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

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

  • It's the deciding factor

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Extremely important

    Votes: 3 3.2%
  • Important

    Votes: 5 5.3%
  • Somewhat important

    Votes: 13 13.7%
  • Neutral

    Votes: 11 11.6%
  • Somewhat unimportant

    Votes: 12 12.6%
  • Unimportant

    Votes: 14 14.7%
  • Extremely unimportant

    Votes: 14 14.7%
  • It plays no role whatsoever

    Votes: 23 24.2%


log in or register to remove this ad

This is a real finesse thing. As others have said, feeling weak/barely scraping by all the time can be as boring as stomping everything you come across.

I will say that some of my players strive to be as optimized as possible, while others make characters that are very middle of the road- the optimized characters end up feeling like it's their job to protect the "normies."

I heard this from Matt Colville years ago and I still agree with it, that overall players want their characters to be John McClain- they want to struggle, be bloody and bruised, but succeed despite the odds. Buuut it's important IMO for them to feel powerful here and there, to see how far they've come. Let their fireballs toast some hordes, let the fighter defeat some pompous blowhard knight.

I personally have the issue with 5e though where high level characters, t3+, can wreck near anything... And some of my players that got to t4 didn't want to do it again because "it feels silly" powerful. But others are not at all against reaching those heights....

Meanwhile I'm over here with my E9 rules that I have yet to actually implement in a game... I like the idea of the PCs having to pull in allies etc to take on big threats rather than becoming demigods that can 1v1 a balor without a scratch... But then that means, practically speaking during a combat, that they get less playtime unless I give them control of the allies.

Anyway, tangent. I don't like super powerful characters.
I discovered that I like Sword and Sorcery rather over High Fantasy... It's more personal.
I've heard this before, and while I do think that players want this, I don't really think it's a realistic desire. You can't consistently beat the odds, because then you've got the odds wrong. So what these players are actually asking for is to be lied to, to be tricked into thinking they keep beating the odds when in fact the game is designed to generate that illusion.
 

Do you really mean overpowered, or do you mean feel like heroes? I want my players to feel like they are playing heroes, which means higher stats and good abilities. However, heroes have weaknesses and are challenged on their quests. They can fail.

Sometimes I will put in an easy encounter so they can "basically RTFLPWN enemies," since it's good to feel like you are super duper, but most fights are challenging to hard. Even for the heroes.
I would love it if someone could generate a generally agreed-upon definition of the word "hero" in an RPG context.
 

I've heard this before, and while I do think that players want this, I don't really think it's a realistic desire. You can't consistently beat the odds, because then you've got the odds wrong. So what these players are actually asking for is to be lied to, to be tricked into thinking they keep beating the odds when in fact the game is designed to generate that illusion.
Oh it's the PERCEPTION of beating the odds, not the REALITY. And it's not what they're actively asking for but rather what does, on observation, seem to provide the most satisfaction.
 




We'll probably get That right after the internet agrees on what alignments are.

Well, what do you mean by "hero" then?
the person who can do what others can't. The person who defies fate, the people in charge and comes out ahead, not in some zero sum situation where everything is always against you. note this can be achieved at any level in any RPG if the DM is willing to allow it. And definitely not some Castelvania style game Crawl where every baddie levels up exactly as the PC's do. UPs and downs are required to feel like a hero.
 

the person who can do what others can't. The person who defies fate, the people in charge and comes out ahead, not in some zero sum situation where everything is always against you. note this can be achieved at any level in any RPG if the DM is willing to allow it. And definitely not some Castelvania style game Crawl where every baddie levels up exactly as the PC's do. UPs and downs are required to feel like a hero.
So, narrative stuff? Nothing to do with the setting and what makes logical sense in that settings context?
 

So, narrative stuff? Nothing to do with the setting and what makes logical sense in that settings context?
For instance I've played in games where all the bad guys where always PC level or above. They never fail morale checks are always so terrifìed of the BBEG that they never give information. The city guard can kill you easily, the thieves guild can kill you easily and 10 levels later nothing has changed. At no point did the DM allow the players to put level anyone anywhere. As you level you should get powerful enough some organizations, and even smart bad guys just wont cross you. Or if they do you smack em down. Doesn't mean everything should be easy but. Things should change. That guy that robbed the PC's in all their trade deals at 1st level should be scared to do it to them at 10th level. You take out one Baronthe other Barons SHOULD be worried about what happens whem they cross you. But I'm too many games every single encounter is "Level appropriate" which is demoralizing, and because it just means you are always at the same point,facing the same level of threat. It just becomes "Mortal Kombat". Ok whose the next contestant
 

Remove ads

Top