Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

[Epiphanis]

I am thinking of using the following as rules for new PC creation in my campaign. Please opine regarding them: too strict, not strict enough, etc.

1. Characters have 400 Total Points to work with, which includes 75 points of Matching Complications.

2. One complication must be the 20 Point “Code versus Killing.”

3. Purchases are limited as follows.

a. Any number of Attack Powers may be purchased, but any individual Attack Power (not Power Framework) is subject to a limitation of a maximum of 60 Active Points (APs). Note that with HTH and HKA powers, APs invested in STR are counted together with those of the power towards this maximum. [Limited: reduce to maximum 40 AP/Attack Power.]

b. SPD is subject to a maximum value of 9. [Limited: reduce to maximum value of 5]

c. Defense Powers: This category includes all Powers ending in “Defense” as well as Damage Reduction, Damage Negation, Invisibility and Desolidification. Total Character Points spent on such is limited to 40 Character Points. [Limited: reduce to maximum 30 Character Points]

4. With respect to the limitations set forth for the three categories in #3 above, the player may ignore one of the three at the cost of accepting the limited version given in brackets for the other two.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Looks pretty good, though I generally try to keep SPDs on the low side unless the concept REALLY calls for it. So...most characters have 4-5 SPD..once in a while you'll get a 6 SPD...7 and higher very rare. Rest seems reasonable...just make a note that points alone don't always determine effectiveness. look closely at any powers in the rulebook with a "Stop sign" or " ! " symbol. These powers are considered super efficient for their point costs and may prove troublesome to a campaign...

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Would maximum SPD of 7 [Limited: 4] be more appropriate without being too constraining?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

I, for one, will think long and hard before considering any game where the GM orders me to take a 20 point CVK.

 

But then again, I don't really do Silver Age, either.

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

If the Code versus Killing is a serious issue, you probably don't want to play in my campaign anyway.

[assault]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

c. Defense Powers: This category includes all Powers ending in “Defense” as well as Damage Reduction' date=' Damage Negation, Invisibility and Desolidification. Total Character Points spent on such is limited to 40 Character Points. [Limited: reduce to maximum 30 Character Points']

 

Is this limitation on each particular power, or on all of them?

 

Do the PD and ED characteristics count?

 

A 40CP limit on Resistant Protection (assuming it's split evenly between PD and ED) gives you 13 points of each. That's enough to bounce most small arms, but not enough to deal with a modern heavy machine gun. Is that what you are looking for?

 

Such a character would also take body from 4 dice (12AP) Killing Attacks, which are quite affordable within the guidelines. Granted, mandatory CvKs will tend to preclude many PCs from having such attacks, but they are possible.

 

I'd consider a closer look at what you are aiming for in this area.

[Sketchpad]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

From my experience, a SPD 6 is usually where I settle for starting characters (with a +2 for Speedsters when running). I'm also pretty harsh when it comes to my campaign standards, allowing little maneuvering at character creation.

For example: For standard supers, I allow the following:

• Attack Powers: 75 AP (with HA counting active strength as part of that)

• Defensive Powers: 50 AP

• Misc. Powers (such as senses): Unlimited within the character concept

 

The only way players can circumvent this is by working on a good background. If someone turns in a 3 sentence origin, they're lucky if they get the base

[assault]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

From my experience' date=' a SPD 6 is usually where I settle for starting characters (with a +2 for Speedsters when running).[/quote']

 

I tend to assume 5 as standard, 6 or 7 as above average, 4 below average.

 

I have been known to design speedsters that can actually suck up a certain amount of damage, so their SPDs don't tend to be as high as most others.

 

• Defensive Powers: 50 AP

 

I tend to allow 60 AP, since I use 20 PD/ED as my equivalent of "only a bursting shell can penetrate his skin".

[Sketchpad]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Makes sense Assault ... actually, I find that the average of 4-5 SPD tends to be more common then not ... but that's in my games

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

In general I dislike hard caps. I think a 75 Active/12 Damage Class starting point allows for more creative builds. But some character concepts require going beyond even these limits (with appropriate limitations of course). Speed is a good one too keep low though, 4 for non-speedsters and 6 for speedsters (these are starting limits).

 

See my JLA thread in my sig below for 6e 400 point examples all built on this premise.

 

edit...

END use is big factor too though.

If you don't plan on enforcing END then Hard Caps might work out better since higher active point abilities tend to run through END quicker (see my Green Lantern writeups for a clear example of this).

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Is this limitation on each particular power, or on all of them?

 

Do the PD and ED characteristics count?

 

Its for character points spent on all Defense Powers totalled together, but it slipped my mind to specify about PD and ED. It does NOT include standard PD and ED, but DOES include purchasing advantages for them, including Resistant.

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Excellent feedback so far. Thanks.

[Alverant]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

If the Code versus Killing is a serious issue' date=' you probably don't want to play in my campaign anyway.[/quote']

Ouch. That's a bit harsh don't you think? Could you explain this some, please?

 

Not having CvK doesn't mean the character will kill. They can choose not to. But requiring it at such a high level doesn't make sense for all character concepts. At the "total" level you don't just have an aversion to killing, it includes killing attacks period and high level normal attacks (which still do Body). It means pulling your punches even if you're fighting someone who can obviously take them. Worse, it means interfering with those who don't think the same way.

 

If you're going to ask your characters to have CvK, I would suggest dialing it down to 10+ or 5+ or allowing another code of conduct that discourages killing in its place (for example no killing of minions or "normals" and no killing of supervillains who don't kill as well. But when faced with a psycho, go ahead).

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

I'd suggest the following:

 

Drop SPD to 6/4 limited. 9 is really, really high compared to everything else.

 

Instead of AP caps, use DC caps (12/8 limited). Capping AP rather than DC always leads to weirdness, and horribly shafts people who take any non-DC-increasing advantage.

 

Your defenses may be a little too low compared to attacks, especially for a game with CVK being the norm. All out rDEF would be 13rPD/13rED which is not enough to stop you from taking damage from a 12 DC killing attack. A more likely balanced setup would be something like 15/10r. A 12d6 Blast gets 27 past defenses which will almost certainly stun, and everyone is likely to get 2-shotted, if not 1-shotted. Is this the level of defense vs. offense you want?

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

I'm not really interested in debating the moral issues of requiring a Code versus Killing (although if locking down 20 of the 75 complication points raises mechanical problem I'm unaware of I'd appreciate a heads up). As a GM, I could require that all the PCs be mutants, or teenage high school students, or normal costumed vigilantes with no actual superpowers, and nobody would bat an eye about it. Yet somehow a mandate that the PCs not be killers requires justification? It's a parameter of the campaign. If you can't have fun playing a character who doesn't kill, this just isn't a game for you.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

I'm not really interested in debating the moral issues of requiring a Code versus Killing (although if locking down 20 of the 75 complication points raises mechanical problem I'm unaware of I'd appreciate a heads up). As a GM' date=' I could require that all the PCs be mutants, or teenage high school students, or normal costumed vigilantes with no actual superpowers, and nobody would bat an eye about it. Yet somehow a mandate that the PCs not be killers requires justification? It's a parameter of the campaign. If you can't have fun playing a character who doesn't kill, this just isn't a game for you.[/quote']

 

I don't think anyone is debating the merits of enforcing a style of game you want to run. At the same time though it's nice to have room for some shades of gray.

My version of Wonder Woman has: 10 Psychological Complication: Reluctant to Kill (Common; Moderate). I based this on her killing Maxwell Lord in the comics (he was mind controlling Superman, she had to kill Max or Clark or be killed herself eventually). She is the only exception to the 20 point CVK on the team and it follows from her warrior upbringing on Paradise Island.

 

Another example is the Justice Lords Superman (from the animated Justice League) killing President Luthor with his Heat Vision to keep him from launching a nuclear missiles. That world's Superman arguably had less than 20 points in CVK. If you don't want the players to ever be faced with those situations with any free will at all then keep the 20 point requirement.

[Tasha]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Also, I find the way you express your powerlevels to be kind of confusing (though that may be due to my being under the weather)

 

I find as a player and as a GM to show Max and average (ie DC 12, avg DC10; DEF avg 20; max 30 rDef 10avg max 15 etc) this allows a little slop for folk who want 10d6 Blast 1/2 end (62pts). It also lets everyone see what the average attacks, def etc. are going to be.

 

as a Number thingie. Make sure that you set your average Def to 2x avg DC and your max Def to 2.5 Max DC that give a wide range of defenses where PC's won't be insta KOed, and sets a reasonable max Def that you can Damage with average attacks.

 

On the CvK thingie. 0 Pts in CvK = Reluctant to Kill this is the default for any Champion campaign. This reflects the normal person who might kill someone in sheer self defense, but not otherwise. The CvK Psyc builds on this to make someone who is truly devistated if they had a hand (even remotely) in killing someone. IMHO you should be able to still get the Silver Age feel, by pointing out in the guidelines that characters who kill don't fit your vision of the campaign, and that you highly recommend that all PC's take CvK at some level. That's just my opinion and I'll let this part drop here.

[assault]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Lately, I've been using "Code of the Golden/Silver/Bronze/Iron Age Superhero" instead of CvK. I lifted the idea from Pulp Hero.

 

While it's horribly nebulous, and obviously can lead to debates, it covers the whole range of attitudes generally shared by particular characters in a particular milieu.

 

I partly adopted it as a response to Iron Age style rants, of course. Yes, Golden Age characters can indeed blow up Nazis...

 

I would generally add a "motivation" related Psyc complication as well: why the character does what he/she does. But only if I still needed the points - some characters have enough to get by on without it.

 

I'm lazy enough to have a standard set of complications:

15 Secret Identity

20 Code of the X Hero

20 Motivation

15 DNPC

5 Hunted

 

I vary this according to individual cases, naturally. It's mainly aimed at generic Silver Age characters with few physical complications: Batman, the Flash, etc.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Ouch. That's a bit harsh don't you think? Could you explain this some, please?

 

Not having CvK doesn't mean the character will kill. They can choose not to. But requiring it at such a high level doesn't make sense for all character concepts. At the "total" level you don't just have an aversion to killing, it includes killing attacks period and high level normal attacks (which still do Body). It means pulling your punches even if you're fighting someone who can obviously take them. Worse, it means interfering with those who don't think the same way.

 

If you're going to ask your characters to have CvK, I would suggest dialing it down to 10+ or 5+ or allowing another code of conduct that discourages killing in its place (for example no killing of minions or "normals" and no killing of supervillains who don't kill as well. But when faced with a psycho, go ahead).

Exactly so. I don't have an issue with a "No killers" ground rule, but the way a 20 point CVK is written (and usually played) I don't really see them as appropriate to ANYONE who uses the application of force to solve problems. I tend to handle genre inappropriate actions by swift and appropriate application of in-game social pressure (translation, wrongful death suits, murder/manslaughter/aggravated assault charges, being sent to super-prison)rather than simply forcing everyone to take "Conscientious Objector" levels of CVK.

As an example... Say a character wants a background/ Secret ID as Law Enforcement. He's not going to be able to fulfill his duties with a 20 point CVK. Simple as that. And depending on the interpretation, he might just find himself attacking his fellow officers to save the perp they're trying to stop.

 

This violates my suspension of disbelief.

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Instead of AP caps, use DC caps (12/8 limited). Capping AP rather than DC always leads to weirdness, and horribly shafts people who take any non-DC-increasing advantage.

 

I'm working on the assumption that 60 AP is mathematically the exact same thing as 12 DC, as the 6th Ed rules define a DC as equal to AP/5 (6th Ed, Vol. 2, p. 97), counting APs from all advantages, not just damage-increasing ones. I think you are advocating dice of damage based cap (i.e., 12d6 for standard damage, 4d6 for killing) but I'm not sure this is what you mean. Could you clarify?

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Also, I find the way you express your powerlevels to be kind of confusing (though that may be due to my being under the weather)

 

I find as a player and as a GM to show Max and average (ie DC 12, avg DC10; DEF avg 20; max 30 rDef 10avg max 15 etc) this allows a little slop for folk who want 10d6 Blast 1/2 end (62pts). It also lets everyone see what the average attacks, def etc. are going to be.as a Number thingie. Make sure that you set your average Def to 2x avg DC and your max Def to 2.5 Max DC that give a wide range of defenses where PC's won't be insta KOed, and sets a reasonable max Def that you can Damage with average attacks.

 

I based the way I expressed my limitations largely on the "a la carte" character construction templates from Champions 6E. These varied quite a bit but a typical non-brick was allocated 40 character points to Defensive powers beyond basic attribute scores (though some included options to boost said scores as defensive options, and some allocated more or less points). I want to follow those basic principals without establishing a specific baseline of average scores to work off of. I may have to rethink this. I will give it more thought.

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

If you don't want the players to ever be faced with those situations with any free will at all then keep the 20 point requirement.

 

Honestly, and sincerely not being snarky, that is almost exactly what I do desire. I've given this a lot of thought and I am well aware that there are other, and from some perspectives better, ways of handling lethal force in superheroic gaming. I have my reasons for wanting to do things this way, the virtues of which I'm not really interested in debating. I know that some potential players might have issues with this, and I'm not saying those issues are unjustified. I'm not even saying that I promise to deliver a gaming experience that, in all its awesomeness, will overcome such issues to the point that a player won't mind. I am saying that that is (more or less) the way I intend to do it and if a potential player can't enjoy playing in a campaign run that way, he's wasting both of our times trying to do so.

[assault]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

I am saying that that is (more or less) the way I intend to do it and if a potential player can't enjoy playing in a campaign run that way' date=' he's wasting both of our times trying to do so.[/quote']

 

The only problem I would have with this is that complications are supposed to be things that actually come up in the course of the game. A 20 point CvK will come up a lot.

 

For it to be worth its points, it will have to be a real problem. The case where PCs will always have to pull their punches and the like is only the tip of the iceberg. (In fact, that could largely be avoided if the PCs are built to avoid doing lethal levels of damage in the first place.) There should be regular situations where it would require real choices to be made, where the choices the PCs will have to make choices aren't in their interests.

 

That's fine, but it shouldn't be overdone.

 

Alternatively, it could be that it isn't really a complication at all. Since it's a campaign ground rule, and applies to everybody, it's arguably not worth any points at all!

[Epiphanis]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

Alternatively, it could be that it isn't really a complication at all. Since it's a campaign ground rule, and applies to everybody, it's arguably not worth any points at all!

 

That... is an interesting point. But not all NPCs have it.

[assault]

Re: Definitional Points for a Champions campaign

 

That... is an interesting point. But not all NPCs have it.

 

True, but complications, and points in general, are a bit different for NPCs. They're more like guidelines for the GM than anything else.

 

Followers are an exception, if they are built and controlled by players. Even there though, the GM has the ability to fiddle with them.