Mutants and Masterminds d20 2nd Edition Thoughts

[Lago_AM3P]

I'm soliciting for them right meow.

Though as you all know, Lago prefers the straight dope sugarcoated with min-max advice.

In fact, I want to see as much of that stuff as possible.

[Tokorona]

Take Luck as much as you can (capped at PL). Oh, and Perception-range powers. They autohit (still provoke a Toughnes save)

Also, you'll probably wnat to ask TavishArtair or Imban for min/max advice. (*shakes an angry fist*)

[TavishArtair]

Generally, the most severe limiter in any game of M&M will be the referee. This game was not made on the assumption that the referee will allow you to do everything that is technically within the rules. In fact, it will break if you do so, because eventually some smartass will get the bright idea of creating Blasts that are reduced to a Free Action. However, it is spelled out in the book that, in general, you should not allow this sort of nonsense. The referee should disallow anything that obviously causes the game to collapse in on itself, and also disallow anything that doesn't fit the mood of the game: time travel in a street-level heroes game would be, ah, inappropriate.

Once you don't allow the players to do Stupid Shit That Stops The Game From Occurring, however, it is fairly well balanced. Everyone has a basic cap on their stats that stops them from goonily exceeding their allies. Most archetypes are easily built, and even very exotic powers can be created in the rules by applying a few ad-hoc modifiers (the basis of which are described). Ultimate Power is a useful supplement if you expect to be doing a lot of the latter, and creating custom powers in general.

On the subject of inflicting harm, Tokorona here is lying. Perception range powers max out at the PL and cannot be improved via tradeoffs, autofire, or criticals. Accordingly, they're fairly ineffective for dealing with opponents who have high saves, including Toughness saves, and are even worse if your opponent is Impervious: that guarantees that any General Area or Perception range attack will do nothing. What a Perception range power is useful for, is bypassing Defense and hitting speedster or other dodgy archetypes. Occasionally you run into a non-speedster who you just want to do damage to without a roll, of course, but it's really hard to justify Perception attacks in the first place, so it's probably not worth the bother.

Instead, if you want to do effective damage in an area, use Targeted areas (a variant from Ultimate Power). You get to use an attack roll here, and can thus apply Power Attack, score a critical (with Improved Critical, this gets easier), and have the Autofire extra applied.

Alternate powers can be quite devastating. Normally you can only use one at a time, which balances it to a degree: more attack methods experience rapid diminishing returns. Some powers, however, should not be allowed as alternates, even if it makes sense. Healing as an alternate power, for instance, is quite annoying. It costs a lot less than Regeneration (1 power point compared to many) and is just as effective, barring death. With the Total Healing extra (which I believe is another UP source), dealing damage is a loser's game. With this in mind, if you intend on actually beating someone up being a reasonable proposition, limit Healing to outside of arrays, so that it at least costs sufficiently much. Same with Boost... don't let its seemingly lasting effects fool you, I can turn it on and then switch the array and still gain the benefits. This is another point where the referee should kick your head in. The cardinal rule is "If something is not a disadvantage, you shouldn't get points (or a discount, in this case) for it."

Fortitude, Reflex, and Will-based powers are both more and less powerful. A character will always max their Toughness save relative to their PL and tradeoffs, but may not pay as much attention to these Saves. Conversely, the Saves can get even higher. Using things like Stuns and Snares, however, is definitely encouraged by the system. They may not win the fight automatically for you, but there are certainly situations where they are more advantageous. Grappling is also fun for you and annoying for your opponents, as expected.

Hero Points have the same acronym as HP for a reason. Run out of these and you're liable to be put out of commission. Conversely, use them sparingly: it might be better to accept being punted across the field or missing, than not have one for a more vital occasion.

In general, I find M&M to be a more interesting system than most, and to be fairly balanced. Usually, a power point is worth a power point, and most characters of equal PL are of about the same power, although there is certainly room for making a "combat character" who is more specialized.

[Lago_AM3P]

Is it just my imagination or does shrinking make you completely hardcore for no real reason?

[Lago_AM3P]

Anyway, if you were looking for an undeniable edge without breaking theme, what would you go for?

Since there aren't multiple attacks, it looks like being able to feint as a move-equivalent action is very powerful. Also powers that allow you to shift your points around with each transformation look crazy without causing the DM to whap you upside the head.

What powers do you recommend for being able to take on the highest array of challenges without pushing the 'average' person in your party off of the range? Ranged Deflection looks crazy-go-nuts, too.

[virgil]

I'd have to look around a bit, but before I go into detail of what you'd be able to do, I do need to point out something when it comes to creating a powerful character under the MnM system.

You can make a very well-rounded character that fits the theme and all that, but any 'power-plays' are inherently weakened; as part of the DM's job is to make villains for you to fight. Since it's boring to have Superman fight Two-Face, you're going to use villains that can actually challenge you. If you make a physically invulnerable character, then you'll fight villains that immobilize you, or mind control you, or not get noticed as they do whatever it is you were trying to stop. If you make someone with various forms of Save-or-Svck besides damage, then you'll fight people that can resist it (or be immune).

Therefore, builds that are capable of at least two different kinds of attack are good, as one-trick ponies are the easiest to counter and the hardest to play when they're countered. A good attack with an AP or two for other types works well here.

[Lago_AM3P]

Therefore, builds that are capable of at least two different kinds of attack are good, as one-trick ponies are the easiest to counter and the hardest to play when they're countered. A good attack with an AP or two for other types works well here.

That's why I have my eye on powers that have multiple variable-input uses, like Transform, Alternate Form, Gadget, and Shapeshift.

I'm also keeping my eye out for bonuses that the system forgot to reign in, like the size bonus to AC and attack but also stuff that suddenly becomes very lethal in this system, like Hide in Plain Sight + Stealth with some appropriate sense blockers.

[Lago_AM3P]

We're going to avoid outright cheese like transfer, boost, mimic, summon, and duplication. No PC should ever have these unless the DM completely takes over these powers. These are especially bad powers to have if you're trying to avoid suspicion.

So I'm going to stick to cheese that doesn't break the game.

Other things I noticed:

Area effects are complete crap for anything but taking on mass villainy because of the evasion feat. Melee effects are crap because of the aura power. Therefore you want a ranged attack. Unless you have a powerful movement ability and Immunity: Auras.

Exception to melee attacks: grappling. You can get a crazy-high PL-breaking bonus and deprive people of action without even really trying. Unfortunately it's embarrassingly easy to escape grapples if someone has a mind to it.

Attack bonuses are easier to boost than damage bonuses. Getting several kinds of defense on your side are easier than boosting your attacks. Without spending too much bread, you can have concealment, deflection, evasion, and toughness to cover your ass and just having one of those can keep you in the running. Therefore it seems that power attack is a must. Also having an attack that targets a different save.

Feats are worth their weight in gold. They can't be taken away from you and grant massive price reductions for no reason. For example: attractive and attack specialization.

Picking up Shapeshift with the Slow extra x 2 and Limited is the cheesiest thing ever. Or you can just take the limited extra.

[virgil]

Actually, attractive and attack specialization are priced appropriately. You gain a +4 to two skills for 1pp, yet it's flawed to only affect the opposite sex; and the skill rank cost would've been 2pp, so the flaw reduces it to 1pp.

The Hide in Plain Sight feat isn't actually better than just using concealment, just different. You still need to deal with Spot checks, which can be as high as your Stealth checks. For 10 ranks of Concealment, you're automatically unnoticeable to ALL senses without having to make opposed checks.

The same goes for attack specialization, which is flawed once for melee/ranged, and flawed again to that specific attack form; there is technically a downside to using that exclusively, if you are somehow left without that specific attack, you're boned.

I'm still surprised at the fact that they don't have a cap built into grapple bonuses, other than the fact that several powers have Immunity (Grapple) built into them (low rank insubstantial, teleportation, damage aura to make it a bad idea, etc).

Area attacks are generally considered the realm of anti-mook powers anyway, but still have some use when dealing with high Defense trade-off types (Evasion doesn't make you immune).

Assuming you make yourself all-around capped, it'll cost you (46+PL*9) points to have...
Basics: Defense, Improved Toughness, Fortitude, Reflex, Will all at caps
Powers: Flight 1, Invisbility, Teleportation 3 (Accurate with all power feats but progression), Ranged Attack power at caps (2 AP)
Feats: Power Attack, Accurate Attack, Defensive Attack, Evasion, All-Out Attack

All that and you have a very tough nut. However, you only have 15pp left to cover the rest.

[Hey_I_Can_Chan]

...But that tough nut pretty much wins you the game.

That's the problem with M&M's PLs is that it's totally anticipatory--you can actually count on what you're going to face and the degree of challenge it will be, and while D&D suffers from this problem to a degree, it's not the same degree because D&D is so vast and M&M is so small. How many times does it take for the DM (MM?) to say, "The baddie snares you again," before you grow weary of it?

The idea of True 20 is flawed at its very base, which is M&M. I accept that superhero combat is random, but 1-in-20 random? My teammates can be dropped on a series of successful 20's random? Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman can all three have a bad day against the Riddler and lose? That's crap.

All superhero games suck. Really. I own them all. Down to Supergame, with its use of logs. They all suck. The only one that comes close to being workable is, believe it or not, Villains and Vigilantes, where you play yourself with superpowers--and sometimes you're Hawkeye or the Wasp and sometimes your Iron Man or Thor, because, dammit, that's just how comics work sometime.

[Neeek]

1194423658[/unixtime]]
All superhero games suck. Really. I own them all. Down to Supergame, with its use of logs. They all suck. The only one that comes close to being workable is, believe it or not, Villains and Vigilantes, where you play yourself with superpowers--and sometimes you're Hawkeye or the Wasp and sometimes your Iron Man or Thor, because, dammit, that's just how comics work sometime.

I dunno. Every system that Marvel has ever put out has worked for me. The FASERIP system and the Saga system have both been viable as far as I'm concerned.

[virgil]

I love how people equate 'hard to hurt' with 'win the game' for being a superhero. Have your DMs really been so unimaginative?

If your superheroing requires anything more than blasting one villain at a time, you're going to be in for a challenge. If your villain uses grapples, uses skills, needs to be sleuthed, or uses traps/disasters to threaten many people at once, then your 'tough nut' status does jack.

Despite all of your survival bases being covered, you've left yourself woefully limited at doing anything more complicated. It's stupidly easy to create scenarios where your character would still be challenged or even defeated, and it's varied enough that I doubt you can anticipate it all.

Even then, meeting the caps doesn't mean you're somehow invulnerable to all of the powers; so failure still happens even in your area of expertise.

You'll need better fodder than that to make any argument that superhero games svck.

[Hey_I_Can_Chan]

Okay, how about this: No superhero game can support the Avengers paradigm. In fact, no superhero game can even support the X-men paradigm.

That's 'cause the superhero world is governed by writers who employ characters either because of personal taste or fans' tastes. A superhero team in the comics can be viable with two normal dudes with weapons, a speedster, and a magician. A superhero game on the tabletop can be also if the GM is willing to break his goddamn brain to make it happen. GMs don't get paid on a per issue basis--writers do.

You can't apply CR to a comic villain because the CRs of the PCs varies so wildly. A Champions character who wants to be Batman will have his ass handed to him by a goddamn Booster Gold knock-off in a fair fight because all those 3-point skills do him no good in the beatdown department.

Once again, Spycraft 2.0 shines here because the out-of-combat stuff can influence the in-combat stuff and getting to the baddie is as important as beating the baddie and that means everyone contributes. But in the standard superhero game, with its hundred-plus pages devoted to superpowers instead of systems for using these superpowers, the game don't fly. So to speak.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Actually, there are totally games which support the 'Superman and Green Arrow' on the same team paradigm. My favorite of the bunch is With Great Power..., but I hear good things about Truth and Justice and Capes as well.

[virgil]

What exactly does the paradigm for Avengers & X-Men entail that makes them wholly unsupportable by superhero games? I'm quite skeptical of what you have to offer there, especially since I consider Xavier to be NPC material only (not familiar with Avengers roster).

If you have players who choose "guy with bow" or "guy with laser vision", then neither is at an advantage over the other. How does it break anyone's brain to have a magician and a 'normal' guy with weapons in the same group (if they're of the same PL, that guy is anything but normal with the implied level of combat ability). If you don't have abilities that meet the PL cap, then you aren't of that PL.

Where are you pulling arguments about CR from? I don't think anyone here has tried to use that system in their discussion. I stated that the power and difficulty is wholly dependent on the build of the opponent. PL is used to make sure nobody falls off the RNG.

You don't use your standard Riddler against the Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman trio, even in comics, and see him beat all three. That argument is a whole mess of illogical as a reason against superhero RPGs, especially MnM.

[angelfromanotherpin]

virgileso is talking about inherently unbalanced teams: Superman contributes a lot more than Green Arrow to the JLA, Thor contributes a lot more than Mockingbird to the Avengers, Warlock contributes a lot more than Cypher to the New Mutants. This kind of gross power asymmetry is seen all over the place in superhero teams, for a variety of powerful thematic reasons, but it is destructive to traditional tactical gaming, because it's like going into a wargame where one person gets to command a tank division, and another person gets to command Bob the auxiliary medic.

Now, you can use Champions-style 'special effects' to pretend that a character is just a well-trained normal human, but it actually runs a bit thin, because you know you're just pretending, and that his combat options actually are every bit as effective as the tank-throwing laser-eyed spandex-alien's options.

With Great Power... scales the opposition to the character, but makes each character's piece of the pie exactly as important to the overall plot. So maybe Superman could crush Robin's opponent easily, but he can't take any time out from dealing with his own problems; yet the opposition has to take out both of them to win.

[Lago_AM3P]

The Hide in Plain Sight feat isn't actually better than just using concealment, just different. You still need to deal with Spot checks, which can be as high as your Stealth checks. For 10 ranks of Concealment, you're automatically unnoticeable to ALL senses without having to make opposed checks.

Right. They're supposed to be used in conjunction; that way you can hide in the middle of heated combat. It's a huge attack and defense boon for no real reason and for some reason doesn't register on most peoples' 'powergame' meters even though few people are tooled up to counter it.

Area attacks are generally considered the realm of anti-mook powers anyway, but still have some use when dealing with high Defense trade-off types (Evasion doesn't make you immune).

Double evasion isn't for speedsters, it's for tanks. Someone with high levels of protection picks up improved evasion and they laugh at all area attacks.

Basics: Defense, Improved Toughness, Fortitude, Reflex, Will all at caps
Powers: Flight 1, Invisbility, Teleportation 3 (Accurate with all power feats but progression), Ranged Attack power at caps (2 AP)

Why would you sink good money into a defense bonus and toughness when you could buy the appropriate power feat?

You can buy up an equivalent bonus with defensive roll and if your GM tried to pull the 'you're surprised' crap, you show him your concentration bonus and tell him to shove it.

Why throw good points into your defense bonus when you can take dodge focus and uncanny dodge (some special bullshit sense)?

Furthermore, when you have stuff like transform and shapeshift and gadgets, why would you actually purchase fixed powers like that? Customizable powers not only tend to net you a price reduction if you manage them right without being too cheesy (I don't think anyone would stop you from using slow x 2 on your shapeshift) but they have the massive bonus of being customizable.

Also, like I said, at character creation you want to trade dodge bonuses for toughness bonuses because the benefit for high toughness is better than the benefit for a high dodge bonus. You want to trade attack bonuses for damage bonuses (i.e. having a higher power level).

[Lago_AM3P]

Look, the fact that Superman contributes more to the story than Green Arrow is because of writer favoritism and poor party balancing than anything. The fact that some people are holding games to this (inherently unfair) standard while ignoring that storytelling games have entirely different goals is a failure of their imaginations, not of superhero games.

There's nothing inherent about a superteam that requires the members to be unbalanced. The fictional Freedom League (in Mutant and Mastermind's very campaign setting) have wildly varying powers but were designed to be the equals of each other; they have a history and character almost as rich as their contemporary counterparts. The animated Teen Titans show is a perfect example. In fact, anime teams tend to have much better inter-party balance than ones based off of American comic books.

[angelfromanotherpin]

1194476703[/unixtime]]Look, the fact that Superman contributes more to the story than Green Arrow is because of writer favoritism and poor party balancing than anything.

No, it's because one of them is objectively better at everything than the other one, and yet they're on the same team. That happens in a crossover. 'Party balance' doesn't enter into it, because they weren't created as a party.

The fact that some people are holding games to this (inherently unfair) standard while ignoring that storytelling games have entirely different goals is a failure of their imaginations, not of superhero games.

There are games, some of which I have named, that exist and are perfectly capable of simulating the classic silver-age team-up stories, while not disenfranchising whoever chose to play Mockingbird. Some people want that, and they are disappointed by some other superhero games' inability to do that.

It is an inability, but not a disability. Champions does exactly what it was designed to do, and it does it really well.

There's nothing inherent about a superteam that requires the members to be unbalanced.

There is indeed, nothing that requires it, but it is part of the genre going back to the JSA, which included both the Spectre and Al Pratt. Some teams just have a heavy hitter. Some teams just have a person who gets by on being willing to show up and do the job.

The animated Teen Titans show is a perfect example. In fact, anime teams tend to have much better inter-party balance than ones based off of American comic books.

Actually Teen Titans is a bad example, because Robin rocks everyone else's face off in terms of actual effectiveness (despite being the trained normal archetype).

[Lago_AM3P]

Actually Teen Titans is a bad example, because Robin rocks everyone else's face off in terms of actual effectiveness (despite being the trained normal archetype).

I'd say that Teen Titans is probably the best example, actually, because everyone but arguably Starfire has a powerset that allows them to take on a huge variety of challenges.

Raven, Robin and Cyborg tend to push the limits of party balance (especially Raven) in their respective arcs but when it comes to overcoming generic challenges they're very well balanced.

No, it's because one of them is objectively better at everything than the other one, and yet they're on the same team. That happens in a crossover. 'Party balance' doesn't enter into it, because they weren't created as a party.

Right, it is suspect writing. Either these characters shouldn't have been teamed up in the first place or the writer has been pulling some blatant favoritism stunts.

I'm sure you've read Seanbaby. Profanity aside, a huge part of the Superfriend's section humor is how stupid and simulation-breaking the show was when it tried to have Aquaman fight alongside Superman.

It can be made to work, in the same way that random sexual tension and deus ex machina can still create interesting stories. But the fact that the story has to handwave this cognitive dissonance in the first place is a storytelling weakness to begin with.

I don't see why the JLA or Avengers should be used as a standard to judge the plot device of superhero teams. I don't mean just for gaming, I mean in general. If anything, the vast power disparities between Thor and Captain America is a good example of how NOT to build one.

Some people want that, and they are disappointed by some other superhero games' inability to do that.

It's much harder to balance an unbalanced game then it is to unbalance a balanced one.

Regardless, I have no idea how the system works. If it operates by anything other than DM fiat or having the other players sit out when it's not their turn for attention then I'll be very surprised.

There is indeed, nothing that requires it, but it is part of the genre going back to the JSA, which included both the Spectre and Al Pratt. Some teams just have a heavy hitter. Some teams just have a person who gets by on being willing to show up and do the job.

Then the old standard is idiotic and we need to get rid of it.

We're STILL fighting and eradication dumbass plot conventions and rules intent in Dungeons and Dragons decades after the first ruleset and it's doubtless that we'll get rid of them. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't attack them.

[Lago_AM3P]

http://bb.bbboy.net/thegamingden-viewth ... [br]That's the Teen Titans discussion page, yo.

[angelfromanotherpin]

1194481313[/unixtime]]I don't see why the JLA or Avengers should be used as a standard to judge the plot device of superhero teams.

Um, because it's the source material?

It's much harder to balance an unbalanced game then it is to unbalance a balanced one.

Regardless, I have no idea how the system works. If it operates by anything other than DM fiat or having the other players sit out when it's not their turn for attention then I'll be very surprised.

Simply put, when the GM spends resources against the Superman player, they enter the game as Superman-scale threats. When those resources are played against the Elongated Man player, they come out as Elongated Man-scale threats. Players pick their own character's scale at chargen, are each responsible for thwarting one aspect of the villainous plot, and each of those aspects must be completed if the plot is to succeed. It totally doesn't matter that Superman's opposition is an invading alien armada and Elongated Man's opposition is a few fifth-column infiltrators, because the scale is 'special effects' to the mechanics, which treat both players identically.

I'll admit that keeping player-at-the-table power equal while removing character-in-the-game power balance is kind of a tricky idea, but it does work.

Then the old standard is idiotic and we need to get rid of it.

Party balance in superhero gaming is the old standard at this point. It's only recently that games that can satisfactorily do the classic power discrepancy have been made, and they do it by not being tactical wargames, but by doing something else entirely.

We're STILL fighting and eradication dumbass plot conventions and rules intent in Dungeons and Dragons decades after the first ruleset and it's doubtless that we'll get rid of them. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't attack them.

See, D&D falls down because it doesn't simulate the source material. Asymmetric power is the source material for superhero teams. It touches on all kinds of superheroic themes, like 'is it the super that makes the hero?' and 'everybody needs help sometimes.' It also feeds into the soap opera that's at least half of superhero comics (How can I call myself a member of this team when I contribute so little?).

[RandomCasualty]

1194483669[/unixtime]]
Simply put, when the GM spends resources against the Superman player, they enter the game as Superman-scale threats. When those resources are played against the Elongated Man player, they come out as Elongated Man-scale threats. Players pick their own character's scale at chargen, are each responsible for thwarting one aspect of the villainous plot, and each of those aspects must be completed if the plot is to succeed. It totally doesn't matter that Superman's opposition is an invading alien armada and Elongated Man's opposition is a few fifth-column infiltrators, because the scale is 'special effects' to the mechanics, which treat both players identically.

I'll admit that keeping player-at-the-table power equal while removing character-in-the-game power balance is kind of a tricky idea, but it does work.

Problem is that you can't stop Superman from taking out Elongated man's opposition.

See, D&D falls down because it doesn't simulate the source material. Asymmetric power is the source material for superhero teams. It touches on all kinds of superheroic themes, like 'is it the super that makes the hero?' and 'everybody needs help sometimes.' It also feeds into the soap opera that's at least half of superhero comics (How can I call myself a member of this team when I contribute so little?).

But who wants to play Aquaman traveling with Superman and Thor?

This is a game and being t3h suck just isn't fun.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Problem is that you can't stop Superman from taking out Elongated man's opposition.

In fact, in WGP Superman's player can't affect EM's player's opposition. His resources are incapable of being spent that way. That doesn't keep Superman the character from helping out his buddy, but that happens when EM's player spends his own resources and narrates it as heat beams from the sky or whatever.

This perfectly mimics the narrative conventions of JLA fights, which ignore that Superman and the Flash should own everyone before anyone else knows the fight has even started, and just pair heroes and villains up for a few panels each. It's not supposed to be realistic, it's supposed to be JLA.

But who wants to play Aquaman traveling with Superman and Thor? This is a game and being t3h suck just isn't fun.

Look, some people want to play Aragorn, and some people want to play Frodo. The destined hero and the everyman hero both have their own appeal. In many game systems, players are heavily discouraged from playing the two types together because Frodo's low power level disenfranchises his player. WGP and similar games do not disenfranchise low-power concepts compared to high-power concepts, which is an ingenious innovation.

[RandomCasualty]

1194551505[/unixtime]]

Problem is that you can't stop Superman from taking out Elongated man's opposition.

In fact, in WGP Superman's player can't affect EM's player's opposition. His resources are incapable of being spent that way. That doesn't keep Superman the character from helping out his buddy, but that happens when EM's player spends his own resources and narrates it as heat beams from the sky or whatever.

This perfectly mimics the narrative conventions of JLA fights, which ignore that Superman and the Flash should own everyone before anyone else knows the fight has even started, and just pair heroes and villains up for a few panels each. It's not supposed to be realistic, it's supposed to be JLA.

How does this mechanic work exactly? Does it rely on the GM always throwing opposition in equal number to the PCs or what?

So if you had Superman, Aquaman and Batman travelling together, you'd have a Superman level threat, a batman level threat and an aquaman level threat every battle?

Also what happens if Aquaman loses his one on one combat and then Superman just decides to clean up the mess? Or is he prevented from doing that?