Super-Hero systems: pros and cons

Nnesk

Explorer
Howdy,

I'm trying to choose between two super-hero systems for a new campaign I'm starting:
1. M&M 2ed
2. Silver Age Sentinels

It's gonna be an x-men-ish style campaign, with no sub-generes (except for the occaisonal noir/dark-n-edgy/golden age adventure). Plain-old "We're cool super heroes" style.

I have both systems, and they both look as cool as Antartica. I'm a d20 veteran, but SAS doesn't look all that hard to learn.

Can anyone recommend one or the other? Any specific flaws or adventages to either one?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Khuxan

First Post
Is there a thread or webpage somewhere that compares many of the superhero RPGs out there, not just M&M and SAS? I for one would love to see a comparison of the pros and cons of Wild Talents Essential Edition, Supers20, Mutants and Masterminds, and so on.
 


Set

First Post
I'm not familiar with SAS (I have the d20 conversion, but have no idea what the Tri-Stat rules looked like).

But M&M2E I'd heartily recommend. The Atomic Think Tank forums have a Roll Call section that has, literally *thousands* of characters statted up, by fans who really get the system. When I was writing up some Nightcrawler knock-offs for a scenario, I did a search on Nightcrawler in that section and found five different versions of him that I could look at for inspiration and design techniques to rip off for my own stuff.

Obscure X-characters like the Acolytes and Morlocks have even been statted up by some, so that if you want to throw familiar faces at players who are familiar with the X-verse, you've got that option, and if a player says, "I want to play someone who has powers like Magik," there will be several choices for you to look at for designing that sort of power.

I was a big fan of 1st edition M&M, and really struggled to 'get' the changes in 2E, but several people there sort of took me in hand and showed me how to convert some ideas and stat them out in 2E, and since then, I like it even more than 1st edition!

Generally, the concept of 'power level' and 'trade-offs' makes it relatively painless to make a team with a 'Superman' and a 'Batman' character on it, and keep them at least somewhat balanced.

In a standard four-color game, everyone will be Power Level 10. Normally, a Power Level 10 character can't have more than a +10 attack, +10 damage, +10 defense and +10 toughness. Using 'trade-offs,' a character can still be considered to fit into power level 10, but swap some attack for damage, or some defense for toughness.

A more 'Hulk' like character, easy to hit and not that accurate, but nearly impervious to harm and hitting like the train that delivered the mack truck, could have a +5 attack, +15 damage, +5 defense, +15 toughness.

Someone like Spiderman or Batman or Deathstroke the Terminator might be insanely accurate and hard to hit, but not be ridiculously strong. Give one of them a +15 to hit but only a +5 damage, and a +15 defense but only +5 toughness, and they still count as effectively power level 10, since they'll have weak areas to counter their strong areas.

(And, naturally, feats like Power Attack, which takes an attack penalty for a damage bonus, just as it does in D&D, might allow the Deathstroke character to make up for his weaker punches by sacrificing some of his amazing accuracy, making some characters extremely flexible. There are also tradeoff feats called Accurate Attack (+atk, -dam), All-Out Attack (+atk, -def) and Defensive Attack (+def, -atk, like Combat Expertise), creating a lot of potential flexibility, for those who are interested in that sort of thing.)
 

Honestly?

Just get M&M.

Silver Age Sentinels isn't _bad_, but it's not popular. Everybody and their cousin loves M&M and if you wind up having questions or uncertainties, you'll be able to get plenty of advice. How _good_ the advice is might be up for debate, but that's a whole other topic. :D

SAS suffers from a peculiar problem that's not quite unique to Guardians of Order games, but is darn close. It's a point buy system that relies on player/GM negotiation.

See, Tri-Stat (what powers BESM and SAS) provides a decent enough framework and costs, but it expects a few things that catch a lot of people by surprise because they don't expect it from a point-buy system.

One of those things is that the GM is going to be involved in the creation of characters and will say "No" sometimes.

People expect as close to "perfect" a balance as possible. If something is worth "1 point" than anything that's worth "1 point" is going to be as close to exactly equivalent as possible.

GoO games aren't like that.

It's not that they're horribly imbalanced, but they aren't as "balanced" as they could be. As Tri-Stat evolved, there were certain oddities that developed in the system too. PMVs are a source of problems.

If you're not sure about the Tri-Stat system, you can get the free version here:
DriveThruRPG.com - White Wolf - Tri-Stat dX: Core System Role-Playing Game

As I recall, The Authority version of the SAS rules is considered to be a better version than SAS, with the caveat that you should probably scaled the dice down a bit.

If you're looking at SAS d20? Skip it.

It's not bad, but BESMd20 is a _very_...quirky... system. The d20 fans hated it for a number of reasons, and the BESM fans hated it because GoO was jumping on the d20 bandwagon.

Both Tri-Stat and BESMd20 games basically expect the rulebook to be treated as more of a "guide" than a firm rules thing. Many people aren't comfortable with that, and want the rulebook to be a solid "neutral" way of keeping both GMs and Players under control.

If you're fine with going it alone and you've got flexibility at the table, SAS (either flavor) is a pretty good way to go. Not perfect, but not bad.

M&M showed up and absolutely crushed Silver Age Sentinels. I personally happen to like 1st ed M&M better than 2nd Ed, but that's a whole other topic.

It's got some solid staying power and if you're already familiar with d20, it's probably going to just be easiest to pick this up.

Plus, they've got all kinds of supplements, which is important for some folks. They're even coming out with something called Warriors and Warlocks, which I guess will let you do fantasy games using the M&M engine.

Make your life easy, go with the crowd, and get M&M. It's a solid choice and you'll be able to get far more support (in the forum of product and fans) than you will with SAS of either flavor.
 

Nnesk

Explorer
That's it, I'm sold. M&M it is.

Btw, what's the major difference between the two editions? I only have the 2nd anyway, but now I'm curious.
 

jdrakeh

Front Range Warlock
SAS suffers from a peculiar problem that's not quite unique to Guardians of Order games, but is darn close. It's a point buy system that relies on player/GM negotiation.

See, Tri-Stat (what powers BESM and SAS) provides a decent enough framework and costs, but it expects a few things that catch a lot of people by surprise because they don't expect it from a point-buy system.

One of those things is that the GM is going to be involved in the creation of characters and will say "No" sometimes.

In fairness, this is true of HERO (with its 'stop sign' powers) and GURPS, as well. People may not play HERO and GURPS like that, but both systems pretty explicitly spell out that the GM should be involved in the character creation process and can veto certain powers/disads/etc.

The 'stop sign' powers in HERO came to mind, because they're specifically singled out as known game-breaking options. I'd go as far as to say that the text in HERO tries very hard to discourage their use, though leaves them in as an option for GMs who want/need them.

Speaking from personal experience, I've seen several GURPS and HERO games implode because GMs didn't take the advice of the designers and allowed certain identified game-breakers into play without considering the consequences beforehand (the Time Travel option for Extra-Dimensional Movement in HERO was a notable culprit).
 
Last edited:

hopeless

Adventurer
I've run SAS and think its quite a good system, I've heard similar stories about M&M but it boils down to how you like your game.
M&M seems more generic, SAS however you can literally design any power enhance it so you could have a superstrong hero whose strength could be dependent on solar energy or a mentalist able to effect several foes and even have defects such as having to wear a ruby red visor since a trauma in their youth cost them their control over their energy blast power for example anyone care to provide similar examples on M&M's behalf?

Looks like several someone's have been working to help overcome that divide, good to hear ran the d20 verison of SAS preferred the original version because the game I ran it swiftly became a case of players looking to take advantage of improving their characters intelligence rather than trying to counter their mentalist character's weaknesses or forgetting they're playing superheroes and killing their foes...

Anyway all the best with your game.
 
Last edited:

Qualidar

First Post
M&M seems more generic, SAS however you can literally design any power enhance it so you could have a superstrong hero whose strength could be dependent on solar energy or a mentalist able to effect several foes and even have defects such as having to wear a ruby red visor since a trauma in their youth cost them their control over their energy blast power for example anyone care to provide similar examples on M&M's behalf?

Sure, how about either of those cases you just described, to start. I would think that most (if not all) point-buy systems have a mechanic in place for disadvantages like that.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
That's it, I'm sold. M&M it is.

Btw, what's the major difference between the two editions? I only have the 2nd anyway, but now I'm curious.

2nd edition M&M takes the game a bit father away from d20 than the 1st edition. It removes stats from attack rolls (no more debates about whether str of dex should affect hitting) because you simply buy up your attack bonus. Lots of feats have levels that can be bought up for increasing benefit while the feats in 1st are a bit more static. Powers are broken out a bit more and presented in slightly more stripped down structure than in 1st. Enhanced statistics are handled differently between the two editions (I think 2e is simpler in this regard). Hero points were a resource you started with and spent down in 1st edition, while in 2nd edition are more something you gain as the story (and slings and arrows of combat) gives you setbacks.
 

Remove ads

Top