From: kieran@cmatter.physics.indiana.edu (kieran)
Subject: Re: marvel vs. Champions
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 06:27:18 GMT

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.

    Well, that's true just enough to be misleading.  To paraphrase a great
quote "I can use the rules for Monopoly too, if I modify the sections on
combat".  One issue is how much fixing you have to do to get an enjoyable
game.

    Sure great players and GM's make a great game.  But great players
and GM's seem to express *reasoned* preferences for one game system over 
another.  A lot of people are giving reasons for their preference for 
Champs.

>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.

     Our definition of _LONG_ seems to differ, but I certainly agree that
the proper description does require some thought.  Let's assume that the
player is making up an armored character, who may or may not be exactly
Iron Man.  She must decide if the character can be separated from the armor.
If the character can, then she must decide how easy that is, and if other
people can use it, and how hard it is to replace.  These have important 
considerations for the game, and many players want to be able to specify
these things, or at least not be taken by surprise by a GM who has a very
different concept of how an armored character should work.

>  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.  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.  

      Ah well, here we have an essential difference in preference.  In
programming terms this is the difference between the point-and-click
mentality versus Unix gurus.  Champs is a lot like Unix: you have a 
series of basic powers (utilities) that you concatenate and modify
to obtain a desired result.  There is often more than one way to do
this, but that is not a fault of Unix or Champions.  To me the Hero
metasytem is *very* much like writing a shell script.  As in Unix, 
there are lots of pitfalls for the beginner, but the system is quite
powerful once you learn it.

    I'm not trying to insult anyone by referring to the point-and-click
approach.  My girlfriend just bought a Mac and loves it.  She can do
all the things she wants on it.  I can't get it to do the sorts of
things I want, so I don't like it.  But it is very friendly for newbies
and often gets the job done.  If it meets your needs, then use it!

    But many people want to be able to craft their own utilities.  
Champs is an "operating system" that allows you a similar flexibility 
for campaigns.  It's not for everyone, especially if "off the rack"
games meet your needs.   But it does give you a framework for an
enormous amount of creativity.  Tune into the Champ listserver sometime
to see the sort of games people are running.  That same flexibility
allows for poor character design and generalized confusion.

>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.  

    Yep.  It takes a while to learn the system.  I wrote an article about
this for `Haymaker!', a Champions APAzine.  Poor/incorrect descriptions of
powers can lead to problems.  I am not sure your example is one of the best, 
but I think most Champ players would agree that the system demands some
careful thought from the players and GM, especially during character
creation.  But that is the price of a flexible, coherent framework, IMO.

>The rules don't matter so much for experienced groups, so
>their experiences of good play are pretty much irrelevant to the specific
>system.  

    I don't agree here.  The rules are important for experienced players,
too.  By knowing them well you can craft the exact effect you want.

>The middle and beginning groups are the ones that need a good rule
>system, and Champions isn't it for them.  

    I think you underestimate people, but I understand your point.

>Virtually every other supers system
>out there doesn't confuse like Champs, because nobody else defined powers as
>abstract effects.  This is at the hub of Champions' problems.

    Ah, but this is precisely the point of its strengths.  I can craft
exactly the powers I want.  And, barring rule hacks, I have a good way
to compare all of these exotic powers.  AD&D gives you two hundred or so
spells.  DJ will have more.  But in Champs, there are millions (actually,
many more!) of effects you can create.  Sure, good players and a good GM
can decide that Ginsu's really sharp blade should cause more damage, in
any system you happen to be running.  But in Champs you have a reasonable 
set of rules (Armor piercing, penetrating, or additional stun multiples, 
for example) for quantifying it.  Not only that, but you can have a good 
estimate of how effective they are relative to other powers.

    One final point from the computer OS analogy:  long and hot are the
flame wars over the One True Operating System, the first of the Holy Wars
on Usenet.  The debate over Champs vs. Everything Else often resembles it.

                                 Kieran Mullen