How do you manage "loophole" powers?

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think it was Jeff Goldblum's hipster doctor in Jurassic Park

[BoloOfEarth]

I'm sorry Scott.  I didn't really read your post as reductio ad absurdum, but I suppose it was.  So my apologies.

[bigdamnhero]

I guess what I'm trying to say is, if it's within the rules, I don't want to punish someone for creativity/smarts.  

...

Also, if setting caps or nerfing characters works for you and your group; great!

It's not about "punishing" anybody or "nerfing" anything. It's about maintaining some semblance of game balance. You seem to see this as external to the system and somehow a cop-out on the GM's part. But what I and others here are trying to say is that establishing caps/guidelines/whatever is a fundamental part of the system.

 

Well, my daughter just made a character to join the play test group; and her character has a MONSTER Gate power (similar to the teleport power BigDamnHero mentions), attempting to replicate the power of the portal using mutant in the latest X-Man film.

For a high-powered superhero game, that isn't nearly as unbalanced as it was in a my low-powered fantasy game. But again, my concern is not the power it's the power level. Unless you all just really enjoy seeing who can create the most over-the-top mega-power, in which case valle con dios. But your OP implied that you realized your wife's power was completely unbalanced and you wanted help with that. There is no loophole in the power - the loophole is in the unrestricted power level.

 

With no limits, does that mean I FINALLY get to play Margarita Man?

I'd ask you to promise never to use your power for evil, but I see I'm too late.

[Christopher R Taylor]

 

 

There is no loophole in the power - the loophole is in the unrestricted power level.

And that's what it comes down to.  I agree that you can go overboard setting limits on players, and its good to let people experiment and build fun ideas, but what you got, that's what happens.

[sinanju]

So I appreciate all the advice surrounding talking to her (because we all want to have fun in a balanced game), and looking at the AP or DC and potentially putting limits on it prior (not allowing it) or nerfing it (reducing) later; however, I'm of the mind set that it's the GM's job to deal with this kind of stuff.  I didn't put a limit on the AP or DC prior to our testing this out and building characters, and don't think I will later either.  I hate telling a player "hey, you made a great power there, good job!  But, it could upset the balance of the game, cause your so smart, so I can't allow it"...  I agree we all want an enjoyable and balanced game for fun, but as GM I figure that's my job and I should figure out a way to do that, without punishing a player who has a good concept.  That's actually why I posted here, to get ideas how to manage this; ruling it out is not a way I want to manage it, that's like giving up as a GM in my mind, and not fair to my players.

 

Tastes (and experiences) vary. I played for many years with a group composed almost entirely of rules-lawyering power gamers, myself included. Half the fun of those games was tying to win the perpetual game of King of the Hill (i.e., most absurdly overpowered, or cunningly designed) when designing characters. The GM was expected to (and generally did) spot these things and forbid them entering his game. A statement amounting to "Yes, you're very clever, but you can't do that in my game" was usually sufficient. The rules lawyer got some recognition for his cunning exploitation of the rules, and usually was then willing to tone it down to a playable level that didn't ruin the game for everyone.

 

Sometimes a build slipped by the GM (or even more rarely, everyone was genuinely surprised by how monstrously effective a particular build could be). And then the GM would have to outlaw or compel a redesign of the offending character/power. We never thought of it as "punishing" the player. As I say, if anything, you got kudos for being so cunning in how you worked the rules to your advantage--but then you were expected to back off* in the interests of everyone having fun in the game.

 

But that's what worked for the group I played with. Different groups approach things differently.

 

*After all, the GM was a power gamer too, and he had an unlimited budget. In that kind of match, the GM could always win.

[Scott Baker]

*After all, the GM was a power gamer too, and he had an unlimited budget. In that kind of match, the GM could always win.

You got that right. And it's true no matter whether the GM is a power gamer or not. Which is often a hard thing for players and new GMs to understand. It's not GM vs. Players, it's the shared experience of playing (and hopefully having fun).

[Lucius]

Re: Margarita Man for 6th Edition...

Margarita Man

Nibblin' on sponge cake
Helping a thug make
The smartest decision he's made in some time
Yeah he'll get off scott free
But that doesn't bug me
'Cause the three he'll turn in are the worst kinds of slime.

Savin' the day again, I'm Margarita Man
Scanning for some good deed I can do
Some people claim the fact I'm here is a shame,
But I know, that they don't have a clue.

That mugger was stalking
A young woman walking
But now he's freaked out and his mind's come unglued
She's a real beauty
A Mexican cutie
She's had a close call, but she hasn't a clue.

Savin' the day again, I'm Margarita Man
Scanning for some good deed I can do
Some people claim the fact I'm here is a shame,
But I know, that they don't have a clue.

 

 

edit; wrote another verse

 

My fights, I must pick 'em

I can't save each victim

And dealing with psychopaths drives me to drink

But if you ask how come

Some killers get so dumb

And finally get caught, well now, what do you think?

 

Savin' the day again, I'm Margarita Man

Scanning for some good deed I can do

Some people claim the fact I'm here is a shame,

But I know, that they don't have a clue.

 

 

 

Lucius Alexander

Some people claim that Jimmy Buffet's to blame,
But I know, it's the palindromedary's fault.

[Echo3Niner]

So, my reaction of the approach of limiting power design, after giving the CP limit of 400/75, comes from my other game experience.

 

As I mentioned, I have run (several other games, but) Earthdawn (ED) and Shadowrun (SR) pretty much non-stop since 1991; while ED has levels (circles) to create some of the "limitations" mentioned earlier; SR does not.  There are no levels in SR, and there is a point based character generation system.  Drawing a parallel, I am so confident in my GM experience to handle about any character, not only do I allow all the alternate types of characters, I have worked with players to generate new ones, and introduced additional types myself, all outside the standard rules.

 

I would never trouble myself with controlling how a character is made in SR, because the system works in such a fashion that I am confident no character, no matter how well crafted, could upset the balance of the game to a point I couldn't manage it.

 

Because I am less experienced in HERO/Champions, that was why I posed the question.  As I mentioned, I did not intend to offend anyone by discounting their advice on limitations, it's just that I find that unnecessary in SR, so am having difficulty understanding why I need to do it in HERO/Champions.

 

The other advice for in-game ways to handle it, have all been great, and in-line with the "spirit of my intended question".

 

Don't get me wrong, if we continue to play this game test, and I continue to see that powers built without limits will (unintentionally) be game unbalancing, then I will enact the advice here of various limits.  As "Champions Complete" (perhaps it's not so 'complete') does not offer advice on limits (like another book that was mentioned does), that is one of the reasons I am reticent to do so.

 

SR does have limits to starting skills and various other "powers", usually of 8d6; but, that's built into the game rules for starting characters.  So, I'm not against the concept in general, and I understand the reason for it.  BUT, since CC doesn't include it, if I have to do it, I'll have to come up with that AP or DC (or another) limiting rule, and add it as a "house rule", and that's where I am saying that's kinda like "giving up" in my mind.

 

I am confident enough with SR to give my players ultimate freedom, but I understand the rules have built in limitations that keep any starting character from being unbalancing; so how come CC doesn't?

 

 

Again, we come back to character design. If a character has a 17 OCV and a 15 DCV, I'd expect the villains to be similarly powered. A villain with a 14 OCV and a 15 DCV (looks pretty close, right?) will get hit 5 tines in 6, and only hit half the time. Assuming SPD, attacks and defenses are similar, he's pretty much doomed. This is an often overlooked aspect of the use of 3d6 rather than 1d20 - volatility is markedly reduced and small variations have much more significant effects.

Hero imposes no such limits - it is, perhaps, better described as a "game system" than a game. The players and GM design their game, including its internal balance, themselves. With 400 points, and no limits, the game is easily broken, as you are already seeing.

 

So, these two points trouble me;

 

First) You're bringing up yet another point of balance in the game (CV's).  Which haven't really been discussed in these limitation discussions.  So, now beyond AP or DC, I now need to look at CV's too?  What would you recommend for limits on those?

 

Second) I will give you that "game system" for HERO; however, CC is supposed to be "everything I need to run a Champions Superhero game".  So, I'm a little concerned that everyone here agrees there needs to be limits, and there are no guidelines in CC on those limits, and everyone here is not agreeing on what those limits should be either.

 

If I concede that limits are needed to ensure game balance, a game (Champions - not HERO) with ~30 years of history should have these limits pretty well ironed out by now one would think; and I would assume that it would be part of the character creation rules.  Even if it's a slide rule scale, based on the types of games; the chart that gives the overall CP/Complications guidelines should also have a column for a well thought out/play tested starting character limitation as well (IMNSHO).

 

So, Scott Baker mentioned a chart from the 5E/6E book which gave a good limitation guideline; could you put a further example of that up?  I'd like to see it myself, then hear from everyone here if they think that's a good way to limit starting characters, or if some other or additional (CV's?) limits should be imposed?

[pinecone]

Well, I am no expert on 6th, or CC for that matter. "Back in the old days" Hero had a lot of internal ballencers, so it was generally "OK" to just let stuff happen. (at least for me...)But it seems to me, that most of the internal ballence is Gone, and because the base points have been greatly increased, it is way easier to build "unbalenced" things. I thought CC did at least talk about the need to keep a "look out" for "bad builds". That was the original reason for "Stop!" and Look out! symbols..

 

The main areas of concerns are (IMHO) Damage, and Defence. (they need to be in concordance) CV, as Hugh mentioned, 2 points of CV is a very steep hill to climb. 3 CV is overwhelming.

 

CV is not as major as Damage, and Defense, because there are many counters. For example you CV 12 character can still get "tagged" by AE and Mental attacks.

 

"Old classics" to be wary off are: "Invisable mentalist", and his cousin, the "Psychic Sniper". The "Mind Mole" is the most extreme. (A mentalist with Mind Scan, and Tunneling, and/or X-ray vision.

 

Almost any "lotsa adders" power is troubling...Example, RKA 1D6+1, AP, x2, Pen Auto fire, AE:1 Hex, yadda yadda..   Damage Shields vs uncommon defenses, and Autofire vs non standard defenses.

 

Well Autofire in general magnifies any mods you add... Autofire Pen, is a very dangerous combo for example.

 

So a not super serious example: The Voyuer

 

X-ray Vision, Telescopic

Ego attack, Autofire, x10 shots, Rend> 0   say 2D6. Looks harmless enough, doesn't cost very much, but Dang! I don't have my CC handy...is that 20, +1, +1,+1/2? So 70 points?( active) ( special effects: Direct Telepathic stimulation of the part of your brain that experiances embarrassment)

 

One last area, where I've seen "bad things" is TK, plus Martial arts. It can be a fun character, but it can also be messy. It just depends on the player.

[Scott Baker]

There isn't agreement on caps since everyone runs their own games with whatever guidelines work for their particular vision (power level, genre, etc.). As the "generic" super hero game, CC can't possibly define hard-and-fast rules for every possible type of superheroic campaign you want to run.

 

You mention that you're confident in other systems because you've been playing them for a long time. If you had the same experience with Hero, you likely would not have asked your question in the first place. Since you did, we've given you a number of ideas that have come from our own experience. Given time you could come up with all of those same ideas yourself, and know what sort of things to look for when balancing your game, just like you know how to do that for ED and SR.

 

I'm not sure how much is too much to post, so here's the guidelines for 6E Standard Superheroic:

 

Characteristics: 10-40

SPD: 3-10

CV: 7-13

DC: 6-14

Active Points: 40-80

Skill Points: 25-80

Skill Roll: 11-15-

Def/rDef: 20-25/12-18 

[bigdamnhero]

As "Champions Complete" (perhaps it's not so 'complete') does not offer advice on limits (like another book that was mentioned does), that is one of the reasons I am reticent to do so.

See p190, but you're right there's not a lot of discussion or details. The 6ed book spells out example guidelines at different power levels, and honestly I hadn't noticed that didn't make it into CC until you pointed it out. So my apologies! I can see how that'd be confusing.

 

I am confident enough with SR to give my players ultimate freedom, but I understand the rules have built in limitations that keep any starting character from being unbalancing; so how come CC doesn't?

The difference is that the Shadowrun rules are only designed to run basically one game: Shadowrun. Not to say there isn't some variety of course, but it falls into a much narrower spectrum. They hard-code those sorts of limits in the rules because they already know what type of game you'll be playing.

 

Champions, by contrast, is meant to allow you to create any type of campaign you want, from gritty Iron Age vigilantes to Silver Agey Cosmic Being Beyond The Ken Of Mortal Man. That's what Hugh meant about it being more a game system than a game per se - you use Hero to create the game you want to play. But the mere fact that it's so open-ended means that there is HUGE potential for abuse or munchkinism (intentional or not). The way you limit that is by the GM setting guidelines on what does/doesn't fit within your campaign. They can't build limits like that into the Champions rules, because what would be appropriate for your game wouldn't fit with mine. So instead of hard-coding it, Hero expects the GM to set them according to their particular game. It requires a little more thought and work upfront on your part, granted, but once you get the hang of it it becomes second nature - witness all us Old Timers acting like it's the most obvious thing in the world.

 

So, Scott Baker mentioned a chart from the 5E/6E book which gave a good limitation guideline; could you put a further example of that up?  I'd like to see it myself, then hear from everyone here if they think that's a good way to limit starting characters, or if some other or additional (CV's?) limits should be imposed?

Short version: For standard 400-point superheroes, 6ed recommends Powers generally run from 40-80 AP; defenses should run 20-25 with 12-18 resistant, OCV & DCV should run in the 7-13 range, and typical Damage Classes should be around 6-14. These are absolutely just guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules; they don't necessarily prohibit a character with an OCV of 14 and a 15 DC attack, but they signal to both Player and GM that such a power is above the normal range and thus deserving of a closer look. Does that help?

[Scott Baker]

@Pinecone: I wouldn't say the balance is gone. It has always been possible to build an unbalanced character. What has happened is that there are a lot more options to mix-and-match in unbalancing combinations. 

[Scott Baker]

See p190, but you're right there's not a lot of discussion or details. The 6ed book spells out example guidelines at different power levels, and honestly I hadn't noticed that didn't make it into CC until you pointed it out. So my apologies! I can see how that'd be confusing.

 

Short version: For standard 400-point superheroes, 6ed recommends Powers generally run from 40-80 AP; defenses should run 20-25 with 12-18 resistant, OCV & DCV should run in the 7-13 range, and typical Damage Classes should be around 6-14. These are absolutely just guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules; they don't necessarily prohibit a character with an OCV of 14 and a 15 DC attack, but they signal to both Player and GM that such a power is above the normal range and thus deserving of a closer look. Does that help?

I hadn't noticed the chart wasn't there until I went to get a page reference and couldn't find it.

 

Thanks for the additional description at the end, I just posted the stats.

[Greywind]

I would also take a look around the board at the various character threads. They might give you some ideas about power levels.

[Echo3Niner]

Well, this all helps...  BUT (you knew there had to be another 'but' by now right?), it does make it difficult for a GM new to the game (or at lease new again), and players who have never played...

 

I am very glad I am running a test game with family, before I bring this to my actual gaming group (though my daughter and out of state friend are in the gaming group, they're family, so don't count in the same way).

 

Some of those point totals seem low to me - 80AP, seems low.  Frankly, I am now more concerned about CV's if the 3 point gap represents such a huge disparity in game play.

 

So, if the party's OCV & DCV (M if they're mental) is 10-12 to start, and then as they rise, my villains need to always be in the same range?  Because if they're off by 3, we're saying that's an encounter ender?

 

In other games, SR as an example (cause it's what I know well); you can have some fairly unique characters in the party, doing a pretty wide spread of abilities, making for a good range of characters for people to enjoy.

 

If CV's are SO important, and keeping AP's, DC,s, SPD, defense totals and potentially other stats (my lord look at "Rule of X" on pg190) so tightly reigned in for "balance", how do you achieve a variety of characters?

 

So, having read pg190 again, I start to focus on the paragraph about making characters unique.  The fear I have after finally getting what you are all saying, and understanding what the book is saying (in effect), is that the section on making characters unique is important, because in order to "balance" the game, all the characters start to look alike...

 

Thus, if you get too restrictive, how do you leave enough range for players to end up with the characters they want when they sit down and start coming up with a character concept?  Here's what I can envision: Player - "OK, so here's my idea..."  GM - "OK, great concept.  So in my game, we need to raise your OCV & DCV, otherwise you'll never hit anything and you'll be hit too often.  Then, we need to ratchet down your power a bit, cause it's too powerful.  Then, we need to lower your speed a bit, cause it's unbalanced, and raise you defense, or you'll never last through the fights."  When you're done, the character shares little in resemblance to what they envisioned when they started, and numbers-wise, they are very close to everyone else's characters...  AND, I don't mean cause you didn't tell them the limits; I'm talking about what they are describing for their character (e.g. my wife says, I want a female Bull's Eye, who never misses - then I have to say, well, nice idea, but that's unbalancing, so we'll have to make you as accurate as everyone else...)

 

This concerns me...

 

How come the over all 400/75 point total doesn't work as the limiter?

 

Logically, with the same points to spend, can't I have a brick with a lower DCV, cause he relies on his defenses to soak up damage, but a speedster (QuickSilver or even Spiderman) who has little in the way of defenses, but relies on his very high DCV to never get hit?

 

I can't have one character in the party who has a normal OCV, cause he hit's really hard, so it's OK that he misses sometimes.  But another character who hits almost every time, but because of that point expenditure they can't hit very hard?

 

In the comics the mentalist is almost always unbalanced, cause almost none of the other folks have defense against mental powers.  This is much like mages in many games though, because the assumption is if you spend a ton of points on magic (or mental powers), when I do finally hit you with my brick, you're going down cause you've got no defense to withstand the punch; like the mage can't take the hit from the paladin with a two-handed sword?

 

So, if I start to narrow many stats down to a tight limit to "balance" my game, how do I support variety of character types (as in the examples specifically above) in my game and allow players to play their concepts out?

 

And finally, ironically, the "Champions" example characters in the back of the book, and the villains too, don't follow these limits very well.  If I calculate correctly, when Arrowhead is throwing or shooting, he's got something like a 15OCV, based on the DCV of the Champions, he should almost never miss (assuming the 3 point gap referenced earlier is an encounter ender).  The only Champion with any mental juice at all is Witchcraft, so Esper should wipe out the entire team except her.

 

This point limit balance thing appears more difficult than I imagined, and I know this is a lot, and I'm likely over doing it here, but I honestly have these questions, so appreciate the patience...

[Cantriped]

The thing to remember here about guidelines is to be flexible with them, especially in regards to the abilities that make a character unique. You make a group of characters mechanically unique by keeping almost everything to the guidelines, but making exceptions for the few truly important things; this way under most circumstances the character will perform as they are expected to, but are still able to shine at the things that set them apart from their table-mates. 

A character intended to never miss really should have an OCV 3-6 points higher than "everybody else", a speedster should have twice the Speed (or 2-3 times the potential movement speed anyway), and a Brick should probably be able to carry the entire party and all of their vehicles in one hand while holding his Margarita in the other. 

 

That being said, one of the 5th edition books made the very good point that players tend to spend their points differently when they get large numbers of them at once than they do when they are getting a few here and there. Guidelines on point expenditure are intended to encourage a more even distribution of points at character generation. I once made the mistake of building a character who was too much a Glass Cannon (The Invisible Kind), He was a cool and interesting character (and probably very broken), but without a baseline amount of resistant defense he was slain outright in the first encounter before he could finish assuming his Heroic Identity. It was disappointing and anti-climatic, and in hindsight I wish I had taken my GMs advise and given my glass cannon some Combat Luck (Resistant Defenses with a Luck Special Effect) or something to make them a little bit more durable.

[Scott Baker]

 it does make it difficult for a GM new to the game (or at lease new again), and players who have never played.

I've never met the perfect game system. There's always questions, concerns, and learning to take place. You just have to be willing to work with the players to make changes as you progress in order to have a better game for all.

 

 

How come the over all 400/75 point total doesn't work as the limiter?

Because everyone is building what they want. In other systems, if you get a sword, for example, it has certain properties, including how much damage it does. In Hero, I'm making my own sword. I haven't run across a GM lately that would let me define how much damage my sword does in say PathFinder or D&D.

 

If we were talking about cookies, SR/PF/etc.are plates of store-bought cookies. there may be a few different types, and some different shapes, but you get exactly what's there, and no more. With Hero, players are being given a set of ingredients and basic recipes which they then go out and modify and make all different types and shapes of cookies.

 

This doesn't make them intrinsically better or worse, just different. What you are missing, and people have pointed out, is an understanding of the basic system (how does combat work for example)..The one thing that keeps coming up across all these "how do you handle" threads is a willingness to talk with the players and work with them to make adjustments if you find something that doesn't work for you.

[Christopher R Taylor]

 

 

How come the over all 400/75 point total doesn't work as the limiter?

Basically because someone could spend all 400 points on one power.  I have a 26d6 killing attack!

[pinecone]

Hmm...still can't "quote"...For Echo 3 niner...

 

Yeah, the "trap" in caps is making them hard...they work best as "suggestions". So if I want to play bulls eye, and the average CV is 8. I can figure that an 11 OCV will get the job done (plus a few levels vs range mod ) My super targeting char will play just like I want. But Hero does not do absolutes, so maybe someday I fight a super speedster who has a CV of 11.  But once I tag him/her down they go, because the defenses are low....ballence is maintained.

 

Without guidelines things like "I never miss" have no meaning. (You could buy this as AE: 1 Hex, accurate, and keep the CV low as well) Mental powers Used to be limited by expense, they cost twice as much. But as base totals have risen, that is a much smaller hill to climb.

 

These days CV is split out, so that helps as well. just watch out for both values being outside the envelope. As an example, if I want to run a 12DC game, I describe it as 12Dc is normal for a super, 10 is noticeably low, 14 impresses even other supers... So if you want to be the Strongest, cool, you're a hero afterall. But don't try to be the most accurate, most well defended etc.... Your thing is being the Strongest (Str 70..?) and I make sure you get to be the strongest, that's my job as GM. So most villians will have a Str of 60 or less, and a hyper strong villain will be Str 65.

 

Soon it becomes common knowlage that "Nobody is stronger than Vanguard!" (of course, Mr. Invincable is tougher...  ) Shoot if the main power is Mental Entangle, why not use OMCV to hit anyway? Simpler, and avoids becoming "unhittable" as a side effect.

[BoloOfEarth]

To me, the CV difference thing isn't necessarily an encounter ender.  I've introduced villains with higher DCVs than anybody could easily hit.  It just forces the players to get creative.  Switch targets so someone who *can* hit him takes him on.  Several people coordinate to get a Multiple Attacker bonus.  Someone with an AoE Entangle or Flash uses it to bring the target's DCV down, then everybody else does a Covered attack on the target and, then BLAMMO.  Or have one PC keep the tough guy busy long enough for everybody else to take out the bad guy's friends, then everybody dogpiles the Big Bad.

 

As to the 400/75 point total serving as a limiter -- it does.  A high AP power being brought down to a reasonable cost -- those things are called Limitations for a reason.  And often, the powers themselves might have "limitations" of their own.  (Using Margarita Man as an example, I'm sure a clever GM could find a way to use the fact that Mind Scan creates a two-way circuit as a jumping-off point to his own nefarious ends.)  Now, as other have pointed out, you can take things to a ridiculous level.  But then, so can the GM.

 

That said, I think setting reasonable limits is in everybody's best interests.  In most games (Hero as well as other RPGs), one uber-powerful player character in a group generally means the GM has to throw at least one uber-powerful foe into the mix to balance the combat.  And that can really suck for any non-uber-powerful PCs in the group.

[Echo3Niner]

That said, I think setting reasonable limits is in everybody's best interests.  In most games (Hero as well as other RPGs), one uber-powerful player character in a group generally means the GM has to throw at least one uber-powerful foe into the mix to balance the combat.  And that can really suck for any non-uber-powerful PCs in the group.

 

I have seen this too many times to count, and obviously not in HERO/Champions, since I only played it for one campaign back in the early '90's; but, in many other games.

 

As I generally play with a good group of players, who don't try to rape the rules too much; most are in their 30's to 40's (except one player and my daughter), and everyone has been playing RPG's for at least 10-15 years, and most for more than 20; they usually try to make their characters balanced within the party, and within the campaign.

 

Like my wife however, innocent accidents can happen in HERO/Champions (as I found out with this mental entangle) without limits, that cannot really happen in these other games.

 

So, I'm going to have to figure out a way to balance some limits/caps for character generation, while still allowing players freedom to make wildly divergent characters, still feeling like they end up with what they want, and not making all the characters be just alike (at least numerically).

 

Hopefully between the advice I have gotten here, and my experience with my play-test group, I'll find a good starting point; then we'll just have to be flexible once we start if anything is "broken"...

[Gary Miles]

Re: Margarita Man for 6th Edition...

 

Margarita Man

 

Nibblin' on sponge cake

Helping a thug make

The smartest decision he's made in some time

Yeah he'll get off scott free

But that doesn't bug me

'Cause the three he'll turn in are the worst kinds of slime.

 

Savin' the day again, I'm Margarita Man

Scanning for some good deed I can do

Some people claim the fact I'm here is a shame,

But I know, that they don't have a clue.

 

That mugger was stalking

A young woman walking

But now he's freaked out and his mind's come unglued

She's a real beauty

A Mexican cutie

She's had a close call, but she hasn't a clue.

 

Savin' the day again, I'm Margarita Man

Scanning for some good deed I can do

Some people claim the fact I'm here is a shame,

But I know, that they don't have a clue.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Some people claim that Jimmy Buffet's to blame,

But I know, it's the palindromedary's fault.

[Balabanto]

It really doesn't take very many dice of mental entangle to stop just about anyone, its sort of silly to get too carried away with the points.

 

The real problem is that Mental Entangle is not expensive enough. Period. This power used to cost more in earlier editions of the game, and in games where Mental Defense is a "Power" rather than something that you can build with a machine, it's overly broken. In a game where most people have normal EGO scores (10-15), Mental Entangle is a godly ability.

[Lucius]

Sometimes I do at-tack

Someone who can zap back

And that's why I practice defending my mind.

My psychic illusions

Will give them delusions

About who and where and just what they might find.

 

Dying Martian Scream: (Total: 260 Active Cost, 35 Real Cost) Mental Illusions 16d6, Area Of Effect (1m Surface; +1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Attack Versus Alternate Defense (Resistant Mental Defense; +1/2), Constant (+1/2), Cumulative (+1/2) (260 Active Points); Extra Time (1 Hour, Only to Activate, -1 1/2), Limited Power Creates illusion of an alien mind, on a far planet, dying from the contact with a psychically aware Human (-1), Concentration (0 DCV; Character is totally unaware of nearby events; -3/4), No Range (-1/2), Limited Power Mental Contact Only (-1/2), Mandatory Effect EGO +20 (-1/2), Stops Working If Mentalist Is Stunned (-1/2), Side Effects (Effects character (Margarita Man thinks he's dying, suffers damage as if hit by the Illusion); -1/2), Cannot Cause Harm (-1/4), Limited By Senses Mental Group ONLY is affected (-1/4), Conditional Power Power does not work in Uncommon Circumstances (Must have had a couple of margaritas before activating Damage Shield; -1/4) (Real Cost: 35)

 

Saving my ass again, I'm Margarita Man

But never mind, you won't remember my name.

Some people might say that I'm just paranoid, but hey

Guess how long I've been playing this game.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I'm palindromedary man

[massey]

In my experience, to get a good balance in the game, characters should meet these basic standards:

 

1) They have enough Defense + Con to take an average attack without being Stunned.  So if your average attack is 12D6 (42 Stun), 20 Def and 23 Con is about as fragile as you'd want to get.  Weaker than that and you're very vulnerable to being knocked out of the fight.

 

2) They have enough Defense + Stun to take 2-3 average attacks without being knocked unconscious.  So with your 12D6 (42 Stun) average, about 20 Def and 45 Stun or 25 Def and 40 Stun is about as low as you'd want to get.

 

3) You want to have some amount of resistant defense and/or special defenses (power defense, mental defense, flash defense) if those powers are going to come up with any regularity.  You do not have to have a lot of the special defenses, because those attacks are rare, but if you are going to be hit by them once a battle, or once every other battle, you should have something to ensure you are not neutered by them.  5 points of special defenses is usually enough to take the edge off.

 

4) Beware of powers that can take down an enemy in one shot.  Any type of unusual power combination (megascale teleport usable as an attack) can end up disrupting the game.  Continuous Uncontrolled NNDs and the like can be quite difficult to stop.  Anything that has more than a +1 advantage probably needs to be looked at closely -- it might be fine, it might be woefully ineffective, or it could be amazing.

 

5) Speed ranges should be within about 2 of one another.  If the campaign average is 6, then a guy with a 3 speed is going to be very bored during the game.  A guy with a 9 speed is going to make everyone else bored.

 

6) OCV/DCV more than 3 outside the average can be difficult to deal with.  If I have an OCV of 8, and the villain has a DCV of 12, it will be very difficult for me to hit him.  There are ways around this (spreading an attack, a brick throwing a car at him, etc), but it will require taking extra measures.  

 

--

 

That is not to say that these things are hard and fast rules.  You have have Superman with 125 Str and a 35 Dex team up with 45 Str 23 Dex Aquaman if you want.  If your players can make it work, that's great.  And some characters should be outside of the normal range.  An X-Men game where the players have to fight the Juggernaut (80 Str, 10 Dex, 50 Def, 50% reduction, 50 Con, 30 Rec, 100 Stun, +6 OCV w/ punch, 20" KB resistance) could make for a great experience.