What makes a successful superhero game?

[Micah Sweet]

This is where things like shuffling damage off on emotions or relationships could come in. To avoid damage in a fight, you shift that to emotional damage which you need to process later to clear it. Say 3-5 preselected ways to do so. Thing is regularly but not always moping on Yancy Street. Regularly but not always arguing with Johnny. Etc.

That is definitely one way to do it that is effective for some people, but personally I strongly dislike the idea of tracked emotional/psychological damage, certainly when it plays like another "hit point" pool. Just rubs me the wrong way.

 

[Eric V]

As part of MSH's combat sequence, players were allowed to make a defensive FEAT roll that could make it harder for foes to hit them. The real issue is that most rpg players consider defensive options anathema to the extent that they will put their characters in terrible positions tactically just so they can constantly attack.

Sure, but that took their action for the round, no? DD is no closer to defeating the thugs if he does this.

 

[Thomas Shey]

This is where things like shuffling damage off on emotions or relationships could come in. To avoid damage in a fight, you shift that to emotional damage which you need to process later to clear it. Say 3-5 preselected ways to do so. Thing is regularly but not always moping on Yancy Street. Regularly but not always arguing with Johnny. Etc.

I think at least one of us confused my point.

Metacurrency awards are good at representing frequency, which seems like what you're talking about, because they're self-regulating; the player brings them in in part because it seems appropriate and in part because they want the metacurrency points, but either way they'll take care of it themselves.

The problem cuts in when you want to represent intensity, that is to say how strong the effect is supposed to be. Example: acrophobia. This could range from "avoids situations with heights whenever possible (even when tactically inconvenient)" to "the above, but takes serious penalties to operate in that situation" to "cannot force themselves to engage with heights deliberately under any circumstances." (This latter actually probably represents my degree of personal acrophobia).

There are ways to deal with that sort of distinction, but they tend to require more fine-grained metacurrencies than almost anyone seems to deal with, so you never see it in practice.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I prefer 2, coupled with a solid session 0 where expectations of play are agreed upon. Option 3 leads IME to gamist actions where players look for ways to mechanically advantage disruptive behavior, and come up with a fictional excuse after the fact. Fortunately, my current crop of players are more interested in playing their PC in a way consistent with their personalities and the fictional circumstances than they are pushing for mechanical advantage.

I do have to point out that in the superhero genre, some degree of what could be classed as "disruptive behavior" is actually pretty common, depending on how you count it, close to universal. Its pretty rare for a set of supers to have sufficiently overlapping priorities and ethos that they don't sometimes cause problems for each other and themselves.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, sounds like a "talents & flaws" style system, a la many beloved (by me) RPGs of the '90s.

Why yes, yes it does.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That is definitely one way to do it that is effective for some people, but personally I strongly dislike the idea of tracked emotional/psychological damage, certainly when it plays like another "hit point" pool. Just rubs me the wrong way.

I know that's a common feeling with some parts of the hobby, but I'll tell the truth; doing something like it in a game where psychological trauma is going to be a significant factor seems the only practical way to do it that doesn't depend excessively on people being exactly on the same page. Not all games need that, but for the ones that do, I've never seen a better solution.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Sure, but that took their action for the round, no? DD is no closer to defeating the thugs if he does this.

That's what I thought I remembered too. Its both uncertain, and leaves you largely in the same situation when the next round rolls around.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do have to point out that in the superhero genre, some degree of what could be classed as "disruptive behavior" is actually pretty common, depending on how you count it, close to universal. Its pretty rare for a set of supers to have sufficiently overlapping priorities and ethos that they don't sometimes cause problems for each other and themselves.

True, but player motivation behind that behavior is what I'm talking about here.

 

[Thomas Shey]

True, but player motivation behind that behavior is what I'm talking about here.

Eh, honestly, if someone is doing it just to be a jerk, they can just bake in the kind of behavior they want to in buying Disadvantages out the gate and leave it as a time bomb anyway. Pay-up-front or pay-as-you-go doesn't really change that.

 

[Tonguez]

Cap is superhero mostly due to his ethics and behaviour. In terms of power, he and Bucky are low level supers, below Spidey. Enhanced human level. Black Widow is peak human level. On their own, Cap/Bucky are specialist mid tier, BW is elite street level, but neither of them, alone, can't go head to head with heavy weights of Marvel Universe. TBH, their power tier is last one that's interesting to play for me personally. Above them, you get in real superhero ( ability, power and threat level) territory.

I'm not disputing that Cap is a Superhero, and that is both because of his ethics and because of the 'heroic boost' he gets on top of being The Super Soldier - this is evidenced by Cap being able to take on Thanos (in the Comics he's beaten Thanos on his own) and his ability to wield Mjolnir (as seen in the MCU).

(as an aside, I think that Heroic Boost is probably an important aspect of the Superhero genre where narrative games help by have a means to push beyond the normal abilities and do extra. Using a Benny/Fate Point to wield Mjolnir or for Hulk to be "the Strongest one there is" is important to the Superhero fantasy)

Anyway Bucky and Black Widow imho are super-spies who only get the Superhero tag because they happen to be in a Superhero movie. For instance, Brixton Lane in the Hobbs & Shaw movie, gets cybernetically enhanced and in one scene lampshades it with "“Look at me. I’m Black Superman!” nonetheless Hobbs & Shaw isnt a Superhero movie despite featuring a super soldier villain and two 'peak human' protagonist. Black Widow in particular exist in the same space as James Bond or more La Femme Nikita neither of which are Superheroes even though Natasha Romanov would slip easily into their movies.

Anyway YRMV