Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMScott" data-source="post: 1648544" data-attributes="member: 11734">Two comments here - first, a hero who doesn't have an arch-nemesis after his first few outings either isn't doing his job or is fighting well under his weight class, otherwise it's pretty much a comic book convention and as such hard to class as a disadvantage. That leads into the second one - most PCs will likely pick up an arch-nemesis during play, it's hard to see why the ones who specified one beforehand should get points for it.These all seem more appropriate as plot devices or general background than statted out weaknesses to me. Mechanics - if any - will vary from case to case, since it's unlikely one general set of rules will cover all situations.I never really understood this one in Champions; "I am a functioning member of society, and so I have a weakness". It works OK with the roll-for-appearance mechanic in Champs and a creative GM, but in the less structured world of M&M I'm happy to see it go. Again, in Champs this weakness basically means "you're a superhero so you have recurring enemies". Absent Hero's mechanics for exactly valuing a disad - which makes morphing stale hunteds as the campaign goes on a fairly precise process - it's not one that seems to fit M&M to me. Another problem is that in a typical group, any hunted that one of them gets tends to end up taking on the whole group to get at their target - there's no reason only one person should get the points if all are inconvenienced. Might be neat to run a campaign where everybody specifically has the same hunted, but otherwise I don't know if I'd allow this one in my game.Can't comment on these since I don't allow constructs as PCs.Not a bad concept, but it seems to me it'd be better built using flaws on powers. All those will saves look a bit clunky to me, particularly on a PC.This is already in the book, under the general heading of "Quirk".I like this sort of weakness for super-dependencies (i.e. some super-soldier type who has to take a regular dose of several drugs or lose his superhuman powers), but not when it applies more generally to problems like "normal" addiction or gambling. The latter are better handled as plot devices, IMHO. I'm uncomfortable with trying to quantify everything that could go wrong with a character, and I don't think a character's battle with his personal demons should be left to the dice.Overall, the real problem I have with a long list of weaknesses is that you then get some players who want points for all of them on the one hand, and other players who will undergo the effects of the weakness without getting the points on the other. For me, the list in the book is pretty much fine since it makes it clear that not every super has weaknesses that grant points. Offering weakness points for many of the standard comic book conventions - like having an arch-nemesis, or having some government agency after you - implies that every hero has one weakness, or often several. This is a change (albeit not a huge one) in the way M&M seems to have done things.</blockquote>

Verification