Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: marvel vs. Champions
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 18:20:05 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Jeffrey Lawrence Bailey writes:
>I happen to know several ways to make powers that are campaign-destroying 
>and the GM has little recourse against "But the points work!".  

Heh. I would think that you are presenting a very flawed view of champs.
There are many 'crocks' and the referee has the right to deny them simply
because they are too powerful. Regardless if the PC can afford them. 
Regardless if the rules allow for them. Regardless if 'the points work.'

Why? Because, like in all other games (including MSH) the referee has the
right and responsibility to do so. Hero is like most other game: if the
referee sucks, don't expect the game to be any better.

>I was just pointing out that Champs has a much harder time simulating high-
>power action. 

No, you were pointing out that Hero takes a lot of points to go "galatic."
Why shouldn't it? After all, if it is so frightfully effective, shouldn't
it be frightfully expensive?

>4. Champs and flexibility?  I'm afraid you've got a contradiction in terms.
>   For example, Iron Man _clearly_ wears armor.  Yet Champs has no way of
>   expressing this as a focus to be removed, because even as an OIF a character
>   could take a non-combat action to remove the armor, clearly impossible given
>   the character.  

I don't understand what the blazes you are trying to say. Can you rephrase 
it? Iron man has armor, true. Now, what's the difficulty in removing it when
he's KO'd? 

>Marvel had to put an extra end on the chart for the Beyonder.  (Note
>that Champs never, _NEVER_ lets you make an enemy with power like this.)

Why not? You subscribe to the equal point theory, where you and I and 
the referee all get the same number of points to construct our forces,
then we mix it up. Sounds like Hero40K, more than Champions. 

As referee, I can make an enemy with power like that, and very easily.
I say it has it, and it happens. Now, whether or not it is wise and good
for the campaign is another matter.

And the reason we don't need an extra end on the chart for the Beyonder
is simple: Hero doesn't use charts. That is an immeasurable plus in my
book.

>The Mechanon bonus bothers me because it means that any hero or villain
>in inexpressible in regular Champs terms.  

I just look at it as experience, which incidentally is what Hero Games has
more than once explained it as. Mechanon has been around for a while, and
villians should keep pace with heroes for experience, shouldn't they? Just
because he's not a rookie, he shouldn't be constructed on the same points
as a rookie, eh?

>That's a point; I forgot to mention that Champs, like AD&D, has far too
>many tables, considering what the average roll is for.

Speed Chart, that's used, but that's at the fingertips of the players.

To-hit requires no tables as such, but there are various maneuvers (if
we take those out, then some people will say that each attack is like
any and every other.) 

Normal and Killing Damage requires again no tables until the target is
KO'd. If the referee is using the optional hit locations, the tables
are again at the player's fingertips. If using the optional damage rules,
use them (I'd recommend you not, they're not that great.)

Mental Powers, Presence attacks require one extra table. (Respective
for each attack.) 

What other tables are you talking about? I come up with one mandatory, so
it is on the character sheet, one if you KO someone, and a few optionals.

-- 
Got Mole problems?
Call Avogardo 6.02 x 10^23
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy