What do you think of supervillain teams?

[phoenix240]

Recently in another a member mentioned that they didn't like the concept of supervillain teams, finding the idea of a long term steady team of villains silly. I hadn't heard this opinion before but that doesn't mean it's not a common one. So what do you think of Supervillain teams in general?

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

They make perfect sense. One, superheroes tend to cluster in teams, so unless you're powerful enough to take on one all by your lonesome, having some buddies to watch your back is a good idea. Two, they give the same thing to villains they give to heroes; diversity. One person can't do it all; you see 'villain teams' all the time in the real world, it's called organized crime. Three, most supervillains aren't complete monsters or utterly amoral psychopathic baby-killing puppy-eating lunatics (and those are the ones who don't form teams) ... the villains on the team may actually, Ceiling Cat forbid, like each other and be friends.

[Clonus]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Recently in another a member mentioned that they didn't like the concept of supervillain teams' date=' finding the idea of a long term steady team of villains silly. I hadn't heard this opinion before but that doesn't mean it's not a common one. So what do you think of Supervillain teams in general?[/quote']

 

Well let's have a look as the teams I've dreamed up:

 

FTW: FTW are a street gang of super powered young people. But not really impressively superpowered people. They recruit every runaway mutant fleeing their family's reaction to the manifestation of their powers and offer them safety in numbers with people who won't be afraid of them.

 

Caliban's Crew: The Crew are respectable supervillains on the level of Spider-Man's usual sparring partners, but Caliban is a higher order villain who could beat any of them, several of them put together. They're part of a team because Caliban tells them to be part of a team, pays them well, and could put them down if they got out of line. Caliban does that because he has better things to do with his time than constantly put out fires in his criminal empire.

 

The Califate: The Califate are simply unaware that they are supervillains. They regard themselves as superheroes defending the Middle East from outsiders and working to bring it together as the superpower it deserves to be.

 

Adrian Messenger's Brides: The Brides are a cult competing for their prophet's favour.

 

The Freak Show: Experimental subjects on the run from the lab they escaped from, they commit crimes to remain at large and stick together out of a history of shared suffering and a common foe.

 

The Horsemen: Former military comrades with upgraded hardware who now work as mercenaries.

 

Long term supervillain teams work when they have things to bind them together, things like a common foe, a shared ideology, and just plain liking each other. Then there are short term teams that have constantly rotating membership that basically make them a different team each time, like the Masters of Evil, the Sinister Six, and the Secret Society of Supervillains. They'd probably last longer if they experienced much success, because that would in itself bind them together.

[wrestlinggeek]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I personally love villain teams. Gives me somthing to throw at the heroes that has the same advantages they do. Diversity, teamwork, etc. Plus, there are several reasons for such teams to get together and stay together. Some are mercenary groups that work well together and maybe even like each other. Some are made up of the individual villains of the PCs, banded together to keep their enemies from ganging up on them. One is the villainous equivalent of the Fantastic Four. Not power-wise, but that they are basicly a super-family, just on the other side of the law.

[Badger]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Personally, I dont get the villain team stab each other in the back routine. Not saying it wont happen, but EVERY time? I would imagine many villains would be like many heroes in one regard. Pragmatic enough, to know that having teammates can make their life easier, and it would impractical to rid yourself of them prematurely (if no other reason).

 

ANd heck, villains can get lonely too, I suppose.

[lapsedgamer]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Well let's have a look as the teams I've dreamed up:

 

FTW: FTW are a street gang of super powered young people. But not really impressively superpowered people. They recruit every runaway mutant fleeing their family's reaction to the manifestation of their powers and offer them safety in numbers with people who won't be afraid of them.

 

Caliban's Crew: The Crew are respectable supervillains on the level of Spider-Man's usual sparring partners, but Caliban is a higher order villain who could beat any of them, several of them put together. They're part of a team because Caliban tells them to be part of a team, pays them well, and could put them down if they got out of line. Caliban does that because he has better things to do with his time than constantly put fires in his criminal empire.

 

The Califate: The Califate are simply unaware that they are supervillains. They regard themselves as superheroes defending the Middle East from outsiders and working to bring it together as the superpower it deserves to be.

 

Adrian Messenger's Brides: The Brides are a cult competing for their prophet's favour.

 

The Freak Show: Experimental subjects on the run from the lab they escaped from, they commit crimes to remain at large and stick together out of a history of shared suffering and a common foe.

 

The Horsemen: Former military comrades with upgraded hardware who now work as mercenaries.

 

Long term supervillain teams work when they have things to bind them together, things like a common foe, a shared ideology, and just plain liking each other. Then there are short term teams that have constantly rotating membership that basically make them a different team each time, like the Masters of Evil, the Sinister Six, and the Secret Society of Supervillains. They'd probably last longer if they experienced much success, because that would in itself bind them together.

 

Those are all excellent examples. The point about a good team is that it makes sense. When villains have a motivation for joing forces and remaining together, the team makes sense. If they have some sort of connection outside of crime it is even more interesting. By the way a couple of them are stolen. Rep to you.

 

Look, in the real world we have had Bonnie and Clyde, The Dalton Gang, even all the way up to the Crips and the Bloods. Sometimes you need more manpower to get everything together.

[Duane From RI]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

The comic books have tons of villain teams. Most are "revenge squad" types though. Sinister Syndicate/Six, Fatal Five, Masters of Evil (most incarnations anyways), Superman Revenge Squad, Injustice Society/Gang/League, Monster Society of Evil and so on. Then there are the teams formed under a uber-villain who almost always has it out for on hero or hero group (Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, Brotherhood of Evil). Comic books spend a considerable amount of ink on having villains attacking the heroes. Even the Skrulls spent tons of effort attacking the Fantastic Four instead of simply getting on with conquering the galaxy. Between these two types - I really think they way outnumber the more Champions style teams. I can think of some though - Circus of Crime, Royal Flush Gang, Justine Hammer's incarnation of the Masters of Evil.

 

Champions always seemed to come from a different direction. The first edition example of play was Starburst and Crusader busting in on Ogre robbing a bank. My guess is that for pre-made villains, the writers of Champions didn't feel like crushing our suspension of disbelief by using the phrase "insert your player's heroes here", so the backgrounds of the villains were far more independent of any campaign particulars.

In fact, if you were to count up all the villains published in 4e (I'm guessing at least 350), that's on par with DECADES of villainy of any one hero group in the comics.

Backstabbing seems more common amongst ad hoc villain groups in the comics. It isn't a good idea to backstab Magneto, and I really can't think of many instances where that happened. But groups like the Sinister Six commonly fall apart because somebody begins as top dog and somebody else "knows" they can do better and besides, if the guy in charge is only getting your collective butts kicked you may as well usurp them.

 

Villain teams give a GM the opportunity to cover many combat options without springing an overly gimmicked uber-villain. Champions villain teams really capture this concept - a little love for The Ultimates please. Many comic books also try very hard to capture this concept - the original Brotherhood of Evil mutants had a mentalist, a speedster, a probability alterer, a brick (I guess Unus can be classified as a brick) and a Toad. The Fearsome Five over in Teen Titans had a solid mix. Various incarnations of the Masters of Evil tried for variety. Note however that all three of these examples were villain teams that faced hero teams. Villain team ups against individual heroes had far less variety unless that hero had a nice variety of villains - consider the balance presented by Doc Ock, Electro and Mysterio - all frequent members of the Sinister Six.

Anyways - if Champions has the goal of presenting us the chance to play like a comic book - villain teams aren't silly.

 

The key is what your goal is for that particular story. Fearsome Five was a change of pace away from HIVE or the Brotherhood of Evil. Egghead's Masters of Evil was meant to be a goof. Justine Hammer's Masters of Evil was meant to be a villainous foil to the Thunderbolts since they were the REAL Masters of Evil simply in disguise. Villain groups allow a writer (or a GM) to present a challenge to a team without trotting out an uber-villain in every arc. Or sometimes a villain team allows the uber-villain story to be more of an onion - first you dispense with the team while the uber-villain monologues, next the uber-villain takes the field in his/her full glory. On the other hand some uber-villains have very little combat potential but tons of story potential and the team gives them oomph.

[Christopher]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Recently in another a member mentioned that they didn't like the concept of supervillain teams' date=' finding the idea of a long term steady team of villains silly. I hadn't heard this opinion before but that doesn't mean it's not a common one. So what do you think of Supervillain teams in general?[/quote']

I guess the comic books do not tend to long lasting/successful Supervillian Teams. They usually form for one goal and are either foiled by the heroes, or foiled by the heroes because of internal bickering.

One reason is, that they might not been needed every adventure. Quite often the comics only deal with a part of the hero team (the rest being elsewhere), so no entire team is needed to chalange the heroes. A few well-fitting enemies or one with unfair advantage (the desolid guy while your counter is elswhere) is then often enough.

 

As such it could seem "unusual" to have lasting supervillian teams from someone who only knows Marvel/DC.

Hero needs the teams, because it is far more likely to have an entire team of heroes in every session/adventure - Marvel/DC not so much.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Flash's Rogues Gallery has worked together for decades now. The Brotherhood of (Evil) Mutants has changed its roster quite a few times but has likewise existed for decades and continued to exist even when Magneto was missing, dead (again), good (again), et cetera. While "super-villain team-ups" may be more common both Marvel and DC have had plenty of long term villain teams over the years.

[Christopher]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Flash's Rogues Gallery has worked together for decades now. The Brotherhood of (Evil) Mutants has changed its roster quite a few times but has likewise existed for decades and continued to exist even when Magneto was missing' date=' dead (again), good (again), et cetera. While "super-villain team-ups" may be more common both Marvel and DC have had plenty of long term villain teams over the years.[/quote']

No real idea regaring the flash (perhaps they are so weak they need to work togheter), but why the Brotherhood of Evil Mutant stays togehter is obvious: Not because they like each other, but because of the world that would repell them.

 

Even if you find more examples, the combination of changing rooster and not being the main focus creates the perception that there is no real fixed team and only a "crimepartner of the week" concept, wich is still a big difference to hte Hero Supervillian Teams.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

If a changing roster means it's not a real team than the X-men, Avengers, and Justice League shouldn't be considered "real fixed teams" either.

[PamelaIsley]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

There is a big difference between a stable team framework like the X-Men, Avengers, and Justice League that feature periodic turnover and villain teams that simply disintegrate after every failed operation and then are revived later, bearing no resemblance to the old version of the team except in name. The Injustice League / Society and Society of Supervillains comes to mind in this regard. With very few exceptions in DC comics (I'm not a Marvel expert) most villain teams are just change-of-pace constructions designed to reinforce the importance of a plot line or be the feature of a plot line themselves. And they work quite badly. The Injustice League's latest incarnation (where Luthor takes the entire Justice League prisoner, only to lose because Batman unlocks everyone) is a great example of something that looks cool on paper and then the plot ends up not working.

 

I don't like villain teams. I find the idea pretty implausible, and not only because of the "evil destroys evil" concept. Supervillain teams represent an enormous concentration of power, so much power that I can't imagine them being "allowed" to exist for very long. If something like EuroStar really formed and committed atrocities as often as they seem to do virtually every government in Europe, plus the United States, and every superhero they could influence would be hunting EuroStar 24/7. EuroStar isn't HYDRA, that can afford to chop off a limb or two and let more grow back -- they are a small team, once located, they are in some trouble, especially since about everyone seems to know their relative power level.

 

EuroStar (and other Champions teams) is a designed super-team, so it doesn't suffer from the Injustice League's ad hoc, "how on Earth do these guys fit together" problems (although that raises other issues). This is another major issue with villain teams. Batman Rogues, Wonder Woman rogues, and Superman rogues hardly belong in the same universe, much less on the same team. So every time I see Scarecrow ("you're made of straw!") standing next to Circe (basically a goddess) and Lex Luthor in a Dr. Destroyer-level Kryptonite fueled battlesuit, it just seems ridiculous.

 

A team like GRAB (which seems patterned on something like Flash's Rogues) makes even less sense to me. People who want to just commit low, under-the-radar crimes for the purpose of amassing wealth would go out of their way to avoid calling attention to themselves. They wouldn't want to attract superheroes at all. The best way to mess that up would be to group together with other supervillains and become a lot more conspicuous, and more of a perceived threat. Why Bluejay, with her battlesuit, would need support from other members of GRAB to take down a bank security guard is beyond me. And if a superhero team shows up to stop said robbery, the game is over for that kind of team anyway, even if GRAB is powerful enough to fight their way out of one botched crime. Ideally GRAB would want its crimes to be blamed on regular criminals; instead, GRAB is well known and even hangs out with Lady Blue, one of the most famous villainesses in Champions.

 

Supervillain teams also raise questions about base locations (leading to yet further suspension of disbelief that evil organizations can conceal an unlimited number of Terror Dromes and Hall of Dooms all around the world) and infrastructure. A supervillain trying to conquer the world or whatever also risks more leaks, dissent, and premature attention with each superpowered lackey or partner he recruits. Supervillain teams, to me, only make sense as part of some huge organization that already is providing infrastructure and logistical support for other reasons like VIPER, HYDRA, or Dr. Destroyer. There the supervillains would have an easier time blending in and being part of something big enough to justify both being together and following hierarchical orders. Villain teams based on some kind of a partnership concept (of which there are very few, since every team has at least some kind of a leader) seem even less plausible.

 

I could be wrong. This is just my opinion. But supervillain teams seem like gaming contrivances in Champions and tricks to make a comic issue seem a bit more important. GMs need something to challenge 3-4 superheroes so Champions rolls out a dozen or more supervillian teams. When you find your fourth or fifth Crimelords clone in a book, it just starts to feel a bit strained. When those teams all seem constructed to provide some kind of an ideal combat/tactical/power mix, it seems even less believable. What are the odds that there are so many supervillains in the world that someone like Fiacho could find individuals willing to both submit their power to his and happen to fit some sort of a tactical need on his team? It borders on absurd. I don't like villain teams in comics either because they tend to be used very poorly used and written (again, see any appearance of a "Legion of Doom" type team in DC comics).

 

Just my opinion, not very well expressed, but since I was the member referred to in the original post, I thought I should comment.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

The comic books have tons of villain teams. Most are "revenge squad" types though. Sinister Syndicate/Six' date=' Fatal Five, Masters of Evil (most incarnations anyways), Superman Revenge Squad, Injustice Society/Gang/League, Monster Society of Evil and so on. Then there are the teams formed under a uber-villain who almost always has it out for on hero or hero group (Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, Brotherhood of Evil). Comic books spend a considerable amount of ink on having villains attacking the heroes. Even the Skrulls spent tons of effort attacking the Fantastic Four instead of simply getting on with conquering the galaxy. Between these two types - I really think they way outnumber the more Champions style teams. I can think of some though - Circus of Crime, Royal Flush Gang, Justine Hammer's incarnation of the Masters of Evil. [/quote']

 

As a point of order, I would classify the Fatal Five as a "Champions Type Villain Team". They were brought together in one story (background in Hero system), and have worked together since that time. They have a more stable lineup than most superhero teams.

 

Champions always seemed to come from a different direction. The first edition example of play was Starburst and Crusader busting in on Ogre robbing a bank. My guess is that for pre-made villains, the writers of Champions didn't feel like crushing our suspension of disbelief by using the phrase "insert your player's heroes here", so the backgrounds of the villains were far more independent of any campaign particulars.

In fact, if you were to count up all the villains published in 4e (I'm guessing at least 350), that's on par with DECADES of villainy of any one hero group in the comics.

Backstabbing seems more common amongst ad hoc villain groups in the comics. It isn't a good idea to backstab Magneto, and I really can't think of many instances where that happened. But groups like the Sinister Six commonly fall apart because somebody begins as top dog and somebody else "knows" they can do better and besides, if the guy in charge is only getting your collective butts kicked you may as well usurp them.

 

Books are books, games are games.

 

As you note, Hero has enough villains for decades of comic publishing. How many appearances (Hero writeups) has each villain had? Well, we've had six editions, so few, if any, have more than five or six writeups. If each writeup added and dropped a member, that's still a pretty stable group over the 25+ years of Hero's history as compared to, say, 25 years of Marvel or DC publishing. We don't write a new story for the team every month, so we don't need to see as much variance.

 

As well, many villain teams are teams of the hero's solo foes. How many Champions games feature characters with lots of solo adventures, along with their team adventures? Not many - so, unlike the JLA or the Avengers, mining their members' solo adventures for team opposition isn't an option in most Hero games. Solo villains against whole teams tend to work better in comics than in games. Try putting the heroes up against the Blob, the Vanisher or Unus the Untouchable flying solo. Solo villains in the game need to be powered up compared to team members. Solo villains in fiction can often divide and conquer (the team members' SPD seems to fall when faced with a solo villain, since they don't each get an action for every one, or even two, taken by the villain).

 

No real idea regaring the flash (perhaps they are so weak they need to work togheter)' date=' but why the Brotherhood of Evil Mutant stays togehter is obvious: Not because they like each other, but because of the world that would repell them.[/quote']

 

A perfectly legit reason for a villain team sticking together, IMO. The rogues tend to hang out together mainly in their off hours, rarely sharing plots. When they do work together, it's not a consistent roster, much less all of them joined at the hip like PC superteams (another departure from the comics).

 

Even if you find more examples' date=' the combination of changing rooster and not being the main focus creates the perception that there is no real fixed team and only a "crimepartner of the week" concept, wich is still a big difference to hte Hero Supervillian Teams.[/quote']

 

If a changing roster means it's not a real team than the X-men' date=' Avengers, and Justice League shouldn't be considered "real fixed teams" either.[/quote']

 

Very true - compare how often the villain teams in comics, and in Hero, change to how often the hero teams change and they seem quite comparable. Characters in the comics tend to appear more often than characters in the game. We see the popular ones in multiple books, they get modified by the writers, etc. - they don't just appear, get defeated and vanish to Stronghold until the GM needs that specific personality ir power type again. They change and evolve more than the game characters. One Villain team with a long Marvel history would be the Frightful Four. They had a rotating membership because the characters evolved. For a long time, three of the four formed a core - Wizard, Trapster and Sandman. They worked together sans fourth member, and recruited new fourth members. What happened to the old ones?

 

Well, Medusa turned out to be an Inhuman, afiliated with a hero group (how often do gaming characters CHANGE teams, much less change sides?), Thundra's story was resolved and she also moved to the hero side. The Brute was a one-off. Electro was added and left (why? for a Spidey crossover, of course!). Klaw joined for a while. Sandman reformed, so he left. Doubtless, I'm missing some. Over time, the group faded away. They'll likely show up again. But how many changes, compared with how many appearances? Had they been written up in Enemies I for 1st and 2nd Ed, updated for 4E and then again for each of 5e and 6e, we might have seen the original four in the first writeups, the Inhumans in 4e and Thundra replacing Medusa, then probably a scenario in 4e featuring the Brute with the FF lead-in, perhaps only the core three in 5e, perhaps Sandman reforms in a CU update book, and a replacement fourth member (maybe a previous solo villain) in 6e. Compared to many of the villain teams in Hero's history, that's a lot of separate writeups, and a lot of roster changes , but they simply haven't had nearly as many appearances in the game as they have in the comics. And many CU gamers don't want to mess with the canon, so they don't vary the teams since that might contradict the next CU update.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Implausible is stock-in-trade for superhero books. It's the conventions of the genre; things work like that because they have to work like that.

[Clonus]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

 

I don't like villain teams. I find the idea pretty implausible, and not only because of the "evil destroys evil" concept. Supervillain teams represent an enormous concentration of power, so much power that I can't imagine them being "allowed" to exist for very long. If something like EuroStar really formed and committed atrocities as often as they seem to do virtually every government in Europe, plus the United States, and every superhero they could influence would be hunting EuroStar 24/7.

 

Much like the authorities end up hunting top terrorists.

 

 

EuroStar (and other Champions teams) is a designed super-team, so it doesn't suffer from the Injustice League's ad hoc, "how on Earth do these guys fit together" problems (although that raises other issues). This is another major issue with villain teams. Batman Rogues, Wonder Woman rogues, and Superman rogues hardly belong in the same universe, much less on the same team. So every time I see Scarecrow ("you're made of straw!") standing next to Circe (basically a goddess) and Lex Luthor in a Dr. Destroyer-level Kryptonite fueled battlesuit, it just seems ridiculous.

 

That's not an issue with superhero teams. It's an issue with DC comics. Typically Marvel villain teams are designed a lot more like RPG villain teams with everyone in the same weight class.

 

 

A team like GRAB (which seems patterned on something like Flash's Rogues) makes even less sense to me. People who want to just commit low, under-the-radar crimes for the purpose of amassing wealth would go out of their way to avoid calling attention to themselves. They wouldn't want to attract superheroes at all. The best way to mess that up would be to group together with other supervillains and become a lot more conspicuous, and more of a perceived threat.

 

I don't agree. Most super villains are very poorly equipped to operate under the radar. The best way for them to avoid superhero involvement is to execute their crimes very quickly, discourage attempts and ability to communicate until you are clear, avoid predictable target selection, and to have a well hidden lair or secret identity to fade into after the op. The model for a successful bank robbery was set by the Stopwatch Gang and that was how they operated.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/stopwatchgang/index.html

 

Solo operatives aren't particularly good at executing major robberies for the most part. They can only do one job at a time, so they can't for example allocate one person to watch the bystanders, another to disable the banks alarm, one ready with transport, and another couple to load. Supervillains typically have a lot more firepower at their disposal, but nothing that lets them multitask that much more effectively.

 

Why Bluejay, with her battlesuit, would need support from other members of GRAB to take down a bank security guard is beyond me. And if a superhero team shows up to stop said robbery, the game is over for that kind of team anyway, even if GRAB is powerful enough to fight their way out of one botched crime.

 

Er...why?

 

Supervillain teams also raise questions about base locations (leading to yet further suspension of disbelief that evil organizations can conceal an unlimited number of Terror Dromes and Hall of Dooms all around the world) and infrastructure.

 

How long did Osama Bin Laden remain hidden?

 

A supervillain trying to conquer the world or whatever also risks more leaks, dissent, and premature attention with each superpowered lackey or partner he recruits. Supervillain teams, to me, only make sense as part of some huge organization that already is providing infrastructure and logistical support for other reasons like VIPER, HYDRA, or Dr. Destroyer.

 

Hey, a team's a team.

[Duane From RI]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I guess for me it comes down to the definition of "silly". Are villain teams "silly" in that they are a gimmick to tell easy to write stories or are they "silly" in that they don't belong in a particular campaign.

In the comics they are definitely gimmicks. And some comic book lines don't have them. I don't know Spawn all that well but I will say I don't know of any villain teams. Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong.

But on the other hand they are a genre convention for Marvel and DC. If a Supers campaign has a goal of mimicking that genre than villain teams are a must. If a Supers campaign has a goal of being more like Dragonball Z then villain teams don't make sense. It comes down to what the GM is trying to present as his artistic vision and what the players are willing to play in.

The Supers campaign I'm working on will not have permanent villain teams. They don't make sense given the campaign's backstory - mostly because each villain has a goal of being known specifically for the atrocities they commit. I'm not trying to capture the feel of a Marvel or DC universe. I have problems with several other comic book conventions and want a campaign that addresses those and in the process I'm villain teams are punted to make the whole backstory hang together.

[PamelaIsley]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I knew Bin Laden would get mentioned and I don't want to discuss him or his organization, but I will say that he did not put on a brightly colored costume and personally commit every act of terrorism he plotted. If he had, one would think he would have been easier to catch. And his organization fits with what I was saying about super-powered squads making more sense as part of a larger organization that exists for other purposes, like HYDRA, COBRA, VIPER, or Dr. Destroyer's legions.

[Clonus]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I knew Bin Laden would get mentioned and I don't want to discuss him or his organization' date=' but I will say that he did not put on a brightly colored costume and personally commit every act of terrorism he plotted. If he had, one would think he would have been easier to catch. .[/quote']

 

That's a problem with supervillains, not supervillain groups. I would think, however, that when supervillains were hiding out after jobs they would not wear the costumes or would only wear them under conventional clothing. Those villains who are so disfigured by their powers that it is impossible to hide in plain sight have even more reason to want to hook up with groups because they need more normal people to transport and hide them, not to mention answer the door for pizza delivery.

[Duane From RI]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I find it an exercise in futility to attempt to apply real world logic to comic books. There are SO MANY genre conventions that don't make sense that comic books would never sell if we demanded common sense. One quick example to reinforce this particular topic: 83mm High Explosive Anti-Tank with the proper guidance system versus Eurostar. Is Fiacho really tougher than 58cm of rolled homogenous steel?

Starting from 1st edition, the genre conventions that Champions forged included villain teams like The Ultimates, Eurostar, Geodesics. This really wasn't exactly like the comic books because the goal of the genre was that the heroes took the battle to the villains instead of the other way around. Island of Dr Destroyer - heroes invade a Dr D base. Deathstroke - heroes hunt down a villain team before they unleash an atrocity. Serve and Protect - hero team goes rogue and needs to be stopped.

Champions isn't the only rpg to dispense with aspects of a literary genre in order to forge its own path. Call of Cthulhu the rpg had groups of investigators purposefully sticking their noses into the machinations of the Great Old Ones. Definitely not how HP Lovecraft wrote his stories.

Every genre, even HP Lovecraft, has conventions that don't make sense but are part of what make that genre what it is. Since the goal of any writer is to tell a compelling story - the genre conventions should be supportive of character motivation, problem solving and other components of good story telling and not the focus of the story. I think one would find that any story where the genre conventions are the focus and the characters are there to support the genre are awful stories. Shambler from the Stars is awful - an excellent example of genre gone bad (of course Shambler from the Stars was written to poke fun at the genre conventions).

----GUSH ALERT----

I will say the beauty of HERO system is that any one of us can imagine our own genre conventions and implement them. The HERO system core rulebooks specifically tell us to take liberty and forge our stories. Is it pricey? Well, my estimation is that for $80 out of pocket you can get the two Core Books and both Player's Guides. However these are written well enough and packed with thoughts on how to tweak things that IMHO $80 is a bargain. Back that up with these forums and you can discuss house rules that will be both balanced and fit the genre you are forging. I'd say $80 is within the scope of a player and I would encourage players to become their own GMs.

[PamelaIsley]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

It isn't so much about real world logic as internal consistency. To me, villain teams are internally inconsistent with comic book worlds that try for a modicum of realism (versus pure Silver Age-type settings). My belief is reinforced by how DC has used villain teams (since I'm biased toward DC comics and their universe) and how I perceive the Champions world and its villain teams. They just come across as very "gamey" in Champions.

[phoenix240]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Implausible is stock-in-trade for superhero books. It's the conventions of the genre; things work like that because they have to work like that.

 

True and, honestly, I don't see villain teams as that implausible or unrealistic particularly once you accept the premise that incredibly powerful people are allowed to run around enforcing the law in masks because they were mutated in some freak lab accident or something similar. The idea that people of like minds might band together for mutual support, protection, acheivement and even companionship makes sense even if they are "good" or "bad" people. Humans are pack animals, we're generlly driven to find groups.

 

Would criminal groups fracture, suffer from intenal bicker perhaps even violence? Sure, humans are drama creatures as much as we are social. How many superheroe teams have had blow ups big and small because of conflicting personalities and other issues? Yet they still form. The main reason they're probably so stable are meta to some degree. The team is popular, audiences like consistency, games keep the same players, etc. Villains groups work best with some reason to exist but then again, so do superhero teams. Just that "we've united to fight for justice!" is ususally considered enough reason.

 

Evil is more diverse

[lapsedgamer]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

There is nothing about the CU teams that is completely inconsistent with what DC and Marvel shows in their books. The Brain Trust is almost an exact rip-off of the Brotherhood of Evil, though I don't like some of the write-ups. The Ultimate are a variation on the Frightful Four. Come on, Binder...Trapster. Actually, he's probably closer to an amalgam of Trapster and the Wizard, but you get the point. I will agree that the CU teams show more consistency in membership and longevity than most of the comic books villain teams, but that's easy to change in your own games, so I don't consider it an issue.

 

The published stuff is designed to make it easier for the GM to put something together. It is sometimes helpful to be able to just pull out five or six balanced and matched characters to oppose your players if you didn't have to come up something on your own that week. However, how the dynamics of the teams play out in the long run is up to the GM and to some extent the players.

[phoenix240]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

That's a problem with supervillains' date=' not supervillain groups. I would think, however, that when supervillains were hiding out after jobs they would not wear the costumes or would only wear them under conventional clothing. Those villains who are so disfigured by their powers that it is impossible to hide in plain sight have even more reason to want to hook up with groups because they need more normal people to transport and hide them, not to mention answer the door for pizza delivery.[/quote']

 

Agreed. It's not like they are sewne into them (well most of them aren't). It's pretty much the same as superheroes and their secret IDs You could say that, realistically, if there was an organization like Viper or Hydra looking for you, not held back by any sorts of laws or concern for rights, there's no way just taking off the domino mask you were while screwing with them is going to keep them from fiding out who you are, too. At least not with major backup like a large govornment or the military working to help you.

 

I would think supervillains with secret ids probably spend a little more time in them than allot of heroes as they tend to be active. They go out, do things, get done and come home. Superheroes are reactive and have to be ready for trouble, patrol and the like. Being in secret id (or at least looking "normal") is good for laying low, casing potential jobs, etc.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

I don't like villain teams. I find the idea pretty implausible, and not only because of the "evil destroys evil" concept. Supervillain teams represent an enormous concentration of power, so much power that I can't imagine them being "allowed" to exist for very long. If something like EuroStar really formed and committed atrocities as often as they seem to do virtually every government in Europe, plus the United States, and every superhero they could influence would be hunting EuroStar 24/7. EuroStar isn't HYDRA, that can afford to chop off a limb or two and let more grow back -- they are a small team, once located, they are in some trouble, especially since about everyone seems to know their relative power level.

 

Everyone else is doing such a good job addressing most issues, I'd just like to speak to this one point. In the real world, "concentration of power" involves troops, guns, armored vehicles, aircraft, etc., all requiring facilities which become very difficult to conceal by the sheer space they take up. Supervillain teams concentrate that same power in a few individuals. As such they're more concealable from detection by authorities than real-world assets, not less. They take up less space, they can move about relatively discreetly, until they're ready to strike. Not to belabor the Bin Laden analogy that was already brought up, but imagine a small terrorist cell packing the firepower of an armored brigade.

 

Just to carry that comparison further, even if a government or law-enforcement agency located a supervillain team, any counter-force they could muster -- not counting superhumans -- sufficient to take down a powerful team of villains, would take time to assemble and move to the desired location, being quite visible in the process. A small group of superhumans is far more mobile on short notice, especially since they often have extraordinary movement abilities, like flight, teleportation, or tunneling.

 

IMHO, when you look at the situation in practical terms, powerful, well-organized supervillain teams have a great edge in efficiency versus any conventional government resources. Their only effective counter is superhero teams -- which is what we see in Champions.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: What do you think of supervillain teams?

 

Speaking more generally to the topic of the thread, I'm quite fond of supervillain teams. Like others I enjoy their diversity, the greater challenge they present to heroes, and the interplay of their personalities. I actually prefer stable villain teams to ad hoc collections, because the dynamics of their relationships are really interesting to roleplay. Villains being villains, conflicts of some sort are bound to erupt sooner or later. The dynamic of those conflicts versus the ties that bind them interests and entertains me, and I try to bring that across to my players when they deal with the villains.

 

I'm really not fond of teams along the lines of, "Let's get together so we can beat up more people and take their stuff!" I like my villains to have a common link that holds them together, whether motivational or thematic. Even a team like GRAB has that -- they're diverse in their backgrounds, abilities, and visuals, but they're all super-thieves who want to get rich without really hurting anyone. They'll even help out if there's a great need and it won't be too dangerous.

 

Not long ago I posted a villain team concept to the forums, assembling a group of solo villains from the new Champions Villains Vol. 3. None of them were written to be part of a group, and they all appeared for Fifth Edition in different source books; but seeing them all together, the numerous commonalities between them seemed to demand that they be brought together. I guess this is an appropriate place to link to Gaia's Wrath