Trebuchet

I think Bruce Banner is a wimpy a scientist as Stargate SG-1's Daniel Jackson. In fact I could see Michael Shanks playing the role if they have any superheroes on The Agents of SHIELD TV Series.

Well, I always liked the character too, but I rather doubt Daniel Jackson would have a 20 STR or an 18 CON either. He's an ordinary man with a bit of training and a lot of smarts. A 20 STR is pro-football-player level STR. Does he really strike you as someone as strong as four ordinary men? That's about where I would have rated Teal'c.

I agree, Michael Shanks would be a great Bruce Banner if the character appears in SHIELD.

Bruce Banner

 

Val Char Cost

20 STR 10

18 DEX 24

20 CON 20

12 BODY 4

18 INT 8

11 EGO 2

15 PRE 5

18 COM 4

6 PD 2

4 ED 0

4 SPD 12

10 REC 4

50 END 5

32 STUN 0

Total Characteristics Cost: 100 Points

 

Cost Skills

3 Breakfall 13-

12 Combat Luck +6 rPD +6 rED

3 Computer Programming 13-

4 Martial Block

4 Martial Dodge

4 Martial Strike

3 Martial Throw

1 Navigation [Air] 8-

5 Offensive Strike

3 Paramedic 13-

3 Power [iNT] 13-

2 SS: Medicine 11-

3 SS[iNT]: Nuclear Physics 13-

Total Skills Cost: 50 Points

 

Cost Powers

5 ES: RPT, OAF: Avengers ID Card (-1)

5 Flight 2", Megascale 1km (+1/4), No END (+1/2), Use Simultaneously 4x Mass (+1), OIF[bulky]: Avengers Quinjet

50 Multiform: 250 Points [Hulk]

40 VPP 30 Points, OIF (-1/2)

Total Powers Cost: 100 Points

 

Total Cost: 250 Points

 

150+ Disadvantages

5 Accidental Change: When Attacked (Uncommon) 8-

5 DNPC: Betty Ross [Red She Hulk] (Slightly Less Powerful) 8-

10 Hunted: SHIELD (More Powerful/NCI/Watch) 8-

10 Hunted: Thunderbolt Ross [Red Hulk] (As Powerful) 8-

20 Normal Characteristics Maxima

10 PsyL: Loves Betty Ross (Uncommon/Strong)

20 PsyL: Protective Of Innocents (Very Common/Strong)

10 PsyL: Scientific Curiosity (Uncommon/Strong)

10 SocL: Secret Identity [bruce Banner] (Occasionally/Major)

Total Disadvantages Cost: 250 Points

This looks pretty good overall, although I do question Bruce Banner having a 20 STR and an 18 CON. He's practically the very definition of a wimpy scientist; even if we accept that he worked out a bit in his later years a 10 or 15 STR and CON seems more probable. JMO, and again, the overall build looks good, Cassie.

Those guys were nasty. I think the team brick Durak was the slowest one and he had a dexterity of 23 and speed of 5.

Our team MidGuard fought them 10 years ago next month and it was a brutal fight. At one point in the battle every member of our team was either Stunned or unconscious, but we managed to turn it around a few Phases later and most of them are still in prison.

Durak was too tough to just KO since our own brick was absent, so we ended up mentally paralyzing him instead after we'd taken down Mentalla. Scorpia OTOH was pretty much a joke.

I suppose a Hound of Tindalos joke at this point is out of the question.

It would have been less expensive in the long run to, instead of paying for all the lighting, just get rid of all the corners.

This does bring up an interesting situation. What if you have a group of Superheroes who have a minimum force standard, and a new superhero doesn't play by the same rules? Do the other heroes try to get him to change his ways? What if they continue?

 

Who would you rather be, Superman or Jack Bauer?

Under the right circumstances, Jack Bauer could accomplish things Superman could not.

Massey makes my point (I loved you in Desperate Journey, by the way). For him average damage is 12d6, but for me most 250 Point superheroes would be between 8-10d6. Characters like Superman and the Hulk would be on the 12d6 level. while Batman would have 6-8d6. It's all a matter of putting the characters on a level playing field and simulate powers that the characters have without going overboard. DC Comics never did have any self restraint during the Silver Age, giving it's characters a never ending arsenal of powers and skills at the drop of a hat while Marvel began it's continuity. We each build the campaign we like.

 

To quote Emma Peel "It's only a game."

The problem with your 12d6 assessment for Superman's damage is that it is flatly contradicted by things we often see him doing with his strength (and I'm not even including the planet-moving Silver Age abomination), such as lifting battleships. That would put him in the 100+ STR range right there.

Batman doing 8d6 or so with his martial arts seems reasonable; when he's fighting alongside the Justice League he seems to utilize weapons such as explosive batarangs or electrified brass knuckles, which might put him into the 11-12d6 range.

As you correctly point out, Marvel manages the disparate power levels in teams like the Avengers or X-Men much better than DC does. The power difference between Hawkeye and Thor is handled much more reasonably than the difference between Green Arrow and Superman, who usually seems more like an Earth-bound god or plot device than a playable character. I'm not certain the Justice League is playable as a group; but the Avengers? Absolutely.

Broad damage spreads can work in Champions; it just takes the right group and GM's who will tailor scenarios so the low-damage characters can shine too. It's not something the rules alone can address; it takes cooperation between the GM(s) and players. As I've stated previously, we have a 9d6 to 17d6 spread in our MidGuard campaign and everybody has a great time. Far from being unhappy that one PC does 17d6 while the next best does only 14d6 and most do 12-13d6, the other players continue to encourage the high-damage character's player to let his PC get even stronger and tougher. Our players self-limit because they have their own concepts of how powerful their characters should be and build accordingly.

Since I play the 9d6 character, if anyone has any reason to complain it would be me. But I'm perfectly happy, thrilled even, with the way things are. My favorite comic characters are Captain America and Batman, and my Champions PC Sil'f is in many ways an homage to both of them, particularly Captain America. Making her too tough, or do too much damage, would damage her core concept.

Thanks for this. Worth noting.

 

As for stats on the STR I am thinking that if the base is 10 for STR then STR should be something like 25, 40, 55 or 70. Don't wamt to go overboard on this.

DEX again I would fix at 23 and Spd as 5 unless anyone can come up with a good reason why.

I would say INT can either be 10 if the person in the armour did not make it or perhaps 23 if they did make it. This leads to Inventor skill or somesuch plus other skills like mechanical or other engineering.

EGO would be again dependent on whether the person who is in the armour made it. I would say if INT is 10 then EGO is 10. Otherwise it should be higher.

CON would be linked to STR. The higher the STR the higher the CON. I would say a minimum of 20 but probably in the range 23-28.

PD and ED would be low and dependent on the armour itself.

I am in favour of some Mental Def or Power Def the more powerful the armour is and certainly if INT and EGO are 10 then it should have some protection.

Thoughts please.

Like Greywind seems to, I've always preferred the "normal man in a suit" approach to building powered armor characters, which means I prefer to leave DEX, CON, and SPD the same both in and out of the armor and just increase defenses in the armor; and both the "powered armor" players in my MidGuard campaign concur. We feel it makes the man wearing the suit a better character. To improve combat ability a "combat computer" can be included to add Combat Skill Levels; similarly Damage Reduction (or perhaps Damage Negation in 6E) can be substituted for increased CON. (Why would armor increase the ability to resist being Stunned from mental or NND attacks?) Power Defense seems a natural, Mental Defense seems justifiable as well.

I also much prefer the "I'm the genius designer/builder" approach to the "I'm wearing a suit some smart guy built." In Champions I like highly intelligent characters (I don't think I've ever played one with an INT of less than 18. My powered armor character, Ranger, had an INT of 28, but he was supposed to be a Tony Stark-level genius); although given the definition of INT in Hero an 18 is quite adequate. INT 23 or higher is just gravy.

Flight seems almost de rigueur, and perhaps some life Support and Enhanced Senses.

Just my $0.02 worth. I've always loved powered armor characters, although I haven't played one since before 4th Edition was released.

Just to lighten things up a bit in this thread, I thought I'd post this video titled 'What if Superman Punched You?"

I have never liked the Stun Lottery. Sadly, I have also never seen an adequate replacement for the idea. It would take a complete rebuild of the idea of Killing Attacks. I always thought making Killing Attacks an Advantage instead of a distinct Power might be plausible, but that would require an almost complete redesign of the entire damage system in Hero. Probably not worth the effort.

Blowing out a star isn't an in-game effect. Freezing Lake Superior, travelling through time and pushing planets are all quite legitimate things for a character to buy.

 

I've been investigating planet pushing since watching a 60s era Filmation short yesterday. It definitely is a point sponge, but not quite as bad as it seems.

 

Time travel is straightforward EDM.

 

Freezing Lake Superior is a mega-scale Change Environment.

 

The last two are nothing special, as long as you impose Silver Age restrictions on Time Travel (no tactical use, and limited ability to change the past).

Yes, but I didn't imply these are not buildable, only that trying to make such a character workable within the context of a campaign may be highly problematical. Champions is not played in a vaccuum; characters have to interact with NPC's and usually with other PC's. Some poor GM also has to come up with scenarios that can plausibly challenge such a character. I think it might be doable as a one-on-one with a single player and GM; or as a "one shot" with a short campaign duration, but I don't generally consider those as a template for a top-notch campaign. I tend to rate success as leading to long-running campaigns; the campaign where I started playing Champions in 1982 is still running and my own MidGuard campaign is about to enter its 21st year. YMMV.

I'm considering upgrading my Supergirl build to include the first one, plus some other stuff. It would take her to 450 points. If I squeezed it into 350, she wouldn't be able to afford all the other neat stuff I want to add. In fact, I could add all three in a 450 point version.

 

My idea for planet pushing is probably a bit over the top though. Basically, I buy an extra 140 points worth of Strength, without bothering to buy enough END to use it regularly. It ends up "use strength, recover, use strength, recover..." That and her issue with killing would keep her under control, despite being able to throw a 40 dice punch.

 

She would be able to push the Earth, according to the suggestions in the Ultimate Brick.

This all pretty much supports my assertion that a Silver Age Superman isn't buildable on 250 points. I still question whether he would be playable within the context of a campaign, but that's really a separate issue.

BTW, I like your Supergirl builds for the most part, but then even in the comics she's never been as over-the-top as Silver Age Superman. I will point out that 40d6 is still not enough damage to completely destroy an M1A1 Abrams tank in one hit as built in 5ER. Anyone really doubt that Kara should be able to total a tank in one blow?

Tre's statement that Superman is not a playable character brings up an interesting point. It reminds me of Supergirl's last appearance on Smallville where Jor-El's voice told her that Clark had to face Darkseid alone.

 

Who made up that rule?

You can pull it off in a TV show or comic because there are no other players to piss off, but in a point-based game? Either Silver Age Superman is so powerful he makes the other PCs totally superfluous, or Superman is so badly downgraded power-wise he is no longer recognizable as the iconic character. There is no middle ground.

Normals shouldn't have access to attacks above a certain level. Most thugs are just normal characters with maybe a couple of HA and a RKA that does at most 2d6 damage, or an automatic weapon that does 1d6 with five shots. Maybe Superman gets hit by a rocket launcher but that's going to be EB 8d6, so Supes feels it but it doesn't stop him if he's hit.

 

That's one of the problems I have with point inflation, you have ordinary criminals built on 250 points so your superheroes have to be built on a 1000 points.

IIRC a hand-held anti-tank M72 LAW rocket in 5ER is 6.5d6K AP EX, which works out to over 19.5 Damage Classes. That seems like a weapon (or equivalent) that Superman's opponents - be they thugs or supervillains - could quite easily have access to. But Superman in the comics would completely ignore such an attack assuming he was resisting Knockback, but he would take zero Stun or Body. Sure, with your 25 rPD he can ignore a 1d6 RKA as long as the opponent doesn't roll two 6's (one for damage, one for Stun Multiplier).

I don't recall ever seeing "ordinary criminals built on 250 points" but think most mooks would reasonably be 25-50 points, and are very typically armed with weapons bought as equipment; i.e., free. So they can easily have M16's, hand grenades, and other minor military-grade small arms. These are a serious threat to Batman, who faces such attacks quite frequently. Do you intend your "Superman" to be dealing with nothing more threatening than switchblade-wielding gang members? I see this from the exact opposite perspective: You've made your iconic superheroes so puny you've had to rebuild your world out of paper mache, styrofoam, and cardboard. I want superheroes to be super. You don't have to spend 500 or 1000 points to do that; 250 or 350 does just fine. You just won't get major iconic characters like Silver Age Superman or Green Lantern with those point levels, but you can still get someone who is truly super. Golden Age Superman, or early Batman, Spider-Man, Flash, or Fantastic Four all are buildable with 250-350 points.

BTW, in our long-running 4-Color MidGuard campaign it is an explicit requirement that military-grade weapons be a threat to the PC's. Sure, our brick can pretty much ignore assault rifles and other such small arms, but bombs, artillery, and antitank missiles are a whole 'nother story. And as a rule we use the military hardware straight out of Hero (Dark Champions in particular). We also make it a point, about once a year, to throw "normals" (usually agents or soldiers; occasionally exotic animals like velociraptors) at our team just to remind them of how truly powerful the heroes are by comparison. Everyone always has a blast in those scenarios.

couldn't you have saved yourself a lot of posts by just saying you don't feel superman is a playable character?

Yes, but I don't feel that Superman isn't a playable character. I have real qualms about Silver Age Superman as a viable Champions character, but Golden Age seems perfectly playable. All I ask is that he be built on a realistic number of points; without absurd pretezeling of the build to hit an unrealistically low point total. Silver Age Superman is incredibly (I would say ludicrously) powerful; his cost should be correspondingly incredible.

I know literally dozens of Superman versions have been built and shown here, but I do wonder how many of those were ever actually played in a campaign?

It's possible to do a Superman Multiform. I think it gets a little tricky but shouldn't be too hard.

 

The problem is by talking about a "Silver Age" Superman you're talking about a 25+ year period of time, when Supes could do just about anything. I like a lot of the silly stuff that they had him do. Get into a fight with a wizard and get changed into a monkey? Sure! I like that a lot more than Iron Age comics where I hate all the characters.

 

The thing about the Silver Age is that Superman actually jumped up and down the power scale a lot, probably due to writers not paying attention or not caring. I've seen him shrug off nuclear weapons without getting his hair messed up and then turn around and get amnesia when he was hit by a lightning bolt. Rather than pull your hair out trying to get some rationalization for those differences, you could explain it away with a Multiform. Multiform in the sense that he's not actually changing into something else, but that his powers fluctuate apparently based on whatever he's paying attention to at the moment. I have previously posted a 250 point Superman in some older threads that made heavy use of multipower. Right now I'm getting a chance to play him in a 350 point 5th ed game and he fits the bill perfectly, and he's basically 100 points cheaper than everybody else but still gives the Superman feel.

 

​If I were to build Superman with a Multiform, I'd give him certain baseline stats in all his forms. I'd give him at least a 30 Str to represent him when he's not paying a damn bit of attention or actively trying to use any super powers. That still lets him pick up a small car without thinking about it when he drops his keys the same way we would tilt back the couch. This is "bumbling Daily Planet reporter" Superman. In this writeup he'd have his super-ventriloquism and super-hypnotism, superspeed typing, all of his reporter skills, and most of his super powers would have the Invisible Power Effects advantage (using heat vision at a low enough level that people can't see it, etc). He also has super-senses that are good enough to warn him if Metropolis is under attack, etc. He has to be durable enough to survive hits from super-grade attacks, but you don't really have to give him the full invulnerability package here. The Silver Age genre protects him to a certain degree (at most he's going to have to surreptitiously stop street crime, he's not going to get into a full fledged super fight in this mode). At most he'll get knocked back through a wall or something and can then change into a different form.

 

You would have your general "combat" Superman who has high stats and is designed for fights. This guy doesn't need all the Clark Kent skills, the super-hypnotism, most of the enhanced senses, or any of the out-of-combat tricks. He isn't going to be flying around the world to turn back time or pushing a planet.

 

Then you've got out-of-combat Superman. This IS the guy who can fly through time and push planets, repair bridges at superspeed and freeze Lake Superior with his super breath. He isn't gonna need much in the way of Dex or Speed, and probably not defense either. A 10 Dex, 3 Speed, 20 PD/ED character wouldn't be out of the question. He's not paying attention to that sort of thing at the moment.

 

You could have invulnerable Superman. He goes to this when he knows the villain is about to unleash his biggest attack, or when he's going to get hit by a nuclear bomb, or something where he's really got to show how tough he is. When he does this, he probably goes from 30 PD/ED (or so, depending on your campaign) to 100 PD/ED with Damage Reduction. This explains why he can generally soak hits from mega-villains without breaking a sweat, but on occasion some loser with a 12D6 energy blast can shoot him and actually cause damage. The exact execution of this is left to the player who builds it. Generally Superman should be able to switch between forms flawlessly, with no visual difference between the characters. If built right, there should not be many instances where an observer (not knowing the details of Superman's character sheet) says "that's weird, Superman suddenly seemed to fly a lot slower".

Why not just do it all with a really big Multipower? Have a decent "baseline" Superman, then have a huge MP with extra SPD, defenses, movement, attacks, etc., to ramp any of those up as needed.

The Silver Age Superman had a number of powers

 

Invulnerability - This has two components. One is the ability to take damage without harm. A 20 rPD would make Superman bulletproof, for example. The other is Life Support in order to survive in High Radiation, High Pressure/Vacuum, Intense Cold/Heat.

Here I disagree only on scale. Superman is not only not harmed by bullets and shells, he doesn't even notice them - i.e.; he doesn't even take Stun. He's walked through military-style combat with dozens of bullets and even anti-tank missiles hitting him repeatedly with no more notice or concern than you or I would show if it was drizzling. This suggests, within the Hero System, that he needs a Resistant PD in the low 100's. (I'd probably go with about 150 rPD.) Oh, and I'd Harden it at least twice. A Hardened x2 rPD of 100 with 75% Damage Reduction would also work.

Obscene? Absolutely. But then Superman isn't about playability as a PC. Superman's true role is as a shining example of what being a hero is all about: Doing what is right. Superman isn't a great hero because he has powers above and beyond those of mortal men; he's a hero because he does the morally right thing, not the easy thing.

After Batman retired Joker went for Supes. Ended up killing most of the Planet staff, including Lois.

Really? And so Lois Lane and most of the Daily Planet staff are dead in all Superman comics?

Oh, that's right, it was only in the Elseworld series, set on an alternate Earth with the Justice Society on Earth-22. Hardly convincing evidence that the Joker routinely goes after powered superheroes...

A Focus is a disadvantage, which has two parts.

 

One, it can be taken away from the character.

 

Two, there are times, especially in a secret identity, it won't be available.

Even better (from the GM's viewpoint, a Focus can make maintaining that Secret ID more difficult. Using focused powered armor, for example, can create situations where the PC simply has to keep his Focus unavailable for quick access because having Armor Man's armor standing in the corner at the high society function would threaten to reveal his Secret ID. Better yet, the security team at a protected location might well prohibit our hero from lugging in the large crate where he has concealed his armor. "I'm sorry, sir, but the policy is no packages are allowed. You'll have to leave that outside. We'll give you a claim ticket after we scan it for explosives or radioactives."

It's the gift that just keeps giving!

Just a thought: I know you're using Kryptonite primarily as a Limitation to shave points, but wouldn't it actually make more sense within a campaign to simply define Kryptonite as an attack that only effects Superman? Perhaps a STR Drain combined with a Suppress of whatever Framework he uses to build his Kryptonian powers? Then it becomes a major Power for his opponents to acquire rather than a -1/4 Limitation which gives it too much value since Superman often goes literally years without encountering Kryptonite; whereas to give it the proper frequency in Hero he'd have to encounter it every 5th or 6th game session.

So most of Superman's powers would have both a Doesn't Work in Red Solar Radiation (-1/4) and Doesn't Work in Green Kryptonite Radiation (-1/4)?

 

That's good for a fictional character, but as a character in a RPG it basically gives Lex Luthor and off switch, and only his cruelty allows Superman to live and get a chance at escaping.

The Green Kryptonite could be permitted as long as he still has the chance to use normal human strength, skills, and his wits to escape Luthor's latest death trap. Even for Lex Luthor getting hold of Kryptonite can't be a simple exercise, as is shown by the fact it doesn't show up in every Luthor scheme.

Nope' date=' because if you have a 1000 Point Batman you'll end up with a 1000 Point Joker , and then the latter isn't a human being anymore but some kind of supernatural killing machine.[/quote']

 

Why? Do you think Batman has to also be a killing machine to deal with the Joker? Most of Batman's points go towards more Contacts, Perks, Skills, a base, numerous vehicles, and spiffy gadgets. I doubt the amount of damage he inflicts, or can take for that matter, has changed significantly since his inception. Batman isn't about being a combat monster.

 

The Joker is a great example of a 250-350 point villain. He's dangerous because he's homicidal, insane, treacherous, cunning, and has (for some strange reason given his propensity to murder them) lackeys. He's never been a match for Batman one-on-one, which is why he uses intricate plots and (even better!) hostages. You'll notice that he doesn't go after the likes of Superman, Wonder Woman, or the Martian Manhunter, but after the "normal human being" Batman.

 

Re: Campaign Damage Caps, Code vs. Killing & Pulling a Punch

 

I know the purpose of rigid rule-of-X caps is to make a GM's job of creating challenging conflict easier but an unintended effect of such caps is to create a certain 'vanilla' combat centric power curve across all characters. This tends to take the away some of the 'super' out of superheroes IMO.

 

Anyway, I am hoping to get more folks to chime in with their thoughts on the subject.

So when we converted the campaign to 5E, we decided to drop the caps and see what happened, and Lo and Behold! The Damage Classes spread from 10 to 14, and several characters lowered defenses proportionately as well. Martial Artists started relying on their higher SPD and DEX and hitting more often, whereas the Bricks were slower but could both dish it out and take it. Right now the spread in our group is 9d6 to 17d6. Obviously this won't work with many groups because powergamers are very far from rare, but if you have the right group it can really resonate. Everyone in our group has a chance to shine, because the powers and abilities are very different. No more vanilla!

An often overlooked negative to caps is that once a character hits a cap, even on what he considers his primary schtick, he still has many points to blow (For example a Brick, limited to 60 STR, still has several hundred points remaining), so the obvious way to spend them is to pump up something else until he hits the next cap, then move on to a third, and so on. This eliminates a lot of the "economic" aspects of the point system because if he can't buy what he wants then he'll buy the next-best thing, which often ends up being DEX or some other Characteristic or Power that might not truly fit the concept.

I think, if a GM decides caps are truly necessary, then "soft" caps are the way to go: Let characters exceed the set caps, but all points above the cap cost double (or possibly more) just like exceeding Human Characteristic Maxima. That means in a game with a 60 Active Point cap that if BlockMan really wants that 75 STR it costs him 90 points, not 65. It'll make him standout from his teammate StrongGuy's capped 60 STR, but at a significant cost.

Re: Campaign Damage Caps, Code vs. Killing & Pulling a Punch

 

I think at one time I experimented with tying damage cap to SPD so that higher-SPD characters would have about the same number of dice of attack in a turn as a lower-speed one. That worked reasonably well, but handicapped the team speedster.

 

ETA: ISTR the rule was (20-SPD) x 5 = Maximum effective points in an attack (disregarding haymakers, martial maneuvers, etc.)

We used SPD + Damage Classes <= 20 as a general guideline in our campaign for almost 2 decades and it worked quite well. Haymaker, Pushing, Move Through/By, Levels adding to damage, etc., were ignored for purposes of the formula as they came with inherent penalties; Martial Maneuvers were not. The SPD 4 brick did 16d6, the SPD 9 MA did 10d6, and characters in between those extremes fit in well. Most characters were 18 or 19 on that scale.

We've exceeded that number in the past couple years. I think two or maybe three characters have hit 21 or better; the same brick is now SPD 5 and does 17d6, but it's still the general guideline and still good enough to be effective. Our Mentalist theoretically exceeds that with a 95 Point VPP and a SPD 6, but his innate defenses are so low that he almost inevitably has between a third and half of his VPP used to generate a Force Field, giving him much less offensive oomph than appears on paper. To add to that, he is often using a portion of the VPP Mind Linking our team during a fight and/or giving some of them Mental Defense.

We're not a group of powergamers, so improvements to attack powersets have tended to broaden them with Advantages and/or more unusual attacks rather than simply increasing the base damage.

Can I see your Batman and Superman 350' date=' Tre?[/quote']

 

Um, no. The whole point of my comments in this thread is that it is ludicrous to try to shoehorn major characters like Batman or Superman into starting character levels; it distorts them so badly they cannot remain true to their concept, especially with the absurdly complicated builds it takes to get into those low point totals. Most iconic characters would be fairly simple, albeit expensive, builds. Trying to build iconic characters of post-origin points in their careers with 250 or even 350 points is at best an exercise in futility.

 

I might tackle designing an early-career Batman (Like in the comic "Batman: Year One" or possibly the film "Batman Begins") for 350 points, although I suspect I'd be unhappy with it. But Superman? No way. I wouldn't consider a post-1945 Superman build for any less than 750 points; and I think 1000+ points is quite plausible.

 

I'd always prefer, in a Champions campaign, to build original characters. Of course, there would be nothing wrong with them being inspired by, or being homages to, iconic characters.

 

And on that note, I think I've had my say on this topic. We're clearly not going to reach a meeting of the minds here.

How helpless should Kryptonite make Superman? I mean would he have to rely on Valerie Perrine to save him from the Swimming Pool death trap?

The range of effects in the source materials is pretty broad, so I think it's probably better to determine Kryptonite as being more of a Plot Device and build it as a fairly powerful Susceptibility rather than assigning a concrete effect to it. Additional effects can be built into the scenario on a case by case basis.

I think the more points' date=' the more trouble the Player will have dealing with all the powers and disadvantages, Tre. [/quote']

 

What could would possibly be "more trouble" for a player than running a Rube-Goldberged "Superman" built with a Cosmic VPP and Multiform, as you presented in your recent thread on building a 250 point Silver Age Superman?

 

I would suggest that players are far more likely to successfully play characters with reasonably straight-forward builds than they would be to play iconic characters built by being pretzeled into absurdly complicated builds purely to hit an arbitrary point total.

 

You want to run original character 250-point Champions games, that's cool. There is certainly something to be said for simplicity, especially for beginning players. But you're selling both yourself and your players short by pretending that Batman and Superman would be reasonable matches in combat. The problem with doing so is that, Batman and Superman being practically the definition of iconic, the player of neither character is going to be happy with the build. The Superman player will easily grasp his character is far too wimpy; and the Batman player will feel cheated because he's going to know that if he wins it was only against an absurdly crippled opponent.

 

And seriously? Pepper Potts as 200 points!? Just how fast is her shorthand?