Cost of Followers

[bigdamnhero]

Question about Followers, and a change from 5ed that I hadn’t noticed until ghost angel pointed it out the other day.

 

Under 5ed, if a Follower had 100 base points, and another 75 points from Disadvantages, the PC only paid based on the 100 base points, ie 20 points. (Ignoring XP to simplify the discussion.) The 75 points worth of stuff bought with the Disads are essentially free. [Example 5ER p82]

 

The same Follower built under 6ed runs 225 total points, costing the player 45 points. No “freebies†for taking Complications. [Example 6e1 p102] Yes, 6ed characters have more starting points to throw around, but almost all of that goes to the increased cost of Characteristics.* So compared to Skills, Powers, other Perks, etc, Followers now effectively cost twice as much as they used to. 45 points can buy a LOT of Powers!

 

So what to do? The simplest way (and the one I’m considering) is just house-ruling the cost for Followers to 1 per 10 (or 1 per 11?) instead of 1 per 5. But I wanted to check if anyone else had tried this, and if so how it worked for you and if you saw any problems with it? Do we also need to give them extra points for the Complications, or does changing the cost to 1 per 10 cover this? Other considerations?

 

Lastly, would you apply this to Bases & Vehicles as well? Any changes?

 

* This isn’t a complaint – I’ve actually come to like the way they did costs in 6^th, and I’m not looking to re-open that particular argument.

[Killer Shrike]

If you use Resource Points (In 6e, described in the Advanced Players Guide starting on page 191), the cost of Followers effectively gets cut in half thanks to the point ratio to purchase that kind of Resource Point...and as the GM you can adjust the ratio further if you like.

[Lucius]

You could also house-rule it back to "Complications don't count against total points."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary taglines don't count against total posts

[ayinde]

to be honest I never understood why the extra points were free in the first place are they free for duplication or multi-form? not trying to start a fight just want a better grasp of the system

[Lucius]

to be honest I never understood why the extra points were free in the first place are they free for duplication or multi-form? not trying to start a fight just want a better grasp of the system

 

It depends on what you mean by "extra" or "free."

 

Suppose we built two Followers. One is built on 300 Base Points and no Complications. Another is built on 250 Base Points plus 50 pts of Complications for a total of 300 pts.

 

Now, personally, I think the first Follower should cost more and is clearly superior to the second, who is burdened with Complications. Others seem to regard the two as exactly equal.

 

 

Now compare the second Follower to still a third, built on 250 Base Points and NO Complications. Are these two equal? Or does the second Follower "outrank" the third, despite the fact that those "extra" points are matched with Complications?

 

 

How you approach these comparisons also pertains to how the Followers are built. If Followers are bought based on their value before Complications, then Complications must be detrimental to the "Leader" character (the one paying points) and valued in terms of how they impact that character; a Complication like "Loyal to Leader" or "Watched by Leader" would be absolutely impermissible because they WOULD be free points. Conversely, such Complications would be perfectly acceptable if they're not saving anyone any points anyway.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

In fact, why should the palindromedary have any Complications at all?

[psyber624]

Hrm, I don't have 5e personally but frankly a character that is only 100 points getting 75 points worth of Complications (Bringing them to 175 points) sounds rather broken to me. Were you able to create characters like that in 5e? What was the limit to complications based on initial Character Points? Sounds like that would have been easily abuseable with the right complications. 20 points for a 175 pt follower is just dirt cheap. but to each their own I guess.

[Christopher]

Hrm' date=' I don't have 5e personally but frankly a character that is only 100 points getting 75 points worth of Complications (Bringing them to 175 points) sounds rather broken to me. Were you able to create characters like that in 5e? What was the limit to complications based on initial Character Points? Sounds like that would have been easily abuseable with the right complications. 20 points for a 175 pt follower is just dirt cheap. but to each their own I guess.[/quote']

You still had to pick a "Power Level" wich also means a maximum of points you an get for Complications. But be a 200+50 Character with a 100+75 Sidekick and you get a 175 point Follower for only 20 Points (100/5) - this is a literal example from the 5E Character Creation Handbook.

Things got messy once the Folowers Total Points reached yours or get extremely low (like an animal).

 

Overall it does sounds like a bug that was fixed/simplified in 6E: Now Folower, Duplicate, Multiform and Summon all have absolutely identical Cost Structures.

One thing I heard of that might have influenced the old rules: Back then Supervillains we supposed to buy thier Organsiations as Followers. While now we only expect them to buy the ones always has in thier personal Vicinity (usually none at all), and the rest can just appear as the Plot/Difficulty demands.

[ayinde]

I think duplicate still requires dups to pay the points for duplicate power

[psyber624]

Hrm' date=' I don't have 5e personally but frankly a character that is only 100 points getting 75 points worth of Complications (Bringing them to 175 points) sounds rather broken to me. Were you able to create characters like that in 5e? What was the limit to complications based on initial Character Points? Sounds like that would have been easily abuseable with the right complications. 20 points for a 175 pt follower is just dirt cheap. but to each their own I guess.[/quote']

You still had to pick a "Power Level" wich also means a maximum of points you an get for Complications. But be a 200+50 Character with a 100+75 Sidekick and you get a 175 point Follower for only 20 Points (100/5) - this is a literal example from the 5E Character Creation Handbook.

Things got messy once the Folowers Total Points reached yours or get extremely low (like an animal).

 

Overall it does sounds like a bug that was fixed/simplified in 6E: Now Folower, Duplicate, Multiform and Summon all have absolutely identical Cost Structures.

One thing I heard of that might have influenced the old rules: Back then Supervillains we supposed to buy thier Organsiations as Followers. While now we only expect them to buy the ones always has in thier personal Vicinity (usually none at all), and the rest can just appear as the Plot/Difficulty demands.

Thanks. While it would be far from the most broken thing buildable in HERO Followers sound like they would be way to cheap with that pricing structure. Just my opinion and I am sure that its possible to build followers that are truly only worth 20 points to the main character with that structure but especially when you add in the whole 5 point doubling feature it sets my GM alarms a ringing big time.

[bigdamnhero]

I don'€™t really have a problem with 6ed basing Follower cost on Total Points. It probably makes more sense and is certainly cleaner. And since they made that change for PCs, they kinda had to change it for Followers. My concern is whether 6ed Followers are overpriced as a result. I certainly never felt like Followers were underpriced in previous editions, and given how few of my players took Followers, I don't think they saw it as a huge bargain.

But my 6ed players have commented on how wimpy Followers seem for how expensive they are. For a 400-point superhero, is it really worth spending 45 points to buy a €œPowerful Heroic€ sidekick or henchman, who certainly will not be able to stand up to superheroic-level combat? 45 points can buy a whole lot of Powers.

 

@ Killer Shrike: I hadn't thought about using resource points. I don'™t think it would fit with this particular campaign, but not a bad idea.

@ Lucius: Of course, since 6ed character guidelines call for fewer Complications compared to 5ed Disads, that might not solve the imbalance?

@ Ayinde: It looks like 5er Duplication cost was also based on Base Cost, not Total Cost. (5er 152). 5er Multiform (5er 211) doesn't specifically state base cost, but I would interpret it that way. So at least it's consistent within editions. Again, I haven't used those Powers extensively since switching to 6ed, but I never felt like they were massively underpriced in 5ed?

@ Lucius again: I agree Complications that actually benefit the PC (ie Loyal To PC) should not count for anything. In fact, 6ed specifies that (6e1 p103).

@Psyber624: Well, keep in mind that 5ed character guidelines allowed far more points from Disadvantages than 6ed does from Complications. That's another change I wasn't sure about at first, but have since concluded Steve was probably right to change it.

[bigdamnhero]

I don'€™t really have a problem with 6ed basing Follower cost on Total Points. It probably makes more sense and is certainly cleaner. And since they made that change for PCs, they kinda had to change it for Followers. My concern is whether 6ed Followers are overpriced as a result. I certainly never felt like Followers were underpriced in previous editions, and given how few of my players took Followers, I don't think they saw it as a huge bargain.

But my 6ed players have commented on how wimpy Followers seem for how expensive they are. For a 400-point superhero, is it really worth spending 45 points to buy a €œPowerful Heroic€ sidekick or henchman, who certainly will not be able to stand up to superheroic-level combat? 45 points can buy a whole lot of Powers.

 

@ Killer Shrike: I hadn't thought about using resource points. I don'™t think it would fit with this particular campaign, but not a bad idea.

@ Lucius: Of course, since 6ed character guidelines call for fewer Complications compared to 5ed Disads, that might not solve the imbalance?

@ Ayinde: It looks like 5er Duplication cost was also based on Base Cost, not Total Cost. (5er 152). 5er Multiform (5er 211) doesn't specifically state base cost, but I would interpret it that way. So at least it's consistent within editions. Again, I haven't used those Powers extensively since switching to 6ed, but I never felt like they were massively underpriced in 5ed?

@ Lucius again: I agree Complications that actually benefit the PC (ie Loyal To PC) should not count for anything. In fact, 6ed specifies that (6e1 p103).

@Psyber624: Well, keep in mind that 5ed character guidelines allowed far more points from Disadvantages than 6ed does from Complications. That's another change I wasn't sure about at first, but have since concluded Steve was probably right to change it.

Sorry, cannot get it to stop messing with my apostrophes!

[psyber624]

Something to remember about costs of followers is that its not necessarily how they are built by your group, but how they COULD be built that has alot to do with pricing structures. 45 points gives you a character that can act on its own, go where you cant, and has its own powers. That 45 points buys you up to 225 points of sidekick to go with you. You can spend those 225 points any way you want so you can create the Glass Cannon side kick (where you basically have another attack, which can be up to campaign max strength, but just doesn't get all the bells and whistles). You can create Skill Sidekicks which can do all your non-combat stuff, you can create Stealth/Spy sidekicks who can get where you can't and can find out all sorts of things for you. Or you can create the "watered down Hero" sidekick that you seem to be thinking of where you try to build a fully formed character, just on far less points (which is most common in source material, the Robin's and Kid Flash's and such).

 

Then you have to look at their effect on gameplay as well. If one player has a sidekick he gets more "action" in a combat (if the sidekick is designed for combat). More of the "play" time is dedicated to his actions as he is effectively controlling two characters (or easily many many many more with the doubling rule). That can also create unfun situations in your gaming group.

 

So, at least in my opinion (and yes, this is just an opinion post, as always YMMV) 45 points is appropriate for a 225 point hero. Yes, 45 points could buy a hero alot of powers, but 225 is EASILY configurable to be worth that even if you take into account for everything a second character has to buy.

[Christopher]

[...]

Those reasons are why I invoked the similiarities between Follower and other "Total Cost/5"-Powers.

Follower, Vehicle, Duplicate, Summon, Multiform - they all do similar things with different levels of Control, Replaceability, ability to act independant, ability to be "different" from the base sheet

What they all do is: Giving you an extra Sheet to work with. A (often) totally freely selectable set of Skills, Powers, Complications and the like.

Summon, Follower and Duplciate also give you an extra set of actions in Combat and the ability to work in more Place then one at a time.

 

Multiform: Perfect Control, 2nd Best diversification, least replaceability. Plus only one "Sheet" can act at a time

Duplicate allows you perfect Control, worst diversification, bad replaceability, simultanious acting

Summon gives you worst control, perfect replaceability, perfect diversification, simultaneous acting

Follower medium control, medium replaceability, perfect diversification, simultaneous acting

Vehicle perfect control, medium replaceability, perfect diversitfivation, unable to act on it's own

[Lucius]

@ Lucius again: I agree Complications that actually benefit the PC (ie Loyal To PC) should not count for anything. In fact, 6ed specifies that (6e1 p103).

 

And under 6th edition, unlike 5th, they don't count for anything.

 

My issue is that even if a Complication IS a hindrance to the "Leader" (or whatever you call a character who has a Follower) they STILL don't count for anything.

 

If those points were coming "free" then making them anything but hindrances would be sheer munchkinism. If they're being paid for the same as the base points, the justification for requiring them to be disadvantageous to the character paying the points, evaporates.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Dependent Non Player Palindromedary

 

[bigdamnhero]

Something to remember about costs of followers is that its not necessarily how they are built by your group, but how they COULD be built that has alot to do with pricing structures. 45 points gives you a character that can act on its own, go where you cant, and has its own powers. That 45 points buys you up to 225 points of sidekick to go with you. You can spend those 225 points any way you want so you can create the Glass Cannon side kick (where you basically have another attack, which can be up to campaign max strength, but just doesn't get all the bells and whistles). You can create Skill Sidekicks which can do all your non-combat stuff, you can create Stealth/Spy sidekicks who can get where you can't and can find out all sorts of things for you. Or you can create the "watered down Hero" sidekick that you seem to be thinking of where you try to build a fully formed character, just on far less points (which is most common in source material, the Robin's and Kid Flash's and such).

 

Then you have to look at their effect on gameplay as well. If one player has a sidekick he gets more "action" in a combat (if the sidekick is designed for combat). More of the "play" time is dedicated to his actions as he is effectively controlling two characters (or easily many many many more with the doubling rule). That can also create unfun situations in your gaming group.

 

So, at least in my opinion (and yes, this is just an opinion post, as always YMMV) 45 points is appropriate for a 225 point hero. Yes, 45 points could buy a hero alot of powers, but 225 is EASILY configurable to be worth that even if you take into account for everything a second character has to buy.

Good points. Thanks.

[bigdamnhero]

@ Lucius again: I agree Complications that actually benefit the PC (ie Loyal To PC) should not count for anything. In fact, 6ed specifies that (6e1 p103).

 

And under 6th edition, unlike 5th, they don't count for anything.

 

My issue is that even if a Complication IS a hindrance to the "Leader" (or whatever you call a character who has a Follower) they STILL don't count for anything.

 

If those points were coming "free" then making them anything but hindrances would be sheer munchkinism. If they're being paid for the same as the base points, the justification for requiring them to be disadvantageous to the character paying the points, evaporates.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Dependent Non Player Palindromedary

Well, actual hindrances "count" towards the required number of Complications for that power level. So you could list "Loyal to PC" on the character sheet, but you would still need to come up with X number of genuine Complications.

[ghost-angel]

I'd like to point out something that seems to be getting done very wrong RE 6E and Complications.

 

It is not 100 Points + 75 Points Of Complications (for example) for a 175 Point Character; It is 100 Points, 75 Points must be accounted for by Complications, for a 100 Point Character.

 

Complications are not additive.

[Lucius]

I'd like to point out something that seems to be getting done very wrong RE 6E and Complications.

 

It is not 100 Points + 75 Points Of Complications (for example) for a 175 Point Character; It is 100 Points, 75 Points must be accounted for by Complications, for a 100 Point Character.

 

Complications are not additive.

 

Complications in 6th edition work 100% identical to previous editions except that the way they are explained is more confusing, as if someone attempted to describe accounting without ever mentioning the concept of owner's equity.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Just because it has a head at one end and a head at the other and no other heads doesn't mean it's two headed!

[Christopher]

I'd like to point out something that seems to be getting done very wrong RE 6E and Complications.

 

It is not 100 Points + 75 Points Of Complications (for example) for a 175 Point Character; It is 100 Points, 75 Points must be accounted for by Complications, for a 100 Point Character.

 

Complications are not additive.

I think you got it wrong:

A 175 point character is still a 175 point Character.

It is just that instead of saying 100 Free + up to 75 from Complications (for a total of 175), it says:

175 total, of wich 75 points must be covered by 75 points of Complciations.

 

Same math, different expression.

[Greywind]

...and no one has even touched on room, board, or pay.

[psyber624]

I do agree with GA tho, its easy to misunderstand (especially if your new). 5e was 100 +75, 6e is 175 with 75. Not hard to think that 6e winds up with a 250 point character in that situation.

[ghost-angel]

I think you got it wrong:

A 175 point character is still a 175 point Character.

It is just that instead of saying 100 Free + up to 75 from Complications (for a total of 175), it says:

175 total, of wich 75 points must be covered by 75 points of Complciations.

 

Same math, different expression.

 

I was using a 100 Point Character as an example. If you say "100 Points, with 75 Points Of Complications." you have a 100 Point Character in 6E. I did nothing wrong with my math or explanation.

 

If you say "100 Points + 75 Points Of Disadvantages" in 5E you absolutely get a 175 Point character.

 

And THAT is why the distinction needs to be made, and it not merely just a different way of expressing the same thing. If you want a 175 Point Character in 6E you just say "A 175 Point Character. 75 of those Points are accounted for by Complications."

 

Right off the bat, in 6E it has simplified itself down - you know your point total in the first sentence. No further math is needed at that point to know the grand total of points characters will be built upon in 6E.

[psyber624]

I think you got it wrong:

A 175 point character is still a 175 point Character.

It is just that instead of saying 100 Free + up to 75 from Complications (for a total of 175), it says:

175 total, of wich 75 points must be covered by 75 points of Complciations.

 

Same math, different expression.

 

I was using a 100 Point Character as an example. If you say "100 Points, with 75 Points Of Complications." you have a 100 Point Character in 6E. I did nothing wrong with my math or explanation.

 

If you say "100 Points + 75 Points Of Disadvantages" in 5E you absolutely get a 175 Point character.

 

And THAT is why the distinction needs to be made, and it not merely just a different way of expressing the same thing. If you want a 175 Point Character in 6E you just say "A 175 Point Character. 75 of those Points are accounted for by Complications."

 

Right off the bat, in 6E it has simplified itself down - you know your point total in the first sentence. No further math is needed at that point to know the grand total of points characters will be built upon in 6E.

not to mention it eliminates the math altogether. No more need to add Base CP to CP from Disads, you just know right off the bat! We will leave it to the math geeks to deal with the "You can reduce the number of points of Disads by reducing the Base CP" aspect that is now missing!

(sarcasm)

YAY! Less Math in HERO!!!!!

(/sarcasm)

[Lucius]

 

I was using a 100 Point Character as an example. If you say "100 Points, with 75 Points Of Complications." you have a 100 Point Character in 6E. I did nothing wrong with my math or explanation.

 

If you say "100 Points + 75 Points Of Disadvantages" in 5E you absolutely get a 175 Point character.

 

And THAT is why the distinction needs to be made, and it not merely just a different way of expressing the same thing. If you want a 175 Point Character in 6E you just say "A 175 Point Character. 75 of those Points are accounted for by Complications."

 

Right off the bat, in 6E it has simplified itself down - you know your point total in the first sentence. No further math is needed at that point to know the grand total of points characters will be built upon in 6E.

 

You haven't eliminated the math, you've just hidden it. Or converted what was an addition problem to a subtraction problem. I fail to see where that simplifies anything. Especially for new people coming into the game. I have NEVER met anyone who had a problem understanding the old way of presenting it, I have seen people fail to grasp it by the current way.

 

It remains true that

25+75 = 100

and that

100-75=25

Whether you make the equation explicit or leave it as an exercise for the reader. I don't think you can change that. If you CAN change the fundamental laws of mathematics, I urge you to go to Washington DC, Congress desperately wants to be able to spend just as much on bases and tanks and aircraft and even more every year on military pay and benefits but somehow get the total to add up to less than the sum of its parts.

 

It also bugs me that while it is still not mandatory to take the full possible value of Complications, it seems as if the intention was to create the impression that it IS mandatory. As I recall, a prospective new player reading the book doesn't know there's a choice until getting to and reading the chapter on Complications.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that we're off topic

 

[Christopher]

I think what ghost-angel meant to say is: "It is very importat to note (and often forgotten) that the annotaiton for Characters points have changed between 5E and 6E" (it took me a while to figure that out myself).

 

5E anotation is:

Base Points/Complication Points (leaving total points to be a mental exercise)

 

6E annotation is:

Total Points/Complication Points (leave base points to be a mental excercise)

 

Nothing with how Complications work has changed. Nothing with what Pointlevels characters belong to has changed (though the levels have gone up a bit).

The only thing that changed is how Character Points/Complications are written.