Adversarial Answers

[Ndreare]

I see a lot of post were someone responds "I would never allow that rules legal thing that is realistic in my game". or some one of a thousand variants. Why?

If you answer questions that way is it because...

You see yourself as the adversary of the players?

You see your players as sneaky no goods trying to get one over on you?

You do not like the diversity?

You believe it will endanger "game balance"?

I really don't get it.

 

For examples of what I am talking about.

Variable Power Pools

KS: Google/Wiki

Unified Power

and many more.

 

Personally VPPs are super common in fiction, KS: internet access is super common in real life and unified power builds are even used by NPCs in the book. And many more. When it comes to killing things, I had a 30-06 when I was 13 and that will pretty much kill anything short of 2000 pounds. I lelgaly own a AR-10 and an AR-14. a .223 round will go right through armor like it was not there. In most fiction (not 4 color supers) and in real life taking a life is more about willingness than power. So why do we put kid mits on the player characters and then do whatever we want with unlimited points for NPCs?

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Most likely the balance issues, but there are others. For instance, none of my players are proficient enough with the HERO system to build their own characters; giving any of them a Variable Power Pool would be a recipe for disaster as they would have to interrupt me at every twist and turn for me to explain how to build whatever power construct they're attempting.

 

A lot of it is just personal preference as well. There are a number of 'official' ways to build things that I disagree with and do not use. For example, the Mr. Fantastic wraparound-snare maneuver has been 'officially' printed using Entangle; I don't like this. I just buy it as Extra STR, only to Grab. I also don't use the size/weight templates; if someone is permanently large, small, or heavy, I use Inherent Always On Growth/Shrinking/Density Increase; it makes for a less cluttered character sheet.

 

To your last question, PCs and NPCs occupy entirely different 'story space' and operate under completely different rules.

[Martin2]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I see a lot of post were someone responds "I would never allow that rules legal thing that is realistic in my game". or some one of a thousand variants. Why?

If you answer questions that way is it because...

You see yourself as the adversary of the players?

You see your players as sneaky no goods trying to get one over on you?

You do not like the diversity?

You believe it will endanger "game balance"?

I really don't get it.

 

For examples of what I am talking about.

Variable Power Pools

KS: Google/Wiki

Unified Power

and many more.

 

Personally VPPs are super common in fiction, KS: internet access is super common in real life and unified power builds are even used by NPCs in the book. And many more. When it comes to killing things, I had a 30-06 when I was 13 and that will pretty much kill anything short of 2000 pounds. I lelgaly own a AR-10 and an AR-14. a .223 round will go right through armor like it was not there. In most fiction (not 4 color supers) and in real life taking a life is more about willingness than power. So why do we put kid mits on the player characters and then do whatever we want with unlimited points for NPCs?

 

I think it is all about game ballance.

 

And that game ballance is ballanced in the favour of the GM .

 

The GM may not like a perticular game rule as it does not fit in with his setting or may not feel comfortable with the rules.

 

Players can always try and convince a certain GM and these boards have changed my view or understanding of certain rules which I would not previously use.

 

VPP for players have to be right for the player as well as the character. I can emagine some players will bend a VPP to breaking point and waste a lot of game time producing powers that are game legal but SFX not legal etc. Some players will know the rules and be able to play a character with a VPP. Also some VPP will break active point limits for some games (60 point no skill instant change VPP are very high active point cost compared to 60 point MP).

 

Villains are different as the GM should know the rules and are fighting for a story line so know when to win and when to lose. And also when they break a VPP (like for plot effect the VPP gains 10 active points not written on the sheet) they have not actually broken the VPP as a GM has the power to do it for the story.

 

Cost wise very few GM's have a build what you like policy. In those games you build to a SFX and not a point limit. So you can have 200 point heroes with 500 pint characters (like comic book equivilent teams).

 

But most gamers are used to a build to a points level as it is more "ballanced" for game play.

 

Killing people is down to the GM. They set the killing level and beyond that they decide what action to take. Some GM's do not want "heroes" to kill. As heroes should not kill and if they kill above a certain level in game terms they become villains and the local law enforcement starts going after them. And if a GM wants to play a certain way and the players do not want to then the game becomes uncomfortable for the GM and he either changes the game or stops playing. Some GM's have a high body count level or are highly flexible to game theme changes. Some are not. That is also about game ballance.

 

The GM's role is to provide an environment to entertain and make it fun for everyone. And in different games there are different rules for different game ballance for game fun for the GM as well as the players.

 

So to maintain a ballance of rules and game enjoyment the GM picks the balance (the players then have to slowly convert the GM with good points ).

[psyber624]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Mostly it is about game balance. Yes, you can run adventures with characters of various power levels but that is difficult to pull off and has a very real chance of causing some really interesting builds to become worthless.

 

It is also about "preserving each players unique niche". If you have an attack multipower with a ton of slots, you always shine. There is almost no adversary you don't have an answer for. Which means either ALL your teammates have to do the same thing, or those that don't take advantage of that have to sit out while you always get center stage. Also, some powers, like VPP's, basically mean you can do almost anything. You don't need a team, you have a power that can solve any problem thrown at you. Which is one of the reasons I HATE VPP Magic based users. You basically are handing them the entire book and saying "Do whatever you want.".

 

HERO has a lot of flexibility. It is designed so that you can create basically any power you want. However this means that you have the ability to truly abuse the system to create really overly powerful characters that can do way too much.

 

Consider the following power:

 

Variable Power Pool. 80 pt pool, 80 pt control, Cosmic (+2), Only to create Multiforms (-1/2), AP (200), RC 160

 

There you have a 160 pt power that will allow you to create "ANY CHARACTER" in a standard game, whenever you want to, at the drop of a hat. You can make an exact copy of any other PC in the game, an exact copy of any 400 pt villain that comes across. You can build powers in an instant to exploit any weakness. You could create a Multiform with Duplicate and create your own bloody team. This power is basically an I win button.

 

And it is PERFECTLY legal under RAW. It even has a really simple writeup.

 

That is the power that the HERO system puts in your hands. The GM's job is to keep that sort of thing in check. Which is where the "Adversarial Answers" come in. Basically, my view is that anything I let you do that every other PC will basically HAVE to adopt to stay competitive with you is not allowed. I have an idea of where I want the power level of my campaign to be. If a power you are suggesting allows you to be more powerful than the power level I am aiming for I will likely suggest modifications or deny it. So, for instance, in my "campaigns" VPP's are rare. Multipowers are only allowed in two flavors: Attack Multipowers (limited to 3 slots max) and Tactical Multipowers (no fixed slots, all power slots must require a tactical choice in using them (this is usually used for things like movement and forcefield or the like. You have to make a choice where you want to put the points, this creates interesting tactical decisions without granting you a huge amount of power) Unified Power needs to make sense and needs to be worth a -1/4th (in other words getting drained has to be something you fear, not just a free way to drop the point costs.) etc.

 

And note that that is just ME, when someone asks a rules question I try to state exactly what the rules say, but I may give my opinion as well (I am entitled to it after all ).

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I disagree that it is all about game balance. Just recently I saw someone coment that a GM would "laugh in your face" for even suggesting "x" and then proceeded to explain how useless the build was, and then refused to explain why they wouldn't allow it. I think a lot of people get strange little ideas and when an alternate way to do something is suggested they give a knee jerk reaction "no".

 

As to VPPs, all Powers must be prebuilt and on a GM approved list. Done. Don't know why people always bring up the "incompetent player will slow everything down" argument when the solution is that simple.

[Tasha]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I see a lot of post were someone responds "I would never allow that rules legal thing that is realistic in my game". or some one of a thousand variants. Why?

If you answer questions that way is it because...

You see yourself as the adversary of the players?

You see your players as sneaky no goods trying to get one over on you?

You do not like the diversity?

You believe it will endanger "game balance"?

I really don't get it.

 

For examples of what I am talking about.

Variable Power Pools

KS: Google/Wiki

Unified Power

and many more.

 

Personally VPPs are super common in fiction, KS: internet access is super common in real life and unified power builds are even used by NPCs in the book. And many more. When it comes to killing things, I had a 30-06 when I was 13 and that will pretty much kill anything short of 2000 pounds. I lelgaly own a AR-10 and an AR-14. a .223 round will go right through armor like it was not there. In most fiction (not 4 color supers) and in real life taking a life is more about willingness than power. So why do we put kid mits on the player characters and then do whatever we want with unlimited points for NPCs?

 

VPP's are disliked by more than a few GM's due to the possibility for abuse by very savvy players. It's one of the hardest things for a GM to deal with and get the powerlevel right on. Also VPP's can lead to the character always having the right attack to trip a villain's Vulnerability. This can be frustrating to a gm who puts the Vulnerabilitys there as a way for a specific character to have a chance to shine beyond their norm.

 

Hero is a game system that takes a firm hand by the GM to keep the powerlevels right for the game. The Power point system is really ripe for abuse by players. So GM's have a critical role in reining in abusive characers. I don't think that it really because of an adversarial relationship to the players. I think that too many GM's are driven by doing things in a way that doesn't cause arguments. ie It's better to forbid something that might be abused and not have to stand up to a player that did abuse the power.

 

I have had GM's limit the kinds of Skill levels the Players could purchase. Their conclusion that 8 pt(5pt in 5th and earlier) or wider skill levels were 'unrealistic' because noone could know how to use that many weapons.

 

Things like that are why I tend to dislike most "House Rules". I really try to run games as close to RAW as possible.

[Martin2]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I disagree that it is all about game balance. Just recently I saw someone coment that a GM would "laugh in your face" for even suggesting "x" and then proceeded to explain how useless the build was, and then refused to explain why they wouldn't allow it. I think a lot of people get strange little ideas and when an alternate way to do something is suggested they give a knee jerk reaction "no".

 

As to VPPs, all Powers must be prebuilt and on a GM approved list. Done. Don't know why people always bring up the "incompetent player will slow everything down" argument when the solution is that simple.

 

Yes that is nothing about game balance. Obviously the GM in question was a jerk and the player should leave or if the other players got the same unfriendly GM experience they all should arrange for the other players to boycot the game and run something else with a new GM.

 

With with the majority of VPP's you do not have to have every power approved before hand. That is the thing with a instant change no skill roll VPP you can make any power you want within what a player thinks is within their SFX. So a player meets a situation that has not been covered by a power within the SFX can create a power and say "I am doing this". This is why VPP are picked to be as flexible as possible. Very few VPP have "can only have limited use of slots" as this is a MP. (Unless you have a must change at base option VPP)

 

An experienced player (no mention of competent / incompetent) will have all their main powers listed already and have a good idea how to modify their current ones. An inexperienced one who knows nothing of how Hero works and does not know how to build his powers needs a lot of GM support to build powers outside the ones already designed by the GM. And I have had players like this and they would be a nightmare to control as a GM I would have to nurse them through a power build every time and so slow the game. Also as a GM you can design a power that would work the best in that situation (eg teleport killing attack, do I pick double AP to get past the hardened ED I know exists on that villain or NND a defence he has not got etc). So you have to decide do you want to create a power that fits the situation exactly based on a players "I want to do this" or randomise it to work or not work.

 

The problem is that a character with a VPP is the best power for a player who does not have a clue how to use set powers. As long as you the GM want to do that and want to pick every power to fit the situation the player wants. But in that the GM is playing that character and if you are happy to do that good for you, but I am not.

[Greywind]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

With with the majority of VPP's you do not have to have every power approved before hand. That is the thing with a instant change no skill roll VPP you can make any power you want within what a player thinks is within their SFX. So a player meets a situation that has not been covered by a power within the SFX can create a power and say "I am doing this". This is why VPP are picked to be as flexible as possible. Very few VPP have "can only have limited use of slots" as this is a MP. (Unless you have a must change at base option VPP)

"Okay. One hour break while Bob crunches his numbers," has been the death knell of many a night of gaming.

[Tasha]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I disagree that it is all about game balance. Just recently I saw someone coment that a GM would "laugh in your face" for even suggesting "x" and then proceeded to explain how useless the build was, and then refused to explain why they wouldn't allow it. I think a lot of people get strange little ideas and when an alternate way to do something is suggested they give a knee jerk reaction "no".

 

As to VPPs, all Powers must be prebuilt and on a GM approved list. Done. Don't know why people always bring up the "incompetent player will slow everything down" argument when the solution is that simple.

 

I have had competent players slow things down while changing slots in his Limited, but still Cosmic VPP. That was way back in the day when VPP's were first introduced. Now I require prebuilt powers for the VPP and try to set limits on the number of powers that list (I had a player give me multiple pages full of power builds for their VPP).

[Martin2]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I have had competent players slow things down while changing slots in his Limited' date=' but still Cosmic VPP. That was way back in the day when VPP's were first introduced. Now I require prebuilt powers for the VPP and try to set limits on the number of powers that list (I had a player give me multiple pages full of power builds for their VPP).[/quote']

 

Well if I was playing a VPP in your game I would also get a long list of powers so not to slow down the game crunching the numbers but also have a good index to find the right power quickly .

[Escafarc]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I tend to allow most things. I need a good reason to ban something(or if it doesn't fit the campaign genre). I usually make creation suggestions that are in the PC's favor.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Yes that is nothing about game balance. Obviously the GM in question was a jerk and the player should leave or if the other players got the same unfriendly GM experience they all should arrange for the other players to boycot the game and run something else with a new GM.t.

 

Love you too.

 

Wanna make sure you know what you're talkin' about before you shoot your mouth off next time, please and thank you?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

 

With with the majority of VPP's you do not have to have every power approved before hand.

 

Sorry for not being clearer. I was not saying VPPs require a list, I was suggesting requiring a list instead of out right banning them.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Love you too.

 

Wanna make sure you know what you're talkin' about before you shoot your mouth off next time, please and thank you?

Sorry, I didn't mean to make you a target and I did not explain he discussion well. Yours was just he most recent example I had of someone banning a build out of hand with no further discussion that was obviously not about game balance.

 

 

Back on topic, even when "game balance" is the reason given for changing something I am baffled at how often the individual in question admits to not actually having tried the RAW first, they just assume there will be an issue. I see this pretty often, especially with certain new players.

[Greywind]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Any time I have a player that wants to use a VPP on a character I do insist on there being a list of powers. It speeds up gameplay. Especially in the cases of people not knowing how to build. I do not want the delay caused by trying to figure something on the fly when gaming. I do not want players distracted by trying to figure something and NOT paying attention to what is going on around them.

[Clonus]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I see a lot of post were someone responds "I would never allow that rules legal thing that is realistic in my game". or some one of a thousand variants. Why?

If you answer questions that way is it because...

You see yourself as the adversary of the players?

You see your players as sneaky no goods trying to get one over on you?

You do not like the diversity?

You believe it will endanger "game balance"?

I really don't get it.

 

THe top reason is "hard to adjudicate" (which includes time consuming). Right after that is "nonsensical or incomprehensible" (and I include KS: internet access in that category). Then after that there's just things which annoy me. For example I am sick of Dial H For Hero characters. I could cheerfully go for years without seeing another staggeringly original "My character can turn into 12 different characters, one for each sign of the Zodiac" The whole point of having a superhero team is to rely on each other to provide diversity. OK these characters tend to be garbage anyway just because of the point cost issues, but even if they weren't, they just rub me the wrong way, and I've seen so many of them.

[Burrito Boy]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I could cheerfully go for years without seeing another staggeringly original "My character can turn into 12 different characters' date=' one for each sign of the Zodiac."[/quote']

 

I think that could be a cool character concept if the hero could only assume one form at a time and the form was determined by which sun sign is currently dominant. Consider it stolen. Now all I have to do is pull out my copy of The Zodiac Conspiracy and start tinkering.

 

Don't try and follow me. This is staggeringly original and I don't want anybody copying me.

[sinanju]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

"Okay. One hour break while Bob crunches his numbers' date='" has been the death knell of many a night of gaming.[/quote']

 

I love playing PCs with VPPs. A lot of character concepts work best (imho) with a VPP rather than, say, a MP. But I've been playing Champions since first edition. I can cobble together a power (complete with advantages and limitations) on the fly, while other players take their turns. And just in case I can't, I always have a list of pre-designed powers I can default to when time is an issue.

 

And I try not to kick if a GM nixes a particular power I want to use. Game balance is an issue, for sure.

 

VPPs can work well, but they require a certain level of trust between GM and player. The player has to trust that the GM won't unreasonably restrict what he can do with the points he spent on his VPP, and the GM has to trust the player not to delay the game while he fumbles with a calculator, or to be a rules lawyer and ruin the fun for everyone.

 

 

As for the original question--issues of game balance are a large part of why GMs say no. But also taste is part of it. Some power builds may be perfectly legal under the rules, but the GM may find such a power (or the character who would have it) too silly* or otherwise unfit for his game.

 

*Rule one on any character-design handout I give to players is: "No silly characters. Nuff said." There's plenty of room for humor and laughter in my games, but I want the characters to be plausibly realistic (by superhero story standards, anyhow).

[Greywind]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Absolutely.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Well if I was playing a VPP in your game I would also get a long list of powers so not to slow down the game crunching the numbers but also have a good index to find the right power quickly .

 

I think that's fine - the reason for the restriction is to speed up play. I'd be more inclined to rule on a length of time I'm prepared to wait for your action, which would combine:

 

- shorthand builds (we had a character with an "attacks only" VPP who had the number of dice of 3, 5, 10 and 15 AP powers costed out at various advantage levels to facilitate quick builds);

 

- pre-fab power lists;

 

- don't sweat the small stuff (new power? is it clearly within the character's capabilities and point levels? then let it go through - we can add the fine mechanics to a pre-fab list later - the GM can slow the game down just as much as the players can by being overly rigid/detailed).

 

The VPP itself needs pre-definition, though. What are its SFX? What can, and can't, it do - in broad strokes? Assess that last as a limitation on the control cost, depending on how restricted it is. Ensure it will not leave other PC's feeling like second fiddle, and away we go.

[phoenix240]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

I think that's fine - the reason for the restriction is to speed up play. I'd be more inclined to rule on a length of time I'm prepared to wait for your action, which would combine:

 

- shorthand builds (we had a character with an "attacks only" VPP who had the number of dice of 3, 5, 10 and 15 AP powers costed out at various advantage levels to facilitate quick builds);

 

- pre-fab power lists;

 

- don't sweat the small stuff (new power? is it clearly within the character's capabilities and point levels? then let it go through - we can add the fine mechanics to a pre-fab list later - the GM can slow the game down just as much as the players can by being overly rigid/detailed).

 

The VPP itself needs pre-definition, though. What are its SFX? What can, and can't, it do - in broad strokes? Assess that last as a limitation on the control cost, depending on how restricted it is. Ensure it will not leave other PC's feeling like second fiddle, and away we go.

 

That last part has been the biggest issue I've run into with VPPs especially when defined as Cosmic Power or Magic.

 

Edit: Technology can be a bad one too considering how unlimited comic book supertech can be.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

With no limitations and a Cosmic pool, it costs 150 points to have one 60 AP power available, which can be changed at will. I find that extra 90 points the more specialized character can spend go a long way to equalizing matters.

 

Even with that, some things the VPP can't do could still be defined. I've never seen a Herald of Galactus use a mental power with his VPP. For that matter, if the Power Cosmic can do anything, why can't it Transform a useless planet into one edible by Galactus? Sure, it takes time to affect that much BOD, but at one BOD per phase, a 5 SPD character can accumulate 25 BOD per minute - 1 day for 36,000 BOD seems plenty fast - enough for the Big G's dinner!

 

Magic needs better definition. Again, no SuperMage in the comics seems to have full versatility of powers.

 

This comes back to the VPP being used to define a character/ability, not just a naked mechanic.

[phoenix240]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

Allot seems to be depend on the relative skill levels of the players. But being able to instantly switch up your abilities to match the situation can go a long way particularly if the player is clever. Then there's the feeling of "anything you can do, I can do" which can spoil some players fun. It doesn't even have to necessarily true but the perception matters.

 

I'm not doubting your points but I've seen it wreck quite a few games or at least cause uncomfortable friction. Enough to make me leery of including really loosely defined VPPs. Having a tighter limit on just what the Pool can do helps as does have a player that understand that sometimes just because you can do something doesn't mean you should and is willing to step back from time to time to let the other PCs have some spot light time. Infinitely variable VPPs aren't something I'd want to give a glory hog type of player.

[Greywind]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

At the very least require the skill roll to change it up.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Adversarial Answers

 

At the very least require the skill roll to change it up.

 

The most versatile VPP I can recall running had no skill, but had "No Skill Roll 14-", 1/2 phase 11- and 0 phase 8-. If he wanted to change the pool, he rolled 3d6 and:

 

8 or less: figured out the switch instantly and had his full phase remaining;

 

9 - 11: figured it out in a half phase and had a half phase remaining;

 

12 - 14: figured it out but it took the whole phase;

 

15 or more: didn't figure it out but spent his whole phase puzzling over it

 

A "cosmic" (0 phase; no skill roll) VPP is more suited for a "list of powers" VPP like a multipower with unlimited slots, IMO.