resource Player Questionnaire

[Supercape]

To all Freedom City Play by Post Players!

 

This questionnaire, unlike the others on the site, is purely optional and comes with no PP reward. And unlike the others, it is directed at you, as a player, rather than your character.

 

So why fill it in?

 

You don’t need to.

 

The reason for doing so is to give a short indication of what you are looking for in in a role playing game, or more specifically, this role playing game. There are a multitude of ways people play and enjoy role playing games, and no way or preference is right or wrong. However, by indicating your own preference, you are giving a signpost to GMs and other players.

 

It is only a sign post. Do not think of it as a chain or cell. By indicating your preference you are not cutting yourself out of potential game play.

 

What you are doing is helping everyone enjoy themselves. If you love detailed combat play over the city with huge knockback distances, and the GM gives you a convoluted spy/detective story, it’s a raw deal. Sure, you may have fun, but you could have had more fun if everybody knew what you wanted.

 

And of course preferences change. Some days you might want that convoluted spy/detective story, or a superhero horror story in a ghost house. This is nothing but a guide, not a binding statement.

 

The questions are deliberately wide, so feel free to answer them how you see fit. You can answer them in detail or in brief, but try and keep them a manageable, readable size! J

 

It is important to remember there is no right or wrong way to answer these questions. There is no place for any smugness or superiority in saying one style or preference is better than another.

 

To answer these questions, please reply to this thread with a post below (one post for all five questions) and link it to your signature for reference. 

 

 

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

[Vahnyu]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

50-50 is a poor approximation, but it will have to do. Depending on how the mood strikes, a proverbial dungeon-crawl could be more desireable at one time, while a breather episode of social interraction and character development may be more desireable at another time. However, at no point should either of those parts be completely absent. As such, a maximum of 50% variance margin towards either side feels about right, to me(That is to say, 25-75 in favor of roleplaying, or 25-75 in favor of game). But whether it's role-playing centered or it's game centered, it should be engaging, first and foremost!

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

As we are roleplaying superheroes, bad things are bound to happen. As a rule though, the PC must eventually overcome those setbacks one way or another, whether by sheer force, wits, planning, luck, or whathaveyou. It may not happen immediately, or even in the same thread, but a failure at success should always be a promise for a second chance at a later time. Given, the Player and the GM could very well endeavor to work things out in order to make the failure a permanent thing for the PC, a force that has far-reaching consequences(such as the death of a beloved), but that should be done with the explicit consent of the Player. Overall, a 5 to 20% chance throughout the PC's entire career should be a reasonable  expectation.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

There's a place for the madly cackling villain, and there's a place for the cold, calculating visionary of noble intentions yet highly questionable practices. Villains should be able to work within the intended narrative of the story. As for the protagonists, it matters little how many dimensions a PC has, as long as she has her heart in the right place, and striving to be as true to the paragon-of-heroism model as she can. There's beauty in simplicity, and there's investment in complexity.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

Themes should match the archetype the PC fulfills(or approximates). A typical Powerhouse may find herself far more often playing detective than she can handle in a fun and believeable way for her abilities. A typical Costumed Adventurer may often find that she can't contribute meaningfully in cosmic adventures. A typical Gadgeteer may find that her technological skills are unsuited for consistently dealing with supernatural threats. Of course, PCs rarely are typical, and even then, they have plenty of room to grow and adapt, but they should still expect a reasonable percentage of challenge geared towards their particular set of skills. Unless of course a particular Superhero was explicitly conceived with having "fish out of water" as their character concept, of course. Threads don't HAVE to have combat, but they must certainly have to present opportunities for the PCs to expand on their Powersets as well as their character. Players should endeavor to resolve combat in a manner reflecting the PC in question. A hot-tempered Superhero may decide to subdue enemy combatants as soon as possible, without giving them room and chance to threaten non-hostiles, while a pacifist may try to reason with them, even to the point of avoiding bringing physical harm to her enemies. And of course, as the strategist will note, the most efficient victory you can gain is the one you get by winning the fight before it starts.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

Growth. RPGs are all about growth. Character growth. Power growth. Social enviroment growth. Not forced growth, of course, but organic and natural. As for Superhero RPGs, in particular, they are also about arcs. Most usually, multiple Super-Villain arcs(that is to say, a superhero may be expected to encounter a couple of reccuring villains, one at a time each, or even many at once), but Character arcs are not unheard of, and can certainly be engaging on their own right(example, the Neo-genetic Nightmare arc, from Spider-Man:the Animated Series, which was more about Peter Parker dealing with his unstable at that time powers, while trying to deal with various other characters of the universe, each of whom had their own agenda).

Edited October 31, 2013 by Vahnyu

[Raveled]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

I really like the tactical element; I blame early exposure to D&D. I do recognize that without story stuff, though, there isn't much point to do the tactical stuff. I suppose it'd be a pretty even split.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

I am fine with the villain getting away, even as a result of bad dice rolls. If it's a result of bystanders getting hurt or dying, I'd prefer to discuss it beforehand. I'm okay with it happening, but I don't want it coming out of the blue.

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

At the end of the day, I don't want to worry and angst over whether or not my PCs beat up a good guy. I don't necessarily mind antagonists whose motivation is in the grey, but their actions, at least, should be clearly reprehensible.

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

I view everything that involves a dice roll or a challenge on the road to success to be an Obstacle. I don't mind how Obstacles are structured or presented, as long as it is something the PCs can overcome.

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I like huge displays of power. While there can be good stuff in a fist-fight between normal humans, I'm really drawn to the over the top action set-pieces; Superman using a UFO as a bludgeon against a kaiju, or the Flash running through a city to disarm a dozen bombs in the space between clockticks.

[Sticklefront]

1. If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

I honestly prefer the sotry to the tactical aspects of the game. The Rule of Cool is the most important thing to me, rather than the way the dice fall.

 

2. Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

I like it when failure is always a possibility. I think all character decisions should have ramifications. It adds a sense of danger, and makes for more interesting play that just throwing powerful characters at a problem until it goes away!

 

3. Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

I think that the more ambiguous, three-dimensional stories have great potential. The best example I can think of is the newer Avengers run that Brian Bendis did for Marvel; everything from the breakout at the Raft prison, and the New 52 from DC. There are some more questionable moral choices to be made, but all the characters are unquestionably heroic.

4. This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

I don’t really have a preference, but I think combat is an integral part of the superhero genre; however clever or stealthy a character is, let’s be honest… we all love a superpowered throwdown as a climax!

 

5. Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

Only that it’s important for the heroes to BE heroic. Especially in the superhero genre, the PC’s should each get to shine. NPC’s, other PC’s, the villains and the world they exist in all have to believe in what the heroes do, and requires more than a little suspension of disbelief in order for it to work!

[Supercape]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

Ideally, pretty much 90% story telling focus. It's not that I mind the tactical stuff - in fact, I enjoy it, it's just I get that buzz elsewhere, from computer and board games. For me, I can only get the roleplaying buzz from RPGs, so that where I want the focus to be. I don't mind tactical stuff creeping in, but so often I find it gets in the way of my role playing perspective. Also, as I usually have no huge desire for my PCs to "win" (I find it awesome whatever happens) I never really have the drive to do the tactical stuff. 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

I like failure as it makes victory all the sweeter. On the whole though, Superheroes should succeed more than they fail. And major, devastating failures like death of a beloved need to be a collaborative discussion. I would be happy with anything up to and including a 50% fail rate. I confess I always love the classic superhero meets villain, gets snot beat out of him, crawls away, reflects, and comes back wiser, to defeat the villain in second round. Or maybe there are more reversals. 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

Very much three dimensional. Its all about having to make decisions. The highest point an RPG can reach for me is when I find out something new about my PC, and possibly, myself, through a choice made in a conflicting situation. I have never believed in abstract concepts of "good" and "evil", although there is clearly action that is awful by the standards of the vast majority. The most interesting villains to me are people like Magneto. 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

I like all three, although I don't like threads without any conflict. There has to be conflict and violence in a thread, but conflict and violence does not have to mean physical. I quite like detective threads and I like mysteries. But more important is the clash of wills and agenda's. 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

I have found I prefer to play at the middle or lower level of PL range (PL 12 is very top end), and on the smaller more intimate scale (well, by superhero standards anyway!) compared to the grand canvas of the world. Daredevil is much more intriguing to me than Superman. I like buttons being pushed, and that feeling of being out of control rather than in control. I find the Superhero archetype an endlessly fascinating window into the psyche of man. But above all, its about fun!

[KnightDisciple]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

I prefer a mix that tends toward an even split, as this isn't a no-rules freeform game. We have rules and stats for a reason!

That said, some variance is fine. 70-30 Story-Game, or 60-40 Game-Story, are about what I'd say would still be fun. What's more fun for me is doing the crunchy game stuff, then giving my own fluffy story-character spin in the IC thread.

 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

I'm pretty okay with my hero taking a beating (poor Gabriel used to get near-killed in every other vignette or solo thread or whatnot). A villain escaping is just another chance for plots later! Humiliation's a bit trickier, and I think it'd depend on what kind of humiliation (so it'd take a discussion first). "Calamity" is kind of vague; a villain not only escaping, but getting the gizmo/plan/document/money/jewels/whatever they wanted? Sure, that can happen. Villains taking over a country should probably be a discussion with Refs. Deaths, be they of bystanders or loved ones, should be pretty darn rare, and in the latter case very thoroughly discussed.

I'd say 10-20% overall "failure" rate.

 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

I myself believe that Good and Evil are definite concepts, so I like stories that lean more that direction. I don't mind varied, complex backstories and motivations, but "good guy fighting good guy" (assuming it's not Mind Control or EVIL ROBOTS) should, in my mind, always end up being a team-up thread (in classic comic tradition). Someone like Magneto has some sympathetic ideas, but is ultimately not a good guy, because of what he does to try and achieve those ideas. As well, heroes shouldn't be so bad you're questioning why they aren't working for bad guys. That said, reformed villains are a pretty awesome hero idea, so genuine new-leaf-turning is always cool!

 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

I like a mix of all those ideas. Taking Gabriel for example, he can investigate (by talking around and getting clues from what people have heard and seen), social (dimplomancing, as well as getting a read on people), and also fight. Not every thread needs to do all 3, but I like to do all 3 with any character if possible.

I don't need combat in every thread, but if there is combat I generally like at least a few rounds of it unless the dice are incredibly generous or harsh.

Subtle approach avoidance is fine, especially since the option being there doesn't mean it gets taken, or can get taken, every time.

 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I like seeing my heroes work with other heroes a lot. I lean toward preferring at least part-time membership on teams, as I find they are great vehicles for having a group working together. I also like to see an attitude that all our characters are awesome in their own ways, and steps taken to make sure everyone can pitch in in a thread.

[Ari]

Unless otherwise stated, presume the sentence "What Vahnyu said" is somewhere in the mix.

 

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

Like a lot of people on here will say, a relatively equal mix of both is my preference. Too much role-play focus and it turns into a game of make-believe where every now and then you throw a dice, too much game focus and it's easy to feel bored and uninvolved because you're still fighting this villain hideout you were fighting weeks ago and the plot has ground to a halt. When both have weight it's best to my mind, when both matter.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

It really depends on the story you're trying to tell with the character. For a Spider-Man-esque hero like Geckoman, for instance, his repeated beatings and mistakes work because they are about more than just him failing, it's about him growing and changing as a person, and their decline in frequency and severity represent his maturation into somebody respected and capable. On the other hand, somebody like Fulcrum requires sudden, abrupt hardship for it to work right, reminders that although she's impenetrable she's still fallible. For my characters, they're neither everymen nor iconic, they fall somewhere in that maddening between place where if it's too big it feels forced and if it's too small it feels unimportant. As a player I don't really mind failure, my reaction to certain things notwithstanding, and non-permanent setbacks are great for both Hero Points and player engagement! That and people such as Sorus have complained that their listed Complications don't come into play, which is less than ideal when that's supposed to be a major part of the game.

 

I'm say...45% for bad things rather than good to happen to my characters. Hashing big problems out beforehand is vital though. It makes for a better story and nobody should have some hardship befall them just because the GM feels vindictive that evening.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

I'm starting to think you like this subject Supercape! Anyway, while most of the time our characters are just responding to/helping avert disasters, I see your point. It again comes down to what the game is about, if it's a high-stakes story of political intrigue, a two-dimensional cardboard cut out for a bad guy would be disappointing at best. On the other hand, asking Overshadow "But why do you really want to take over the world?" is not likely to get anybody any particularly enlightening answers, because the real story is about the heroes fighting his armies and agents. Not to say Overshadow can't have intricate and layered reasons, or that all espionage instigators are bottomless enigmas, but sometimes ambiguity and complexity hurts rather than helps. I'd prefer if the situation itself was more ambiguous and without easy answers, rather than the players. It's all too easy(as anyone who has experienced or observed my GMing can attest!) to fall into good good guys vs bad bad guys with little going on around them. Superheroes were invented for children after all. But cases where power isn't enough can lead to some awesome stories, and keeping things grounded in uncertainty can be helpful in preventing whats happened to a lot of shared superhero universes.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

I really, really, really like it when a good investigation thread comes up. I like it when these people with vastly different lives have to puzzle their way to the answer. Next to that I enjoy stories about superheroes dealing with more or less ordinary situations that take cah-raaaazy twists. However, there is a reason so much of the books is about combat, and a good old brawl with stakes of any size is fine by me. Like Vahnyu said comic book heroes work best when playing to their strengths, and locking Mr. Fantastic in a room full of spellbooks with a magically locked door is only intriguing so many times.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

Exploring a world. There are infinite possibilities in one city alone, not to mention the rest of the planet, or the wealth of alternate universes, underground countries, interstellar civilizations and myriad timelines. It's one of the reasons I like the Atom Family so much, that's what they're all about.

[thomasdm3]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like? 

I would say I like a good mix of both.  probably slightly more on the tactical side but I enjoy both aspects. 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

I'm fine with failure as long as it make  since.  Sometimes in life even when everything is done right failure still occurs. That's life.  I like games and stories where an actions consequences are not always simple to determine and can be unexpected as long as there is a logical cause and effect chain to give an explanation of what happened .  

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

I like gray  characters though I like for my heroes to have some heroic  qualities and the villains to have some evil qualities . I also like when villains and heroes are not always on the same side. For instance Tyrion Lannister from A song and ice and fire is both a hero but also a member of the "evil side". I abhor wholly good or bad characters. I fine them boring and unrealistic. Most characters should be driven by motivations and believe what they are doing is justified. In other words I like my characters to think and act like real people.  I don't mind the occasional psychopath when done wright.   I prefer moral complexity somewhere in-between harry potter and game of thrones with game of thrones being a little to ambiguous.    

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 I think that  avoiding combat is fine and even should be encouraged when engaging the enemy will not help complete the objective. I also think that information and preparation should be far more important then the actual battle. For example  if you know what superpowers/ flaws a villain has that give you a big advantage. Conversely if you are able to hide certain aspects about you own powers that also give you a huge advantage.      

 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?  I'm not a big Super hero comic book person though I do like the flexibility that the M&M  system offers. 

[Brown Dynamite]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

Honestly, the last line in Vahn's answer hits the nail on the head for me on this one.  As long as it's engaging I'm thrilled.  Both combat and story elements can drag out however long is needed to accomplish the goal of the scene.  If one or the other is failing to do so, then it's a simple matter to trudge through.  However, for me  I don't feel there's an exact ratio to ever get a perfect mix.  As long as the direction still serves a purpose to the narrative you're intending to tell. 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

Some of the best character growth can occur out of a response to failure in my opinion.  So I'm all aboard with failure.  The fact that actions can have consequences also adds to the weight of some stories.  Of course I feel the heroes should take the brunt of the damage.  Rather than droves of innocent deaths or beloved's thrown as fodder for the sake of angst.  Not that droves of deaths are fitting for the setting and the deaths of loved ones should definitely have some discussion thrown in.  The severity of the failings and frequency should be weighted against each individual hero.  Every hero can afford to take a beating, but not every beating will really mean much of the same thing to them.  Be it emotional or physical.

 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

I would love to say that three dimensional partly sympathetic villains should be the standard.  Really I would.  But, sometimes for every Mr. Freeze you need a Condiment King.  Comic relief punch clock villains serve their purpose.  Even the non comic relief ones can be used to great effect.  The most memorable antagonist are of course the ones with deep complex motivations.  But it would be a pity if we lost out on  something like Blimp Man trying to take over the world by attaching all the continents to some sort of giant zeppelin for no other reason than its his shtick.  Of course heroes being placed into situations in which they have to question whether they're truly doing the right thing is just nothing short of enjoyable.  Such as having to protect a villain from a victim or vigilante seeking revenge.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

I like stories that are either in the character's involved wheelhouse, letting them shine at what they're good at.  Or I like stories that are so out of their wheelhouse they have to adapt to overcome the challenge.  I may be expressing the idea poorly as it sounds a bit more all encompassing than I intend to state.  The stories work best when you allow opportunities to accentuate the character's strengths.  Be they in their natural purview or otherwise.  As for avoiding combat, really it depends on the character.  I'll use my two characters as an example.  Although Foreshadow enjoys a scrap he wouldn't bat an eye at avoiding it.  Whereas Glamazon understands there are ways to solve a problem that don't involve her fist, but no need to spoil the fun and explore those avenues.  Besides all characters initially meet combat caps for a reason.  To pay good ole fashion tribute to Adam West *POW* effects.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

Honestly to me the genre allows for a lot of freedom.  It's part of the great thing in Superhero stories.  You can run a noir detective adventure and follow it up with a dab of punching dinosaurs that are ridden by superintelligent nazi apes in the face.  And that's the norm.  You can't tell me that's not just wonderful.  I love the flexibility in being able to tell a wide berth of stories with my characters.  So my preference would have to actually be the option to exercise such variety.  I'm all for telling a dozen investigation stories or brawlfest.  But I just prefer mixing it up with something else in between said patterns.

[piercetbh]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

I feel that 'role playing' and 'game' need to really blend together to make a 'role playing game.' With that said, tactics should take game dominance while the role playing becomes the force that steers the boat, deciding what the tactics are needed for. This usually means for me that a character's actions should be mechanical in nature (requiring attack rolls, saving throws and the like), but be influenced by his role playing behaviour and character development.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

Yes, I want failure, and lots of it! A huge portion of all superhero stories, and even just stories in general, is failure. The hero could lose, or fail to do something, or make a mistake, and then he has to take action to solve the problem, whether it's internal or something he has done to someone else.  It should be possible for any character to fail, to lose a loved one, to be beaten and humiliated, and experience anything else you can think of. A game where you can't lose, even if you do something stupid, is boring and makes it hard to really role play. On the other hand, a game where even a very clever player or skilled role player loses because the villains are overpowered is cruel, and similarly bad for gameplay. It should be possible to fail, at any opportunity, but also always possible to win.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

As I said, a role playing game should be a tactical experience that is driven by its story. This means that villains, being a big part of the tactical game, should have strong involvement in the story as well. They should have a tale to tell and, while not always being sympathetic, be at least understandable. An antagonist should have a strong, non-stereotypical reason behind his actions other than 'HA HA HA EVIL.' Not every villain's story will have to be heard, since sometimes the hero never does learn the villain's motivation. However, they should all have one, in case it is needed (and hopefully it will be).

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

The exact balance of combat, investigation and social focus should depend on characters in a thread, while also trying to change them. So putting the mentalist with low combat stats but a heap of offensive Mental powers in a room full of T-Rexes that are immune to will effects is a little unfair. On the other hand, pitting him against a few guys with pathetic will saves and minimal damage output is way too far into his own ballpark. If the mentalist's powers are all combat-related, give him combat that he can beat. But at the same time, make him try new things. Give him a social situation he needs to pass through. How do his mental powers, which are all aggressive effects like Mental Blast, allow him to thrive? This can encourage a character to develop both in skill and behaviour, and keeps the game fresh.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

A superhero RPG should be the very opposite of rail-roading. No option should be forced, and everyone should have a chance to try anything in any way that makes sense to them. This is something an RPG will always have over any other type of game, and it should be taken advantage of. In most video games, when you encounter a boss, you have to beat that boss. If you lose, you fight him again. But in an RPG it's not like that. You can run away, talk to him, or respond in any other appropriate way. That's awesome, and I want it to be present here.

[Valcili]

1.     If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

I myself prefer a higher focus on the story telling as it allows for a more enjoyable immersion if one is good with describing with words. It allows the stage to be set and opens the imagination. To have a good RPG that involves others there is an element of tactical challenge to help with resolution but without the story telling it’s not much of anything but perhaps a dice game.

 

2.     Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

As this is a site for one to represent themselves in a story as a superhero, most if not always the hero does not die that is acceptable as that is how it is in the comics. You can’t have a hero if the hero dies.  The aspect of failure is a common thing, you learn from your mistakes and if they have no consequences then how would one learn and change. In everyone’s life there is consent growth. The potential for failure should always be there to help keep one in check. Actually failing is probably dependent on what is the root of the failure thus should be discussed prior. But at the same time the shock factor from the surprise is highly appealing as well, but too frequently then it becomes unpleasing. The song of Ice and fire is a great example, the shock and awe from Ned Stark was wonderful however tragic, but by the end of the series it was more of a “whatever, someone died again. Why am I still reading this?â€

 

3.     Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

Greyscale is a wonderful aspect to have in all stories as it opens so many new avenues, one would not want to end the life of a villain if he is not truly evil, but complex trust and suspicion can be generated from a not solely good individual as they may have secret underlying agendas that utilize you as a pawn in their personal great game. Villains are not always villains because they are evil, I really like the idea of turning a villain to the heroes side.  

 

4.     This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

Sometimes combat is the only option…..that is what most people would say but the truth is there is always another way but it generally means sacrifice and accepting the worst end of a deal thus most people will not opt for that as they always want to come out on top. But that is not the way of a hero, the hero makes the sacrifice and works harder to get the upper hand after the fact.  With that said I have no real preference but would always like the opportunity base on the particular character in play to choose combat, investigate or socially talk down a situation.

 

5.     Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

Uniqueness; this is the reason for choosing a superhero RPG the limits are essentially null. If you can imagine it and give it a comprehensible description it can become reality here. Surprises; just like in comic books you can always be surprised as to what will happen, heroes die, and comeback the unstoppable are stopped with ingenuity and teamwork.  Endless possibilities.   I like challenges that are overcome by groups working together.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Valcili

[Exaccus]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

Well, On a guess I’d say 80-90% story, the mechanics can interact with the story and there’s a great deal of pleasure in watching a machine (even a theoretical one on paper) you make run smoothly but it can get tedious after a while, like the ticking of a clock. 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 I am fine with failure that advances the story or is a direct result of my choices, actions or inaction, only failure I might have a problem with is failure because I cannot succeed but might have if only I had X more ranks in a skill or Y Feat etcetera.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

Ultimately I believe what is good and evil will always come down to personal judgement; all that really changes is how easy the choice is to make by our own opinions; that said I can be a very engaging experience when it’s a hard decision to make; though a villain who twirls his moustache is nice reorientation after a particularly dizzying moral dilemma.

 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 31 flavours; all made from milk! I feel variety is the spice of life and don’t object to clever circumvention of problems, I do however not like to be sitting idle in the back of the march waiting for something to do; nor putting someone else in that position

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I confess slight preference for the fantastic and surreal aspects of the genres; I would rather be exploring alien worlds or psychedelic planes than the city streets I understand the appeal of the fantasy of doing a little bit to help fix our real world problems and of being stronger and braver people than we might feel we are and speaking out where we might have held our peace.

[Year_of_the_Fox]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

About 70/30. Too much story and you don't get to put your powers to use. Fighting is fun though.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

Failure is fine, curbstomps or humiliating defeats are absolutely not my style. I prefer losses or victories to have a respect for both the heroes and the villains, and though some people would say kicking around a character or party for a while 'buils character' an 'serves as good storytelling', I couldn't disagree more. It's incredibly off-putting to be in games where it feels like I have no chance, or that my characters are being spit on. Or, that the vilains have no chance (other than mooks of course) and they just get kicked around with no respect being offered to them. I'm fine with just about any loss, except for a humiliating defeat.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

Ambiguity is the stuff that brings out good storytelling. Morality is good if you throw in some grayscale and it can add dimensions.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

Sure, approaching combat from other angles works for me. If I had to rank the three listed things by preference, I'd rank them '3 2 1'. Social, investigative, combat.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I prioritize openness to experimenting with character types and interraction outside of combat time. I also DO NOT like fantasy settings at all unless they're mixed with modern or futuristic, and I prefer SciFi

[The Sailor]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

I am always a "Narrative First" sort of player. I love a good story, and I love a good story as much as a good fight. But I will not be in any way inconvenienced if I don't roll once in a thread. I'm here for being in character and enjoying slipping into someone else's spandex for a while.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

Well it's expected with me that villians will whup me up. It's their job. Even thwart me with clever plans. All the more reason to make a comeback and pay them back. But I'm not a fan of "piling on". Something I have experienced in tabletop and with some other places, where one failure happens, then suddenly the GM decides to turn a surprise complication into the worst day ever.

As for loved ones dying... I would like to avoid that for the foreseeable future after a recent real-world loss a couple months ago.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

I like the differences between good and evil to be clean-cut. But I don't mind realistic motivations, or twists that make pegging a villain as one harder to do. I like a few moral and ethical questions, but I don't want them to become walls to the story. I like Star Trek: The Next Generation style Moral Dilemmas.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

I for one, love all options on the table for "solutions". Although I really, really love scenarios that are solved without throwing a punch. Sort of a fan of the thinking game. Although I will admit I do love balling up my fists and getting down and dirty too. So, as before... I like all options on the table.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I like playing things that I wouldn't get a chance to do in reality, that and this is very much wish fulfillment for me. I like having a laugh too, and don't mind comedy in my game. Also I avoid Grim-Dark style games like the plague, so that would be important to know when there is subject matter coming around that might want me to step out.

[R. Bluefish]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?
At the end of the day, both are critical. The tactical scenes give us a challenge to overcome, and the tools with which to do it, while at the same time the element of randomness prevents things from getting too predictable. And the story provides crucial context, as well as a reason to actually care about what’s happening. But if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to choose, I would probably say story trumps gameplay for me. If all I want to do is blow things up and overcome various challenges, I can play a video game – RPGs are for when I want truly feel immersed in the narrative.
 
2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?
Without the omnipresent threat of failure, what’s the point in trying to succeed? Nothing makes the player fight harder than when they feel that something is genuinely at stake. But at the same time, failure is also not an occurrence to be taken lightly. If I fail, I want to know there was at least a slim chance of success, otherwise the game would quickly become just as tiresome as if I always won. And whenever is humanly possibly, the failure should be integrated into the story. If a loved one is killed, for example, it should have a profound effect on both the hero and the stories that follow. It should not be just a random event that is never mentioned again. If the hero is utterly defeated (physically, mentally, or socially), it should be a lesson to them about how to do better next time. And ideally, they should get an opportunity to settle the score, in an appropriately cathartic manner. Moments of true failure, and how the hero responds to it, are the defining moments of their career.
 
3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)
Moral ambiguity is, for me, one of the most interesting angles for a story to explore, and the superhero genre is no exception. However, with this particular setting and tone, moderation is a wise policy. While having antagonists with understandable (even sympathetic) motivations can certainly enrich the story, and reasonable flaws and limitations are instrumental in creating a good protagonist, this is still a game about heroes. Balance is key: maintaining a certain level of complexity while also ensuring things don’t become bogged down in Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy. The game should make me think, yes, but it should also allow me to eventually make a decision without being constantly wracked by self-doubt. We can all get plenty of that in real life.
 
4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?
First of all, the obvious – combat is fun. It’s what most PPs go into. We hardly ever get the chance to beat up bad guys with superpowers in the real world. Everybody loves an epic life-or-death struggle, and it makes a great climax. Even just whaling on a bunch of mooks makes you feel like an absolute badass. But conflict is the soul of drama, and there’s more than one kind of conflict. Sometimes, using some of your subtler powers to avoid a fight can end up being more satisfying than just charging in and mopping the floor with everybody. Investigative adventures can provide a different kind of challenge (and reward players who bought skills and powers geared towards it). And the social focus is, in my mind, almost mandatory to some degree. It gives you a chance to form meaningful relationships with other heroes, whether it be friendship or rivalry (or a mixture of both). How your character behaves around their compatriots can be what truly makes them come alive. So I suppose you won't catch me complaining about any of the three.
 
5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?
The tone of the story – realistic and grounded, or light and fantastical (or some combination of the two) – should match the characters playing in it. Generally, you don’t see Superman hunting down serial killers, and you don’t see Batman fighting aliens. But there should also be occasional breaks from it to explore something different, or even just try something new for kicks. Being confronted with an especially dark turn of events can lend depth to the lighthearted Cape, and having to fight off giant evil rabid robotic rabbits can make for a hilarious adventure for the dark, brooding Cowl. So, while consistency is important, variety is still the spice of life.

[JediDalek]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

Personally, I tend to gain most of my enjoyment from the storytelling. That said, I think rules and putting definite numbers on things makes the whole game feel much more "real", with actual limits/consequences as opposed to just making it up as you go. I guess mostly storytelling, but with enough challenge to keep the story engaging.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

In real life, I've always felt that failure only really happens when one gives up on trying. Carrying this over to the game, as long as the hero can return to fight another day, I would just consider any losses/failures/etc. as dramatic buildup to an eventual win. However, when somebody plays a superhero RPG, there is usually a bit of wish-fulfillment going on, so you want to succeed more often than you fail. That and a hero who consistently fails will stop being interesting after a while.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

I have always felt like superheroes work best when done as four-color characters with definite concepts of good and evil. That doesn't mean, though, that a little conflict or depth can't make characters a lot more interesting. I've always liked relatable villains, just because the moustache-twirling variety of villains never made any sense to me as believable people, but one can relate to a villain while still clearly seeing that the villain is wrong. For heroes, I guess I would would say that foibles help give them depth, but they should still clearly be good guys at the end of the day.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

As one who enjoys storytelling, I really don't mind social threads. It wouldn't be a very good superhero story without some action, though. I say "action" because, while combat is an enjoyable part of the game, creative use of powers/abilities to avoid fighting someone directly is always a really gratifying part of the roleplaying experience as well. I like a little dice rolling without making a slog out of it. 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

I've alluded a few times already, but my favorite part of any RPG is the collaborative storytelling aspect; being able to share my ideas while also letting myself be influenced by the ideas of others. This is especially cool in a comic-styled world where styles & characters that would normally not be seen together can be made to fit. For example, I have some very Tokusatsu flavored ideas planned for Stinger, and some of those happen and are cool. But then I get involved with someone playing, say, a mystical, "Dr. Strange" type, or a crew of space travelers, and the two styles meld into something neither of us could have done on our own.

Edited May 11, 2015 by JediDalek

[Sakuro]

1. If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

A roughly equal measure of both tactical and story appeal to me.

 

2. Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

Truthfully, I don't like to fail. a protagonist's failure can be healthy to a story though. My preference is for the hero to be the eye of the storm when bad things happen. The bad guy may get away, bystanders and loved ones or allies may get hurt (with the hero trying to prevent it), but crushing defeats or humiliation rarely happen to the protagonist hero.

 

3. Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

I like realistic greyscale antagonists and protagonists. But sometimes you do need a paragon, like Captain America or Red Skull, to show everyone just how bad or good things could be.

 

4. This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

Investigative focused stories and puzzles are two things I can't stand. They can be tolerated in the short term. If investigation is needed in a story, I prefer it to be "soft", a minor element, and quick.

Admittedly I am not the most social person, at least when it comes to chatting people up. Character interation itself, not long wordy dialog, is important. I like politics in a game. I like learning about people and things or using social measures to accomplish a goal.

Combat is good. I like action in general. Rooftop or car chases. Arial dogfights. Running through a trapped room to save NPC X while the bad guy prepares for something menacing. It's even better when I can plot and plan. I'm a plotter, in general, and tend to extend that into the rest of the game, not just combat.

I don't know how long a thread generally runs here, but a given scene doesn't need to have combat to be satisfying for me. I do need some action in a given story though.

It should be noted that in general I do not like comedy. When things get silly I'm even less happy.

 

5. Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

Having options, and being allowed to get creative with problem solving really appeals to me. The key word being "allowed", not forced.

Being the underdog, on the B-Team, or taking care of a minor problem while the Big Leaguers save the world doesn't appeal to me.

It is great when my character is given the chance to have a meaningful impact on the world around them and have the potential to change things. Seeing the character's actions having long term consequences, for good or ill, is appealing.

I also like to explore. There is a lot to see and do, and it'd be a shamed to be confined to one small aspect of that. Even one city can have a lot of diversity to uncover and interact with.

[Ra-endome]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like? I much prefer stories to second-by-second detail micro-management. Combat is important, and I want my character to survive, succeed, and thrive,, but I am hoping that there will be 2 - 3x as much exposition of story-parts and interactions as there will of co,bat results.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish? In order for there to be any real success, there has to be a possibility of failure. In order for a character to learn and grow, s/he must try, risk, fail, try, risk, fail, try, risk, and maybe succeed. Without repeated failures and risks, it just isn't much of a story. Yes, I would like my character to succeed and thrive. But I don't want it all to be easy, all too easy. I want to co-create an excellent story. So, I need those challenges, I need those failures.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like) I don't believe that there is any evil. "Evil" is a religious-political propaganda green-lighting who it is 'okay' to hate, assigning a 'them' to focus our primitive "us v them" emotions on. That said, some people are insane. Some people are confused. Some people have beliefs which oppose those of my character. I prefer enemies that neither I nor my character can predict. I prefer stories that are a bit complex and deep. Light-hearted is okay, but it can exist above the depths of an interesting story, or it can connect one interesting depth with another.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?  I wouldn't want a superhero story-campaign with absolutely no combat. Not being able to predict how an encounter will best be managed is very important to me. Especially with Play-by-Post and having the IC and OOC sides of the same encounters, it seems to me that it is not a question of 'roll' playing v 'roleplaying', it is 'roll' playing OOC and 'roleplaying' IC. I prefer roleplaying stories where the story is character-driven, not plot-driven. There should be a plot, but there should never be only one way to succeed at a challenge or solve a problem. 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG? I would prefer story-creation in which everyone has fun, where we cooperate interactively, and build off of each other's strengths.

[Deel]

On 10/27/2013 at 9:46 PM, Supercape said:

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 I enjoy both, but I am unquestionably better at character writing and storytelling than I am at min/maxing and tactics.  When it comes to tactical elements I prefer to spectate rather than indulge.  

 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 My inclination is to believe that somewhere in the story the main characters should certainly fail at something, even temporarily.  This is one of the main drivers in creating conflict, which is essential in the enjoyment of a story.  It is certainly possible to create conflict without character failure, but in a collaborative storytelling effort like this that should be an option, not a restriction.  I have no problem with my characters failing; I'll go as far as to say that I wouldn't insist on a victorious or happy ending for a storyline as long as the result was well-written and gave me an opportunity to participate in that conclusion.

 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 For me this is a matter of mood, I can really get into the subtlety of establishing a relationship between hero and villain, and engaging in a way that opens moral depths in a situation.  On the other hand, there is something to be said for just breaking out a tub of popcorn and indulging in a straightforward superbattle.

 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

It depends on the context, that said I would say that of the themes mentioned above the two most essential for superheroics would be combat and social.  Investigations can be entertaining as well, and I enjoy comedic adventures even with characters who don't normally do comedy.  I don't absolutely insist in combat in every single encounter, and rather enjoy the relief that comes from finding a creative way to avoiding an expected combat situation.  That a story is written with conviction and competence is more important than what that story specifically includes.

 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

RPGs in general appeal to me because of the freedom to go off the rails and the challenge of doing so in a way that keeps other players engaged.  The Superhero genre appeals to me because of the wish fulfillment and fantastic elements.  Seeing a street-level superpowered first responder navigate a Jack Kirby-esque labyrinth to deliver a giant screwdriver to the Civilization of the Planet Movers while battling the intransigent hordes of the Unfathomable Poodle People all in time to meet his s/o at the park for ice cream would keep me reading. 

 

[wideandnerdy]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

Though in RPGs roleplaying started as context for the game, in a series like this, I'd be looking for the reverse. Gameplay exists to provide some authenticity to the story (everything doesn't just magically work out). While this might get in the way of telling a superhero story the way they're often told in the comics (where story trumps even the internal logic) I'd view the added authenticity as refreshing. So story first with the above in mind.

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

I don't want it to happen constantly but regularly is ok. Failure can set up more satisfying victories later on. 

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

Some of both probably leaning towards more simple. I like gray if the complexities are interesting but the Dark Age of comics was not interesting. Interesting grey morality would be a difficult moral quandary that the hero wrestles with and actually cares about getting right but is also forced to admit that his opponents have a point. Interesting grey morality is not a libertine nihilist promptly dismissing morality as being stupid and naive and/or meaningless. 

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

Strongly leaning towards the Investigative, then Combat Focus, with Social Conflict coming in last (especially if "social" is meant in a political sense, my opinions on political subjects are strong and are likely to be both unpopular and disruptive so I avoid that in roleplaying games). 

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

At the end of the day, I just want to do cool fun and imaginative things with my character's powers and explore the internal logic of the setting. To me, thats a good superhero story. The other things superhero comics try to be are, in my opinion, done better elsewhere and feel shoehorned in when done in comics. Though there are a few exceptions, mostly to do with the nature of power and how it is used.

 

EDIT: I suddenly have a sinking feeling that I wasn't supposed to do this yet.

Edited June 22, 2017 by wideandnerdy
Apologizing.

[BlazingCoconut]

1.       If one views a role playing game as mix of role-playing (story telling focus) and game (tactical challenge focus), what kind of mix do you like?

 

I am probably about 75/25 story to tactical.  Although, with that being said, I love builds and thinking about how to solve problems.  Yet, while the tactical is interesting, the story is what engages me.  I've never wanted to be part of a community for the challenge of numbers.  I have wanted to be part of a community for the shared stories and imagination.

 

 

2.       Our site operates a policy that no PC should die without player permission. Failure, however, is another matter. A villain could get away, an innocent (or beloved) could die, calamity  could happen, your PC could get the snot beaten out of him and humiliated (publicly or privately). How do you feel about the prospect of failure? What chance of failure would you like, and what type of failure would you tolerate, expect, or indeed wish?

 

If there is no chance of failure, then succeeding is not an achievement.  The best stories are about how a character overcome's their adversity.  So I have no issue with PC failure, in fact, I would be disappointed if it was not an option.  As for my tolerance, I have no issues on any type of failure but there are some situations that I would not prefer any character of mine in.  Thankfully, those seem to be covered by the PG-13 codes of the site and not common to comic themes so I don't expect to worry about them.

 

3.       Superheroes have great power, the power to impose their will upon the world. This can mean the chance to escape the moral complexities of the world, or it can mean even greater moral complexities. What do you want? Do you like your antagonists as well defined, clear-cut evil, or your antagonists (and protagonists) to be more ambiguous, greyscale and three dimensional? (we should note that this site does not condone vigilantes or the like)

 

I like having a world where there are complexities.  Heroes should not be above the law, and people should react to them as one might normally expect.  Antagonists should be interesting and not a cardboard punching bag of stats.  They should have reasons for what they do, which are not excuses, but something that a player can see why they are on the road to ruin.  My protagonists I like to be people first and heroes second.  That's not to say they aren't motivated by a sense of good, but that they have other motivations and goals in their life.  There can be exceptions to all of this, but it should not be the rule.

 

4.       This site is unambiguously about superheroes. However, within those parameters, there is a fairly wide canvas. Three main categories that formed are the combat focus, The investigative focus, and the Social focus (which does not necessarily mean just chatting and making friends, but social conflict too). There are other themes and sub-themes, too many to mention here. Do you have any thoughts or preferences about themes? How much combat would you like in a thread, for instance? How would you feel if combat could be avoided by a subtle approach?

 

I am ALL for creative application of conflict.  While comics tends to predominately lean towards punching people in the face, that does not mean that we could not have plenty of great stories about people being heroic in other settings.  I am fine if an entire thread goes by without any physical confrontation at all.  I do want conflict, but a good writer and thus a good story, is about more than just fisticuffs.

 

5.       Finally, do you have any other comments on what your priorities or preferences are in playing a RPG, and more specifically, a superhero RPG?

 

To me, the interesting parts about superheroes is the human bits of them (in general term, not a species term).  The hulk isn't interesting because he's super strong.  He's interesting because of the interplay between Bruce Banner and the Hulk.  Captain America isn't just interesting because of his shield, he's interesting because of the ideals of the man and how he applies that to everyone around him.  The powers just give you an excuse to have a setting where the real interesting bits of a superhero can shine.

 

As for what I want?  I want shared imagination.  Stories.  Interesting tidbits that I didn't have to think up on my own.  Interesting tidbits that I can share with others who might appreciate it.