From: cassidy@cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: marvel vs. Champions
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:21:48 GMT
Reply-To: cassidy@cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Originator: cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu

In article <z=g-Kh_@engin.umich.edu> jlb@engin.umich.edu (Jeffrey Lawrence Bailey) writes:
>Please read the last part of my last post for my real evaluation of the
>situation -- to wit, experienced and cooperative players can play and work
>well with _ANY_ system.  These players can modify poor rules and make better
>calls to cover for poorly written rules.
>
>But has anybody noticed the amount of discussion necessary to define Iron Man's
>armor?  In virtually _every_ system but Champions, Iron Man's armor is quite
>a simple device, just something you carry that adds to attributes and gives
>flight, senses, and ranged attack.  In Champs, you have to debate for a _LONG_
>time what mechanics and what ads/disads relate to the game.  This is exactly
>the kind of problem that makes Champs not only a bad system for newbies, but
>a lesser system for middling players as well.  

	Yes, look how SIMPLE it is to make Iron Man's armor in Marvel
Super Heroes!!  You just cut the card out and you're there!  Gosh! what a
great system that can SO READILY define Ironman's armor!!  Geez, as a
beginner that means that I should wait until TSR has made all the powers
that I want to play, and put them on a little card, so that I can play
them.   Let TSR worry about the mechanics of individual powers.  ( And
this is the exact same "hands-off" attitude taken by TSR since Gygax
made AD&D: "don't you worry your little head about making monsters and
addittions to the system, our system is carefully crafted and you'd just
end up screwing up the game balance." ) 
	No, more seriously now ... 
	As someone else pointed out, designing Ironman's armor takes a
_LONG_ time because the comics change the exact definition of Ironman's
power with a plot device.  And discussion of the limits of his armor
would take a _LONG_ time, as it depends on what each person had SEEN
Ironman DO with his armor.  And that is my point is that in other games,
the definition SEEMS easy, because of their ready-made powers; you just
throw one on and GO.  But when it comes to the exact definition of what
the suit can do, there is MUCH discussion from all sides, saying "I saw
Ironman do such-and-such in this comic.", and " that was then, but
they've changed THAT since then."-- "say, which Ironman did you want to
play anyway?"  As long as someone stays within the mechanics laid down
in the "cut-out" rules there is no problem, but when the player wants something that is not specifically laid out in the rules, there will be a problem
if other people at the table have a significantly different view of
Ironman.  

	Therefore (quasi-philosophically) we never play Ironman exactly,
we only play the GM's/fellowPC's conception of Ironman, and if we are
lucky we can play the conception that WE want to play.  This is so, as I
can recall TOO many times when what I wanted to do was simple enough,
but it could become incredibly misunderstood by the GM and the fellow
players-- who at the worst times could all add their view and further
equivocate the conversation.  If you have NEVER had a problem of
interpetation pop up in a gaming session then you can ignore this point.
(Even if you argue that the ref had a "good enough" grasp of how you
wanted to do something, you would still be going on HIS conception of
Ironman.)

	What was being discussed in a _LONG_ fashion was how EACH POSTER
would represent Ironman's armor.  And I don't think that anybody really
suggested "that's how you'd better do it, buddy!"  So what is being
discussed is the same thing as before: what is the conception of the
power.  John Kim didn't think that Ironman's armor could be taken off
him.  He wasn't insisting that it could not.  And if Ironman's armor
cannot be taken off him, then John's representation is a good one.  As
it cannot be even an OIF, because an OIF must be able to be taken off in
a turn of non-combat.  And unless a player present had a better grasp of
Ironman's armor than John, then if John were the Gm his representation
should stand.  But in Champions it wouldn't matter anyway, the player
tells the GM his special effects, and the Gm decides whether it warrants
a advantage, either way the power is defined, by a combination of what
the player wants and what the best conception of Ironman is. 

	NOTICE TO ANYONE:  Hero has the capabilities of ANY OTHER game
in making on-the-fly rulings.  You don't have to lose that ability just
because characters are made with points!  There are such things as PLOT
DEVICES which can ( if the GM wants ) overrule point costs, and provide
flavor to the game.  The Hero people were making adventures with
Spaceships LONG before anyone devised point costs for them.  If it is
only a backdrop or a plot device, no points need be paid.  A GM can let
players buy a starship as FTL on a focus, if they like-- but when the
player starts talking about the gun that such technology can produce,
and would likely be present on such a ship, and how he would like to use
it to shoot at Mechanon. . .  THIS is where the point cost come into
play.  Also taking such a ship and turning some of the more volatile
components into a monster gun, would not necessarily involve points
either.  It might be done with a GOOD skill roll and a lot of time.  If
it were in Champions and the character started wanting to carry it
around all the time, then points ARE a factor.  Get it?

>Marvel retains the simplicity
>and freedom that lie in defining powers separately.  What further makes this
>kind of design bad is that the way you specify the power actually matters in
>how the power interacts with others.  Dr. Strange uses lots of powers, but
>they're all magic.  Yet Leech, a mutant with the ability to suppress mutant
>powers, has a good chance of Draining Dr. Strange as long as the powers have
>not been expressed _exactly_ right.  Now while this is _NOT_ a problem for
>experienced and good players, it is a problem for groups working up to this
>exalted status.  

	Ah, but it is a problem for systems that do not have such a
power in their list.  But, it is not a problem for a player that has
read all the rules involving drains.

[patently wrong stuff deleted]

>-- 
>Jeff Bailey, jlb@ccs.itd.umich.edu (Open 24 Hours a Day!)
>Standard disclaimer - If you wanted U/M's views, you came to the wrong place. 
>"The owner of the game deals and plays first." -- Nuclear War/Escalation
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy