MindWanderer's Character Creation Tips

Games Sentinel Comics RPG
41

Disagree heavily

That the discrepancy in effectiveness between one class in Dnd and another is due to access to different abilities and spells instead of of one just having raw, higher numbers doesn’t mean that discrepancy isn’t there.

And it is there within classes too. If someone makes a standard two handed weapon fighter, and someone else makes one that dual wields a whip and a hand crossbow because they thought being Indiana Jones would be fun they are going to be very different in their effectiveness. Particularly at level one, since the wired build is going to need all kinds of feats before they become remotely effective. I’ve seen it over and over again from a player of mine who always wanted to do whacky builds that will “start to work at level 7”

Now we are gonna reach a point where i agree with you, and where i think GMs need to be willing to be a little firm in SCRPG since players are roleplaying as character with, well, super powers.

Hitting every minion in the scene for nine every turn would indeed be OP. I don’t think its a thing one character can reliably do every turn for a few reasons

First off, Nearby minions doesn’t mean every minion in the scene, it means a group of nearby minions. “I know you can run at mach 7, but you still need to pick if you want to punch every minion on the north side of the park or every minion on the south side of the park. It takes takes enough of your focus to hit just the bad guys with just enough force to not destroy the entire park that you only get one group” This does still mean the speedster is doing much more then the person just hitting one minion, but they aren’t solving the entire scene on their own.

Next Getting up to 9 damage reliably to me means either you are getting other players to boost you, or you are using a red ability. If its other players boosting you, I think thats fine. If two or three players are spending there turns in tandem to delete a group of minions well that is in general what minions are there for.

If its a red ability it means either you are near the end of the scene, you are wracking up twists, or you are using collections. The first two are fine with me, the last one is where the GM needs to be a little firm.

collections require roleplaying to active. “I draw upon the memory of the last time we fought the Duke of Destruction to dredge up the rage to use my red ability without a twist.”

If the player next turn tries to use the exact same justification to do the exact same thing using either a a different collection or the same unticked with Break the Fourth wall the GM can say no, that well of dramatic tension is dry.

All of this is getting far afield though. I largely agree with you. There are power soruces and archytpes that are stronger then others. There are abilities within those that are stronger then others. There are principles that are more easily used then others and there are -certainly- red abilities that are stronger then others. But at the end of the day i could make a party of four characters in Dnd trying to be quirky and do a special thing that wouldn’t be able to clear one of the starting adventuers. I think a party of three or four SCRPG heroes using all of the worst power sources and archtypes would still be able to make it though the starter kit.

42

The GM shutting off collections is a tough sell, IMO, especially if you consider Break the 4th, which lets you use a Collection every round. I'd be pretty upset if the GM just decided I couldn't use Collections anymore unless I came to with something totally novel every time. Besides, the rulebook says not to be too strict about this.

You can get an average of 9 damage with a Mid and a +3 boost, which isn't hard to get. In my current game, I have a character who gives himself a +3 Persistent as soon as he hits Yellow, then hands out +3-+4 bonuses to the whole team every round.

And yes, it's easy in D&D to create a character who's nonfunctional, so I'll agree that the bottom is lower in D&D than in SCRPG.

43

I really don't want to nitpick, but you just made several assumptions that I don't believe line up with the majority of situations.

First, Mid die. There are two dice pools in the game that actually have a 6 or better expected value for their mid die on a single unmodified roll: 10/12/12, and 12/12/12.
Second, Max die. There is exactly one dice pool in the game that actually has an expected value of a +3 on their max die from a boost on a single unmodified roll: 12/12/12

Edit: Got a spreadsheet for inherent reroll 1s data

First, Mid die. 8/12/12, 10/10/12, 10/12/12, and 12/12/12 all give mid dice a 6 or better for their expected value. While more plausible, that's still quite difficult.
Second, Max die. You still need a 12/12/12 to have an expected value of a +3 on the max die from a boost.

Edit 2: Got a spreadsheet for reroll reaction data.

First, Mid die. I set the spreadsheet to reroll a pool if the mid die was below average for that dice pool ordinarily. Dice pools with a 6 or better expected value on the mid die were 6/12/12, 8/10/12, 8/12/12. 10/10/10, 10/10/12, 10/12/12, 12/12/12. These are definitely achievable dice pools, but excluding the 10/10/10, you need to have a d12 somewhere in the dice pool.

Second, Max die. I set the spreadsheet to reroll a pool if the max die was below average that dice pool ordinarily. Dice pools with a +3 or better expected value on the max die from a boost were 6/12/12, 8/12/12, 10/12/12, and 12/12/12. In all of these cases, you need at least two d12s in the pool.

Edit 3: Got a spreadsheet for reroll reaction + 'reroll 1s' inherent data

First, Mid die. I set the spreadsheet to reroll a pool if the mid die was below average for that dice pool ordinarily. Dice pools with a 6 or better expected value on the mid was were 6/10/12, 6/12/12, 8/10/10, 8/10/12, 8/12/12, 10/10/10, 10/10/12, 10/12/12, and 12/12/12. Once more, all of these dice pools require a d12 in them, except for 10/10/10.

Second, Max die. I set the spreadsheet to reroll a pool if the max die was below average that dice pool ordinarily. Dice pools with a +3 or better expected value on the max die from a boost were 6/12/12, 8/12/12, 10/12/12, and 12/12/12. In all of these cases, you need at least two d12s in the pool.

---- Summary ----

So, if you take a reaction that let's you reroll your dice pool once, and an inherent ability that grants you a reroll on 1s (that locks you out of more rerolls), you end up with a fairly sizable number of dice pools that can give the Mid die of expected value of 6 or greater. With the optimizations suggested dice wise, I'm sure it's not too difficult to pull that off. You'll still need two d12s for your +3 expected value on the Max though, which is pretty restrictive.

With just the reaction to reroll, your dice pool will need either three d10s, a d10 and a d12, or two d12s depending on what your smallest die is. Getting d12s isn't terribly easy, and getting two in total will definitely restrict your options. Not much worse than with the inherent added in though, you still need two d12s for your +3 expected value off your Max die.

With just a free reroll on 1s, you can't use a d6, and you need either two d10s and a d12 or two d12s depending on what your smallest die is. Getting two d10s and a d12 isn't impossible, but it will definitely restrict your options. Getting two d12s is very restrictive. If you want that reliable +3 expected value of your Max die, you need to grab three d12s along the way. It's possible... But you're options are extremely limited.

With neither, the reaction or the inherent, you need two d12s and a d10. If you want that +3 expected value off of your Max die, then you're grabbing a third d12 along the way. Welcome to very few options, we hope that you enjoy the ride.

44

I really think that invoking the same bit of back story to do the same red ability every turn is going against the spirit of the collection far more then then the GM saying no if you can’t be creative. Eventually the d6 minions you’re trying to summon in this hour of desperate need without making the proper offering are gonna get wise.

The slack the GM gives the player is in that they don’t need to get the details exactly right of the events they are recalling, not in allowing the death of Uncle Ben to be so tramtic that every action, every battle you recall it to fuel your anger into the same attack. Thats boring.

And its not like such scrutiny makes the ability useless. The reaction still lets you put one of your dice to any facing you want each turn. Thats strong.

45

I think that's perfectly appropriate as a house rule if you think Break the 4th (or taking a minor twist to use Summoned Allies in general) is OP (which I do), but it's a house rule. The rules as written don't suggest that you should restrict one use of Collections over another that way.

46

Not even remotely a house rule. The rules as written say that in order for a collection to get rid of a twist it has to make sense in the story. Using the same bit of back story over and over again for the same action does not make sense in a dramatic comic book story.

I would go so far as to say ignoring the limitation on collections completely is the houserule, and that its slightly silly to call something OP while ignoring its built in limitation.

47

Here's the full text: "You can invoke your collection instead of taking a minor twist, provided you can think of an explanation for how it’s relevant to the situation."

I don't see anything there that suggests that the same collection (remember, you're unchecking it and using the same one again) can't be used to explain the same thing more than once.  "You can't do it because it isn't dramatic enough" is absolutely a house rule, and is a slippery slope IMO.

48

Then there is this section right after which does suggest putting a limit on use of collections so what Cult of Gloom is saying is not a houserule  

>
> Heroes with a lot of collections can be quite powerful, so issues written to be used by any team of heroes that happen to try them — from street level upstarts to cosmically powerful beings — may limit this power by putting a cap on the number of collections a hero can use to create bonuses. This helps level the playing field, especially when a team has heroes with different levels of experience. If a hero doesn’t have as many collections as the issue’s limit, they gain additional uses equal to the amount they’re missing, leveling the hero playing field.

49

That has to do with how many collections people in mixed tables have, not whether you can or can't "re-use" collections for the same narrative function.  While I definitely think Cult of Gloom is capturing the spirit of the rules, MindWanderer is correct about the letter of the law.

50

“I’m using the memory of uncle ben to get super angry to draw on deep reserves i didn’t know i had to use my red ability early with out a twist”

“You’ve already drawn on that reserve five times now in this one fight, its just no longer feasible that burst of raw emotion is keeping you going, what else you got?”

I think we’re just gonna have to agree to disagree here, but again I think its the other way around. Treating collections like they are just spell points to be ticked off is what goes against the rules text, and its what leads to infinite loop problems in a slippery slope.

I will say that, as the GM, its your job to help your players come up with good collection uses and good twists, or nudge them to find a way to make a power or quality fit. But likewise, as players, sometimes it needs to be accepted that a tool won’t fit to every occasion.

51

It still is directly saying to limit use of collections and so it doesn’t make it a houserule to limit use of them.

52

This has wandered pretty far from the main point of this thread and may be worthy of its own as a discussion.

FWIW, as a GM, I would not let someone use the same call-back - or even mostly the same call-back - in the same scene.  I don't care if that's called a House Rule or not; it's not happening at my table.

That being said, however, it *really* shouldn't be difficult for a player to come up with another call-back to use another collection.

(And all *that* being said, the collection system breaks at about 6 collections anyway, so either they include some previously-unseen long-term advancement notes or I'll be among those house-ruling the permanent exchange of collections for permanent power-ups.)

53

It’s specifically saying, “limit this power by putting a cap on the number of collections a hero can use to create bonuses.” Break the 4th allows the player to uncheck a used collection, allowing them to use it again. Its entire purpose is to subvert this limit. Its entire purpose is to use the same collection–the same justification–to avoid a minor twist, change a die value, or add a story element.

That said, I think it’s a terrible ability, not least for the reasons you and Cult of Gloom state. It’s broken and it abuses Collections thematically. But as written I don’t see any reason to disallow it being used this way outside of a house rule.

54

For some reason I could've sworn Break the 4th said once per session but it doesn't in any older versions I have.  

55

From what I read in a few points, I think that you could argue using a collection per scene should be limited to different points. Using the uncle Ben thing in scenes back to back would be fine, in one fight I would say it needs to be a different story IMO.

56

This'll be my last post on the matter. I guess it still just bugs me to call disallowing an action becuase it doesn't make dramatic or logical sense a house rule when the rules state the action can only be taken when it makes sense for the scene and story, To me it feels less like a house rule and more like exactly what the rule says and actually playing the role playing game.

57

to try and swerve back in the lane-
MindWanderer you said you were not a fan of Action + other Action with Min die but did you rate Attack + Defend with min die a bit higher than the others of that type?

58

I shouldn't have.  Did that come across somewhere?  Attack is a somewhat more valuable action than boost or hinder, but Defend is somewhat less valuable.  That's better than a basic Attack but it's worse than most other Action abilities.

59

To follow up that question, what about the instance where it is: Attack with Mid, Defend with Min against all Attacks against you until your next turn?

60

I didn't say anything about that one.  It's situational, so I didn't feel comfortable making a blanket valuation of it. If a hero can successfully draw a lot of aggro for several enemy attacks, it's fantastic.  Or the hero could end up taking his or her next turn immediately, and it's useless.  It also depends on the GM and the decisions of the enemies--will they attack the defended hero, or attack someone else?  Or take other actions?  Would the heroes benefit if the defense was merely a deterrent?  Too many factors to make a simple statement about.