Hi!
  I was trying to come up with a way to make a Supers game without the laundry list of powers. I think I have it, but I need to know if its broken:
Characters are made of Traits, Traits are divided into 7 categories:
1) Superpowers (This is a Trait with the Power Tag and Super Tag and at least one other Arena Tag - i.e., Physical, Mental or Social).
2) Powers (This is a Trait with the Power Tag and at least one Arena Tag) - Powers differ from Super Powers in that they cannot always be brought into play in a conflict in its Arena (sometimes you are not strong enough to overcome that physical challenge). While Super Powers can always be used to overcome challenges in their Arena.
3) Abilities (Abilities only have the Ability Tag). Abilities fall into the realm of human potential. They impact challenges, but not on the same scale as Powers or Super Powers.
4) Standard Traits (These have no Tags). Standard Traits have no mechanical weight and are simply used to define your character in terms other than kewl powerz.
5) Marks (A Mark only has the Mark Tag). A Mark is a weakness that can be applied to any arena of conflict. This represents an aspect of human weakness that can be overcome with effort (Such as Mark of Greed or Mark of Witlessness).
6) Weaknesses (This will have the Weakness Tag and at least one Arena Tag) a Weakness will impair your progress in its Arena most of the time. These are extraordinary weaknesses that require special care to overcome, like Batman's reliance on a Utility Belt.
7) Super Weakness (This is a Trait with the Weakness Tag, the Super Tag and at least one Arena Tag). This is a catastrophically bad weakness. It will almost always come into play in conflicts in this arena and will be nearly impossible to overcome. Think of Samuel L Jackson's character in Unbreakable when you want to imagine a Super Weakness with a Physical Arena Tag.

Remember, there is not list of Traits, just come up with a Trait and assign it Tags. For instance Deceptive could be a Super Weakness, Weakness, Mark, Standard Trait, Ability, Power or Super Power. Its up to you.

So, based on that introduction, Chargen is as follows:
Have a complete character design in mind, then do the following:
Select 3 Arena Tags for Powers and/or Super Powers. In order to get a Super Power you must spend at least 2 of these Tags (one for Super and one for each Arena)
Select 3 Abilities
Select 3 Standard Traits
Select 1 Mark
Select one Arena Tag for Weaknesses. In order to get a Super Weakness you must spend at least 2 of these Tags (one for Super and one for each Arena)
You can get extra Abilities by selecting extra Marks (on a one-for-one basis)
You can get extra Tags for Powers by selecting extra Tags for Weaknesses (on a one-for-one basis)

Epiphany: Describe the moment when your character decided to use their powers to make the world a better place.

Nemesis: Using the same chargen system as above, design a super villain for the GM to play. You can give him more power tagds without giving him more weaknesses.

Grit: Players start with 3, this number is modified by the following:
Every Power with a Super Tag: -1
Every Weakness Tag: +1
Every Power with a Super Tag that the Nemesis has: +1
Every Weakness Tag: -1

You are done!
  And all of this (except for Standard Traits) feeds directly into the Resolution mechanic.

Example:
Steve Forester
Ice powers (Super, Power, Physical)
Total recall (Power, Mental)
Charming (Ability)
Quick (Ability)
Thorough (Ability)
Likes people
Doesn't like attention
Impulsive
Mark of the Soft touch (Mark)
Can never trust again (Weakness, Social)
Grit: 3 (3-1+1+1-1)

Inferno
Heat ray (Super,Power, Physical)
Hot body (Power, Social)
Instinct (Ability)
Daring (Ability)
Methodical (Ability)
Manic
Narcissist
Driven
Mark of Greed (Mark)
Super predictable (Weakness, Mental)

  So, what I need from you is broken characters. What that means is, they have to fit two criteria:
1) You would want to play this character (so yes, you could make a character with the power to make saran wrap opaque, but would you want to play that character?)
2) You would not want to GM in a game that featured that player character.
  What have you got?

dindenver wrote:
1) You would want to play this character (so yes, you could make a character with the power to make saran wrap opaque, but would you want to play that character?)

Mike,
  The challenge was to make a character, not to argue the definition of a broken character. The idea of my example was to say that yes, you could make a useless character, but could you make a character that you would not want to GM?

Hey Dave,

I didn't realize your thread at Story Games was a cross-post from here. For reference, here's my response:

paul wrote:
Hey Dave,

Okay, I'll play. Here's my character:

Surveillance
He Knows What You Know (Super, Power, Mental)
He's Never Where Your Hostility Thinks He Is (Power, Mental)
Kickboxer (Ability)
Orator (Ability)
Marksman (Ability)
Political Philosopher
Gun Collector
Songwriter
Mark of Bad Temper (Mark)
Infidelity (Weakness, Physical)
Grit: 3 (3-1+1+1-1)

And here's my nemesis:

Jailbreak
Teleportation (Super, Power, Physical)
Flirt (Power, Social)
Kickboxer (Ability)
Do Me A Favor (Ability)
Streetwise (Ability)
Younger Than She Looks
Likes to Read
Never Knew My Dad
Mark of Collateral Damage (Mark)
Trust Issues (Weakness, Mental)

Yeah, that's clever. I can make a character I'd want to run, but not GM for, and then you make me make the antagonist, and by doing so I solve most of the problems I'd have with GMing for the character. Still, I think this particular combination of character and nemesis would be too much for my GMing abilities. What do you think, could you handle them?

Also, I'm not sure I got the Grit calculation right. Your formula lists "Every Weakness Tag" twice, once for +1 and once for -1.

Paul

di wrote:
Oops,
The second occurrence of "Every Weakness Tag: -1" is supposed to be for the nemesis (i.e., "Every Weakness Tag your nemesis has: -1")...

OK, I guess I didn't define the Arena tags very well:
- Physical: Fighting, running, jumping, climbing, challenges that are overcome by physical effort
- Mental: Learning, Noticing, Assimilating and Debate. For instance, if a psychic power does some kind of damage, it is Physical, unless it causes brain damage or some how impairs your ability to learn, notice or figure things out, right?
- Social: Charming, Barter, Leadership, Seduction, Willpower, Performance
And if a Trait has an Arena Tag, that means that Trait can only be used in a Challenge that is in that Arena.

So, in your example:
- He Knows What You Know (Super, Power, Mental) works exactly like you would expect it to and because it has the Super Tag works as well as you wold expect it to. I don't think this really breaks the game. You could use this power to change the world and it would have little or no chance to fail to solve smaller problems, right?
- He's Never Where Your Hostility Thinks He Is (Power, Mental) . But, this can only be used in a mental challenge, a riddle, disarming a bomb, etc. And it doesn't work in every Mental Challenge.
So, if he were engaged in a Physical Challenge, he doesn't have many tools to use. Same for Social Challenges.

For the Nemesis, the point was that you could make your dream character with your hero, then make a character that creates the issues you want to face when playing the game. Does that make sense?
Dave M

paul wrote:
Hey Dave,

Yep, makes sense. And yes, I think the way you have it works exactly like that. I made a character I'd love to try playing (and he's also one I think would be a bitch to GM for), and then the nemesis creates issues for him.

So...is my character broken without a power or super power for physical or social challenges?

Paul

Paul,
  Here is the mechanics so far:
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=26351.0

  OK, to answer your questions:
1) Well, I wouldn't have too much trouble running that character, but I see your meaning. This seems like a social contract issue, I am not sure it can be solved through rules, do you?
2) I think one thing that solves this issue is that when a Chellenge is initiated, one side picks the Arena, the other picks the Scope. So sooner or later, the Scope is going to matter more than throwing another physical challenge at you, right? Also, there is a CCG-like Grit mechanic that lets you use an out of arena Trait into one Challenge. So, that's at least two remedies to potentially monotonous situations, no?

  Really, your example for a Super Power is actually a perfect example. It works the way you would expect and is supported by the mechanics. I really want the Super Powers to e able to over come almost any challenge.
  I think your idea for a Power might be a way to break this system, maybe it needs more exploration.
  Thanks for taking the time to look at this Paul, I really appreciate it.

PS
  Yeah, I posted this in different places, because I get really different feedback when I do.

Dave-

I'm trying to stay on track concerning your questions; though from a slightly different angle. An issue of playability for me would be balance between powers. Since you've gone the sans-power list route, the game relies on an understanding of the rules, and their limits, between all those involved in the game, and favors those who can think outside of the box. Some powers by definition are more versatile than others; their very concepts lending towards giving a character more options during play (maybe, for no good reason).

Looking at your sample characters; you have Ice Powers vs. Heat Ray. When I think Ice Powers I think freezing things& people, building ice walls, making ice armor, shooting ice spikes, and riding around on an ice slide. Also sliding down ice poles, falling into instant snow drifts, creating a vision obscuring blizzard, etc. Now, when I think Heat Ray I envision shooting a ray of intense heat, and shooting a ray of intense heat, and shooting a ray of intense heat. Hey, why didn't that character get Flame Powers?

I may be picking nits; and if so I apologize. The main reason for a power list (usually) is to form a balance between super powers. When writing Ten-Cent Heroes, the biggest challenge I found was striking balance while trying to include every power under the sun, and still make the game playable. I certainly appreciate the rules-light approach, but I'm thinking you may need some sort of versatility dial to separate the one trick ponies from the bag of tricks powers.

The other potential point of confusion is language. I've noticed that Paul's characters had powers with slicker sounding names than yours, that almost pushed the envelope of what they could do. With no list, each player is free envision their own powers, which is cool, except that their could be trouble if the GM doesn't share your vision. I'm thinking their may be some confusion. For instance, on Inferno, I don't understand his Hot Body power; is he engulfed in flames or very attractive?

I think you have a solid start, and play testing will definitely help point you in the right direction.

Keep it up.

Ken

Ken,
  Thanks for taking the time to read this post.

  OK, the reality is that the name of the power doesn't do anything for the power. It's all in the Tags. I'll pick on Paul as a perfect example again. He named his power "He's Never Where Your Hostility Thinks He Is" and quite frankly, this is a brilliantly named power. That if the rules backed it up would be way more effective than danger sensitive sunglasses. But, he gave it the Power and Mental Tags. This means, by definition, that it only applies to some mental conflicts and not all of them. It also implies that it does not work where Physical or Social Challenges occur. Mechanically, it is worth maybe 5 points. it gives 10 Effect Points towards winning a conflict if that conflict is Mental and not being where hostility is can be narrated in. While the other Power "He Knows What You Know" has the Power, Super and Mental Tags. This is worth 100 points. Meaning if it is a Mental Challenge, it is always applicable (no calling BS if a player narrates this power into  a mental challenge, its that powerful) and it adds 100 Effect Points towards winning the conflict for his character. But then again, it does nothing for physical/social challenges.
  Essentially, you decide how effective the power is when you choose it, does that make sense? Does it answer your question?

dindenver wrote:
  OK, the reality is that the name of the power doesn't do anything for the power. It's all in the Tags. ... [T]he other Power "He Knows What You Know" has the Power, Super and Mental Tags. This is worth 100 points. Meaning if it is a Mental Challenge, it is always applicable (no calling BS if a player narrates this power into  a mental challenge, its that powerful) and it adds 100 Effect Points towards winning the conflict for his character. But then again, it does nothing for physical/social challenges.
  Essentially, you decide how effective the power is when you choose it, does that make sense? Does it answer your question?

Hey Dave-

My point was less directed at power potency, and more at versatility. While the power names may hold little currency in the game, I would think that concept plays a pretty big role in determining when using a power would be appropriate. A super power called flame blast, would have less versatility in combat than reality manipulation, but cost the same. They both give the same number of points to a challenge, but I would think the latter power would be useful in a whole lot more situations.My only concern here was that there may be a need for another point of control to keep broad powers from dominating more narrow concept powers.

Now, I think what I'm reading here is that any SUPER POWER can be used in the arena its tagged for (and it can have multiple tags), which would allow a character to stretch their power to make it fit for any situation. POWERS can only be used in their assigned arena, but because they don't have the SUPER tag, its a harder sell to the GM to fit into combat. Do I have it right?

Ken

James,
  Yes, in theory that is correct. That is the idea of the system though. That you, the player come up with the power(s) you think are cool and appropriate and then you tell me how effective the power is and when it is and isn't useful. And this is all negotiated up front, so there is no surprise once game play starts.
  Then the mechanics come back and take you at your word. This means that the char gen phase is probably more critical than in other games. The GM and player really need to work together to make sure that they both have the same idea/expectation of how a power works and when it is effective or not. This is taking a cue from ditv and HQ a lot and I think I have played enough of both to get the jist of it and be comfortable designing a game that uses the same idea.
  So, in your example, the GM and the player would have to have a real understanding of how Sore Big Toe is a Super Power and how it applied to a Super hero story arc, right? This is a case where I have to trust the players to play nice and have fun with each other.
  Does that make sense? Does it bring some satisfaction back to your scenario?

Ken,
  The example I like to use to bring the Power/Super Power dynamic into clarity is this:
Super Strength
If I make a character with Super Strength and I give it Power and Physical Tags. This means I can probably chuck a tank at you. In this case, it will probably apply to most physical conflicts, but its easy to imagine a situation where the Super Strength does not apply, right?

However, if I make a character with Super Strength and give it the Super, Power and Physical Tags, then it is a Super man situation, I can hurl a mountain at you and its really possible for me to do almost anything with my Super Strength that involves a Physical Challenge.

So, I think you have the idea of Super Powers down, and possibly an exaggerated view of the limits on Powers. But maybe not, I might have read too much into your post.

  So, to come back to Flame Burst. If this were a power, I can see it easily being narrated into a fight, no prob. And if it were a Power, that would be more than sufficient, right? And if it were a Super Power you would have to be more creative (I use my flame burst to melt the glass off of that office building and make a ramp for us to slide down so we don't fall to our doom). But the game has given you the narrative authority to make those kinds of stretches.
  Does that make sense? Do you see a flaw to that approach?

dindenver wrote:
James,
  Yes, in theory that is correct. That is the idea of the system though. That you, the player come up with the power(s) you think are cool and appropriate and then you tell me how effective the power is and when it is and isn't useful. And this is all negotiated up front, so there is no surprise once game play starts.
  Then the mechanics come back and take you at your word. This means that the char gen phase is probably more critical than in other games. The GM and player really need to work together to make sure that they both have the same idea/expectation of how a power works and when it is effective or not. This is taking a cue from ditv and HQ a lot and I think I have played enough of both to get the jist of it and be comfortable designing a game that uses the same idea.
  So, in your example, the GM and the player would have to have a real understanding of how Sore Big Toe is a Super Power and how it applied to a Super hero story arc, right? This is a case where I have to trust the players to play nice and have fun with each other.
  Does that make sense? Does it bring some satisfaction back to your scenario?

Given my first post in this thread, and some of the other posts that have arisen, I can see something that keeps lurking in the shadows.

When it comes to defining characters using these rules I can see two distinct games occurring.

The first game occurs during character creation, in which the players try to downplay their powers in the hope that they'll be able to pull a fast one against the GM. The Gm will be on the lookout for loopholes in the rules and trying to prevent players from exploiting them through their characters.

GM: Sure I'll let you use "Heat Ray Eyes" as your super major power, and "Seram Wrap Opacity" as your secondary power.

Meanwhile the player rubs his hands menacingly knowing how truly devastating and multifunctional that power can be.

The second game occurs when play begins. Players who have downplayed their powers now try to maximise them and exploit any advantages to the maximum.

It's not just a flaw here, so don't think that I'm deliberately picking on this generation mechanic...this is an inherent part of a lot of systems. There seems to be some movement to address this problem in the rules by generalising the effects of the powers into simple bonuses (then narrating out the actual use of these powers in game).

I'm just wondering how effectively this issue has been addressed, and that would only come out in a variety of playtest sessions using a diverse sample group.

V

James,
  Thanks for the input, especially giving that you are not a fan of Supers Games.
  Ironically, you are my target demo. I want to make a Supers game that jives with common sense. Meaning characters are assumed not to have super powers. And the genre convention for this setting will be no running around in tights or other costumes (one player has already suggested military style web gear and a kevlar vest would be his preferred crime fighting outfit). Obviously, a suspension of disbelief has to exist for the powers themselves (no way around it. And I really don't want to get into discussions of how super strength works for instance, lol). But, I want the characters themselves to have sane, logical, sensible responses to super powered threats, you know?
  I appreciate your analysis,m and it is reassuring, because I have been told it is trivial to break chargen (the reason I created this post actually).

Mike,
  I am taking a cue from HQ and ditv here. Totally trusting the players. The only thing that has come out of this chargen discussion is an interesting thought for a power.
  One player suggested a power named "I am not where the hostility thinks I am." I think this deserves some more exploration. Not in the sense that it is unbalanced. But in the sense that narrating it might prove difficult. And although it is a clever power, it might prove impractical in actual play.

  And ideally, I like that interplay of pushing the boundaries. I think that is part of good gaming. As long as everyone is playing the same game, its a no harm/no foul situation. I think this becomes dysfunctional when one player is playing the genre emulation game and another is playing the push the boundaries game. Then you get a real conflict between players. So, that is a good point, I'll make sure the boundary pushing game is put in the forefront so people will see it coming, thanks!