Hero System Vs. Mutants & Masterminds. Which is the better super-hero game?

[ValhallaGH]

In a level-based game, characters are on a limited, mathematically specific tier of ability, which is supposed to make them roughly equivalent. M&M is that. You can't get above X attack, X skill ranks, and so forth in D&D 3e, for each specific level, and you can't in M&M either.

...

So, when a Game Master of HERO system sets the DCVs, HERO becomes level-based.
If a GURPS GM set a cap on skills, GURPS is now level-based.
Because character's have a mathematically maximum ability to make them roughly equal.

Am I understanding you correctly? I really would like to understand what you're saying.

 

[pawsplay]

Even if you set a DCV limit for Hero, there aren't discrete levels. You could make Hero into a level-based game by expanding the "suggested DC and DCV" type charts into a a series of dicrete levels. The result would be very similar to the BESM d20 format.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Even if you set a DCV limit for Hero, there aren't discrete levels. You could make Hero into a level-based game by expanding the "suggested DC and DCV" type charts into a a series of dicrete levels. The result would be very similar to the BESM d20 format.

Was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Seriously, I'm starting to get really confused by your posts.

 

[Thanee]

Would it be reassuring if I told you I own the book and am quite familiar with it?

I'm not sure...

It is suggested that it be advanced very so often. That said, level advancement is not a necessity for a level-based game. AD&D would still be level-based even if you froze the characters at 10th level. E6 is level-based, even if you stop gaining levels after 6. If you run a Pathfinder and you use the "gain a level when I say so" method, you are running a level-based game, and rather similar to the default M&M level advancement system, at that.

A character gaining a level is the same as changing the campaign framework?

In a level-based game, characters are on a limited, mathematically specific tier of ability, which is supposed to make them roughly equivalent.

Ok, so every roleplaying game is level-based then in your opinion?

In HERO, for example, the level is set by the number of character points you get (standard heroic, powerful heroic, standard superheroic, etc - that's roughly the same as the PL of M&M, especially if you also use the recommended caps for OCV/DCs/skill checks and so on).

M&M is that. You can't get above X attack, X skill ranks, and so forth in D&D 3e, for each specific level, and you can't in M&M either.

Well, I can understand why you think M&M is level-based at least.

I do not agree with it, because I really don't think what you consider level-based, really is (or should be) level-based.

Basically, you see any limit/cap to a character's ability as a level-based limit.

However, there are two fundamentally different things at work...

1) the level of the character
2) the level of the campaign

You say, both of these make a game level-based. I think only the first one does.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Jeff Wilder]

In a point-based game, characters are on a limited, mathematically specific tier of ability, which is supposed to make them roughly equivalent. M&M is that.

Helped you out there.

 

[pawsplay]

Was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Seriously, I'm starting to get really confused by your posts.

That was a "No, but..."

 

[pawsplay]

A character gaining a level is the same as changing the campaign framework?

If the campaign framework specifies a specific level, obviously.

Ok, so every roleplaying game is level-based then in your opinion?

No, not at all.

In HERO, for example, the level is set by the number of character points you get (standard heroic, powerful heroic, standard superheroic, etc - that's roughly the same as the PL of M&M,

Actually, they are quite different. In Hero, your starting points have no relation to the trait limits, whereas M&M defaults to PL x 10 cp, making M&M levels discrete.

especially if you also use the recommended caps for OCV/DCs/skill checks and so on).

Even then, the categories aren't graduated, so they don't count as levels. You can't say, "Let's increase the caps in Hero by one level." There is no set progression. On the other hand, you can do exactly that when running M&M. If I tweak the DCV guidelines for Hero, that tells me nothing about damage, or even OCV.

Well, I can understand why you think M&M is level-based at least.

I do not agree with it, because I really don't think what you consider level-based, really is (or should be) level-based.

Basically, you see any limit/cap to a character's ability as a level-based limit.

However, there are two fundamentally different things at work...

1) the level of the character
2) the level of the campaign

You say, both of these make a game level-based. I think only the first one does.

That's not my criterion. In my view, PL is a character limit, it's just, by default, set the same for all characters in a M&M campaign. You could, if you wanted, specify a different PL for each PC (for whatever purpose), and PL would still remain meaningful. And in fact, if you use attack/damage tradeoff, you are essentially adjusting the character's PL in a limited way. To accomplish the same thing in HERO, you would have to specify some kind of relationship between OCV and damage.

Note also that NPCs have their own PL (M&M, p.25). Power level is a character trait; the overall PL for PCs is a campaign trait.

 

[Quantum]

Okay. I'm curious, where you trying to get everything to be equal to your PL or at your PL caps? It doesn't matter, but I am curious

.

I'm a min/maxer. I try to get the best advantage possible. When it comes to M&M I try to max out my saves. There are four saves, Toughness, Reflex, Fortitude, and Willpower. The maximum save for Toughness is equal to PL, and the maximum saves for the other three are PL plus 5. So, at PL 10 that's 10 + 15 + 15 +15 for a total of 55 points which leaves 95 points to buy everything else. That's a lot of points. I'd rather spend these points on powers or skills.

I don't necessarily use this method when it comes to my stats, but in my most important stat I like to have at least a 20. That's another 20 points right there. I like to have a minimum score of 10 in all other stats because I have a pet peeve about stats with a penalty to them. I don't mind low or average stats but I personally just can't stand stats with a penalty to them and avoid them like the plague. But with the rest of the stats at least a score of 10 that's a total of 70 points right there. With the saves that's a total of 125 points.

So, there lies what I was trying to describe.

But for me it's important to have my saves maxed out.

And also, you do get to advance in PL as well. If the GM allows it, a character may achieve a new PL when they've earned 15 points.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Would it be reassuring if I told you I own the book and am quite familiar with it?

No.

You've well and truly proven you don't understand what PL is (or, alternatively, what level-based games are.) Time and time again. Not 'reassuring' at all!

 

[Elric]

I'm a min/maxer. I try to get the best advantage possible. When it comes to M&M I try to max out my saves. There are four saves, Toughness, Reflex, Fortitude, and Willpower. The maximum save for Toughness is equal to PL, and the maximum saves for the other three are PL plus 5. So, at PL 10 that's 10 + 15 + 15 +15 for a total of 55 points which leaves 95 points to buy everything else. That's a lot of points. I'd rather spend these points on powers or skills.

That a PL 10 character can have Fort/Ref/Will all at +15 is something of a problem with M&M's design. A character should be able to have one of these saves at +15, but a good rule of thumb is that if your average F/R/W save is over +10, they're too high. It's simply too hard to hurt a character with maxed FRW saves, even though individual characters can justify one particularly high saves (e.g., Speedster's Reflex or Psionic's Will). Average among the core book archetypes is ~+23 between FRW combined, which is a good benchmark to shoot for.

I don't necessarily use this method when it comes to my stats, but in my most important stat I like to have at least a 20. That's another 20 points right there. I like to have a minimum score of 10 in all other stats because I have a pet peeve about stats with a penalty to them. I don't mind low or average stats but I personally just can't stand stats with a penalty to them and avoid them like the plague. But with the rest of the stats at least a score of 10 that's a total of 70 points right there. With the saves that's a total of 125 points.

You buy stats starting from 10 (which costs 0 points). See the first page of Chapter 1, "Hero Creation"