What power levels do you run/play?

[Chris Goodwin]

What it says on the tin.  I'd like to get a sense of what power levels people are using, and maybe generate some discussion.  

[Ndreare]

I cheated and voted for both heroic and powerful heroic. Our games always end up settling in in at that level even if we start off the farm.

[Chris Goodwin]

Well, I did make it multiple choice.    I voted Competent Normal and Standard Heroic.  

[bluesguy]

I went with Standard Heroic, which is what I used for my Valdorian Age.  In my new campaign I am going to probably go with Powerful Heroic or slightly less (200 base points)

[Vondy]

It varies from game to game, but "powerful heroic" is where most of my established characters fall.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Unless I'm playing a Supers game, I always go Standard Heroic of 75+75.   I find that's enough CP to build most anything players generally want to build, while being low enough to prevent character designs from getting too crazy.

[Old Man]

I put in the values for 'typical' campaigns, but I did play a couple of standard normal campaigns based on writing up the players as PCs.  It's really sobering to write yourself up in Hero and then engage in to-the-death melee combat with something really fearsome, like a goblin.

[Aversill]

It depends.  I run Fantasy Hero which is pretty much close to Champions.  I figure out all the extra stuff I expect the characters to get for the campaign to work and then add that to about 250 to get where I want them to be.  I keep Active's at or above 50 (or else mental powers don't work well).  My mechwarrior tends to be gigantic with 250 point pilots and 650 point mechs (mech stuff tops at about 210 Active), but it's kind of a different game all to itself.  I'm currently playing in a Champions game (D List superheroes) where I don't know the power levels, just a general description of my powers.  It's fun.

[Steve]

I've played in a range, from Standard Heroic thieves and pirates in a Swords & Sorcery setting all the way up to superheroic Shadow World characters. I prefer Powerful to Very Powerful Heroes because the abilities are more cinematic to me at those levels.

[TheQuestionMan]

I voted Standard and Powerful Heroic. 

 

I have been convinced to play Standard and Competent Normal by various GM's and using various systems. I never enjoyed the games, but I like hanging out with my friends. These characters end up having no initial goals or ambitions and I focus on characterization over effectiveness. Even going so far as to runaway when confronted by danger. Frustrating the GM and the Players. I find myself constantly remind them we are playing "Normals".

 

What is the Normal reaction to being attacked. Heroes Fight, everyone else finds cover or runs away. I have lost several characters this way, but having nothing vested in the character I just tweak a few point here and there and present the "NEW" character with a different name, profession, and quirks. They eventually stop suggesting they run Low Level Characters.

 

Passive agressive I guess, but it works when I do not point it out to them.

 

QM  

[Markdoc]

I have had two players like this. I found myself forced to remind them that in real life, normal people will often stand and fight when faced with danger - sometimes even extreme danger. In our case, we simply let the characters run away and continued without them, or the players. Everybody else was enjoying the game, which ended up running for years (real time). I think it sensible not to play if you don't enjoy the game, but it's possible to bow out gracefully.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Ninja-Bear]

I voted for standard heroic for both traditional and my oriental fantasy game. The major difference is its more 100 base and 50 disadvantages. I also stick with standard heroic more out of convience than anyrhing else. I don't mind tweaking things though.

[Vondy]

Unless I'm playing a Supers game, I always go Standard Heroic of 75+75.   I find that's enough CP to build most anything players generally want to build, while being low enough to prevent character designs from getting too crazy.

 

The 150 point baseline is where most of my heroic games (all genres) start. The sample characters in star hero, pulp hero, and 6e Martial Arts fit my default targets fairly well. However, I just hand them 150 base points and ask for a list of useable complications. I don't give points for complications -- I use them as a part of my heroic action point matrix.

[Vondy]

 I think it sensible not to play if you don't enjoy the game, but it's possible to bow out gracefully.

 

Cheers, Mark

 

Agreed.

[Aversill]

I voted Standard and Powerful Heroic. 

 

I have been convinced to play Standard and Competent Normal by various GM's and using various systems. I never enjoyed the games, but I like hanging out with my friends. These characters end up having no initial goals or ambitions and I focus on characterization over effectiveness. Even going so far as to runaway when confronted by danger. Frustrating the GM and the Players. I find myself constantly remind them we are playing "Normals".

 

What is the Normal reaction to being attacked. Heroes Fight, everyone else finds cover or runs away. I have lost several characters this way, but having nothing vested in the character I just tweak a few point here and there and present the "NEW" character with a different name, profession, and quirks. They eventually stop suggesting they run Low Level Characters.

 

Passive agressive I guess, but it works when I do not point it out to them.

 

QM  

I think player input in a game is important.  If my players don't want to play the universe I've designed then why are we playing it?  The same is true about power levels.  Saying, "man, I hate playing low pointers," might go along way to making a change, more than passive aggressively throwing character after character into the trash bin.  Or it might force the GM to tell you why you're playing the low pointers.  Maybe the game's so dang cool that it doesn't really matter what point total you're playing. 

 

That being said, normal people will stand and fight when running away means death, which is what you say keeps happening to your character.  Moreover, I don't know, I design encounters around the power levels of the players.  If one of them runs off, everyone else is out of luck.  I would wonder if the other players at the table might be mad about having their characters die.

[NuSoardGraphite]

That being said, normal people will stand and fight when running away means death, which is what you say keeps happening to your character.  Moreover, I don't know, I design encounters around the power levels of the players.  If one of them runs off, everyone else is out of luck.  I would wonder if the other players at the table might be mad about having their characters die.

I actually disagree with this somewhat.  There are so many variables, its difficult to tell exactly what people (individually) are going to do until they are faced with the situation at hand.  Some people will always flee.  Some people will always stand and fight.  And others are totally unpredictable.  If I were playing in a normals campaign, when faced with overwhelming odds with the possibility of death or serious bodily harm, I would probably make an Ego roll for my character and if it failed, my character would flee to cover.  If it succeeded, he would stand and fight.  I think that's a fair way of dealing with that sort of situation.

[Vondy]

I actually disagree with this somewhat.  There are so many variables, its difficult to tell exactly what people (individually) are going to do until they are faced with the situation at hand.  Some people will always flee.  Some people will always stand and fight.  And others are totally unpredictable.  If I were playing in a normals campaign, when faced with overwhelming odds with the possibility of death or serious bodily harm, I would probably make an Ego roll for my character and if it failed, my character would flee to cover.  If it succeeded, he would stand and fight.  I think that's a fair way of dealing with that sort of situation.

 

I think whether "real people" stand and fight is less important than what the GM does -- and the outcomes are -- when the player characters choose to stand and fight.  If they consistently get their clocks cleaned or killed you are 1) teaching them that they can't win in a fight (ergo, a no-win), and 2) building an aversion to playing at those levels. There is a time and place for an insurmountable obstacle you have to avoid and think creatively to get around (even for powerful superheroes), but a GM running a game for normals who doesn't take the time to craft confrontations where normals have "a fighting chance" isn't really running a game for normals -- he's running a game for heroes while being an overbearing pinch-fist lick-penny when it comes to character points. What matters isn't what "normal people" do. What matters is whether you reward or punish the players for playing the hand you dealt them.

[Lawnmower Boy]

I did standard heroic, because that's what the old book said, and I was all starry-eyed and naive. I would be very tempted to let the PCs have more points next time, just to see more varied characters.

[voodoo54]

I run a standard heroic (100 + 50) campaign in a modified Turakian age setting. I like the fairly powerful but can still get their butts kicked by a group of goblins if they are not careful points level.

[JasonPacker]

I'm with you, Chris. I actually usually target a sweet spot of 150 points (6e) that fits between Competent Normal and the start of Heroic. It feels like "level 1" to me, where you're a half-step higher than most everyone around you, but not yet superheroes.