What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

[Querysphinx]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I tend to play a character on the path of redemption. Someone who has either intentionally or unintentionally caused serious harm in the past and who is in his or her own way, marginally crazier than any opponent. They also tend to be highly intelligent folks who fight way above their weight class.

[lemming]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I tend to go toward skilled, though of the characters I played, they tended to have different powers, backgrounds, motivations, etc...

 

Ice Pirate: Highly skilled Martial Artist who still has a mental block about property rights.

Calico: Highly skilled martial artist who believes if Violence is not the answer, you're asking the wrong question. (Personal Redemption type)

Scales: Slow moving Brick, was last working behind the scenes to set in motion a long term goal of deescalating conflict.

Blazer: Musician that kept being drawn into superpowered conflicts. (Fire Blaster) "Form Blazing Guitar!"

Spectrum: Moral Compass for the group.

Vetali: Martial Brick, trying to redeem her family name.

[Shadow Hawk]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

OK, more detail...

I go for the "hero's journey", with a inexperienced character learns to be a hero OR a "redemptive journey" were a experienced character of questionable morals learns to be a hero.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I tend to play a character on the path of redemption. Someone who has either intentionally or unintentionally caused serious harm in the past and who is in his or her own way' date=' marginally crazier than any opponent. They also tend to be highly intelligent folks who fight way above their weight class.[/quote']

 

Paging Harry Dresden....

[Lord Liaden]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Build-wise, I tend to play powerful superheroes with fairly flashy SFX. Never really enjoyed street-level heroes -- they just feel too, well, mundane to satisfy me.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Build-wise' date=' I tend to play powerful superheroes with fairly flashy SFX. Never really enjoyed street-level heroes -- they just feel too, well, mundane to satisfy me.[/quote']

 

Agreed.

 

This may be why I haven't played a telepath in a while. They tend to be subtle ... I haven't been much for subtle lately.

[phoenix240]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Build-wise' date=' I tend to play powerful superheroes with fairly flashy SFX. Never really enjoyed street-level heroes -- they just feel too, well, mundane to satisfy me.[/quote']

 

My character don't tend to be very flashy most martial artists and and other skill/training types. Nothing against the other sorts I just like more "street level" heroes overall. I can relate more to them, I guess.

[sinanju]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I tend to play either classic flying bricks (it's the FLYING part that matters) or characters with flexible powers. I love VPPs and the ability (and necessity) to think on my feet and figure out how best to handle any given situation/opponent.

[Christopher]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

That is something that doesn't often come up in our games. The most we have seen onscreen is a kiss or a hug. Anything else is implied. Fairly PG that way.

I guess I somewhat miss-spoke. I'll try to tell it better:

I generally seperate private and superheroic life. They are all emotionally strong. They are eitehr not outgoing/romatically agressive at all (not shy/charred childs, but also not actively searching or craving for a relationship) or if they are they are also strong enough to work with a "romances in the team are bad" policy (ironically the most outgoing/chaotic concepts tend to be the strongest in that regard).

When romance should become a part of the adventure, they are strong enough to cope with a loved one dying/betraying them/unresolved attraction to team-members. They won't be cold or unaffaected, but they will continue to do "what every other hero would have done in the situation".

When romance is developing they won't dodge around the issue for years, but will talk with the significant other. I should also note that they have no defined preferences for gender, species, or relationship type. Not because I want to open the posibility of women/women romances, but because I think that once you reach a certain level of personality strenght and certinity you can totally ignore physical atraction and start to be atracted to the personality (but since we intuitively percieve certinity as atractive, the romance interest will be considered atractive by most people too).

[Querysphinx]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Paging Harry Dresden....

 

I showed up at my folks house once with my duster, hat, And walking staff, and my mother said, "I thought Harry Dresden was coming up the driveway."

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I guess I somewhat miss-spoke. I'll try to tell it better:

 

 

I was just noting that while there is the occasional romance in our games, the conversations may be played, but the romance (other than a kiss here or an "I love you dear, be back after I take on Firewing" is about as far as it goes. Not saying that you were more so, just that it is a plot/character aspect that really doesn't come up a whole bunch.

[phoenix240]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

 

I was just noting that while there is the occasional romance in our games, the conversations may be played, but the romance (other than a kiss here or an "I love you dear, be back after I take on Firewing" is about as far as it goes. Not saying that you were more so, just that it is a plot/character aspect that really doesn't come up a whole bunch.

 

Not even the occasional Fade To Black and "bow-wakka-chikka-wakka-chikka" background music?

[Dr. MID-Nite]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

For me....powers tend to be natural(few focuses) and I usually have plenty of skills regardless of sterotypes..and I almost always have KS: Supervillains to at the very least remember stuff about guys I've fought

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Not even the occasional Fade To Black and "bow-wakka-chikka-wakka-chikka" background music?

 

Not in the group.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

My characters, whether played or just built as homages, all tend to be finesse characters on some level. I prefer power-based characters whose strength of power is defined early and experience just allows broadening their scope.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I tend to play either classic flying bricks (it's the FLYING part that matters) or characters with flexible powers. I love VPPs and the ability (and necessity) to think on my feet and figure out how best to handle any given situation/opponent.

 

I appreciate and applaud your approaching the VPP with that attitude, but I'm almost the opposite. I dislike them unless the character concept absolutely demands them, like open-ended power mimickers. I prefer my characters to have defined abilities spelled out on their character sheets, with improvisation handled by occasional Power Skill applications or creative use of SFX.

 

I've found myself rather annoyed by the frequent inclusion of VPPS for all manner of villains from 5E, and now 6E. Apologies to Steve Long whom I greatly respect, but to me they smack of lazy design.

[sinanju]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I appreciate and applaud your approaching the VPP with that attitude, but I'm almost the opposite. I dislike them unless the character concept absolutely demands them, like open-ended power mimickers. I prefer my characters to have defined abilities spelled out on their character sheets, with improvisation handled by occasional Power Skill applications or creative use of SFX.

 

I've found myself rather annoyed by the frequent inclusion of VPPS for all manner of villains from 5E, and now 6E. Apologies to Steve Long whom I greatly respect, but to me they smack of lazy design.

 

Well, you have to have a GM who will allow VPPs and who can appreciate them. VPP characters of mine include Raven (who manipulates "reality", which as she knows is merely a collective dream, and she's the only lucid dreamer); Black Mask (similar, but more Matrix-y in concept); and Jesse James, who could change her form in many, many ways. Raven is the most free-ranging of them, with "dream logic" there's very little I can't justify as being covered by the VPP. Black Mask can affect himself best, with more limited powers based on altering the world around him as in the Matrix movies. Jesse is the most limited: she can change her own form (shapechange, density increase/decrease, size changes, etc.) but can't affect the world around her except indirectly.

 

I've played version of these character (or others) using Multi-Powers in games where the GM didn't want to deal with a VPP.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I appreciate and applaud your approaching the VPP with that attitude, but I'm almost the opposite. I dislike them unless the character concept absolutely demands them, like open-ended power mimickers. I prefer my characters to have defined abilities spelled out on their character sheets, with improvisation handled by occasional Power Skill applications or creative use of SFX.

 

I've found myself rather annoyed by the frequent inclusion of VPPS for all manner of villains from 5E, and now 6E. Apologies to Steve Long whom I greatly respect, but to me they smack of lazy design.

 

I agree that VPP's on a character sheet without a suite of abilities already built is a bit lazy (I've done it when modeling characters like Green Lantern, Zatanna & Firestorm because it's practically necessary). Other characters can have a more limited set of abilities but the sheer variety of ways they can be applied demand a VPP because using a Multipower to represent them is actually more expensive due to slot costs (this is why I now use a VPP for Superman, I still stat out all the slots though).

 

One possible house rule solution would be to require a Limitation (-0 to at most -1/4) that acts as a middle ground between the slot costs of Multipowers and the total absence of any additional costs for the near infinite variety of slots in a VPP. The cost structure could be similar to that for Familiarities or be based on a flat doubling (1 point gets 1 slot, 2/2, 3/4, 4/8, 5/16, etc..) and be required to be purchased outside of the VPP with NO Limitations (similar to the weapon doubling rules).

 

Just a thought.

HM

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

VPPs are one of those things I primarily regulate on the basis of 'can the player use it without bogging down the game'. Since nobody in my group really wants to learn the system beyond the absolute basics needed for gameplay (I have to create all the characters), the answer is universally 'no'.

[sinanju]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

VPPs are one of those things I primarily regulate on the basis of 'can the player use it without bogging down the game'. Since nobody in my group really wants to learn the system beyond the absolute basics needed for gameplay (I have to create all the characters)' date=' the answer is universally 'no'.[/quote']

 

Which is why some GMs I've played with don't want to bother with them. I _can_ come up with powers on the fly (it's not difficult, especially if you stick to basic powers without piling on advantages and limitations, or if you have a template for doing certain types of powers worked out), and if I can't I don't hold up the game. (And as I come up with useful or entertaining powers, I do write them out and add them to a list so I can recreate them later.)

[Christopher]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

For me....powers tend to be natural(few focuses) and I usually have plenty of skills regardless of sterotypes..

Same here, no Foci. If a concept is armed, it's a Material Manifestation + Restrainable (for a -3/4 Limitation) at worst. And since there are eitehr magic or supertech times 10, that does not even falsl udner Hammerspace.

 

VPPs are one of those things I primarily regulate on the basis of 'can the player use it without bogging down the game'. Since nobody in my group really wants to learn the system beyond the absolute basics needed for gameplay (I have to create all the characters)' date=' the answer is universally 'no'.[/quote']

Intrestingly even on Herocentral, where you have enough time to write up a power without bogging down the game, a lot of GM's forbid it's use. i guess they have a problem with the character having acess to any power with any advantage unless it is limited.

But form some things it's simply nessesary (how to make "every weapon mankind ever made" without knowing every weapon in advance?)

[phoenix240]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Not in the group.

 

I was joking.

[phoenix240]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I appreciate and applaud your approaching the VPP with that attitude, but I'm almost the opposite. I dislike them unless the character concept absolutely demands them, like open-ended power mimickers. I prefer my characters to have defined abilities spelled out on their character sheets, with improvisation handled by occasional Power Skill applications or creative use of SFX.

 

I've found myself rather annoyed by the frequent inclusion of VPPS for all manner of villains from 5E, and now 6E. Apologies to Steve Long whom I greatly respect, but to me they smack of lazy design.

 

Agreed. I tend to avoid combat variable VPPs for PCs and NPCs as much as possible. In almost every game I've seen them in they've become disruptive in some fashion usually through one character being a major scene hog and stealing everyones else's thunder as much as possible and dominating the spotlight. That's probably more an issue with the player than the mechanic but it seems to come with the territory at least IME. VPPs with limited circumstances when they can change (Equipment pools, for example) have been far less trouble from both ends of the screen. I admire groups that can handle the more variable type well but I haven't played with one where they've worked.

[phoenix240]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

Intrestingly even on Herocentral, where you have enough time to write up a power without bogging down the game, a lot of GM's forbid it's use. i guess they have a problem with the character having acess to any power with any advantage unless it is limited.

 

Maybe it's not how you intended but that strikes me as overly harsh. I mean I resrtict VPPs but its not from a fear of powerful player characters.

 

GMing a wide open VPP character, particularly in a group game is difficult. Players are a creative, improvisational lot even with "limited" Powers and will come at things in suprising new ways all the tme. A character with the ability to pull anything (in some cases literally) out of the air at will can be daunting to challenge or even keep things interesting. In an online game this can be worse as the player usually has plenty of time to think about what to do. Consider the source material, how many times have characters that would have a "VPP" in Hero terms been limited only by Plot Induced Stupidity and you've though how you could do it better?

 

In group settings, certain kinds of VPPs can make niche protection hard to maintain. One character becomes a Jack of All Trades able to switch between function and abilities at will and sometimes perform as well as a specialist in that area with vastly more flexibility. VPPs with sfx like "Magic", "Power Cosmic" and "Reality Manipulation" where the character can do practically anything need a player with a firm grasp of the concept "just beause I can doesn't mean I should" who's willing to give the other players some space to shine or can cause some resentment at the table. No one wants to feel like a side kick after all (or mostly no one, some people are fine with it). The best approach I've seen is to few it as "I do what no one else can" and fill in for gaps that come up instead of jumping to solve every problem.

 

The GM can help with all these issues with various houserules and rulings but some choose to avoid the issue all together and restrict VPPs to what's absolutely nesecary or not at all. I don't think it stems from being afraid of handing the Players power, at least not all the time. There are GMs like that but it takes more than restricting or banning VPPs to indicate it, IMO.

 

Edit: Wow, that went on longer than I thought. Sorry.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: What are YOUR character trademark(s)?

 

I was joking.