Do you allow players to Respec?

[bigdamnhero]

PS: I really see large changes or irrational ones. What I tend to see more often is "I bought this did talent Deadly Blow, it sucks and is overpriced." So I tell them sure go ahead and redirect those points.

Ditto. I'd rather lose a smidge of continuity rather than forcing someone to keep playing with a build that sucks or penalize them because they didn't think of the ultimateoptimal build right out of the gate. It's about the game, not the stats.

[Surrealone]

Ditto. I'd rather lose a smidge of continuity rather than forcing someone to keep playing with a build that sucks or penalize them because they didn't think of the ultimateoptimal build right out of the gate. It's about the game, not the stats.

I think there's a vast world of difference between precluding someone from playing with a build that sucks or penalizing them because they didn't think of something ... and respec'ing every week just to recrunch the character between sessions.

 

Funny thing is our abilities is real life are equally dynamic. When I was in martial arts we would frequently see guys who were awesome and got busy for a few weeks lose a significant edge. The same for those who enjoy football or MMA.

 

In comics this is expressed as an issue to issue change.

And in role playing games this loss of edge is usually represented by the DM assessing penalties for distractions on characters suffering from appropriate distractions ... not by recrunching characters between each session.  It's also a lot less effort with no need for GM review of each person's character to do it that way, which is why it's probably the norm?

[Ndreare]

I think there's a vast world of difference between precluding someone from playing with a build that sucks or penalizing them because they didn't think of something ... and respec'ing every week just to recrunch the character between sessions.

 

 

And in role playing games this loss of edge is usually represented by the DM assessing penalties for distractions on characters suffering from appropriate distractions ... not by recrunching characters between each session.  It's also a lot less effort with no need for GM review of each person's character to do it that way, which is why it's probably the norm?

Eh, I guess experiences vary. Really what matters most to me is the players having fun and some players really enjoy those tweeks. If you as a GM don't, I won't say you are wrong. But we definitely don't have the same play styles and play concerns.

[Surrealone]

It just seems munchkin to me to tweak between sessions.  The implication is that there was a 'radiation accident' or some other in-game rationale for the tweaks (that aren't EXP expenditures) ... every session.  Or, worse, there's no in-game justification for it at all, which means it's more roll playing than role playing going on (hence my use of the term 'munchkin' ... no offense intended, but it's apropos to roll playing).

[bigdamnhero]

I think there's a vast world of difference between precluding someone from playing with a build that sucks or penalizing them because they didn't think of something ... and respec'ing every week just to recrunch the character between sessions.

I wasn't suggesting the latter. Heck, I only hand out XP after every 5-6 sessions because I don't want to have to updated my PC notes all the time.

 

It just seems munchkin to me to tweak between sessions.

Obviously I can't speak for massey, but I took "between sessions" to mean "we don't do it at the table" not "we rebuild our characters between every session."

 

OTOH as Ndreare sez some people just enjoy tinkering with character builds, so if that's what makes `em happy...

[Christopher R Taylor]

It just seems munchkin to me to tweak between sessions.

 

 

I think it definitely can be, I agree.  A GM has to keep an eye on that to make sure its not just characters building the perfect power for the adventure or constantly fixing characters to be more powerful.

[Ndreare]

We don't deal with much of that at our table because it gets eliminated by two universal rules at my house:

1: Wheaton's Law

2: All characters must be approved by your fellow players first.

[dsatow]

Actually I am trying something different with my current champions character in a game.  Instead of using all the points allotted, I created a very minimal character and held back 100 points for future purchases.  He's a brick and new to the idea of being a super hero.  After each game, I look at what he's been through and buy stuff related to his experience.  So far, he's gotten a job with the city of Oakland (buy off the poverty) and has been training with a more senior superhero, bought up the ego.  He's been doing repairs to the base (points in base).

 

I have to say, I like this concept of developing the character so far.  Because the base cost is the super is very minimal, I don't have to worry about not having enough to do something more grand.  And the growth feels very organic.

[massey]

It just seems munchkin to me to tweak between sessions.  The implication is that there was a 'radiation accident' or some other in-game rationale for the tweaks (that aren't EXP expenditures) ... every session.  Or, worse, there's no in-game justification for it at all, which means it's more roll playing than role playing going on (hence my use of the term 'munchkin' ... no offense intended, but it's apropos to roll playing).

 

People in the game world can't see your character sheet.  They don't know exactly how you're built.  Changing a power construct shouldn't require any sort of radiation accident as long as how the character would be viewed on the comic book page doesn't change.

 

Your guy can fly, has super-strength, a force field, and he can shoot ray blasts.  You're sitting there after a session and you are looking to see where you can spend your 3 points experience.  You realize that you can save about 10 points by moving some stuff around.  This thing goes into a multipower, that thing would work better if you built it a different way, whatever.  In the end, your character winds up more effective, but he still flies, has super-strength, a force field, and he can shoot ray blasts.  To a person in the game world, he looks the same.  How are they supposed to know that he now has 5 points of Power Defense or something?

 

As character builds get more complex, you often realize that there's a better way to build something than you initially realized. 

[bigdamnhero]

Actually I am trying something different with my current champions character in a game.  Instead of using all the points allotted, I created a very minimal character and held back 100 points for future purchases.  He's a brick and new to the idea of being a super hero.  After each game, I look at what he's been through and buy stuff related to his experience.  So far, he's gotten a job with the city of Oakland (buy off the poverty) and has been training with a more senior superhero, bought up the ego.  He's been doing repairs to the base (points in base).

I like it! We've never done anything this extreme, but it's common for my players to leave a few XP "in the bank" in case something comes up in game that makes sense. I'm lucky that my players aren't huge munchkins, so this is usually stuff like "Can we say so-and-so has been tutoring me in ___ for the last month?" and such rather than "I really need a specific AVAD  attack to defeat this guy - can I throw those banked XP at it?"

 

People in the game world can't see your character sheet.  They don't know exactly how you're built.  Changing a power construct shouldn't require any sort of radiation accident as long as how the character would be viewed on the comic book page doesn't change.

I agree it's generally fine as long as you don't have new/different powers appearing and disappearing week-to-week. (Tho even that wouldn't be inconsistent with many comics, especially in the Silver Age...)

 

One of the most common "re-specs" we have is characters will want a VPP but can't afford it initially; so they start out with an MP and gradually add slots as they get XP until they reach the point where it's cheaper to convert the whole thing over to a VPP.

 

And we generally only do rebuilds when I hand out XP, which is typically every 5-6 sessions or so. So it's not like the character sheets are changing every week.

[Spence]

It depends on exactly what and why. 

 

Rebuilding just to counter the new threat is not roleplaying.  So no.

Rebuilding because the power/ability build isn't doing what they thought it would do?  Absolutely.

Rebuilding because misunderstanding how the rules work?  Sure.

Tweaking to better align the build with the intended theme? Also a good reason.

 

I encourage building new PC's to round out the players "stable" of Hero's.