How important is it to you or your players for characters to feel "overpowered"?

[Desdichado]

If you are looking for average or underpowered characters, being overpowered is "extremely unimportant."

If it's very important to me to avoid, then no, it isn't. But whatever. I see your point.

 

[nevin]

So I think we could say another aspect of feeling weak is the ability to be taken down by luck. And is this okay in a TTRPG? So many games have a death mechanic, and the ability to crit or fumble only ensures that those death rules get invoked more easily or by underpowered foes. Are we saying "them's the breaks," roll that into the story, bring in someone new? Or do we need to make allotment for player skill or story invoked "heroism" overriding luck in some way?

I do think about whether "luck death" would result would discourage players too deeply or simply be boring. I'd much rather put the character in a coma to be revived with some serious injuries when they awake than say "oh well, he's dead." My guess is I would ask the player how attached they are to the character they are playing before making the call. Again, I suppose it comes down to the spoken or unspoken contract about the game being played.

No the problem comes in because most people think general distribution of rolls should be an individual thing but that's not how random works. A player could roll badly for every roll in a campaign and still be a normal part of the randomness of using dice. The statisticl model includes the people who may roll good nearly all the time and those at the other end and every combination in between. I've played with "lucky" people who almost never roll poorly and some who roll badly almost all the time.
This normal part of randomness can completely overwrite the overpowered overoptimized PC's power or conversely suddenly make the weak under optimized pc a game breaking event. Also seen DM's who always go with the dice wipea party with a string of crits. . It's really something that is a separate but related issue to this discussion

 

[Thomas Shey]

So I think we could say another aspect of feeling weak is the ability to be taken down by luck. And is this okay in a TTRPG? So many games have a death mechanic, and the ability to crit or fumble only ensures that those death rules get invoked more easily or by underpowered foes. Are we saying "them's the breaks," roll that into the story, bring in someone new? Or do we need to make allotment for player skill or story invoked "heroism" overriding luck in some way?

The answer is, "very much depends on the taste of the observer" of course. As I noted, people played BRP games for decades without much buffer. But that doesn't mean part of the reason some people didn't play BRP games was the sudden-death chances and lack of a buffer against it.

I do think about whether "luck death" would result would discourage players too deeply or simply be boring. I'd much rather put the character in a coma to be revived with some serious injuries when they awake than say "oh well, he's dead." My guess is I would ask the player how attached they are to the character they are playing before making the call. Again, I suppose it comes down to the spoken or unspoken contract about the game being played.

My observation was that, coming out of D&D, it produced in many people at the time the idea that combat always had stakes. It might have helped that the way BRP combat worked, defenses were interactive, so there was some sense you controlled your own fate (albeit still dependent on dice) and since virtually everyone had some magical capability you had some ability to put your thumb on the scale in-character, even if the early BRP games weren't super-heavy on tactical options.
But a lot of people who were okay with that at the time got tired of it too, so...

 

[Wolfpack48]

The answer is, "very much depends on the taste of the observer" of course. As I noted, people played BRP games for decades without much buffer. But that doesn't mean part of the reason some people didn't play BRP games was the sudden-death chances and lack of a buffer against it.




My observation was that, coming out of D&D, it produced in many people at the time the idea that combat always had stakes. It might have helped that the way BRP combat worked, defenses were interactive, so there was some sense you controlled your own fate (albeit still dependent on dice) and since virtually everyone had some magical capability you had some ability to put your thumb on the scale in-character, even if the early BRP games weren't super-heavy on tactical options.
But a lot of people who were okay with that at the time got tired of it too, so...

I think we always felt that the Dodge, Parry and magical mechanics in RQ/BRP gave you enough tools to play smart on defense so that luck was less an issue. But I see your point that these days, it may be more work than people want (to optimize PCs and minimize luck death). So we get things like "Hero Points" or other metacurrencies to shorthand the buffer.

At the end of the day, though, I guess the question is do groups want a luck death buffer, and how much work are they willing to put in to have one?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I think we always felt that the Dodge, Parry and magical mechanics in RQ/BRP gave you enough tools to play smart on defense so that luck was less an issue. But I see your point that these days, it may be more work than people want (to optimize PCs and minimize luck death). So we get things like "Hero Points" or other metacurrencies to shorthand the buffer.

Well, sometimes you get both; even people who like an active-defense approach and other things similar to what BRP games do aren't always appreciative of the "second arrow coming your way rolls a 01" phenomenon. Mythras has a luck point mechanic, for example, even though it also does some things to reduce the gaps in your defense traditional RQ could have (you don't get a lot of them, but they're there).

At the end of the day, though, I guess the question is do groups want a luck death buffer, and how much work are they willing to put in to have one?

Well, I'm not sure its particularly difficult to do one in most game systems, so I suspect the first question is the more important one.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Mythras has a luck point mechanic, for example, even though it also does some things to reduce the gaps in your defense traditional RQ could have (you don't get a lot of them, but they're there).

Just personally, I’d prefer either the no buffer option or some kind of permanent penalty (CON drops 1) over something like a Luck Point. The metacurrencies cheapen death even when the death might feel unfair or random. Adventurers should have scars.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Just personally, I’d prefer either the no buffer option or some kind of permanent penalty (CON drops 1) over something like a Luck Point. The metacurrencies cheapen death even when the death might feel unfair or random. Adventurers should have scars.

That's your right, but to be pretty blunt, most people don't care. They don't want to keep generating new characters, especially after they've invested, and they don't particularly care how they get there. I personally think Luck Points and the like are a good compromise because they don't say the world is any less a generally dangerous place, just provide the genre conceit that it is for the protagonists, and for people who don't have an issue with that, I think it works fine; I know some people do (Micah for example) but I don't have much reason to believe that's an issue for more than a small subset of players. And for people who do have groups like that, there are games that still take that approach, so...

 

[aramis erak]

I would love it if RPGs would define what kinds of characters are expected for the game.

Do you want me to roll up Captain Kirk or a redshirt?

A few are pretty clear… by one of several methods.
Method 1: a consistent set of bespoke classes.
Method 2: a jobs list with required abilities listed
Method 3: Templates (which are arguably classes, but lack the directed progress.)
Method 4: clear subject matter in the back cover blurb.
Method 5: lots of pretense.

So here’s a bit of opposite spin on this. If characters are getting hurt or dying frequently in your games, do you have a harsh expectation from either your GM or other players that you just need to “git gud?” Is “player skill” really a thing?

player skill exists when the GM doesn’t quash it…
… sometimes it is learning the setting
… sometimes it is learning the rules
… often, it is learning the GM.

 

[Theory of Games]

"Extremely important"

IME some players hate when their PC can't do whatever cool thing they want it to do. So during session 0 I hold the players' hands making sure their PCs are the best pile of stats imaginable. And I give them all the special equipment they want. And I give them all the information they want.

Then when the TPK arrives I can't be blamed for anything.