a villain who's nasty and scary because he's willing to do the bad, bad things. If you have every villain be a psycho killer... then psycho killers lose their edge, and, to me, being a superhero becomes something almost dirty. I like a bit of grit on the cape, but that's it. I guess I prefer Bronze-age-influenced games. My games tend to be modern, but carrying a certain amount of the optimism over. I like my villains to be dangerous, but few to be actual killers. For instance, the Mystique-led Brotherhood of Evil Mutants in X-Men were fine villains. They were willing to kill, but they didn't go out of their way to do it. The Marauders, on the other hand, went all-out for killing. And I felt their introduction was... a mistake.

 

So I guess what I'd like to see are more high-point villains who don't wanna kill. Ones who will restrain their power and not fire off their maximum-strength energy blasts until they really feel they're on the ropes. 'CAuse if the villains don't pull their punches, why the hell should the PCs?

 

But that's a genre thing. 5E Champions is going for one genre type, I like another. I just have to do some conversions when I GM. The books are still great, and I still buy 'em. Will get VIPER... as soon as the stupid Australian distributer decides they wanna import it.

[Siberian Tiger]

Any sighting of Snakes in the UK yet?

 

Any of our UK contingent seen the VIPER book yet in our few and far-between game shops ?

[djday38]

No, not so far my usual supplier Leisure Games in London has neither Viper or the champions Battlelrouns Adventure yet:confused:

 

rgds

Dean

[Siberian Tiger]

Dean

 

Thanks for the update - have seen Champions Battlegrounds in Playing Games near the British Museum.

 

Steve

[Mastermind]

Originally posted by Lupus

So I guess what I'd like to see are more high-point villains who don't wanna kill. Ones who will restrain their power and not fire off their maximum-strength energy blasts until they really feel they're on the ropes. 'CAuse if the villains don't pull their punches, why the hell should the PCs?

 

So like Isthava V'han or Zephyr in CKC?

 

I like more villians that are more like super-thieves ala GRAB. They're wanted by the authorities, but the PCs can't help but like them.