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

[Umbran]

I would love it if someone could generate a generally agreed-upon definition of the word "hero" in an RPG context.

I don't think we need one. The usual language definitions are mostly sufficient:

Hero (noun): 1) a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities, or 2) a principal character in a literary or dramatic work.

So, narrative stuff? Nothing to do with the setting and what makes logical sense in that settings context?

"Logical sense" does a lot of heavy lifting there. It invokes an objectivity without establishing that objectivity exists or is applicable.

Edit to add: I don't know how "logical sense in the setting's context" isn't "narrative stuff".

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think we need one. The usual language definitions are mostly sufficient:

Hero (noun): 1) a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities, or 2) a principal character in a literary or dramatic work.



"Logical sense" does a lot of heavy lifting there. It invokes an objectivity without establishing that objectivity exists or is applicable.

That objectivity does exist, relative to the setting conceits (which obviously vary by setting). That's my point.

And the two definitions you've offered for hero are quite different.

 

[nevin]

I think the scene in. GOT where after many seasons of buildup the big bad UBER dragon just gets turned into enemy ice dragon with amost no cost. Far too many DM's treat everythiing their PC's do like that.

 

[TwoSix]

That is an incredible claim. 99% play to be the hero? How is that not One True Wayism?

It's not OneTrueWayism if it's based on a sincere belief that 99% is an accurate representation of the demographics involved.

I don't know if it's 99%, but I imagine the number is quite high. Generally, people want more of a Skyrim or a Final Fantasy experience out of D&D, not Crusader Kings.

 

[Umbran]

That objectivity does exist, relative to the setting conceits (which obviously vary by setting). That's my point.

I question that, given that you are invoking objedctivity of... what? You are saying there's an objective view of something with respect to the setting conceits, without having identified the something.

And the two definitions you've offered for hero are quite different.

Yep. I think they both usually apply to RPGs, however. There will be exceptions, of course.

I mean, I am sure there are games in which people play cowardly, ineffective characters that achieve nothing, and nobody would actually consider notable, in games in which the PCs are not, in fact, even the major focus of the action/events. But our game books are usually not written to aim that way.

 

[Wolfpack48]

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.

In my OP I intentionally used “overpowered” instead of “heroic” because several discussions have cropped up recently about players complaining they couldn’t steamroll enemies easily enough. I’m really interested in where the line is for folks, and I may do another poll to drill down into exactly that.

 

[Maxperson]

I would love it if someone could generate a generally agreed-upon definition of the word "hero" in an RPG context.

You might as well ask for world peace while you are at it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not OneTrueWayism if it's based on a sincere belief that 99% is an accurate representation of the demographics involved.

I don't know if it's 99%, but I imagine the number is quite high. Generally, people want more of a Skyrim or a Final Fantasy experience out of D&D, not Crusader Kings.

It's not OneTrueWayism is you believe you're right?

Agree to disagree.

 

[Von Ether]

Being kickass can be subjective sometimes.
My son didn't like 5e for the longest time because the numbers were too low. He would complain how a Pathfinder fighter would kick a 5e fighter's butt.

He stopped for a moment when I pointed out that a PF fighter is never going to meet a 5e fighter and it's all about ratios.

And yet, many complain 5e is a superhero game. So for many folks, the number of dice and damage they can generate lead to that feeling of competence regardless of how powerful they actually are in a game.

 

[Von Ether]

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.

"I want the rules to be fair for both the PCs and NPCs, until I need the NPCs to go down to make me look cool."