Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 9748690" data-attributes="member: 467">I am currently preparing a convention game in which the player characters are superheroes in a aetherpunk/magictech city (using Daggerheart) and one of the key conceits is that the PCs (and the villains) are the only "superpowered" characters in the setting. Basically, the PCs will be 5th level, which is tier 3, and some villains might be Tier 4, but generally speaking regular folks, guards, etc will all be tier 1. Or, to be more generic about it, the PCs and villains are supers and everyone else is a normie.This got me to thinking about the specialness of PCs (and their opposition) in general. So I thought I would put out the question to ENWorld: in general, do have a preference for how unique, special, competent or "super" the PCs are in the games you run (as appropriate for the particular genre and lieu, of course)? Does it depend entirely on the game in question, or do you always like either underdog PCs or more powerful and competent ones? As a player, what is your general preference? And if you have a general preference -- as a player or GM -- where do you enjoy exceptions?I think in general I prefer PCs to be a step above the regular folks, but not so much that there aren't relatively common examples of peers in the setting. Even in supers games, by and large I place PCs in the middle ground of supers -- that is, there are certainly supers less powerful than they, but there are also supers more powerful than they.I actually don't like games with steep power curves, in regards to leveling or whatever. This is, of course, despite having run various forms of D&D for 40 years. I like it when characters stay within some identifiable range of power relative to the rest of the world even as they level.I take a pretty similar attitude toward PC importance in the setting, but closer to the extremes of the range. that is, either PCs never get particularly important in the grand scheme of things, or they become central figures in the doings of the scope of the campaign.What about you? Where do your preferences generally lie for PC specialness, competence, importance, and/or power level relative to the world at large?</blockquote>

Verification