Capes & Cowls superhero rpg

[hermes]

Hi.  I have been lurking here and there in this forum for some time but this is the first time I have decided to post something.  I recently made a bit of a breakthrough with a game system that I have been plugging away at and I thought that this might be a good time to get some feedback on it.  The game is called Capes & Cowls (that is my working title at any rate) and it is a superhero rpg.  I outline my intent in the opening few paragraphs of the document so rather than repeat them here I will just let those who are interested read it at their leisure.  For the sake of simplicity, I have typed up the file as a Word document which can easily be read and downloaded by most people.  If anyone is interested in reading it and has difficulty with Word files then by all means let me know and I will endeavor to write it up in HTML or something similar.  Of course, since I am asking for feedback, it goes without saying that you are all welcome to comment or critique it as per your whim.  I have uploaded the file to the following URL. . .

http://www.geocities.com/winterknights/capesandcowls.doc

Thanks and enjoy!

Glenn Hall

[Tony Irwin]

Of course, since I am asking for feedback, it goes without saying that you are all welcome to comment or critique it as per your whim.  I have uploaded the file to the following URL. . .

http://www.geocities.com/winterknights/capesandcowls.doc

Hey Glen, I couldn't access the your site - probably just my computer, I'll try again later today. In the meantime, what kind of feedback are you after? Do you have specific issues or questions you want opinions on? You may find you get a better response that way, this sticky thread at the top of the indie design page goes into that a bit.

Tony

[Andrew Martin]

Of course, since I am asking for feedback, it goes without saying that you are all welcome to comment or critique it as per your whim.  I have uploaded the file to the following URL. . .

http://www.geocities.com/winterknights/capesandcowls.doc

Hey Glen, I couldn't access the your site...

I couldn't access the file either. I think it's because Glenn's site on GeoCities doesn't have an index page?

[hermes]

Sigh.  Thanks to everyone who pointed out that geocities likes to be difficult.  I had tested the file to make sure it downloaded properly but I suspect that geocities embedded a cookie on my computer or some such which would allow me to access the file but not others.  I believe that I have solved the problem so try this HTML link first and just do the ol' Save As to get the file.

http://www.geocities.com/winterknights/

And, if geocities still does not like you. . .

http://winterknights.tripod.com/candc.htm

As far as specific areas for feedback goes, I guess that I am first and foremost looking for any reactions or comments in general.  More specifically, opinions on the Action Dice pool mechanic (the great equalizer for superheroes) would be most welcome.  Also, if anyone spots any major flaws or areas which I totally neglected to cover then by all means let me know.  And, of course, if you still cannot access the file then I will whip it up in HTML.  Thanks for your patience.

Glenn Hall

[Mike Holmes]

Working fine now.

Mike

[hardcoremoose]

Glenn,

I'm going to confess, my main interest in this game is selfish curiosity.  I've been begging for a cool indie-designed supers game for quite some time, and nothing's quite fit the bill.  I liked some of what Clinton was doing with Panels.  I could see where Doc Midnight was going with Hyperbole, but it just doesn't click for me.  There's The Code, which is definitely cool, but all the rest are point-based nightmares.

So like any good game designer, I wrote my own game.  And I wanted to see how your game compared.

I will say, the problems you have with existing games are pretty much the problems I have too.  And I agree with some of your solutions.  Some I don't.

The A-Numero Uno Cool Thing you got going for you in this game is your In-Character and Out-of-Character designations.  I like what they mean, and I suspect they'll work okay in play, although I think I would change the terminology (these particular terms are already entrenched in rpg vernacular...I'm sure you could do better).  For the record, it's this sort of shared understanding of character that I was shooting for in my own design, so of course I'd like it.  

The Action Dice mechanic seems like it will work, but I'd need to play it to know.  It definitely solves some problems.  I'm not sure if it will create others or not.

The Hero Points mechanics will work, because we've seen them work in other games too.  That's not a crack; I use this sort of thing all the time (in my own supers game, even).  I'd like to see it do more, though.  And I don't really see why you have to wait until after the game to earn Hero Points.  Too often games do too much either before play starts, or after it's finished.  The play is the thing, and the immediacy of an award given as play proceeds can do a lot to affect tempo and pacing.  

I kind of like the GM's die bit - the roll that proceeds each turn of combat - but it's slanted towards the players.  So are the actual costs of using Hero Points for that matter.  That's all well and good - the PCs are the heroes afterall - but remember that a hero is measured by the adversity he faces.

I hate the initiative roll, and I hate the way combat turns are ordered.  I guess "hate" is a pretty strong word, but man, it's so old school.  I guess this is one of those preference things, but really, you could do better.

Damage and how it's dealt with seems kind of clunky.  And even given it's clunkiness, it fails to properly address certain things.  For instance, at one point you basically instruct your readers to disregard the damage rules when they don't make sense, imploring them to fall back upon their shared understanding of the characters.  

The World Creation stuff, as you noted in your text, is borrowed from the esteemed Mr. Sorensen.  I like the dials thing as a sort of social contract metaphor, to get the players thinking about the specifics of their setting and whatnot.  However, regardless of what dial is set to where, the game is going to play the same.  There should be some mechanics here...bennies should cost differing amounts of HPs, damage should behave differently, etc.  Or maybe you could streamline your mechanics somehow, to take advantage of the understanding these dials create in the player about the game they're playing.

Now I'm gonna' tell you what Vincent Baker told me about my supers game, which is what it's missing.  It doesn't have a structure.  It needs some rules for the GM, something that tells him how to use to game, and that really drives home the feeling that you're in a comic book.  There are some neat ideas floating around here; embrace them and you could have something pretty cool on your hands.

- Scott

[Tony Irwin]

Hey Glenn,

Dial Settings

This is the part where you define your game setting.  Some of these dials are of an off/on variety while others allow for varying degrees.  There are six different dials that need to be defined and each of them is described in turn.

Spectra-Analyzer (Monochrome / 4-Color / True-Color)
Comics Code Meter (G / PG / R / NC-17)
Killswitch (Off / On)
Weirdness Tank (Empty / Low / Half / High / Full)
Laugh-O-Matic (Serious / Satirical / Witty / Wacky / Insane)
Cliche Blender (Pulse / Blend / Puree)

Like Scott, I'd ask if you've maybe considered tying these into your system? Say like the GM gives bonus dice to actions that are in tune with where the dials are set. Even handing out d4s to roll along with their d6 action dice might be enough to reward players without unbalancing your action dice resource management system.

There is one other thing to consider when resolving an action.  Any action taken by a character may either be considered In-Character (IC) or Out-of-Character (OC).  An IC action is something that you would expect a character to do or be able to do.  When Batman tries to analyze some chemical residue that he found at a crime scene, that is definitely IC.  When Batman tries to sing for an audience that falls into the realm of OC.  Batman picking up a car and throwing it is not only OC but will also be rated as an Impossible action by the GM.  For an IC action the character may use as many AD as they wish, up to their normal limit.  For an OC action a character only gets to roll 1.  Notice how in our above example Batman has absolutely no chance to throw the car because the most he can ever roll is a single 6.  

I wanted to ask you about this - do you see the game as a vehicle for playing existing comic book heros, in which case its kind of straightforward to determine IC/OC - just argue and quote issues at each other for 15 min ;-) Or will players be inventing their own heros? If its the latter then you might need some really tight character creation rules that can specify just what characters can and can't do (or at least nail down their style for approaching lots of different problems) otherwise it could be really tough trying to figure out whether something is IC/OC for a PC in the middle of the game.

[hermes]

Scott,

  Thanks for the comments and insight.

I'm going to confess, my main interest in this game is selfish curiosity. I've been begging for a cool indie-designed supers game for quite some time, and nothing's quite fit the bill. I liked some of what Clinton was doing with Panels. I could see where Doc Midnight was going with Hyperbole, but it just doesn't click for me. There's The Code, which is definitely cool, but all the rest are point-based nightmares.

So like any good game designer, I wrote my own game. And I wanted to see how your game compared.

  Hmmm. . . your game is unknown to me (possibly because you have been keeping it to yourself or simply because I just plain didn't notice you mentioning it previously) though I am familiar with your great work on Wyrd.  As for the other games you mentioned, I think Panels is fantastic (though it doesn't work for me or my group) and the Code just oozes coolness (though it doesn't fit the bill either).  I must confess that I'm not familiar with Hyperbole though I'd love to check it out sometime if I can track it (or Doc Midnight) down.

The A-Numero Uno Cool Thing you got going for you in this game is your In-Character and Out-of-Character designations. I like what they mean, and I suspect they'll work okay in play, although I think I would change the terminology (these particular terms are already entrenched in rpg vernacular...I'm sure you could do better). For the record, it's this sort of shared understanding of character that I was shooting for in my own design, so of course I'd like it.

  I'm glad that you liked that part of the mechanic.  I thought it was the sort of thing that would help keep players honest by making it to their advantage to play their heroes as they had originally envisioned them rather than just min-maxing in a given situation.  I remember the first time I ever played V & V (now that's a fond memory) I had a character with Flame Powers and loads of Agility.  I quickly discovered that he was a lot more effective shooting his standard-issue CHESS energy pistol than he was at lobbing fireballs so I kept doing that until I finally got older, and more mature, and wised-up to the fact that it didn't really suit the character.  As for the terminology, I used IC and OoC because they were pretty obviously defined, but if you can think of anything more appropriate then I'd love to hear it.

The Action Dice mechanic seems like it will work, but I'd need to play it to know. It definitely solves some problems. I'm not sure if it will create others or not.

  Action Dice are the core of the mechanic.  The idea that the power level of a character is based on his or her importance to the story rather than his or her actual powers was key for me.  Batman and Superman can both use 10 AD, but the actual in-game explanation or description of how they do so would be very different.  I'll have to wait to play test it a bit to see what sort of problems arise.

The Hero Points mechanics will work, because we've seen them work in other games too. That's not a crack; I use this sort of thing all the time (in my own supers game, even). I'd like to see it do more, though. And I don't really see why you have to wait until after the game to earn Hero Points. Too often games do too much either before play starts, or after it's finished. The play is the thing, and the immediacy of an award given as play proceeds can do a lot to affect tempo and pacing.

  You know, it never even occured to me to give out Hero Points during play but that makes perfect sense.  Wicked idea!  I guess I've just been so firmly entrenched in the usual post-game experience rut that the thought never even occured to me.  I'll have to make the necessary changes.

I kind of like the GM's die bit - the roll that proceeds each turn of combat - but it's slanted towards the players. So are the actual costs of using Hero Points for that matter. That's all well and good - the PCs are the heroes afterall - but remember that a hero is measured by the adversity he faces.

  I must admit that the idea of the GM's die stems from the campaign that I currently run using Marvel SAGA.  It's a very handy mechanic and I wanted to include it.  Now that you mention it, there really isn't any need to slant it towards the players with the Hero Points mechanic already in place (since HPs can be used to gain extra recovery).  I can easily change the table so that the current result of 5 occurs on a 6 instead with a 5 now being nothing.  Or, I could slant it the other way and make a 1 function like a 6 and the 2 work like a 5 but to the benefit of the villains.  Do you think that might help?  I do like the idea of having villains spend more points than heroes to accomplish things though (VPs and HPs).  The players would all mutiny if the villains were just as good as they were in that regard.  LOL

I hate the initiative roll, and I hate the way combat turns are ordered. I guess "hate" is a pretty strong word, but man, it's so old school. I guess this is one of those preference things, but really, you could do better.

  Now, do you hate initiative rolls or do you HATE initiative rolls.  LOL  I guess they aren't your cup of tea.  I'm not always a fan of them either but I've seen too many games fall apart without them.  Marvel SAGA uses simultaneous actions and that always used to cause no end of confusion and arguments for my players.  We tried using declared actions too, but there is nothing that sucks worse than declaring something like shooting a villain who gets taken out before your action actually occurs.  Hello, wasted action!  For my group, things just run a lot smoother when there is some sort of initiative order.  Also, by allowing heroes and villains with pertinent powers or abilities to add extra dice to their initiative it helps allow speedsters and the like to get in that first attack.  What sort of other options do you think I might consider?

Damage and how it's dealt with seems kind of clunky. And even given it's clunkiness, it fails to properly address certain things. For instance, at one point you basically instruct your readers to disregard the damage rules when they don't make sense, imploring them to fall back upon their shared understanding of the characters.

  Clunky, eh?  Much of that probably arises from my wording of things.  Also, most of the section on damage seems to talk about what happens after you are reduced to 0 or fewer AD.  In actual gameplay, that won't be occuring all that much (not for the heroes anyway).  The important part of the damage mechanic should be that the heroes lose dice as they take damage.  This means that they become less effective overall, but they can still pull off some amazing feats of heroics even with a single die roll (a hero can still roll a 6 on a single die while his opponent can come up all low numbers with a mittful of dice).  I wanted to simulate the ability of a hero to take a pummelling and yet still be able to pull off something big when the chips were down.  My other option, that I didn't include but might want to write out, was to include a damage save mechanic sort of like the one M & M uses.  Anytime a character takes damage, or perhaps is reduced to 0 dice, they have to make a damage save in order to stay conscious and perhaps avoid injury.  A damage save is just a difficulty check using the amount of damage as the difficulty level (or something like that).  I'll have to plan it out in my head before I try to explain it fully, but you probably get the general idea.  Do you think that might work better?

The World Creation stuff, as you noted in your text, is borrowed from the esteemed Mr. Sorensen. I like the dials thing as a sort of social contract metaphor, to get the players thinking about the specifics of their setting and whatnot. However, regardless of what dial is set to where, the game is going to play the same. There should be some mechanics here...bennies should cost differing amounts of HPs, damage should behave differently, etc. Or maybe you could streamline your mechanics somehow, to take advantage of the understanding these dials create in the player about the game they're playing.

  Ah, the Settings Dials!  I was asked by a friend to actually write down the rules for my game and I wanted to include the Settings Dials for him.  I think Jared did a great job with them.  Ultimately, I would probably be better off coming up with something a little shorter or just describing campaign options in general rather than including them as actual rules--mainly because the idea belongs to Jared and not to me.   That part of my game was less imperative than the actual mechanics so I haven't spent as much time working it out but it appears that I will obviously have to get to it.  I do like your idea of including it within the mechanics of the game somehow. . . I'm just not sure exactly how I would go about that (yet).

Now I'm gonna' tell you what Vincent Baker told me about my supers game, which is what it's missing. It doesn't have a structure. It needs some rules for the GM, something that tells him how to use to game, and that really drives home the feeling that you're in a comic book. There are some neat ideas floating around here; embrace them and you could have something pretty cool on your hands.

  I couldn't agree with you (or, perhaps more accurately, Vincent Baker) more.  The version that you saw is my rough draft that I wrote up for my friend.  It goes without saying that in order to turn it into a fully-realized game, instead of just the bare bones, I would have to include proper introductions, flavor-text, examples, artwork, etc. . . At this point I just want to make sure that I iron out the mechanics, but I do have every intention of making it more colorful and user-friendly.

  Thanks for all of the great insight.  I welcome the help and hope the game grows into something that is actually worth playing.  By the way, as mentioned WAY back at the start of this, I haven't actually seen your own supers rpg.  If you are willing to share, I would love to take a peek.

Glenn

[hermes]

Tony,

  Thanks for the comments and suggestions.

Like Scott, I'd ask if you've maybe considered tying these into your system? Say like the GM gives bonus dice to actions that are in tune with where the dials are set. Even handing out d4s to roll along with their d6 action dice might be enough to reward players without unbalancing your action dice resource management system.

  As I mentioned when responding to Scott, I am certainly open to the idea of tying the Dials into the mechanics (assuming that I ultimately keep the Dials which isn't for certain. . . Jared might hunt me down and put the beats on me).  I hadn't thought about it up to this point, but I'll have to give it some consideration.  I'll probably try to steer clear of d4s though--I've stepped on a few too many of those to want to have them out in the open where my cat might scatter them about.  LOL  Seriously though, I kind of liked the idea of sticking to one die-type for the sake of simplicity (besides, everyone has a hoard of d6s but d4s are a little  more hard to come by for some).  Your basic idea of giving out bonus dice does seem like it might work (or possibly get penalized dice for NOT adhering to the campaign settings).  Hmmm. . . .

I wanted to ask you about this - do you see the game as a vehicle for playing existing comic book heros, in which case its kind of straightforward to determine IC/OC - just argue and quote issues at each other for 15 min ;-) Or will players be inventing their own heros? If its the latter then you might need some really tight character creation rules that can specify just what characters can and can't do (or at least nail down their style for approaching lots of different problems) otherwise it could be really tough trying to figure out whether something is IC/OC for a PC in the middle of the game.

  The questions you have posed are difficult ones.  First of all, as to whether I saw the game as a vehicle for playing existing comics, the answer is yes and no.  I would like to be able to use it for a home-grown setting and I think most people would want to do likewise, but I did want to come up with a game that would allow people to play in an existing universe without too much conversion work needed.  I think that much is accomplished by the IC/OC mechanic.  I know what you mean about needing tight character creation rules, but that is a lot tougher to deal with.  I wanted the character creation to be as simple and un-cluttered with numbers and stats as possible.  I had envisioned the game as relying heavily upon both the players and GM to decide on what is or is not in character.  If a player does a good job of describing their hero well, it shouldn't be too difficult to determine if something is IC or OC.  I suspect that rather than attempt something OC, most players will just try to think of something else that will accomplish much the same goal and still be IC.  Ultimately, it should be a snap decision made by the player with the GM holding the right to veto if it seems obvious that the player is taking liberties with their character.  That's how I envisioned it anyway.

  Does that answer your question?  If you have any other thoughts on how to avoid possible disputes or how to clarrify things a little more rigidly then, by all means, let me know.

Glenn

[hardcoremoose]

Glenn,

Regarding Initiative and Damage:  I really like keeping combat to as few die rolls as possible.  You know, it is one of those preference things, but I don't see the point of doing with three die rolls what you can do with one.  

To that end, I'll leave your Damage mechanic alone for now, since I don't have a better suggestion just yet, because it doesn't already require a separate roll (until you hit negatives, anyway), and because I haven't played it yet to know how it will work.  I am familiar with how Mutants & Masterminds works, and I do sorta like that mechanic, but it would mean another die roll.

Initiative is tricky.  All you really need is a method for organizing who says what, and when (this all you really need for any resolution mechanic, of course).  This could be anything - a die roll, a flat stat, GM fiat, etc.  I'm not quite sure how I would do it with your game.  You could go with a single die roll to determine initiative for the entire combat (maybe with an opportunity to re-roll your initiative on subsequent turns, but only by spending Hero Points).  Or maybe I'd just say whoever has the most Hero Points goes first (or maybe whoever has spent the most Hero Points thus far in the game, which might give the villains a big advantage), and then adjust for in-game reality, like Speedsters and whatnot.  My point, and it's the same with the Damage rules, is that there's a lot of unexplored territory here mechanically.

With the Setting Dials, my suggestion is to expand upon what you've already done, and use them to help define what is In-Character and Out-of-Character.  Like I said, this is the coolest thing for me.  It's about a shared understanding of world and character, which is essential to a satisfactory play experience.  The easiest example that comes to mind is character death: In a Four-Coor game it would be absolutely OC to declare a killing blow against an enemy.  You could still do it, but game-wise, you'd be limited to one Action Die.  I'd go through the Dials in this way, connecting the various tropes to specific kinds of IC or OC behaviors.

And moving on from there, I want to comment on some of Tony's concerns.  He's right, of course...it would be much easier to run established characters through this game, so long as all of the players were familiar with those characters.  But even that's no guarantee - try to run Batman in this game with a player who's familiar with the comics and a GM who's only seen the movies, and you'll run into problems.  What you need - and I think you're on the right track - is a chargen system that establishes the look and feel and mood of the character in each participant's mind.  I'd use everything at your disposal to get to this point - the Setting Dials, Origin stories, character artwork (especially character artwork).  And ultimately, because no two people are going to exactly agree upon how a character should be portrayed - a mechanic that lets the player trump the GM when the GM says something is OC, and the player is adamant that it isn't.  In fact, you may already have that mechanic - a player can spend Hero Points to interpret and add powers on the fly, which might just do the trick.

Well , that was a bit rambly.  I blame it on my lack of sleep.

Best,
Scott

[Jeph]

I like the subjective judgement for difficulties thing. It's awesome. It allows for unique characters without having to calculate a single stat. You get a Big Thumbs Up!

[hermes]

I like the subjective judgement for difficulties thing. It's awesome. It allows for unique characters without having to calculate a single stat. You get a Big Thumbs Up!

Thanks!  It does leave a lot of room for interpretation, but I prefer that to the eternal min-maxing that tends to go on in a lot of other games.  I am also a firm believer that the fewer the levels of difficulty the easier it is to decide which ones to apply.  I had originally wanted to use only 5 (automatic, easy, average, difficult and nearly impossible) but ultimately it made sense to include the other two (very easy and very difficult) just to cover all the pips on the die.  :)

Glenn

[hermes]

Scott,

Regarding Initiative and Damage: I really like keeping combat to as few die rolls as possible. You know, it is one of those preference things, but I don't see the point of doing with three die rolls what you can do with one.

While I do agree that fewer rolls is generally better, I think that there is only so far that you can go.  I recently played in a Godlike campaign with my group and I shudder every time I think back to how much more complicated that system is, despite its attempts to try to reduce the number of die rolls needed.  They meant well, but it just made things worse for me.

To that end, I'll leave your Damage mechanic alone for now, since I don't have a better suggestion just yet, because it doesn't already require a separate roll (until you hit negatives, anyway), and because I haven't played it yet to know how it will work. I am familiar with how Mutants & Masterminds works, and I do sorta like that mechanic, but it would mean another die roll.

I think that an extra die roll is inevitable, though I believe that it should only be necessary once a character is reduced to 0 action dice.  Essentially, a character would have to roll a damage save in order to avoid unconsciousness or injury once they lose all of their action dice.  The amount of damage beyond what was needed to reduce them to 0 action dice becomes the target number for the save (ie. if a character at 2 AD takes 4 levels of damage then their damage save target will be 2 which means that they will need to beat that number in order to stay conscious or avoid injury).  Once a character is at 0 AD then the amount of damage they take will automatically be their target number.

You could go with a single die roll to determine initiative for the entire combat (maybe with an opportunity to re-roll your initiative on subsequent turns, but only by spending Hero Points).

Hmmm. . . I kind of like that idea.  I'll have to see if I can work with that.  Perhaps everyone involved makes an initiative roll at the outset of a fight but must then spend AD from their pool in order to re-roll their initiative on future turns.  Instead of actually writing down everyone's initiative on a piece of paper (or something like that) our group actually uses something called an initiative track and miniatures (actually HeroClix).  The track is just a large sheet of paper with numbers written along it, evenly-spaced.  All characters are represented by a unique miniature which then gets moved up and down the track as needed.  That way we can always tell who is at what initiative with a simple glance.  It works.

With the Setting Dials, my suggestion is to expand upon what you've already done, and use them to help define what is In-Character and Out-of-Character.

That makes perfect sense to me, though I'm not sure it needs much of a mechanic beyond saying that something which falls outside of the established setting should be considered OoC.

As far as character generation goes, I think that in order to play the game using an original setting, the players will need to flesh out their characters well (and the GMs will need to make sure that they do this).  The more detail and information that you include about a character the easier it will be to know what he or she can and cannot do.  If a character leaves something too vague then I think the GM has the right to question whether or not it is sufficient to be considered IC.  If the GM rules that the character has not been defined clearly enough then the hero can, as you have pointed out, always spend a Hero Point to fix that on the fly.

Glenn

[Phillip]

I think this game has the best core mechanic (the Action Dice/Hero Points and the OC/IC designation) for a supers game I have seen yet.  Somebody FINALLY nailed down a good way to easily capture the (core, anyway) FEEL of a comic book.  This game says 'Play me!'

Enough with the praise.  I hope you don't mind if I give you some feedback and suggestions.  These ideas are mostly chrome plating, really, nothing to do with the core mechanics, but you may find them helpful.

- Damage mechanic:  I like the earlier suggestions of using the number of AD you have lost as a target number for an action check (or whatever you call it).  It's binary- you stay conscious as long as you make the roll until you get to whatever level is unconsciousness (was it -6 AD?).  The AD system is so simple to read that one extra die roll is not bad at all.

- Character Creation options:  This doesn't bother me a lot, but it seems that characters are mechanically identical, at least at creation.  How about some options?  
- Advantages:  You could allow something called Signature Moves or whatever you wish. They would basically give the character a unique maneuver or ability they could use once per game that would let them do something extraordinary or break the rules in some way (like recovering AD, or automatic success at some action, for example).  A good example would be when the Thing yell's "It's Clobberin' Time" – he could get a bonus when fighting thugs, for instance.  You could also allow characters to have Specialties that give them an extra AD when attempting specific actions (or adjusting the target number/result).  Both of these would be optional and could be paid for in some way (maybe costing HP or giving up starting AD?).  The only problem I see is with the Specialties- this might not fit in with the style of your CC or may seem tacked-on.
- Motivation:  This would fit in with expanding the CC rules to use the dial settings.  Motivation is of course what makes the hero tick and why he is a hero.  It would not cost anything; everyone has it.  It is a two-edged sword- you can invoke it to get a bonus, but the GM will also use it against you (it can be enforced using the OC rule).  Frex:  Batman's Motivation is Obsessed with Bringing Criminals to Justice.  He could use this to get a bonus when interrogating the Joker's thugs, but he may be so focused he may be oblivious to some other threat (reacting to the threat is an OC action).
- Drawbacks:  Basically heroes can take Complications, which are built-in plot hooks that enforce the 'super-powered soap opera' aspect.  You have to have at least one, and you can get extra ones to get more HP or AD.  Complications can be invoked automatically when the player fails a roll.

- Negative Hero Points:  In addition to the villains getting VP when the heroes use their HP, it may be a good idea to give the villains VP when the hero does something OC, or just acts otherwise un-heroic or stupid.

- Enforcing the Genre:  There are some things you can add that would help reinforce the genre you are aiming for.
- Sound effects and dialog:  Give the heroes extra HP or an extra AD if the players provide sound effects and cool hero dialog for a scene.  
- Writer's Favor:  Maybe there is a way to represent characters that the comic book writer likes more than the other characters beyond the AD (like Grant Morrison writing JLA- it often seemed that Batman was his favorite character).  I can't think of how you would either determine Writer's Favor or what it would give the hero, though.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Glenn,

Did some thread-searching for you. Regarding the principles underlying so-called "initiative" and related stuff, check out:

The four steps of action (fundamental)
What is IIEC?
Disruptive and/or stupid IIEE question
Two little dice, so much time
On the time of narration (very technical)

Best,
Ron