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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5909885" data-attributes="member: 4937">Basically it comes down to this: most subsystems that get created for a popular game aren't as interesting or as well thought out as the main system.  4e 'skill challenges' (which are no such thing) are an excellent case in point.   Additionally, it's also important that a subsystem interface smoothly with the main system.  Your description of problems buying into a subsystem in M&M seems to have both of these problems to one degree or another.My favorite chase subsystem is 'Hot Pursuit', but unmodified it has the problem of not interfacing well with the main game as well.  In particular, it has the exact problem your character is (probably rightly) complaining about - it simply doesn't reward being able to move faster and indeed MUCH faster than your opponent as much as it should.  Instead, it gives only a fairly small bonuses in winning a race to the faster competitor.  This makes sense in cases where the terrain is complex and the difference in speed between the competitors is very slight, but as a general rule for adjudicating chase scenes it doesn't.  It's all well and good to try to justify it by briefly imagining some cinematic action, but if the rules come first over common sense then at that point its not a chase - it's a railroad.  A good system doesn't let its abstraction shine, especially in the midst of a game with otherwise concrete relationships between propositions and results.To handle smooth transitions, you need to not drop out of your normal player/game master interface when modifying the rules sets.  If switching between discrete and concrete motion (like D20's typical movement in concrete) and continious abstract motion (like an abstract chase system that measures only the abstract distance between participants) you need to make sure this transition is somewhat transparant.  If the distance is 'close' or 'far', you still need to know how many range increments that roughly corresponds to.   You still need to properly advantage the guy whose characters has the Run feat, boots of speed, or expeditious retreat up.  Particularly with players who hold a more gamist table contract, you need to make sure that they don't feel like you are changing the rules just to cheat them which means that they need to feel like the subsystem makes sense and is something that they can leverage advantage out of and gain control of the game with.  Gamists want to feel that their choices matter and the outcome isn't arbitrary or predetermined.  So subsystems scare them.Overly simple subsystems tend to scare narrativists as well, because they feel that their actual choices are being limited by an arbitrary subsystem.   Likewise, simulationists are going to focus on discrepencies between the outcome and the logical outcome.  If you have players with mixed goals, then they might end up raising all the objections.I've had great fun with subsystems over the years, but in general I've found that subsystems need house ruling more than any other section of a game and that you need to be really clear ahead of time about what is happening and why with some players before you bring a subsystem in.  In a game like M&M, its easily possible that some characters bonus in a chase should be so high that they can't lose.  In that case, explain to the character that sure, they can always 'catch' up to the villain, but that this doesn't mean necessarily that the villain is going to stop moving.   In this case, the roll of the speedster/teleporter character might be to force the villain to slow down/stop, allowing the rest of the team to successfully beat his chase result and thereby bring him to close quarters and ultimately end the chase. I would think that most characters would agree that D20 doesn't handle continious simultaneous motion well with its default combat system.  In your particular case, it sounds like the player felt that you were deliberately nerfing his character.  Try to satisfying the player that his concerns are met.  That means providing a narrative framework, frex: "Imagine the avengers are chasing a character like Rhino (or the Hulk) through the streets of the city.  If Quicksilver is with the team, then because of his superspeed, he can pretty much always determine the distance on the Rhino and its unlikely (barring unconsciousness) that the Rhino can do pretty much anything about that.  But on the other hand, Quicksilver is going to need to pull off some sort of stunt to slow Rhino down so that the heavy hitters on the team can force the Rhino into a melee."   Also try to assure the character that whatever super-movement abilities that he has will be given proper due.  If you can move 10x faster than what you are chasing, the bonus on a race check shouldn't equate to merely 5% or 50% more likely to succeed, but virtually assured success.  Narrating anything less requires either the realization that you simply aren't 10x faster, or else the narrative of a fumble - and there is only so often you want to narrate a fumble because you'll quickly irritate players if it happens too often.   Finally, you'll want to focus on the options that the subsystem opens up for the player and the character - perhaps the ability to 'head them off at the pass' or otherwise gain narrative control.If in fact you can't justify the subsystem in those terms, then there is a good chance its a bad subsystem and you should just drop it or at least fix it.</blockquote>

Verification