How are Superhero games different?

[fireinthedust]

TwoWolves: yes. Exactly. If you use dice you run into the same issues over and over again when designing a system: resolution using Dice has necessary consequences that in some way repeat themselves over and over in most if not all systems.

I'm finding myself at a point where, whatever I write, I'm seeing patterns similar to every single game I've ever played somewhere. How do I avoid doing what other companies are already doing if, on some level, all of them do it already?

Like, look at the turn system: Standard, Move, and maybe Minor actions as well. It's just something that happens: you can attack, and likely move, too; or you can full attack or something. There's initiative sorting of some sort.

Basically, I feel like no matter what I do I'm liable to get dinged somewhere by someone for something everyone does; for something that needs to be done by everyone simply because RPGs are RPGs.

 

[BenBrown]

TwoWolves: yes. Exactly. If you use dice you run into the same issues over and over again when designing a system: resolution using Dice has necessary consequences that in some way repeat themselves over and over in most if not all systems.

I'm finding myself at a point where, whatever I write, I'm seeing patterns similar to every single game I've ever played somewhere. How do I avoid doing what other companies are already doing if, on some level, all of them do it already?

Like, look at the turn system: Standard, Move, and maybe Minor actions as well. It's just something that happens: you can attack, and likely move, too; or you can full attack or something. There's initiative sorting of some sort.

Basically, I feel like no matter what I do I'm liable to get dinged somewhere by someone for something everyone does; for something that needs to be done by everyone simply because RPGs are RPGs.

Novelty for novelty's sake is over-rated. There are some people who, upon seeing a new game, will instinctively look to see if the mechanics are familiar. Some of those, upon seeing a familiar mechanic, will claim the writer of the mechanic is stealing from somewhere else.

The proper response to this is not to abandon the mechanic because it is similar (or even identical) to another, but rather to continue to use the mechanic because it is appropriate.

One can not copyright mechanics. If the mechanic is appropriate for what you are trying to do, by all means, use it. The people who will ding you for using things that are similar to existing mechanics are not, in my experience, game designers.

 

[BenBrown]

Just as an aside, what is different in Superhero games isn't the mechanics, but rather the scope. In doing comic book superheroes, you need to include a ridiculous variety of characters at scales ranging from ordinary people to trans-cosmic Powers That Be.

A friend of mine had several tests that he used to put superhero RPGs through. They included the "Green Lantern Test", in which you attempt to create a character whose powers are more-or-less only limited by his (or his player's) imagination. The game must be flexible enough to allow this.

There's also the "Robin Test". Including Batman and Superman in a general superhero RPG is par for the course. The trick is to include both of them, plus their supporting cast. The numbers have to be fine-grained enough to be able to distinguish Robin from Jimmy Olsen mechanically, and not have Superman's numbers be impossible to do math with quickly.

I can't remember if there were any others.


I really wouldn't worry too much about the core mechanics. It's in the details where you distinguish yourself. After all, both the Hero System (Champions) and GURPS use 3d6 roll-under as their core mechanic, and both have rules for doing superheroes, but the characters look significantly different.

 

[Walking Dad]

... or you can full attack or something. ...

Full attacks aren't that common outside of d20 and many variants also got rid of them (Fantasycraft and for a superhero example, Mutants & Masterminds).

Most points of this thread are also applicable to point buy systems in general.

 

[fireinthedust]

Full attacks aren't that common outside of d20 and many variants also got rid of them (Fantasycraft and for a superhero example, Mutants & Masterminds).

Most points of this thread are also applicable to point buy systems in general.

How so? Other than that everything's point-buy? (no challenge, I'm just hoping for more insight)
Then again, I can't think of a lot of patterns of point buy for something like Mutants & Masterminds that wouldn't end up with solutions like Linked Powers, Extras, and Arrays.

And what are the general action patterns of most games? (I'm going to swish through my limited non-d20 library right now)

I mean, for D&D you expect a lot of combat, so you need to do more than just attack every round, and just moving feels like a wasted turn. And you don't want to cheat someone who's focusing extra effort on their actions.

For other games I can see the basic need of "what do you do this turn?" and just have people pick something.

 

[fireinthedust]

Just as an aside, what is different in Superhero games isn't the mechanics, but rather the scope. In doing comic book superheroes, you need to include a ridiculous variety of characters at scales ranging from ordinary people to trans-cosmic Powers That Be.

A friend of mine had several tests that he used to put superhero RPGs through. They included the "Green Lantern Test", in which you attempt to create a character whose powers are more-or-less only limited by his (or his player's) imagination. The game must be flexible enough to allow this.

There's also the "Robin Test". Including Batman and Superman in a general superhero RPG is par for the course. The trick is to include both of them, plus their supporting cast. The numbers have to be fine-grained enough to be able to distinguish Robin from Jimmy Olsen mechanically, and not have Superman's numbers be impossible to do math with quickly.

I can't remember if there were any others.

Figure some out and I'll see what I can pull off. This sort of thing helps with M&M: throw darts at a board full of comics characters and see if you can design them with the rules.

Superman
Batman
Robin
Jimmy Olsen
Green Lantern
Thor
Lex Luthor
Captain America
Hawkeye
Doctor Doom
Metamorpho...


Another issue for games in general, I find, is whether a rule puts someone's potential inside or outside "the box". If I give someone three options, they'll pick from those three. If I give them a conundrum, they'll come up with something.

Granted, lots of folks go for the direct approach when they're uncertain of the scope of the threat or don't understand it, so it often pays to be aware of their general attack patterns. I don't see modern groups capturing the bad guys and turning them over to police, for instance, even when I run a four-colour game! Lex Luthor would not survive a group of gamer heroes if they knew he was in Lex Corp Tower, for example. Latveria would be nuked from orbit, and J. Jonah Jameson would... well, maybe he'd be okay. Fine. But the rest would need to keep the players guessing for sure.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm looking over my copies of Champions (1989 or so) and Mutants and Masterminds (all three editions). I've seen other games, but only vaguely recall them.

I'm wondering: do all superhero game systems necessarily follow the same structure for rules?

No. Because they don't need to. It's just a common pattern.

ability scores

Not needed. In most cases for a mid-high end supers game you can fold Ability Scores under Powers - Batman's intelligence is treated as a power. Ability scores are only really needed when people are close to matched and in Supers the differences are qualitative more than quantitative.

powers (includes skills, feats, powers, equipment)

Yes. Always. You can't be a Super without powers.

complications/flaws

Not needed and tend to show up as a consequence of Point Buy.

use of power points or build points to buy abilities

Marvel Super Heroes IIRC had a "just stat them" approach. And one of the most powerful characters was Longshot - d100 resolution mechanic and his luck allowed him to take the dice in either order. How do you cost that?

For example, most resolution systems work like this: die-roll vs. target number (DC, # of successes on a d10, whatever), beat that number and you succeed. No matter how far removed we are from a game, I've yet to come across a system that isn't a re-hash of this basic principle.

Dread. You start with a Jenga tower. Succeed at your pulls, knock the tower down and you die.

So they aren't always that simmilar. But it's a good standard pattern you've noticed. And the devil, as they say, is in the details. You might as well call all 1950s board games "Roll dice to move round a board. Some squares are good some bad" and argue that Monopoly and Snakes and Ladders are the same.

 

[Neonchameleon]

TwoWolves: yes. Exactly. If you use dice you run into the same issues over and over again when designing a system: resolution using Dice has necessary consequences that in some way repeat themselves over and over in most if not all systems.

Seriously, take a look at the Spirit of the Century SRD. It's different and usable. And IMO a much better base to a Supers game than d20.

Like, look at the turn system: Standard, Move, and maybe Minor actions as well. It's just something that happens: you can attack, and likely move, too; or you can full attack or something. There's initiative sorting of some sort.

Full attack on a grid based system should be taken out and shot especially for a supers game. It turns the whole thing into a static slugfest. And most games avoid it for this reason. Move actions are an artifact of grid and minis based games.

And the initiative sysem can be used well to underline the nature of the world you're in.

For instance the Cubicle 7 Dr Who RPG IIRC has the initiative order going something like Talkers, Movers, Doers, Fighters. Which means that The Doctor always has time talk to and bamboozle the monsters before they get to shoot him. And running away from a bomb to dive behind cover (moving) happens before someone sets it off (doing). But you only get to choose one as your main action. Perfectly in line with Dr Who where the Doctor can monolog without people just shooting him. But would never work in many settings because shooting is faster than talking.

For another, Robin Laws' Feng Shui has an initiative system that also determines the number of actions you get in a turn. If you roll a 12 on your initiative you get 12 'shots' to act on (actually shooting costs 3, although reloading costs 1) and the person who rolled 9 only starts acting with his 9 shots once you reach 9. Really useful for cinematic combat and rewarding speed.

Basically, I feel like no matter what I do I'm liable to get dinged somewhere by someone for something everyone does; for something that needs to be done by everyone simply because RPGs are RPGs.

Seriously, you can borrow aspects of games. And almost anything under an OGL as long as you publish an SRD.

 

[Twowolves]

Figure some out and I'll see what I can pull off. This sort of thing helps with M&M: throw darts at a board full of comics characters and see if you can design them with the rules.

Superman
Batman
Robin
Jimmy Olsen
Green Lantern
Thor
Lex Luthor
Captain America
Hawkeye
Doctor Doom
Metamorpho...

Currently, M&M 3rd edition is the licensed system for DC Heroes, so every character from the DC universe should already be statted out for M&M. The M&M 2nd ed book Instant Superheroes is full of archetypes that more-or-less cover the rest (and also some of the DC characters, only all at PL 10). Many good write-ups for most any imagined supers character have been done and posted over at Atomic Think Tank forums as well.

So, yes, M&M can be used to make most any sort of character.

 

[fireinthedust]

have them already.

Although to be fair, none of the write ups for the DC Adventures books are accurate anymore: The DC 52 reboot just changed everything. Sure they could be similar, but much of the M&M work has been retconned or rebooted.

Which, I might add, is a sneaky and uncool thing to do to GR. IMO, it's not like DC didn't know M&M was doing this massive book. And there were piles of setbacks along the road, delaying publication over and over, which means that somewhere along the line there was lack of communication. Sure, the GR people weren't going to be told what the reboot would look like. Still, now they're selling out of date (for now) material. Oi!


I like the Doctor Who initiative order. It's different and kinda cute, really.