Marvel Super Heroes RPG (FASERIP)

[GRWelsh]

Have you guys ever played any of the super hero RPG's? I've been thinking about the box set I still have -- which I bought way back in 1986 -- the MARVEL SUPER HEROES Advanced Set! We had a lot of fun with it, back in the late 80's. We never played the established heroes of the Marvel Universe, but always invented our own. I remember it being a lot of fun and not very serious, with constant joking around -- which I thought was the appropriate feeling for a super hero game (Spidey humor always made his book my favorite). If you didn't come up with a name for your hero, someone else or the press would (one guy kept getting called "The Human Trashbag")!

I know there are other options out there, such as VILLAINS & VIGILANTES, co-designed and illustrated by one of the early TSR artists, Jeff Dee. And there is CHAMPIONS, which a lot of people swear by, and it does have an impressively balanced character creation system, but personally I find the complexity too cumbersome in actual play. I've never played DC HEROES, but I've heard good things about that system. Anyone else have experiences with these games?

[geneweigel]

I have this large negative association with superhero games.

They've all gone wrong.

And I've been through V&V, MSH, then bought everything for and considered playing MSH Advanced and Palladium HEROES UNLIMITED.

I think they all seem too "geek" in that its just another D&D in spandex pants and not a game in itself.

You need to find a "meta-game" where there are other goals besides accumulation and advancement. It doesn't fit. The resource goal being overrided for example someone rolls up a Batman-type and its endless cheese outs through contraptions and living it up as "what I would do if I were rich" garbage.

[Scott]

I've ran Marvel and TMNT games, and had a lot of fun with both.
Once my Saturday night game finishes up the current adventure, which could be as soon a two sessions, I was planning on trying another genre for a few sessions. Super heroes, horror, or sci-fi fi, I haven't decided yet, but Marvel and TNMT are both contenders.

[GRWelsh]

I agree, it cannot be simply D&D mechanics in a mask and cape... That won't feel right. And that's why I've always liked the Karma system in MSH, since it is earned by doing good deeds and can be spent to pull off incredible, against-the-odds feats. The villains should always be stronger than the heroes, but Karma is the equalizer. The game isn't perfect, but I like that the system has a built-in motivation to do good rather than simply to gain experience and accumulate power. It doesn't really work for Punisher, Wolverine, or Deadpool anti-hero-types, because they immediately lose all Karma when they kill... But for the classic, four color heroes of the 1960's and earlier, I like this system.

[Scott]

At some point Marvel came out with a second edition that was card based. I only played it once, and wasn't very fond of it, but I played a lot of the original Basic/Advanced rules. The mechanics are very easy to learn, and work very well for the super hero vibe.

[foster1941]

Whenever we tried to play superhero games we always ran into trouble with power-scaling, in that some players would want human-scaled characters a la Batman or Spider-Man and others would want godlike characters a la Superman or The Silver Surfer and it was seemingly-impossible for those to work together. Maybe it wouldn't have been with a really good GM, but we were all 11-12 years old at the time and to us it just looked like character B was objectively a whole lot better at everything than character A, to the point of rendering character A effectively irrelevant.

[GRWelsh]

That's a good point about the power-scaling, and that can be an issue. MSH has a random generation system that is wonky and can lead to gross inequities and even rather pathetic heroes (Note: personally, I've always found the pathetic heroes to be hilariously fun to play!). CHAMPIONS addresses that with a point system, which means, in theory, everyone should be balanced -- although some players are definitely better at min/max-ing than others. This is both a strength and weakness of the system, because mathematically it puts everyone on the same footing, but in practice it rewards the min/max-ers over the casual players (which is annoying) -- so even CHAMPIONS can have an imbalance issue.

A possible solution for MSH is to have the players discuss among themselves what sort of super heroes they want to play before the game begins, and that way have it established beforehand if you're doing street level, cosmic level, or somewhere in between. And then maybe put caps or minimums in the character creation process -- like for street level heroes no beginning attribute or power over Incredible (40), no starting body armor better than Excellent (20), or similar limitations. With cosmic-level heroes, you may want to set minimums instead, to keep everyone up at the god-like Thor and Silver Surfer level.

There is another character generation method in MSH as well: modeling. Character modeling is described in the Advanced Set Players' Book on p. 12 (italics mine): "Given the length, breadth, and depth of the Marvel Universe, there will be heroes for whom we haven't written official versions. For this reason, character modeling is the best way of simulating these characters for your campaigns. This method of character generation also works pretty well for those characters you have invented yourself, without having to rely on tables... The creation of the modeled character is similar to that of the generated character, save that instead of rolling randomly, the precise abilities are chosen by the player. All references to minimum Powers, number of Contacts, and types of Powers are ignored when modeling."

[geneweigel]

My brain is rusty on MARVEL. The karma was off for killers and I think thats the same rubberization that we got in Second Edition where the bad guys are always beaten no matter what.

What would be a good repair?

It can't be public adoration because Spidey would be shitcanned.

And shouldn't villains have the ability to pull a fast one like they always do?

Look at the death of Gwen Stacey for example.

I would go back to the comic format and establish that the elements of the comics themselves are the real "game".

The splash page expectation in the title.
The cliffhanger.
The origin.
The flashback.
The blatant lying false expectation cover.
The secret origin.
The in panel behaviors (Thing showing up at Avengers mansion with Nick Fury for cards, Batman disappearing mysteriously with no explanation, Wolverine having to cut loose, Superman having ridiculous alternate stories, Reed Richards randomly finding hidden enclaves of themed superpeople, Spiderman having bad things happen constantly, Daredevil being reluctant to team up, etc.)
The secret or normal seeking identity.

This is just shit I'm shooting out. I'm sure this could be refined instead of using "karma".

Example RED SKULL:

Present the players with what the session is going to end up with hypothetically but over the top fake.
Then tone it down maybe hinting at the real ending with some prose narration but it will unfold the way they make it.
The lab is being robbed. The arriving detective support identifies him as a Red Skull connection.
(A game angle about using origin points) He's forced origin of a new guy with a secret origin version the red skull.
The detective gets killed by a blast. (A game angle with first person to say something unfunny and appropriately shocking gets points towards things)

Chapter 2 the detective is still alive or other weird shit that stabilizes the panic at the end of chapter 1.
The player playing the Punisher is not actually working with the team but is informed that he's not even there though he thought he was. This makes the other team validate that they are all together. If these two types mix its a confrontation and the villains gain some kind of energy from this.

Etc. Etc.

[GRWelsh]

Villains absolutely should be able to pull off a fast one now and then, and they do get Karma in the game, just not for outright killing (unlike heroes, they don't lose all of their Karma for killing, just 30 points). Villains can spend their Karma to build things, reduce damage taken, arrange an escape or mysterious death, or to successfully perform an action. They get Karma for things like committing crimes, defeating heroes, bragging and putting heroes in deathtraps.

That was exactly what I was thinking about when watching that scene in "Austin Powers" when Scott wants to just shoot Austin and Vanessa, but Dr. Evil won't let him and says, "Scott, you just... don't get it, do you? You don't."

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb428ySuFjA

[GRWelsh]

Mar 2, 2018 23:39:36 GMT -5 geneweigel said:

My brain is rusty on MARVEL. The karma was off for killers and I think thats the same rubberization that we got in
I would go back to the comic format and establish that the elements of the comics themselves are the real "game".

The splash page expectation in the title.
The cliffhanger.
The origin.
The flashback.
The blatant lying false expectation cover.
The secret origin.
The in panel behaviors (Thing showing up at Avengers mansion with Nick Fury for cards, Batman disappearing mysteriously with no explanation, Wolverine having to cut loose, Superman having ridiculous alternate stories, Reed Richards randomly finding hidden enclaves of themed superpeople, Spiderman having bad things happen constantly, Daredevil being reluctant to team up, etc.)
The secret or normal seeking identity.

Those are all good notes, and the sort of thing good GMs or Judges will incorporate into a game to make it feel authentic and "like the comics." If someone is playing Spider-man, he should have this feeling as Peter Parker he can't win no matter what he does. For example, Peter makes a date with a girl he has a crush on -- he can't believe she said yes! -- but then he can't make the date because he has to stop a super-villain!

That's not so much a game mechanics thing as it is situations and little details the Judge throws at the player.

[geneweigel]

Emotional expense points?

[geneweigel]

How about hero versus hero expense?

[geneweigel]

A new superhero "score":

The idiom score.

Anything "meta" goes into it and feeds other parts of the game.

hero vs hero does something really negative to the idiom but it resets all the positives now that would be a real comic game.

[GRWelsh]

Yes, there has to be some provision for the hero vs. hero dynamic. When I go back and read the comics from the 60's and 70's I'm always amazed at how much the heroes fight each other. The Fantastic Four and Avengers were fighting amongst themselves constantly. When Spidey wants to join the FF, he fights them. When Black Panther first meets the FF, he fights them. When the Avengers first met the X-Men, they fought each other. Many "Marvel Team-up" issues started with the heroes fighting each other, usually over a misunderstanding, then teaming up to beat some villain. A guest hero in a book almost certainly meant a hero vs. hero fight for at least a few panels!

Great way for the super heroes to meet -- a misunderstanding leading to them fighting each other!

In the old days (Bronze Age and earlier), in-fighting never had the emotional weight or consequences of "Dark Knight Returns" and afterwards with the rather mean Superman v. Batman dynamic that's been around ever since (1986+), with an example of "Civil War" in the comics (2006-2007) with heroes getting killed and friendships being shattered. In the old days, it was more just like rough-housing, with dialogue like, "Hey, sorry I beaned you, I thought you were the bad guy!" "No problem, but I'm glad you're one of the good guys because you pack a solid punch!"

[geneweigel]

A villain ability?

The idiom is always the cause though.

Some characters are more "Punisher" than they are mislabeled as like the Hulk. And the Thing's idiom to freak out mixed with the Hulk's being on the "Punisher" scale potential-wise.

The Hulk can destroy the known universe of man as we know it in a few hours yet somehow he manages to tip toe. In the hands of a "player" with "strength stats" this ability is lost.

[GRWelsh]

How would the "idiom" ability score work? Do you mean something like if you play the hero true to the character's idiom (i.e. how portrayed in the comics) you get points in this score, but when you diverge you lose points, something like that? And how would it work with original characters that the players invent?

It's funny, but in the earliest appearances of the Hulk and the Thing (early 60's), they're basically the same guy: thuggish, contemptuous of weak humans, with a chip on his shoulder, one step away from being villain... "If you see me as a monster, then I'll act like a monster!" Gradually, they are each developed into very distinct, complex beings.

With the Thing, he goes from being a thug lashing out against everyone around him to "the guy who never gives up" and a creature of pathos as well as becoming one of the best comedic characters of the Marvel Universe.

The Hulk's catch-phrase is "Hulk smash!" but like you say, there is more to him than that. There is also, "Why won't puny humans just leave Hulk alone!" and "Hulk hates Banner," and "You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." So, the Hulk isn't someone who indulges in his rage (the way some people enjoy it*), he's driven to it, with many hints that he'd rather not be... The Hulk also has self-loathing, a feeling of being self-divided, and -- later on-- a childlike innocence, like he's not just primal rage but also primal in other ways... the 1970's comic book Hulk would make a good friend because it would never occur to him to betray you!

*One of the few missteps in the Marvel Cinematic Universe was when Bruce Banner said, "That's my secret, Cap. I'm always angry." Sure, it was a cool scene, but that doesn't fit the archetype. Bruce Banner represents the rational, intellectual side of the everyman who is afraid of losing control to the bestial, primal side: he's not always angry, he's always afraid of getting angry and losing control (a universal fear we all have, especially males). The Hulk isn't a super power Bruce Banner has, it's a state he wants to avoid!

[geneweigel]

Frames of idiom types and activate the pro by volunteering the con

[GRWelsh]

That sounds a bit like the system in CHAMPIONS that allows you to buy powers by taking weaknesses or limitations. MSH has a similar list of limitations you can put on powers to raise them one rank, and some seem quite familiar... like you could have powers that only work at night (reminiscent of some character, I thought it was Doctor Mid-Nite), are limited in how many times you can use them per day or week (reminiscent of Hourman) or don't affect a certain color (like Green Lantern). Some limitations and weaknesses seem silly, but they can be a great in-road to role-playing and provide options for the Judge to make the game feel more like a comic book.

A friend of mine likes to tell the story of how he was in a CHAMPIONS campaign and one of the other players was trying to 'game the system' by taking a weakness against stuffed animals because he thought that would never come up. The GM promptly invented a super-villain named "The Toymaker" who built an army of giant stuffed animal robots.

[geneweigel]

Yeah, I think what I'm aiming at is the same problem with CALL OF CTHULHU. If you could fix a superhero game then you could definitely fix COC. Its characters not behaving as characters in the superhero case it makes things get instantaneously get out of hand but in the COC case when characters are just stats with "skill checks" its instantaneously a crime romance adventure that Lovecraft would have loathed.

[GRWelsh]

In the super hero game there has to be some provision for overcoming a weakness or limitation, since that is so central to the archetype. Facing and overcoming your weakness is an important part of the hero's journey. And from a meta-gaming standpoint, a weakness is like throwing the GM a bone to give him more personalized details to work with in coming up with a scenario. So, that is a must-have.

In CALL OF CTHULHU it is a bit more difficult, since Lovecraft's stories are often more about creating an atmosphere of dread and eerieness than they are about the protagonists actively driving the plot along... There a few exceptions, like in "The Dunwich Horror" "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward," "The Lurking Fear," or "The Shunned House." But for the most part his protagonists are the neurotic dreamers or sensitive artists or fainting scholars who end up fleeing for their lives ("The Festival," "The Whisperer in Darkness," "At the Mountains of Madness"), getting destroyed ("Dagon," "The Haunter in the Dark," "The Temple"), or finding out they themselves are monsters or otherwise disappearing from the earthly realm ("The Outsider," "Rats in the Walls," "Shadow Over Innsmouth," "The Silver Key"). A lot of times his protagonists merely uncover a story or observe events without making any difference ("The Call of Cthulhu," "Pickman's Model," "The Shadow Out of Time"). So, I think it is inherently challenging to have a game that stays true to Lovecraft, yet also allows the players to be active participants who can make some kind of difference. A way to handle the skill button pusher problem is simply tell the players they cannot ask to use a skill, they must describe what they do and you as the GM will tell them when a skill check is required. So, the game can end up being more about what the player does, how he investigates, where and how he looks for details, making logical connections, etc. than about his character successfully making skill checks.