Any suggestions on how to handle, say, Superman and Batman in the same story, as far as physical strength goes?

Someone buys Olympic-level Strength for Bats (1 Coin).

Someone else buys Super-Strength for Big Blue (1 Coin).

They armwrestle, as a Complication. What happens?

Isn't the problem in making this a complication? I would certainly rule that this is not sensible as such, because there is nothing complicating Superman's life here. You could of course challenge that, but I assume that I'd have a fact that'd state that Superman is indeed superstrong helping me.

AFAIK a complication has to make sense storywise, that is, it has to include some real uncertainty. The players will have to be committed to the possibility that the complication goes one way or the other. The above complication is only possible if all the players are ready to take the possibility that Batman wins.

Of course, I've not read Universalis yet, so don't mind me.

Well, the way you do it is like this:

Batman
Strong

Superman
Strong x 10

Not really much of a problem, hehe.

As with your post about guns. One Coin worth of "super" strength is equal to one Coin worth of "trained" strength and potentially one Coin worth of knife and one Coin worth of hydraulic jack -- all depending on how you're using the Coins.

To claim that Superman is stronger than Batman just because you understand that's how it works, even though the same number of Coins has been committed to them is to misunderstand or cheat the story-value of the Coins.

Chris

Christopher Weeks wrote: As with your post about guns. One Coin worth of "super" strength is equal to one Coin worth of "trained" strength and potentially one Coin worth of knife and one Coin worth of hydraulic jack -- all depending on how you're using the Coins.

To claim that Superman is stronger than Batman just because you understand that's how it works, even though the same number of Coins has been committed to them is to misunderstand or cheat the story-value of the Coins.

The key to resolving this is the Challenge Mechanic.

If the complication narration goes astray from the believable, Challenge it!

a 1 die to 1 die (or 2 dice each with Name) Complication is fine between Bats and Superman, if thats how the Traits fall.

Regardless of which player wins the Complication the narration and expenditure of coins must be believeable.

If Bats player says "Yea, Bats slams Supes are down on the table[1 coin spent], pay up!"

Challenge it!

If Bats player goes "Bats puts a glowing sliver of Kryptonite on the table[1 coin], saying "Lets have a fair contest" then slams his Supes arm down[1 Coin].

Don't challenge it.... etc... or Challenge it because Kryptonite is rare...etc

Keep in mind if you have Control of Superman when this Complication starts, its a perfect time to say "Hey Superman is way Stronger than Batman ,I'm bumping his Strength up by 3 Coins...to Strength x4"

Yeah Bob's right - the winner of the complication can narrate whatever they want. But if it's not believable, or even satisfactory, you can use the challenge mechanic to force them come up with a satisfactory explanation which takes all the traits into account. The conflict resolution system won't try and find the most plausible answer to any situation, instead it decides which player must narrate a plausible answer for the situation and dictates to them what ingredients their answer must contain.

So when you get to the dice rolling stage the dice won't decide "Is Superman or Batman stronger" or even "Which one wins the arm wrestle?". Instead the dice are deciding "Which player gets to continue this story about Superman and his Super Strength and Batman and his Olympic Strength having an arm wrestle together?". It's up to you to challenge that player if his continuation of the story sucks. In fact its up to you before the dice even roll to spend lots of coins, traits and dice to make sure its a player you have faith in that will be the one who gets to continue the story. If Superman and Batman are only rolling one dice each its because no one cares enough about what will happen next. If you want to see a particular outcome then you need to invest coins in it - and you'll quickly find out whether your fellow players care about the same ideas and stories that you do by whether they support you or oppose you (or don't even bother to get involved).

Added this in an edit:
Garibaldi and the Shadow vessel. A Universalis complication can't actually answer the question "Would Garibaldi surive?". Only you can answer that question. When you start a complication what you're really asking is is "Which player amongst us shall decide if Garibaldi survives?". Usually the answer the system gives you back will be "The player who cares most about this question and has demonstrated this by investing most coins/traits/dice." but obviously dice are dice and sometimes you'll get a surprise result. The winner of the complication is the one who then decides and spends their victory coins to narrate whether Garibaldi survives, so it's your job to make sure the winner is someone who feels the same way you do (or challenge them until they do). If you want a story that follows the rules and conventions of Babylon 5 stories, then make sure the victor in a complication is always someone who feels the same way. If DC comic conventions are important to you then spend coins to prove that.

Tony Irwin wrote: Added this in an edit:
Garibaldi and the Shadow vessel. A Universalis complication can't actually answer the question "Would Garibaldi surive?". Only you can answer that question. When you start a complication what you're really asking is is "Which player amongst us shall decide if Garibaldi survives?". Usually the answer the system gives you back will be "The player who cares most about this question and has demonstrated this by investing most coins/traits/dice." but obviously dice are dice and sometimes you'll get a surprise result. The winner of the complication is the one who then decides and spends their victory coins to narrate whether Garibaldi survives, so it's your job to make sure the winner is someone who feels the same way you do (or challenge them until they do). If you want a story that follows the rules and conventions of Babylon 5 stories, then make sure the victor in a complication is always someone who feels the same way. If DC comic conventions are important to you then spend coins to prove that.

Okay. Just as in the "dialog" guns thread, I had missed that players can add coins during a Complication to help ensure victory, or at least a more reasonable contest. That helps a lot.

Ralph, I tip my hat to you, sir. So much of this game is brilliant, not just in the concept, but in the counter-intuitive way you elegantly solve so many potential problems. For instance, being able to add in traits during a Complication is something that runs so counter to traditional rpg rules thinking, yet works so smoothly to solve this problem.

Thanks.

-Hudson

CPXB wrote: And in hand-to-hand combat between Batman and Superman it would be the same way, huh? "But . . . Batman has Strong, and Martial Arts x 2, and Acrobatic, and . . . ." "But Superman is still Superman."

It just seems weird, still.

Something else about the Batman v. Superman issue: I'd say that if you've only put one Coin of Strength into Superman and one Coin into Batman, then you don't really have "Superman" and "Batman". You have "Kinda-Excellent Man" and "Batman" or something. It is my opinion that you shouldn't use the Challenge mechanic to make things seem right with no regard for what the Coins/Traits say (though maybe you cannot, really). You should use the Challenge to help refine what the Coins/Traits say about outcomes.

Chris

Well, I was going for a very extreme example. I imagine, if it cam up in play, and players weren't being careful, it might be more like Batman: Pinnacle of Human Strength x3, and Superman: Superhumanly Strong x4. Which would still allow for the kind of relatively-equal (in terms of coins) armwrestling contest I brought up, and would still need the same kind of solutions people have offered to avoid a nonsensical resolution.

But I see your point and will keep in mind when I get to play.

Further, I point to exhibit A wherein Batman beats Superman in the Dark Knight.

Sure he has on powered armor, sure he's hit Superman with a ton of stuff from the armored batmobile first, sure he's got Kryptonite on his side, sure Superman was hit by a nuclear weapon of unknown megatonnage only days before - but that's how you make it plausible for Batman to beat Superman.

Mike

Hudson Shock wrote: Well, I was going for a very extreme example. I imagine, if it cam up in play, and players weren't being careful, it might be more like Batman: Pinnacle of Human Strength x3, and Superman: Superhumanly Strong x4. Which would still allow for the kind of relatively-equal (in terms of coins) armwrestling contest I brought up, and would still need the same kind of solutions people have offered to avoid a nonsensical resolution.

But I see your point and will keep in mind when I get to play.

Tony Irwin wrote: Here's an alternative to think about - spend one coin to create a fact, eg "Someone with the superhuman trait can never be physically beaten by a normal human." If its something that people agree will help the game and clarify things then they'll allow it, in fact they'll hopefully spend coins to enhance the wording or create supporting facts.

Batman's not exactly what I would call a 'normal' human. :)

I'd make sure that the SUPER designation was a sub-trait of the trait it applies to, myself. So that a hero isn't Super in all traits without spending additional Coins for each trait.

I think that gimmick would be fine for certain types of comics emulation. For "Four color Supers" it would be just fine.


So, Batman couldn't out physical Superman or Captain Marvel applying Strength to Strength (Super)...but there's nothing that keeps him from applying his Martial Arts, or Utility Belt Gadgets to them in order to defeat them.

It comes down to making sense during the Complication Resolution narration phase... and Challenging (and negotiating away) narrations that don't make sense.

Catching up on some threads after being out of town for a week.

I think most of the angles have been covered on this one but I'd like to add one more.

The Traits don't have to actually measure physical ability. Rather they measure story importance. How often does Batman solve problems by raw physical strength? How often does Superman solve problems by raw physical strength? Your answer to that (and it may vary by personal interpretation and which "version" of the hero you're inclined to draw from) will indicate any need to make numerical differences in the Trait level.

My inclination if I were going to run a 4 color supers game (and somewhat to my chagrin I have to admit I haven't yet)...would be to use a rules gimmick similiar to the one Tony proposed, only I'd word it this way.

"Super Heroic Traits will be tiered, with Tier 0 being normal human. A superhero cannot activate a Trait for dice in a Complication against a foe who has substantially the same Trait at a higher tier"

The Tiers would need to be established as a rough guide, but I envision them as being basically like the tiers of Amber Diceless.


If Superman gets into a fist fight with the most recent winner of the World's Strongest Man competetion...is that that really going to matter? No, The World's Strongest Man may have Strength x4 (or whatever) but Superman has Tier 3 Super Strength x4 (or whatever). The World's Strongest Man would get to use 4 dice worth of Strength agains Joe schlub...but against superman, he's no better off than Joe Schlub.

Similarly, Batman might have Tier 1 Super Strength x4, which would enable him to beat the bejeezus out of TWSM, but would be useless against Superman. But that doesn't mean that Batman couldn't get all kinds of dice from other Traits.

The reverse of this...Batman's "Tier 3 Clever Idea" x3 trait would render Superman's "Tier 1 Clever Idea" trait useless...which would nicely explain the "everone gets stupid when Batman's around" effect so common in old Justice League comics.


Of course this is only necessary for Superhero "gear heads" who get all giddy when contemplating whether the Hulk is stronger than Thor. Its entirely possible to play a completely enjoyable supers game without (as others have already suggested) needing anything other than the Challenge mechanic to deal with any "incorrect" narrations.


BTW: Hudson, thanks for the comment. But we have to include Mike and a goodly number of playtesters who ripped early drafts to shreds in that praise.