# Mutants & Masterminds 3rd Edition



## crazy_monkey1956 (May 12, 2010)

Green Ronin Announces M&M 3rd Edition

The press release answers one of my questions about whether M&M and the new DC RPG will be compatible.  They will both be using the 3rd edition version of M&M.


----------



## Aryoche (May 12, 2010)

I'm looking forward to seeing this, and I seriously hope Ultimate Power is incorporated into the main rules as opposed to being a seperate book.


----------



## Elric (May 12, 2010)

Steve Kenson has confirmed that the game will still use only a d20: The Atomic Think Tank; Mutants and Masterminds 3rd Edition Announced


----------



## Piratecat (May 12, 2010)

Damn it. I'm just going to give Green Ronin all my money, aren't I?

And it'll be worth it!


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 12, 2010)

Gah!  I just bought five or six Second Edition books!  I even found a copy of _Ultimate Power_!

Is Steve Kenson still in control?

Any statements on how backwards compatible with Second Edition?

Any speculation on what the most major changes will be?


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 12, 2010)

I hope they seriously kick up the art. 1st ed had some of the best looking super hero RPG books period. The second ed art was all over the place from awesome to that shouldn't be there.


----------



## Fifth Element (May 12, 2010)

Three editions of a game in 8 years?


----------



## Henry (May 12, 2010)

Veeery tempting. I don't play much M&M lately, and I'll have to wait for the internet verdict to see if it's something I'll want just yet.


----------



## Eridanis (May 12, 2010)

I'm glad they're doing this. Hopefully DC Adventures will bring in some new RPG blood, so having a fresh rulebook on the shelf next to it makes a lot of sense.

I bought the 1E rulebook and never played, and bought the 2E rulebook and never played*. Reason tells me I shouldn't make it a trifecta, but I'm adding it to my "forthcoming goodies" wishlist anyway. 

*Except for that one time playing in an awesome** Piratecat game at GenCon. But it was Indianapolis, and we were young. How was I to know?

**Is there any other kind?


----------



## ProtoClone (May 12, 2010)

Cool...but I have yet to play any of the editions. 

Hopefully this new edition will be something that doesn't need a purchase for those unable to make one and can be handled with a .pdf of what has changed.


----------



## renau1g (May 12, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> Three editions of a game in 8 years?




...and people beat up on WotC for constant edition changes 

I do like the concept and it's the best superheros rules I've seen in a d20 (or any) system, but I have suffered under two poor GM's and have had my viewpoint of the game tainted...now if only I could get in one of those awesome** Piratecat games that might help

**see Eridanis post


----------



## darjr (May 12, 2010)

I wonder how much impact his work on ICONS and experience with FATE will have on the new edition?

I'm thinking if any it bodes well.


----------



## drothgery (May 12, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> Three editions of a game in 8 years?




Non-D&D games that go >5 years between editions are very much the exception, not the rule, AFAICT.


----------



## Mallus (May 12, 2010)

Excellent! I anxiously await the opportunity to convert Joséirus, the Egyptian God of Mexican Wrestling, to M&M*3*e.


----------



## Diamond Cross (May 12, 2010)

Oh  no.

Stop changing the rules so many freaking times. Damn. It seems that every other year there has to be a new editions thanks to all the people who have to have their take on what they think the rules should be.

And then of course there'll be all the idiotic edition wars going ad nauseum.


----------



## Piratecat (May 12, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> Three editions of a game in 8 years?



Call of Cthulhu has had 12 different editions since '81, including a whopping _five _in the span of eight years back in the 80's. I'm not too worried about a third edition of MnM. For one thing, there are fewer books to upgrade than with D&D.


----------



## Stereofm (May 12, 2010)

Well, my heart belongs to Paizo, but this is just too tempting to ignore ...

I WANT IT NOW ! Raarararararararaaarrrrrrr   !!!


----------



## Treebore (May 12, 2010)

Normally I do not like new editions, but M&M is one of those rules sets where things can definitely be made to work better and easier, so as long as they do that, well, I'll be more than happy to join in on this new edition.

I just hope they also make a good "conversion guide" available, because I certainly don't want the 15 or so books I own to become useless. Then again, if they do the kinds of rules changes I am hoping for, it only will change the core book anyways. So all the write ups and such in all the various books I, and others, own, should still be largely usable as is, much like the change between 1E and 2E.


----------



## Elric (May 12, 2010)

Taliesin, one of the most prolific M&M converters (imo, he's the best too) had a look at some of the rules changes and found himself very pleased with the changes.  Another person working on the DC project agreed as well.


----------



## Scribble (May 12, 2010)

Games that only use one type of die... eventually end up annoying me.   I have all those loney polyhedrons looking up at me saying... Whyy... whyyy won't you roll me? Just once... c'mon... The d4 is like, don't you wanna know what it would be like to get a random number say between 1 and 4? Then the d12 is all like, now you know how I feel all the time jerks... and the other ones all start laughing...

This never happens to you?


----------



## Eridanis (May 12, 2010)

Scribble said:


> I have all those loney polyhedrons looking up at me saying... Whyy... whyyy won't you roll me?




And then Cthulhu rolls a natural 47.


----------



## coyote6 (May 12, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Games that only use one type of die... eventually end up annoying me.   I have all those loney polyhedrons looking up at me saying... Whyy... whyyy won't you roll me? Just once... c'mon... The d4 is like, don't you wanna know what it would be like to get a random number say between 1 and 4? Then the d12 is all like, now you know how I feel all the time jerks... and the other ones all start laughing...
> 
> This never happens to you?




This is why you play more than one game. 

Play M&M to exercise your d20, then play Savage Worlds to exercise the d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12, then, if the d10s in SW isn't enough, maybe try some Call of Cthulhu/Runequest/BRP to work out the percentile dice.


----------



## Scribble (May 12, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> This is why you play more than one game.
> 
> Play M&M to exercise your d20, then play Savage Worlds to exercise the d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12, then, if the d10s in SW isn't enough, maybe try some Call of Cthulhu/Runequest/BRP to work out the percentile dice.




At the same time?

Man... I hardly have enough time/brain power to play one game at a time.


----------



## Sammael (May 12, 2010)

Will it actually be balanced this time?

One time we tried a M&M campaign, the GM ran away screaming because one of the players made a totally unbalanced character that he had no way of challenging. OTOH, I constantly tweaked my character (with the GM's permission), and he was still virtually unplayable even after 3 revisions.


----------



## Treebore (May 12, 2010)

Sammael said:


> Will it actually be balanced this time?
> 
> One time we tried a M&M campaign, the GM ran away screaming because one of the players made a totally unbalanced character that he had no way of challenging. OTOH, I constantly tweaked my character (with the GM's permission), and he was still virtually unplayable even after 3 revisions.






???

I would say your group failed to follow some critical base line rules for that to happen. Like having everyone be the same PL. Start your first game at PL 10, or even lower, etc....

Follow the rules and every character is playable, and able to be challenged.


----------



## coyote6 (May 12, 2010)

Sammael said:


> Will it actually be balanced this time?
> 
> One time we tried a M&M campaign, the GM ran away screaming because one of the players made a totally unbalanced character that he had no way of challenging. OTOH, I constantly tweaked my character (with the GM's permission), and he was still virtually unplayable even after 3 revisions.




My favorite way of challenging busted characters is, "Hey, your character doesn't work well for me; here's why ... Can we fix it?" Or more specifically, "A completely undetectable incorporeal psionic who can mind blast people from two continents away -- and does -- is not an appropriate character for this game. Sorry." Or, for my buddies, "This is your character? Hey, grab that GM's screen there; yeah, that hefty one. Smack yourself upside the head."


----------



## Pseudonym (May 12, 2010)

Well, looks like its time to upgrade.  I hope the rest of the group doesn't mind.

So is Silver Age the last 2ed book?  I hope they are quick with the conversion guide, because I have a metric ton of 2E stuff.


----------



## pawsplay (May 13, 2010)

It feels... soonish, but it does need an art upgrade, the archetypes need to be more like the ones in the Instant heroes book, and Ultimate Powers changed the game. In addition to random goodies, the "container" concept from UP really helped clarify how some powers would work, and I like replacing insta-kill effects with the graded approach introduced in UP. So I think I'm feeling pretty positive about this.


----------



## Elric (May 13, 2010)

There are a lot of potential balance issues in M&M 2e.  

See Paragon's excellent thread on balance issues in the PL system (read the first two posts, and the examples linked at the end of the second post, in particular), which is the best discussion of its kind on the official M&M boards (though quite long).

It's hard to avoid if you want a relatively easy to use system that allows for the flexibility to model superheroes, as M&M does very well.  I doubt 3e will have particularly good balance in this regard (though there will likely be improvements from 2e) because of the nature of the tradeoffs involved.

Balance issues can be quite problematic in the wrong group.  Anecdote: Out of four M&M 2e groups I've been in for a decent length of time (one as GM; 3 as a player), there was one where I felt the character balance was a real concern.  Usually problems that may come up were handled pretty easily at the player/group-GM level.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 13, 2010)

Sammael said:


> OTOH, I constantly tweaked my character (with the GM's permission), and he was still virtually unplayable even after 3 revisions.



Your munchkin-fu is weak! Weak like a kitten!!


----------



## Blastin (May 13, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Games that only use one type of die... eventually end up annoying me.   I have all those loney polyhedrons looking up at me saying... Whyy... whyyy won't you roll me? Just once... c'mon... The d4 is like, don't you wanna know what it would be like to get a random number say between 1 and 4? Then the d12 is all like, now you know how I feel all the time jerks... and the other ones all start laughing...
> 
> This never happens to you?




Heh...I know what you mean. An old group of mine went a year playing alternating games of shadowrun and champions. I still can't look at a group of d6 without automatically counting the ones and sixes first...

I really like 2E, but I can see the desire to clean some things up. Especially as they were gonna do it anyway for the new license. Just makes sense to do it across the board.


----------



## Fifth Element (May 13, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Games that only use one type of die... eventually end up annoying me.   I have all those loney polyhedrons looking up at me saying... Whyy... whyyy won't you roll me? Just once... c'mon... The d4 is like, don't you wanna know what it would be like to get a random number say between 1 and 4? Then the d12 is all like, now you know how I feel all the time jerks... and the other ones all start laughing...
> 
> This never happens to you?



I know what you mean. I can add up 4d6 (drop the lowest) in approximately 0.28 seconds. Skills like that atrophy if you don't use them!


----------



## coyote6 (May 13, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> I know what you mean. I can add up 4d6 (drop the lowest) in approximately 0.28 seconds. Skills like that atrophy if you don't use them!




We hadn't played Champions/Hero for years, but when the rogue or sorcerer would roll some redonkulous damage total on their fistful of d6s, someone would almost inevitably say something like "and how many Body?" Someone else would have the total in a few seconds, too.


----------



## Puggins (May 13, 2010)

drothgery said:


> Non-D&D games that go >5 years between editions are very much the exception, not the rule, AFAICT.




That's not really true.  Many of the most famous RPG lines have a history of long periods between editions.

Hero is technically on its 6th edition, though only 3 have been published in the past 20 years.

GURPS is on its 4th edition after 30 years

Storyteller is on its 2nd edition after 19 years

Warhammer is on its 3rd edition after 25 years

Rolemaster is still on its 1st edition

Rifts is still on its 1st edition

Runequest just published its 5th edition after 32 years

Exalted released its second edition after seven years


That's not to say that an RPG can't legitimately have quick turn-arounds for editions.  I think a 3rd edition for M&M is fine- I'd like them to introduce a bit more flexibility into offensive/defensive stats- don't hard code limits by PL, rather make them progressively more expensive.  I doubt I'll get my wish, though.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 13, 2010)

Rolemaster is on version ?

There was Rolemaster.

Then Rolemaster RMSS

Then Red Rolemaster RMSS

Then classic Rolemaster.

HARP fits somewhere along the lines but isn't necessarily there as it is its own game.

But Rolemaster has many problems in terms of editions which is probably one of the things hurting it. I like the whole Classic Concept myself and have those books as my 'core' as many of my older ones did not withstand the test of time.


----------



## Scribble (May 13, 2010)

Puggins said:


> Storyteller is on its 2nd edition after 19 years




Isn't it the 3rd edition? At least for vampire... maybe not ST as a whole though.


----------



## coyote6 (May 13, 2010)

Puggins said:


> That's not really true.  Many of the most famous RPG lines have a history of long periods between editions.
> 
> Hero is technically on its 6th edition, though only 3 have been published in the past 20 years.




Yeah, but one of those editions -- 4e -- was responsible for most of that time: 13 years. And the game was in limbo for some of that time, and we will not mention the Fuzion-powered version of Champions. 6e followed 5e after 7 years.

Champions 1e, 2e, and 3e all came out in, what? An 8 year span?



> Storyteller is on its 2nd edition after 19 years




Storyteller? You mean the White Wolf system? Nah, there've been more than 2 editions. Vampire the Masquerade's 2nd edition came out like a year after 1e. 2e revised was 6 years later (edit: and got replaced with nWoD six years after that). IIRC, the other oWoD games had similar spans between new versions.

The nWoD has lasted six years so far.



> Warhammer is on its 3rd edition after 25 years
> [...]
> Runequest just published its 5th edition after 32 years




Both were out of print for many of those years, though.



> Exalted released its second edition after seven years




Five years, actually.

I think the DC Adventures license helped spur the new edition. Publishing DCA, you'd definitely want to update the rules to clean things up; and once you're updating the rules for DCA, you notice the stock on 2e books is low, it would make sense to use the new version of the rules to release a new version of M&M.

Also, the DC license might limit the number and/or type of books they can do; but if M&M and DCA are really the same system, then maybe they can lure new people in via DCA, and sell them M&M books, too.


----------



## Kafen (May 13, 2010)

Blastin said:


> I really like 2E, but I can see the desire to clean some things up. Especially as they were gonna do it anyway for the new license. Just makes sense to do it across the board.




If you follow the boards at the Think Tank, the game is mature enough to merit the new edition. The new license and official changes that most people want from the boards are a natural thing to do at this time in my opinion.


----------



## pawsplay (May 13, 2010)

Puggins said:


> Rifts is still on its 1st edition




Rifts is on its third edition. There is a revised version, and then Ultimate Rifts.


----------



## pogre (May 13, 2010)

It seems like a good time to move forward with a new edition with the new DC license. I'm not a "supers" kind of gamer, but I do admire the design of M&M.


----------



## dm4hire (May 13, 2010)

And still no 2nd ed Blue Rose!


----------



## Sammael (May 13, 2010)

Treebore said:


> ???
> 
> I would say your group failed to follow some critical base line rules for that to happen. Like having everyone be the same PL. Start your first game at PL 10, or even lower, etc....
> 
> Follow the rules and every character is playable, and able to be challenged.



Everyone was PL 10 and we used just the core book. Despite this, the differences between characters were staggering.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 13, 2010)

Puggins said:


> GURPS is on its 4th edition after 30 years



Just because i don't want to feel _too_ old, I have to point out that this isn't right.

I played _Man to Man_, the combat-system-only precursor to GURPS, against Steve Jackson back in '84 or '85 (at GenCon, between Car Wars bouts).  I'm not positive how much later GURPS was released, but it was at least a year or two.

GURPS is 25 years old, tops.


----------



## Fifth Element (May 13, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> GURPS is 25 years old, tops.



Wasn't it released in 1986? That fits right in with what Jeff is saying here.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 13, 2010)

Yeah, GURPS is 1986. Puggins might be referring to GURPS's precursor, The Fantasy Trip, published in 1980.


----------



## Fifth Element (May 13, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> Yeah, GURPS is 1986. Puggins might be referring to GURPS's precursor, The Fantasy Trip, published in 1980.



Could be. You could arguably say 30 years then, but you'd have to add another edition as well.


----------



## darjr (May 13, 2010)

Fifth Element said:


> Could be. You could arguably say 30 years then, but you'd have to add another edition as well.




Maybe more than one edition would need to be added.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 13, 2010)

First, thanks for that link to Paragon's thread.  A couple of my players -- the power-gamer and (especially) the power-gamer wannabe -- have already stumbled upon a few of the troublesome things Paragon's collected.  I made a post to the game wave saying, essentially, "Cut this crap out, or I'll take steps."

Second, I am growing more excited about the prospect of M&M3, despite having _just freakin' started_ my M&M playing/GMing career.

Third (and this is a pipe-dream), I wish GR would pick 100 people, at random or based on a short survey, to review the M&M3 rules _before_ they go to the printer.  It'd be so nice to cull typos and obvious flubs before paying $35 for the first printing of a rulebook.


----------



## darjr (May 13, 2010)

Doesn't Green Ronin do this anyway? Sort of? Sell the pdf first and fix things in it before it goes to print? It's great if you also get those fixed for your PDF.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 13, 2010)

darjr said:


> Doesn't Green Ronin do this anyway? Sort of? Sell the pdf first and fix things in it before it goes to print? It's great if you also get those fixed for your PDF.



I dunno.  I don't buy PDFs.  But if so, muy groovy.


----------



## Puggins (May 13, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> Yeah, GURPS is 1986. Puggins might be referring to GURPS's precursor, The Fantasy Trip, published in 1980.




Well, my memories of back then are way hazy- I thought I remembered buying GURPS 3e back in 1989, and that the Fantasy Trip WAS 1e.  Going back to my books, I see that it's 2e, and the Fantasy Trip is not listed as an edition of GURPS.  So 24 or 25 years it is.  Four editions in 25 years is still pretty good- especially since the 2nd edition came so close after the first.

And just to be clear, I'm not trying to imply that M&M's 3rd edition is too quick on the heels of 2nd edition.  Just pointing out that lots of games have had editions last five or more years.  Even with corrections to my list, I think that you can say the typical major RPG edition has lasted five years or more.  M&M seems to be perfectly in line with most games.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (May 13, 2010)

I'm a bit nonplussed at this.  Still, having played games like HERO and D&D (and many of the other games listed in this thread) for decades, I'm not all surprised.  Just disappointed.

Its not going to be an "edition war" issue for me, though, just  "new edition release fatigue."


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 13, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I'm a bit nonplussed at this.  Still, having played games like HERO and D&D (and many of the other games listed in this thread) for decades, I'm not all surprised.  Just disappointed.
> 
> Its not going to be an "edition war" issue for me, though, just  "new edition release fatigue."




Same here. I passed on buying HERO 6th Edition because of them splitting the core rules into 2 separate books. So as a GM if I want to the complete rules I'm paying around $70 -$80? PASS. 
Especially since 5th Edition was a one massive book for $50. It really felt like a bargain AND a real toolkit. I'll keep using all my 5th Edition material of which there is MUCH. 

The buy in for M&M is less but still I'm not sure if it's going to be worth the move. If the changes are relatively minor and I can use most of my 2nd edition books then I'll probably do it. If not? then I'll keep 2nd Edition.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (May 13, 2010)

I still love HERO 5th Rev, but I did pick up HERO 6th.  I haven't had a chance to play it- my current game group is not exactly HERO friendly- but it does look cleaner and sleeker.

So far, my only gripe is that Elemental Controls are gone, but I figure I can survive without them.  If not, I can always just port the H5R rules for them right over.

On the plus side, figured stats are now purchased like all other stats, instead of being derived from purchased stats.  This gets rid of a lot of the abuses that (some) people have been complaining about for years- it never bugged me, but it is conceptually easier to grapple with as a newbie and does eliminate a point of temptation for system abuse.


----------



## jmucchiello (May 13, 2010)

I don't play M&M enough to justify buying a 3e and the DC books. Will just buying the DC books cover the changes from 2e to 3e?


----------



## coyote6 (May 13, 2010)

They've said that DCA and M&M3e will use the same rules. There might be minor differences, of course, but it seems like they're supposed to be basically the same.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 13, 2010)

jmucchiello said:


> I don't play M&M enough to justify buying a 3e and the DC books. Will just buying the DC books cover the changes from 2e to 3e?



According to speculation on Atomic think Tank, yes.


----------



## The Human Target (May 13, 2010)

I for one I'm very interested in a new edition of M&M.

Lots of stuff in both 1E and 2E that are either broken, complicated, and most of all not fun.

Not to say that i don't like the older editions, but there is for sure room for improvement.

Hopefully they aren't afraid of making drastic changes where need be.


----------



## Elric (May 13, 2010)

darjr said:


> Doesn't Green Ronin do this anyway? Sort of? Sell the pdf first and fix things in it before it goes to print? It's great if you also get those fixed for your PDF.




They do.  However, for recent 2e books GR has been quite bad about updating the pdf to correspond to the changes in the printed book discovered in this way (the Freedom's Most Wanted pdf being the worst example, as far as I know).  That said, it's more understandable in light of them working on 3e. 

I know that when there have been past updates to the core book in subsequent printings, GR updated the core book pdf correspondingly.


----------



## Votan (May 13, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> For one thing, there are fewer books to upgrade than with D&D.




To some extent, I think that this is part of why editions concerns are higher with D&D.  I used to look forward to new editions (to see what cool ideas might pop up) when a game was only a few books or boxes; less so when it is 30+ hardcovers.


----------



## Princesskeyblade (May 13, 2010)

The Human Target said:


> I for one I'm very interested in a new edition of M&M.




This. 

I am hoping they make character creation a little less painful and make it easier to teach new players. 

But I am really looking forward to it, and will be buying it along with the DC adventures stuff.


----------



## Relique du Madde (May 13, 2010)

Votan said:


> To some extent, I think that this is part of why editions concerns are higher with D&D.  I used to look forward to new editions (to see what cool ideas might pop up) when a game was only a few books or boxes; less so when it is 30+ hardcovers.




This is only really a concern when you are dealing with those books like Ultimate Power, Freedom City, Warriors and Warlocks, and the various archetype/template books.

However, since many of the genre source books had "new powers," "new feats," or "new systems" which were basically created using ultimate power, converting shouldn't be too much of a problem once we see the changes GR does to the powers, flaws, and extras.  Thankfully, GR decided to have most of those source books consist of guidelines for how to tweak M&M for use in those genres.


----------



## Treebore (May 13, 2010)

Sammael said:


> Everyone was PL 10 and we used just the core book. Despite this, the differences between characters were staggering.





I'm not sure what your saying the problem is, differences are expected, in fact, wanted. I take it your saying the difference in power was staggering? If so I know what happened, but I would have to write a small essay to explain it. The good thing is what happened with your group should be cleared up in the new printing/edition.

Otherwise there is a really good thread over on Atomic Think Tank that goes over this issue. If your interested in giving M&M another try ask about if over there, I am sure someone will link you to it.


----------



## Treebore (May 13, 2010)

The Human Target said:


> I for one I'm very interested in a new edition of M&M.
> 
> Lots of stuff in both 1E and 2E that are either broken, complicated, and most of all not fun.
> 
> ...





Agreed with the exception that I don't see anything that I would define as "drastic" needing to be done. Significant, yes, but not drastic. I think they will be able to maintain a large degree of compatibility since they are only looking at doing "fixes" and streamlining, not a total rewrite.

Which is why I suspect I will be fine with a new edition, I have agreed with many things brought up over on Atomic Think Tank needing to be addressed with fixes, be written better, etc...  Plus this gives the opportunity for consolidating all of the rules into one book, making them easier to see and understand rather than feeling all over the place, because they are.

So as long as they consolidate all of the new rules into one book, even if it makes the Gadgets book, Ultimate Powers, and others obsolete, having it all in just one book will make it very worthwhile to me.


----------



## JeffB (May 14, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> Call of Cthulhu has had 12 different editions since '81, including a whopping _five _in the span of eight years back in the 80's.




That may be true PC , but to be fair  CoC "editions" are more or less "revised printings" with new layout, art, etc and some eratta. VERY LITTLE has changed in the rules aspect since 1981. Certainly nothing along the lines of edition chnages we see in D&D, Runequest, Hero, etc etc.. You can pick up a 5.x edition CoC supplement and run it pretty much right out of the book with your 1st edition box set.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (May 14, 2010)

Actually, HERO, with the exception of the Fuzion ruleset, has been pretty stable.  The mechanics are virtually unchanged from its first appearance.

What has changed were things like _additional_ powers, skills talents, modifiers, disads and advantages; the inclusion of errata; revised point costs; elimination of figured stats (so _everything_ is point buy).  IOW, each edition tended more towards expansion of the game rather than changing its fundamentals.

Looking back, virtually everything is intelligible and portable across editions.


----------



## Puggins (May 14, 2010)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Actually, HERO, with the exception of the Fuzion ruleset, has been pretty stable.  The mechanics are virtually unchanged from its first appearance.
> 
> What has changed were things like *elimination of figured stats (so everything is point buy).*




Wow, just this change makes me want to pick up the new edition to look at it.

I hated seeing 35+ dex characters all over the place because the figured stats made it so friggin' cheap at 3 per.


----------



## M.L. Martin (May 14, 2010)

Puggins said:


> I hated seeing 35+ dex characters all over the place because the figured stats made it so friggin' cheap at 3 per.




   DEX is now 2 CP to a point, but it only affects DEX-based Skill Rolls and initiative count within phases--OCV, DCV and SPD are now all purchased independently.


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

You know, I hope they do a little more with PL. It was okay for balancing some combat powers, but I never worried about that very much. It was actually more troublesome to me that a speedster could be nearly anywhere on Earth in minutes, or that characters might be able to lift staggering amounts of weight. That is far more significant to me as far as the campaign goes than one character being a killer in combat.


----------



## Piratecat (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> It was actually more troublesome to me that a speedster could be nearly anywhere on Earth in minutes, or that characters might be able to lift staggering amounts of weight. That is far more significant to me as far as the campaign goes than one character being a killer in combat.



Really? I love that. It exactly mirrors comic books; I'd be really disappointed if it disappears. I dislike trying to build an iconic hero who just isn't good at heroing. 



JeffB said:


> That may be true PC , but to be fair  CoC "editions" are more or less "revised printings" with new layout, art, etc and some errata. VERY LITTLE has changed in the rules aspect since 1981.



Agreed. And you know, that actually irks me a lot more than if there'd been significant rules changes. Chaosium is one of those cases where I love the product and dislike how it's been managed. I have a _lot_ more trust and faith in Green Ronin.


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> You know, I hope they do a little more with PL. It was okay for balancing some combat powers, but I never worried about that very much. It was actually more troublesome to me that a speedster could be nearly anywhere on Earth in minutes, or that characters might be able to lift staggering amounts of weight. That is far more significant to me as far as the campaign goes than one character being a killer in combat.




Those are things that the GM can limit, if they don't want their game to be a high-power universe (like DC Comics). If you want to model a more realistic world, just put a cap on things like that... but don't change the ruleset, because it works for me.


----------



## Nebulous (May 14, 2010)

Despite owning MM2e and several sourcebooks, i never actually played it. We intended to but it just got overshadowed by other systems. However, i will probably pick up the 3rd edition to see what has changed, and maybe finally squeak a campaign out of it.  Personally, i was a little overwhelmed by the character creation process, you could do literally anything you could imagine.  And while liberating, that's hard for me to absorb with a totally new ruleset.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> Really? I love that. It exactly mirrors comic books; I'd be really disappointed if it disappears. I dislike trying to build an iconic hero who just isn't good at heroing.



I agree.  I was squinting at pawsplay's post, thinking, "But ... Quicksilver _can_ be anywhere on Earth in minutes.  The Thing _can_ lift staggering amounts of weight."

I dunno if pawsplay falls into this category, but I've noticed that many people seem to be a little thrown by M&M's "your character starts at comic book levels of power."  I think it's because it's relatively uncommon in d20 games, even though "starting at professional level" is common in other systems.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 14, 2010)

In the last game I ran there was a speedster who could be anywhere on Earth in a round, at his base power level. It was a global JLA/Avengers type of campaign. Tbh it was a little too fast. Anywhere on Earth in a couple minutes would have made some more interesting situations possible with him maybe having to push himself if  was going down in two or more places at once.

In the same campaign, two superstrong characters, a PC and an NPC, had an iceberg hurling competition, which I think the PC won quite narrowly. The PCs had joined forces with a Russian superteam and were discussing their plans on a small island at the edge of the Arctic circle. These two characters just got bored.


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> Really? I love that. It exactly mirrors comic books; I'd be really disappointed if it disappears. I dislike trying to build an iconic hero who just isn't good at heroing.




It mirrors the JLA or the Avengers, you mean. There are a few X-Men in that category of power, over the years. You know what all of those individuals have in common? I wouldn't peg them at PL 10! While it may have less combat potential, I think being able to zip around the world is at least as significant, in terms of writing an adventure story, as being able to bounce a rocket off your chest. I never said I objected to globe-trotting speedsters, just that I thought PL should be applicable to their most significant abilities.


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> I dunno if pawsplay falls into this category, but I've noticed that many people seem to be a little thrown by M&M's "your character starts at comic book levels of power."  I think it's because it's relatively uncommon in d20 games, even though "starting at professional level" is common in other systems.




No, not at all. I'm thrown by the fact that even if you dial the campaign down to PL 8, you can still travel at mind-boggling speeds. Nor am I sheltered d20 player; I actually wrote a Pyramid article about applying social traits to GURPS Supers game.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> It mirrors the JLA or the Avengers, you mean. There are a few X-Men in that category of power, over the years. You know what all of those individuals have in common? I wouldn't peg them at PL 10!



Why?



> hile it may have less combat potential, I think being able to zip around the world is at least as significant, in terms of writing an adventure story, as being able to bounce a rocket off your chest.



I agree.  But so is the ability to reliably spot and analyze the slimmest of forensic evidence, for instance.  Different super-heroes can do different amazing things.



> I never said I objected to globe-trotting speedsters, just that I thought PL should be applicable to their most significant abilities.



Power Level is almost entirely a construct for combat balance, and trying to apply it to non-combat balance (outside of the limited areas like skills, which IMO was only done so as to include combat applications for skills) is opening a huge and ugly can of worms.

Note that a PL 10 speedster can acquire offensive (and to some extent defensive) facets of his super-speed at higher effectiveness than a PL 8 speedster.  And if the PL is tied to points (as it usually is for PCs) the PL 10 speedster will be faster, more versatile, and/or more effective overall.

Super-speed isn't limited by Power Level (other than by points) because it really doesn't need to be.  The comic book genre can easily handle speedsters zipping around the globe, and GMs can simply set a limit if they're running a less four-color campaign.

(So far as I know, BTW, isn't Quicksilver still the fastest character in the Marvel universe, aside from long range teleporters?  And Quicksilver is definitely not higher than PL 10.  In fact, Taliesin (rules-guru/hero-builder supreme on Atomic think Tank) pegs him at PL 9.)


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> (So far as I know, BTW, isn't Quicksilver still the fastest character in the Marvel universe, aside from long range teleporters?  And Quicksilver is definitely not higher than PL 10.  In fact, Taliesin (rules-guru/hero-builder supreme on Atomic think Tank) pegs him at PL 9.)




That version has Super Speed 6 (500 mph) with some ability to move faster in bursts. A character who can move a little faster than a jet plane is not a problem for PL 10. The Speedster archetype in Instant Heroes has Super Speed 9 (5000 mph), and with a little wiggling, can be upgraded to Super Speed 10 and qualify for Insubstantiality as a power feat.


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Power Level is almost entirely a construct for combat balance, and trying to apply it to non-combat balance (outside of the limited areas like skills, which IMO was only done so as to include combat applications for skills) is opening a huge and ugly can of worms.




I don't think it's all that useful for combat balance, and it might be somewhat useful for non-combat stuff. I think it could use some looking at.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> The Speedster archetype in Instant Heroes has Super Speed 9 (5000 mph), and with a little wiggling, can be upgraded to Super Speed 10 and qualify for Insubstantiality as a power feat.



And ... ?



pawsplay said:


> I don't think it's all that useful for combat balance



It's extremely useful for combat balance.  Not perfect, but _extremely_ useful.



> and it might be somewhat useful for non-combat stuff.



I don't even know what that means.  Consider Superman and Batman, out of combat.  Which is more "powerful"?  I think the attempt to balance out-of-combat stuff would destroy the ability of the game to emulate the genre.



> I think it could use some looking at.



Psst!  Take a look at the title of the thread!


----------



## The Human Target (May 14, 2010)

Treebore said:


> Agreed with the exception that I don't see anything that I would define as "drastic" needing to be done. Significant, yes, but not drastic. I think they will be able to maintain a large degree of compatibility since they are only looking at doing "fixes" and streamlining, not a total rewrite.
> 
> Which is why I suspect I will be fine with a new edition, I have agreed with many things brought up over on Atomic Think Tank needing to be addressed with fixes, be written better, etc...  Plus this gives the opportunity for consolidating all of the rules into one book, making them easier to see and understand rather than feeling all over the place, because they are.
> 
> So as long as they consolidate all of the new rules into one book, even if it makes the Gadgets book, Ultimate Powers, and others obsolete, having it all in just one book will make it very worthwhile to me.




Yeah I guess it depends on your definition of drastic.

Agreed on the consolidation. I hate having to flip through several books to find the one well written explanation of how something works.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

The Human Target said:


> Agreed on the consolidation. I hate having to flip through several books to find the one well written explanation of how something works.



Not to mention all the official rulings made in the Atomic Think Tank.

Did you know different attacks can have different attack bonus and damage trade-offs?  (E.g., at PL 10 you can have a melee attack at +5, +15, and a ranged attack at +15, +5.)  I didn't.

Did you know that the modifiers for Growth and Shrinking don't count against PL caps?  I didn't.

Did you know that if the powers are Permanent, they _do_ count against PL caps?  I didn't.

Consolidating rules (and changing the few stinkers) will be very welcome.


----------



## jmucchiello (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Not to mention all the official rulings made in the Atomic Think Tank.
> 
> Did you know different attacks can have different attack bonus and damage trade-offs?  (E.g., at PL 10 you can have a melee attack at +5, +15, and a ranged attack at +15, +5.)  I didn't.




Um, isn't that in the rulebook? I don't have it handy but I could have sworn the book explains that rather well.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 14, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> Chaosium is one of those cases where I love the product and dislike how it's been managed. I have a _lot_ more trust and faith in Green Ronin.





Pulp Cthulhu?

Runs and ducks.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

jmucchiello said:


> Um, isn't that in the rulebook? I don't have it handy but I could have sworn the book explains that rather well.



Maybe, but if so I missed it, and so did enough people that it warranted an official ruling by Steve Kenson.


----------



## pawsplay (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> And ... ?




"Now that we have the disk, where should we hide it?"
"I know! I'll run to Anchorage, Alaska, and put it in a safety deposit box. Then I'll run to Paris, France as a distraction."

It's great, Golden Age stuff. And WAY over-the-top for a PL 10 campaign, in which the other PCs might be a poor man's Batman and a blaster not notably more deadly than a guy with a machinegun.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> It's great, Golden Age stuff. And WAY over-the-top for a PL 10 campaign, in which the other PCs might be a poor man's Batman and a blaster not notably more deadly than a guy with a machinegun.



To be fair, an assault rifle just does damage 5. 10, standard for a PL10 game, is the same as a tank's main gun.

And if the players are anything like mine they'll also have autofire, improved critical and the power attack/all-out attack combo so they hit more like a nuclear bomb.

They could also teleport foes to a great height and drop them (max damage 20, not limited by PL) and use the slam action, which adds the movement power's rank to damage and is also not limited by PL.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> "Now that we have the disk, where should we hide it?"
> "I know! I'll run to Anchorage, Alaska, and put it in a safety deposit box. Then I'll run to Paris, France as a distraction."
> 
> It's great, Golden Age stuff.



No, it's great _comic book_ stuff.

And it'll work right until the telepath plucks the location out of the speedster's mind.

You just can't _mechanically_ balance non-combat aspects of the game without sucking the life out of the genre.  Mutants & Masterminds relies almost exclusively on the GM to make sure that combat-balanced PCs have equal "power" in non-combat situations.

Some people won't like that.  You seem to be one of them.

I like it just fine, and as I said I think the attempt to mechanically balance non-combat will destroy M&M's emulation of the genre, in which speedsters and telepaths and orphans from doomed planets _do_ co-exist on the same teams with superb archers and peerless martial artist detectives.


----------



## The Human Target (May 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Not to mention all the official rulings made in the Atomic Think Tank.
> 
> Did you know different attacks can have different attack bonus and damage trade-offs?  (E.g., at PL 10 you can have a melee attack at +5, +15, and a ranged attack at +15, +5.)  I didn't.
> 
> ...




I knew the first, didn't know the second two.

I don't want M&M 3e to turn into DnD 4E (even though I play and enjoy 4E) but I do think they need to embrace the idea of simplicity, consolidation, and fun before simulation-ism. 

I'd personally like any power with the "Your GM may wish to limit the levels of these powers because they can easily mess with the game" to be overhauled and/or made strictly optional.

I'd also like to see the system break away from a lot of the 3E DnD-isms that have been done better since the d20 release.

Also, I pray for an easy to use benchmark for encounter design. M&M has too much fudging/eyeballing of difficulty as it is.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 14, 2010)

I agree, it's still too close to 3e as is, it still has 5-foot steps which seem very inappropriate for a superhero game.


----------



## pawsplay (May 15, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> You just can't _mechanically_ balance non-combat aspects of the game without sucking the life out of the genre.




Nonsense.


----------



## jmucchiello (May 15, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> "Now that we have the disk, where should we hide it?"
> "I know! I'll run to Anchorage, Alaska, and put it in a safety deposit box. Then I'll run to Paris, France as a distraction."
> 
> It's great, Golden Age stuff. And WAY over-the-top for a PL 10 campaign, in which the other PCs might be a poor man's Batman and a blaster not notably more deadly than a guy with a machinegun.




I thought the poor man's batman level was PL 5. PL 10 should be fresh new heroes who will have Spiderman show up in issue #3. (I don't know the DC equivalent cliche but any new Marvel comic will have a Spiderman crossover around issue 3.)


----------



## pawsplay (May 15, 2010)

jmucchiello said:


> I thought the poor man's batman level was PL 5.




I ran a game in which one player was the Costumed Adventurer. Poor man's Batman (even with feats, heh). She had trouble with three thugs with SMGs.


----------



## coyote6 (May 15, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> I ran a game in which one player was the Costumed Adventurer. Poor man's Batman (even with feats, heh). She had trouble with three thugs with SMGs.




What kind of thugs were they? Were the GM's dice on fire? Must not have been the standard archetypes from the book -- those PL 2-3 minion thugs are no match for the costumed adventurer.

(Power Attack for 5, take 10 on the attack roll, hits a 17 Defense for +10 damage with the boomerang. Takes a natural 20 to not be KO'd.)



Jeff Wilder said:


> Did you know [...]




Sadly, I did. But then, I think I asked some of those questions at one point or another.


----------



## pawsplay (May 15, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> What kind of thugs were they? Were the GM's dice on fire? Must not have been the standard archetypes from the book -- those PL 2-3 minion thugs are no match for the costumed adventurer.




Regular Thugs (PL 2) with submachine guns instead of pistols. It requires a good roll to hit the Costumed Adventurer, but after being under fire for three rounds, the Costumed Adventurer got winged. Still, you know the job is dangerous when you take it. What stings is that the Costumed Adventurer has no car. Meanwhile, the Speedster is having crepes in Paris.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 15, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> Regular Thugs (PL 2) with submachine guns instead of pistols. It requires a good roll to hit the Costumed Adventurer, but after being under fire for three rounds, the Costumed Adventurer got winged.



This had to have been a very inexperienced player, or the unluckiest player ever.  "Under fire for three rounds"?  The Costumed Adventurer can Take 10 on Stealth for a 24, has Sneak Attack ("Surprise Attack" is a typo), hits the PL 2 Thug on anything higher than a 3 (using Power Attack 5), knocks him out if the save is 12 or less (stuns on anything but a natural 20), can spend a Hero Point to Split Attack and possibly take out more than one in a round, and never mind things like Startle and disarming.



> What stings is that the Costumed Adventurer has no car. Meanwhile, the Speedster is having crepes in Paris.



Were they radioactive crepes, trying to take over the world?  If not, so what?  Does the Speedster get tired of his teammates sending him for take-out?

I really don't get the problem.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (May 15, 2010)

I can foresee the speed (or flight/teleport) being problems... in fact I watched a game tank for that reason, but it can be worked around (I had a pc in one of my games have super speed 16 or 17 and it went fine).

 The problem I have (well is mostly my players) is the everyone is superman feel of it. We had a mystic hero (Immortal sorcerer from the 600 ad area who was all sorts of spell and magic item things), a power suit hero ( suit was mostly alien tech gave in the above super speed), a item hero (given the amulat of chronos that had a bunch of funky powers), and a mecha hero (25ft tall robot armor)

 all of them had def scores of 9-11 (speedster had 11, mecha had 9, both others 10) and toughness saves of 9-11 (speedster had 9, mecha had 11, both others had 10)

  it took a while (like 3 sessions) but the mecha piolt finaly flipped, he was incased in 5 tons of metal, how was he just as vunrable as the others... I used the JLA arguement on him 
[sblock=jla arument]
flash, batman, and superman all get spread by gun fire... bat man jumps and evades, and his cevlar absorbs a few glancing blows, superman stands there and looks funny at the gunman as the bullets bounce off, flassh catches the bullets then hands them back tot he gun man... end result is the same, it is just how you get there that is diffrent.
[/sblock]
but he finaly had to walk out on the game becuse he coudn't feel his character...


----------



## pawsplay (May 16, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Under fire for three rounds"?  The Costumed Adventurer can Take 10 on Stealth for a 24, has Sneak Attack ("Surprise Attack" is a typo), hits the PL 2 Thug on anything higher than a 3 (using Power Attack 5), knocks him out if the save is 12 or less (stuns on anything but a natural 20), can spend a Hero Point to Split Attack and possibly take out more than one in a round, and never mind things like Startle and disarming.




Three thugs, three rounds. That's actually pretty efficient for the given stats, considering that a stun doesn't take a thug out of the fight.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 16, 2010)

I can see where you're coming from here, Paws. It's a problem in almost all roleplaying games, that the magic guys are just better than the non-magic guys. I've noticed it in such diverse games as Amber and D&D. It's the case in Champions as well as M&M, where spending your points on lots of skills, talents or feats, bases, vehicles and a variety of stats is nothing like as effective as buying a multipower or alternate power array that includes all the damn useful powers such as teleport, mind reading, intangibility, healing, etc. Batman ends up built on the same point total as Dr Strange but he's much less powerful in game terms.

Genre appropriate? No. In comics although teams feature heroes with a wide array of power, each character gets roughly equal 'screen time'. This works in fiction because the writer has so much power, but game systems have really struggled with this, because the rules are too 'real world' simulationist rather than comics simulationist.

From an article on the upcoming superhero game ICONS:


> Your starting (or base level) Determination is based on how many powers you have. More powers equals less starting Determination. Know why Caped Crusaders and Star-Spangled Patriots are viable heroes? They’ve got more Determination than everyone else…


----------



## kaomera (May 16, 2010)

There's a very delicate balance between letting the characters that ought to be able to do cool stuff do it, and keeping everything balanced. IME this is far more significant in supers games, and they require a lot of, um, "correct play" for lack of anything approaching good terminology...

The speedster can run to Paris and back (quite possibly over water and through walls) because that's what is expected (or was expected by the designers at least, in an attempt to predict what players would expect) of the character archetype. The "problem" with M&M (and other systems do this too) is that while such imbalances are allowed or even encouraged outside of combat, in combat play-balance takes over. Personally I like the way M&M handles speedsters much better than some other games I've played. They actually feel like speedsters...

And that's the other end of the "problem": everyone has pretty equal capabilities once the fists start flying, mechanically speaking. They may do their stuff a bit differently, but the goal is that they all do equally well. If the players embrace the differences that are there, it can make for a really great game. But if they don't (can't or won't, doesn't really matter) then the whole thing is just going to come crashing down. That's one of the pitfalls of M&M and supers games in general: some players get their shtick done for them by the rules, and others have to rely on flavor and description...



pawsplay said:


> I ran a game in which one player was the Costumed Adventurer. Poor man's Batman (even with feats, heh). She had trouble with three thugs with SMGs.



In my experience this just shouldn't be so. I did read up a bunch on the M&M forums and pointed out a lot of little "tricks" to the players, but I didn't feel like it was anything more than what we where doing with D&D at the time. But the PCs really weren't challenged in combat by anything that was more than 2 PL below them.


----------



## Votan (May 16, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> This works in fiction because the writer has so much power, but game systems have really struggled with this, because the rules are too 'real world' simulationist rather than comics simulationist.




This is an exceeding good point.  Part of what makes a good comic book is challenging the protagonists in ways that enable everyone to contribute.  Some serious thinking is required to make Superman and Batman work well together in a typical game.  This is even more true of the golden age versions of these characters.  

The bat plane is neat and all but superman is moving at superluminal speeds.  

I like the idea of determination scaling inversely with power.  It not only matches the comics (where Batman has a strong plot influence) but avoids Batman being meaningless.  I believe the Doctor Who RPG had something similar to make a companion viable.


----------



## AllisterH (May 16, 2010)

*Shrug*

As a longtime member of CBR, the one truism still holds.

Superspeed is an INHERENTLY broken power.

Unless the opponent is Juggernaut (aka...I can tank Hulk at his angriest and take Thor's might godblast in the face without flinching), superspeed simply trumps all.


----------



## Kafen (May 16, 2010)

AllisterH said:


> *Shrug*
> 
> As a longtime member of CBR, the one truism still holds.
> 
> ...




I ran a table top game that limited Superspeed to NPCs. Three of the players tried to use it. They hated it when NPCs had it. Eventually, I kind of set it to the side as a game master. It's a tough thing to do - ignore superspeed in a Supers setting. Jay Garrick would be horrified.


----------



## pawsplay (May 16, 2010)

kaomera said:


> In my experience this just shouldn't be so. I did read up a bunch on the M&M forums and pointed out a lot of little "tricks" to the players, but I didn't feel like it was anything more than what we where doing with D&D at the time. But the PCs really weren't challenged in combat by anything that was more than 2 PL below them.




I don't understand what you could possibly mean by "shouldn't."


----------



## kaomera (May 17, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> I don't understand what you could possibly mean by "shouldn't."



Maybe "shouldn't" is the wrong term, my apologies.

It was my experience that three thugs versus a costumed adventurer-type where three very KO'ed thugs. Having serious problems with them is not a result I would expect.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 17, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> It mirrors the JLA or the Avengers, you mean.  There are a few X-Men in that category of power, over the years. You  know what all of those individuals have in common? I wouldn't peg them  at PL 10! While it may have less combat potential, I think being able to  zip around the world is at least as significant, in terms of writing an  adventure story, as being able to bounce a rocket off your chest. I  never said I objected to globe-trotting speedsters, just that I thought  PL should be applicable to their most significant abilities.




Under current rules, you can built superman as PL 10 / 150pp (I have seen it). Most PL ruling is based on perspective. Has JLA Batman a higher PL than the streets of Gotham? Is he a different superhero?

BTW: Members of the X-Men
Wolverine
Magneto
Colossus
Namor
Professor X  to few?

Ice-man is considered an Omega Level Mutant...




Jeff Wilder said:


> ...
> (So far as I know, BTW, isn't Quicksilver still the fastest character in  the Marvel universe, aside from long range teleporters?  And  Quicksilver is definitely not higher than PL 10.  In fact, Taliesin  (rules-guru/hero-builder supreme on Atomic think Tank) pegs him at PL 9.)




I actually think Northstar is faster. Have you seen his twin-sister's one-shot during siege? All the history, she was either as fast or slower as him.



pawsplay said:


> Regular Thugs (PL 2) with submachine guns instead of pistols. It requires a good roll to hit the Costumed Adventurer, but after being under fire for three rounds, the Costumed Adventurer got winged. Still, you know the job is dangerous when you take it. What stings is that the Costumed Adventurer has no car. Meanwhile, the Speedster is having crepes in Paris.



Doesn't submachine guns increase their effective PL?



AllisterH said:


> *Shrug*
> 
> As a longtime member of CBR, the one truism still holds.
> 
> ...



Can you please explain this?


----------



## Votan (May 17, 2010)

AllisterH said:


> *Shrug*
> 
> As a longtime member of CBR, the one truism still holds.
> 
> ...




What is CBR?

The only power that I'd find more annoying as a DM is Magick style teleports (groups and teleport changes both time and space).  The failure chances would be the only redeeming feature . . .


----------



## Votan (May 17, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> Under current rules, you can built superman as PL 10 / 150pp (I have seen it). Most PL ruling is based on perspective. Has JLA Batman a higher PL than the streets of Gotham? Is he a different superhero?




Superman has had many interpretations so it is possible to do a lot with a minimal interpretation.  But he almost tied the Flash in a race once so if he is PL10 that says very bad things about the Flash's power level . . .


----------



## Relique du Madde (May 17, 2010)

Votan said:


> What is CBR?




Comic Book Resources.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 17, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> Has JLA Batman a higher PL than the streets of Gotham?



Yeah, much higher. This is a difficulty in simulating comics. Mostly the rule is that a hero is more powerful in their own book. Batman is an exception to this.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 17, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> Yeah, much higher. This is a difficulty in simulating comics. Mostly the rule is that a hero is more powerful in their own book. Batman is an exception to this.



This is actually the answer I aimed for. Further, the PL in the comics can even vary from issue to issue. I want a system that can account for it (like M&M already does). And don't want the lifting and running capability being counted as the same as combat powers for balancing.

If you don't want such a high level of super-strength and -speed in your world (Marvel and DC already have this) just limit it as a house-rule. And no one else wants such a rule in your group (and you are not the GM/Mastermind), you have to adapt or look for another one. What is inherently wrong for a lower PL character to travel fast? Has anyone the same issue with teleporting?

A new edition shouldn't be about more limits in a superhero game.


----------



## AllisterH (May 17, 2010)

I don't think people realize how FAST the Flash is.

Indeed, relatively speaking, Quicksilver literally got EMBARRASSED when he tried to race the Flash back during the comic series Avengers/JLA.

Flash is literally capable of evacuating a major metopolitan city in under 2 minutes (see Grant Morrison's "Big 7" JLA run).

Here's a recent example of the utter ridiculousness of superspeed.

And then there's his Infinite Mass punch trick which can ko even Superman.

(The only non cosmic being at the big two we on CBR -Rumbles think can tank the punch is Juggernaut. Indeed...he's probably the only one that can beat the Flash thanks to his non-tiring aspect in the Godproof enclosed domed Rumbles arena)


----------



## Zaran (May 17, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> Rifts is on its third edition. There is a revised version, and then Ultimate Rifts.




Actually Pallidium hasn't changed much.  I wouldn't even call it having a second edition.   That's one game which I feel needs a rewrite badly.   My friends and I never got into it because we felt there was no mechanical balance.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 17, 2010)

AllisterH said:


> Here's a recent example of the utter ridiculousness of superspeed.



Silver Age Superman used to do that a lot. He loved to build things, he was a helpful guy. Like Superboy building a yacht for his parents so they can go on holiday.


----------



## Zaran (May 17, 2010)

jmucchiello said:


> I thought the poor man's batman level was PL 5. PL 10 should be fresh new heroes who will have Spiderman show up in issue #3. (I don't know the DC equivalent cliche but any new Marvel comic will have a Spiderman crossover around issue 3.)




Yeah, I remember when Spiderman showed up in Transformers of all comics.  Although I don't think he ever showed up in GI Joe.


----------



## Piratecat (May 17, 2010)

AllisterH said:


> Here's a recent example of the utter ridiculousness of superspeed.



Actually, that's just sloppy writing. Superspeed or no, the Flash isn't lifting giant girders unless he picked up superspeed at some point as well.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 17, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> Actually, that's just sloppy writing. Superspeed or no, the Flash isn't lifting giant girders unless he picked up superspeed at some point as well.




I think you meant super-strength. I had exactly the same thought.


----------



## coyote6 (May 17, 2010)

Yeah, I just read that yesterday, and was wondering what sorts of girders those were, that he could hoist 'em up. 

I miss Wally West.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 17, 2010)

I don't know if this is old news, but there is a podcast interview with Steve Kenson, where they talk about MM 3rd among other things.

You can find it here


----------



## Knightfall (May 17, 2010)

I'm not sure how I feel about this news. 

I only have three M&M books, so I could easily let them go for a new version. However, I haven't really had a chance to use them yet. 

I'm going to take a wait and see approach to M&M 3e.


----------



## Votan (May 18, 2010)

Relique du Madde said:


> Comic Book Resources.




Nice website.  Thank you for posting the link.


----------



## Aus_Snow (May 19, 2010)

Huh. How about that then. M&M3.

I wonder what they will do to it. What I hope, but simultaneously doubt, is that there's less 'd20' (other than using only a d20, most likely) and more uniqueness, not for its own sake, but to make an overall better game.

This is not the 'd20 age' any more, so clinging *so* closely to those roots is simply unnecessary, IMO. Again, that which works best should earn the highest priority.

BIG news about their DC comics RPG, anyhow. And apparently, that will use the same rules.


----------



## darjr (May 19, 2010)

The linked podcast has more details. No 3-18 stats, just the bonuses. Feats get changed and morphed. Grapple gets changed. And yes Mr. Kenson says that they are making 3rd edition less d20 more streamlined.


----------



## Aus_Snow (May 19, 2010)

darjr said:


> The linked podcast has more details. No 3-18 stats, just the bonuses. Feats get changed and morphed. Grapple gets changed. And yes Mr. Kenson says that they are making 3rd edition less d20 more streamlined.



Oh, I had missed that link. Thanks.

And good! Sounds promising so far. Also? About time, re: True20-style stats.


edit --- Er, is it just me, or does that mp3 need some serious normalisation? :\


----------



## WayneLigon (May 19, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> Yeah, I just read that yesterday, and was wondering what sorts of girders those were, that he could hoist 'em up.
> 
> I miss Wally West.




Wally rebuilt the bridge that runs between Central City and Keystone City with his bare hands. All the Flashes have been shown to move large weights not by picking them up with their hands, but by creating vortices of air. They've stopped trucks, planes, etc.


----------



## coyote6 (May 19, 2010)

WayneLigon said:


> Wally rebuilt the bridge that runs between Central City and Keystone City with his bare hands. All the Flashes have been shown to move large weights not by picking them up with their hands, but by creating vortices of air. They've stopped trucks, planes, etc.




I missed the bridge re-building; what issue was that in? Or, better, who was the writer of the issue? I found some scans online, and I think that was a bit dumb, too.

If the art had shown a bunch of little tornados holding up the girders, it wouldn't have bothered me; using superspeed to make tornados pick things up is classic. Both showed Barry and Wally carrying girders longer than they are, though, so now they are superstrong when running?. Maybe they got a good running start and gave 'em a good high-velocity shove, so they aren't so much carrying them as guiding the flying missiles? I dunno. Bah! It's the internet, I am required to say the writer sucks. 

But hey, this is way off-topic. Hopefully, GR will post some stats for Wally or Barry soon, so we can all see what else has changed on the character sheets.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 19, 2010)

Maybe theyiclude in the text the option for Super-Strength as alternate power for Super-Speed.


----------



## Reynard (May 19, 2010)

There are two basic sorts of Supers games: those that are primarily focused on the genre within the confines of an RPG (M&M, Hero and Gurps Supers fall into this category) and those that attempt to capture the genre froma  narrative/medium standpoint as well ("new school" games mostly, though Brave New World's Trick system did a decent job emulating certain aspect of comicbook combat).

I think the mistake that gets made or the confusion that occurs most is assuming that a super-hero genre game should be able to emulate the narrative aspects of the media which most often include supers. This happens in other genres, too, but supers seems to suffer the most. Gamers are gamers, regardless of the genre, IME and give a D&D player Superman and he'll be ruling the world in the first session. And never, ever give a gamer superspeed -- either you'll end up spending the entire session arguing about relativity, or the campaign setting with be irrevocably changed ten minutes in.

I joke, but my point is this: supers gaming is *not* the same as comic book gaming. Hero and M&M have both been very successful as crunchy supers games, without deeply ingrained genre emulation meta-rules. Genre emulation is, IMO, better left to handwavium and houserules and, most of all, simple agreement between the participants that they are, in fact, playing a super hero game and neither getting rich on the poker tour via telepathy nor murdering every crack dealer in the 'hood is appropriate for the game being played (unless it is).


----------



## Jeff Wilder (May 19, 2010)

Reynard said:


> Genre emulation is, IMO, better left to handwavium and houserules and, most of all, simple agreement between the participants that they are, in fact, playing a super hero game and neither getting rich on the poker tour via telepathy nor murdering every crack dealer in the 'hood is appropriate for the game being played (unless it is).



Exactly.

If a GM is having trouble with speedsters being "out of control" or "too powerful," this is a result of the GM and players not having reached sufficient agreement that they're going to play "comic book reality."  It's not a problem with the system.

If the GM and players want to explore "what would this be like in real life," well, first of all, "Yow, good luck."  Second of all, any limits on realism should be set by the GM, not be part of the default assumptions of the game.

I listened to the podcast linked above, and the part that struck me most was SK's observation that M&M2 already has more constraints on things than he, personally, would choose.  He prefers the freedom to set the limits on a case-by-case basis, as was more the situation in M&M1.

I'm in complete agreement with him, with the caveat that I want and need advice on potential pitfalls (like those provided in M&M products already, but to an even greater extent).  I don't need much in the way of cautions for things like Super-Speed, but that's just where my personal line is ... if there were a sidebar about problems high ranks of Super-Speed could cause in a game, I wouldn't rail against it.


----------



## Doug McCrae (May 19, 2010)

Reynard said:


> This happens in other genres, too, but supers seems to suffer the most.



I think this is because superhero comics aren't just unrealistic in terms of the powers, what technology can do, magic, etc, but also because there are so many genre rules. Superbeings are either very altruistic or very immoral. Taking off your glasses or wearing a mask hides your identity from loved ones. And so on. There are tons of these.

Personally I love them, I love them all. I'm a huge fan of the genre, particularly the silver age goofiness. Incidentally my current thinking is that the best way to run a supers game is to have all the crazy silver age fun stuff - talking gorillas, radioactive teenagers, alien invasions, villain theme teams, gadget obsessed villains like Flash's rogues gallery - but with a relatively realistic modern psychology. You still need the costumes, code names and mostly the good/evil duality tho, otherwise it just ain't comics.

I do find myself disatisfied with games like M&M, for my taste it doesn't go far enough in implementing the genre rules. The crunchy D&D3e style combat is good, tho still a million miles away from the way fights work in comics - highly mobile, rising to a crescendo, not decided by a debuff in round 1.


----------



## Reynard (May 20, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> I do find myself disatisfied with games like M&M, for my taste it doesn't go far enough in implementing the genre rules. The crunchy D&D3e style combat is good, tho still a million miles away from the way fights work in comics - highly mobile, rising to a crescendo, not decided by a debuff in round 1.




Comics and supers have such wonky rules anyway that I figure the best bet is to find a rules set that works for you and your groups' preferences and treat those rules as the "physics" of the setting. If a rules set says that a character who can run 10,000kph is only marginally "faster" than a high end kung fu master as far as combat is concerned, then so be it: in that universe, kung fu masters are just that awesome, or speedsters just aren't, whichever tickles your fancy.  There are so many supers games on the market or OoP but easy to find that no one who likes the genre should ever wont for games (for players, well that's another story).

I am currently starting to put together a M&M 2E PbP campaign that is intended to be used as a backdrop universe to occassional game-day, mini-con and one shot table play and, using the Mastermind's Manual, I figured that combining "Players roll all the dice" and the "Cards instead of dice" rules would give me a solid, comic booky feel. Sometimes, Spiderman flubs it -- i.e. the player rolls low. But in the interest oif the "story", the card mechanic means that instead the player is burning a low card to clear his hand. That means it is intentional, thought out. I think that mnakes for a better emulation of the genre than random die rolls every swing.

The real hard part, IMO, is nailing down the supers sub-genre and general tone. Batman differs from Spiderman differs from Superman differs from Deadpool -- and they are all "super hero comics". Just telling your players you want to run "supers" is dangerous, as each of them could well have a very different definition in mind, from The Authority to Superfriends.


----------



## Kafen (May 20, 2010)

The 'hard' part for the people converting from 2e to 3e MnM might be the conversion from d20 to true20 style gaming. I wonder how that will affect the Supers flavor of the game in 3e.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 20, 2010)

Kafen said:


> The 'hard' part for the people converting from 2e to 3e MnM might be the conversion from d20 to true20 style gaming. I wonder how that will affect the Supers flavor of the game in 3e.




Where did you get this from? M&M and True20 shared the same damage resolution from the beginning and many combat related feats. The only thing that was confirmed in that direction is the use of only ability mods instead of a score. No big deal.


----------



## Kafen (May 20, 2010)

Style thing, mostly... I picked up the True20 system a while back and the game had a pretty good pace to it. Since Reynard is talking style with the others, I wonder if the system change is going to factor into the tone/style/pace of the game itself. 

I've been aware of the damage resolution bit for a while. My old groups hates it - sad to say.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 20, 2010)

I hope personally they don't include to much "style" into the core rules.

Running Iron Age, Hero High or Sword & Sorcery (Warriors & Warlocks) are all hero comic book styles, but very different. They should make genre specific rules optional and only implented in Genre books. 
...
Like they did in 2nd edition.

Maybe this is the rules "difference" between DCU Core  and M&M Core:
They implented the DC specific genre rules into the DC one.


----------



## Hammerhead (May 20, 2010)

The name of the game is MUTANTS and MASTERMINDS. That doesn't exactly sound setting or genre neutral. I would imagine that M&M 3e is going to typically support "normal" superhero activity. I mean, all attacks default to nonlethal, and even attacking at lethal, it can be pretty tough to finish someone off.


----------



## Leatherhead (May 20, 2010)

AllisterH said:


> superspeed simply trumps all.




Except for Preptime.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 20, 2010)

Hammerhead said:


> The name of the game is MUTANTS and MASTERMINDS. That doesn't exactly sound setting or genre neutral. I would imagine that M&M 3e is going to typically support "normal" superhero activity. I mean, all attacks default to nonlethal, and even attacking at lethal, it can be pretty tough to finish someone off.




I didn't said genre or setting neutral. The name of the game and the Freedom City setting are clerly Silver Age. Paragon is not. I was commenting this:



Doug McCrae said:


> ...
> 
> I do find myself disatisfied with games like M&M, for my taste it  doesn't go far enough in implementing the genre rules. The crunchy  D&D3e style combat is good, tho still a million miles away from the  way fights work in comics - highly mobile, rising to a crescendo, not  decided by a debuff in round 1.




like he did:



Reynard said:


> ...
> 
> The real hard part, IMO, is nailing down the supers sub-genre and  general tone. Batman differs from Spiderman differs from Superman  differs from Deadpool -- and they are all "super hero comics". Just  telling your players you want to run "supers" is dangerous, as each of  them could well have a very different definition in mind, from The  Authority to Superfriends.




In the end I don't want reduce the "genre" rules in M&M 2nd. I just want that they keep them broad enough to be useful for the whole genre, not just one age or setting.

Regarding "normal superhero activity": What is normal?

Current?
Combating heartripping zombies? (DC Blackest Night)
State approved villains hunting down heroes? (Marvel Dark Reign)

People who started loving comics in the iron age might have another idea about this then the ones who there were since the silver age (or before).


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (May 20, 2010)

Reynard said:


> I am currently starting to put together a M&M 2E PbP campaign that is intended to be used as a backdrop universe to occassional game-day, mini-con and one shot table play and, using the Mastermind's Manual, I figured that combining "Players roll all the dice" and the "Cards instead of dice" rules would give me a solid, comic booky feel. Sometimes, Spiderman flubs it -- i.e. the player rolls low. But in the interest oif the "story", the card mechanic means that instead the player is burning a low card to clear his hand. That means it is intentional, thought out. I think that mnakes for a better emulation of the genre than random die rolls every swing.




I ran a fairly sucessful campaign using the cards option, and I really think that it did help out with the pacing and story. However, I did have one player who always played his 20 on the first round of combat, even though everyone at the table (except him?) knew that I wasn't going to let him one punch the villains like that. 

Make sure not to let the players make pointless skill checks just to clear their hands. Every card should be important to the story.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 20, 2010)

You know, the card mechanic is really like TSR's SAGA system. They used it for Dragonlance and their Marvel RPG.


----------



## Reynard (May 21, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> You know, the card mechanic is really like TSR's SAGA system. They used it for Dragonlance and their Marvel RPG.




I love SAGA for supers. I wish they would have come out with a generic deck to be used with homebrewed settings, as i don't much care for Marvel. But i'll definitely be mining Marvel SAGA for ideas to include.

Aside: I didn't much care for SAGA for DL, but I would have adored it for Star Wars. In fact, when "Star Wars Saga Edition" was announced, I thought they meant "SAGA Edition" and damn near did a cartwheel..


----------



## Reynard (May 21, 2010)

Dr. Confoundo said:


> I ran a fairly sucessful campaign using the cards option, and I really think that it did help out with the pacing and story. However, I did have one player who always played his 20 on the first round of combat, even though everyone at the table (except him?) knew that I wasn't going to let him one punch the villains like that.




I wasn't imagining giving the players a full 1-20 range so much as drawing hands of 5 or so cards from a common deck.


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (May 22, 2010)

Reynard said:


> I wasn't imagining giving the players a full 1-20 range so much as drawing hands of 5 or so cards from a common deck.




Sorry - that's not what I meant. The players had 5-card hands like you'd give them... but over the span of the campaign, he got quite a few 20s, which he always used immediately, rather than waiting for a dramatically appropriate time.

I'd suggest pulling the face cards from two decks, leaving you with 80 cards to play with.


----------



## pawsplay (May 22, 2010)

I know that every design really wants to be itself, but I would be just a little disappointed if it moves too far from its d20 roots. I mean, there are already plenty of other supers games out there. The d20 "family features" help with conversions and familiarizing players and so forth.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 22, 2010)

Hammerhead said:


> ... That doesn't exactly sound setting or genre neutral. I would imagine that M&M 3e is going to typically support "normal" superhero activity. I mean, all attacks default to nonlethal, and even attacking at lethal, it can be pretty tough to finish someone off.




For all who like to  use M&M for a broad style of games, good news in this post by one of it's writers:

The Atomic Think Tank • View topic - Concerns regarding M&M 3rd edition



> At its base, M&M3 is a leaner, more efficient means to do all things  we love about Part Deux. There's also an added degree of  flexibility--the updated system seems even more capable of handling  other genres and styles.


----------



## megamania (May 24, 2010)

Welp.... this explains the problems I have had in getting certain books.



I just started the game.  have not even officially run a game even.... just campaign notes and the creation of characters.


Buggers.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 27, 2010)

The DC Adventure Journals have started. As the DC game will use the same rules as M&M3, here is the link:

_DC  ADVENTURES_ Design Journal #1


----------



## Aus_Snow (May 27, 2010)

Some more juicy tidbits for y'all:

Exclusive with Steve Kenson


----------



## Walking Dad (May 27, 2010)

As it seems they will give only 1 diary a week, I think I can give m 2 cents about the only one we got so far:

_There will be 4 books

1 Core (14 heroes & villains (total 28) included).

2 Character Books (A-K the first... will have to wait longer for Metamorpho, but this is fine, as I think J'onn (Martian Manhunter) is in the core book)

1 Setting (includes past, future, and dimensions)_


What are your hopes for the first 14 heroes / villains?


---

The diary was a bit weak on the mechanics side, but this was confirmed elsewhere on the Atomic Think Tank:

Use only Ability mods (like True 20).
Will still use one d20 for task resolution.
Have done something to feats.


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (May 27, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> What are your hopes for the first 14 heroes / villains?




There are fourteen heroes shown on the cover that's already been posted - it'd be hard to imagine that this isn't also the list of the ones included in the book.

As for villains, that's a harder question. Some are obvious - when in doubt, pick the archnemesis (Lex Luthor, Joker, Sinestro). But if they try and include a matching villian for every hero in the book, you'll have some really odd inclusions... who do you pick for Plastic-Man or Hawkwoman?


----------



## coyote6 (May 27, 2010)

Add other big enemies picked from the heroes with large rogues galleries, or add villains that are ubiquitous, but not an archenemy of any one hero (or at least not one of the heroes featured) -- for example, Deathstroke. Not really the archnemesis of any one hero, but there aren't a lot of heroes he hasn't faced. (Plus, he's had his own comic before, and basically has one again now.)

Darkseid might be another option, if you wanted a really big bad evil guy to be included.


----------



## Walking Dad (May 27, 2010)

If someone somehow missed this:

*Green  Ronin's Chris Pramas Talks DC!*


----------



## Jared Rascher (May 31, 2010)

Dr. Confoundo said:


> But if they try and include a matching villian for every hero in the book, you'll have some really odd inclusions... who do you pick for Plastic-Man or Hawkwoman?




Carrot Man and Shadow Thief?


----------



## Walking Dad (May 31, 2010)

IMHO, I would choose Hath-Seth for both Hawks:

Hath-Set - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 9, 2010)

New DC Adventures Design Journal is online. It icludes the heroes and villains in the core book and their PLs!

_Aquaman_ (12), _Batman_ (12), _Black Canary_ (10), _Captain Marvel_ (15), _Flash_ (12), _Green Arrow_ (10), _Green Lantern_ (14), _Martian Manhunter_ (14), _Nightwing_ (10), _Plastic Man_ (11), _Robin_ (8), _Superman_ (15), _Wonder Woman_ (15)_, Zatanna (11)_

_Black Adam_ (16), _Black  Manta_ (10), _Brainiac_ (13), _Catwoman_ (10), _Cheetah_ (12), _Circe_ (14), _Darkseid_ (16), _Gorilla Grodd_ (12), _The Joker_ (11), _Lex Luthor_ (14), _Prometheus_ (14), _Sinestro_ (14), _Solomon Grundy_ (14), _Vandal Savage_  (13).


DC ADVENTURES Design Journal #3 - DC ADVENTURES


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 9, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> New DC Adventures Design Journal is online. It icludes the heroes and villains in the core book and their PLs!



Some of those seem ... very odd.  Lex Luthor at PL 14, about 5.4 inches from the graf where they just finished explaining why Batman was PL 12?


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 9, 2010)

Maybe it's a writeup with him using his power armor (would this really be the most iconic Lex?). Still very strange...

And Plastc Man is included for shapeshifting... thought the Martian Manhunter was also an able shapeshifter.

Same goes for mental powers and Grodd. I would really like to see their iconic Martian Manhunter (my favorite DC hero BTW).


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 9, 2010)

I'd probably have a bigger gulf between the top end superheroes and the bottom. For instance I'd give Green Arrow a PL of 8, and Superman a PL of 20 or 25. Maybe I'm too Silver Age in my thinking, I'm not at all up on recent happenings in the DCU. And by recent I mean the last 20 years.


----------



## Greg K (Jun 9, 2010)

Hmm. I was expecting (and would have preferred seeing) Atom and Hawkman in place of Robin and, due to space, Nightwing.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 9, 2010)

As I'm working on some Golden Age stuff atm, it's interesting to note that of those thirteen superheroes, eleven are Golden Age. DC's characters are really old.

Seven of the villains are Golden Age too - Black Adam, Catwoman, Lex Luthor, Vandal Savage, The Joker, Cheetah and Solomon Grundy.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 9, 2010)

Yeah, they're mostly fairly vintage. AFAICT, the newest character listed is Prometheus, and I think he's the only one less than 40 years old. The Nightwing persona is 26 years old, but Grayson's been around since the Golden Age, and the name Nightwing dates from the Silver Age. Oh, and according to Wikipedia, Darkseid debuted in November 1970, so I guess he's just barely less than 40 years old, too. 

From what I've read, only one author has really done a good job with Prometheus (Morrison, who created him -- I'm guessing this isn't the guy from the '80s Blue Beetle comic). Every other appearance basically sucked. And he's currently dead, and was a major factor in some of the most reviled comics in recent history. So I'll call him a weird choice to include.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 10, 2010)

Greg K said:


> Hmm. I was expecting (and would have preferred seeing) Atom and Hawkman in place of Robin and, due to space, Nightwing.



I would rather have seen either of those in place of Nightwing.  (Don't get me wrong, Nightwing is probably my favorite DCU character, but you need to have Robin in there -- who is, BTW, now _Red_ Robin, the current Robin being Damian Al Ghul Wayne -- and you don't need both of them.)

Atom would have been particularly nice as an example of Shrinking, which has serious issues in M&M2E.

Can Martian Manhunter turn into anything, the way Plastic Man can?  I don't know much about the character, as I've always stuck pretty close to the Bat-books and the Titans on the DC side ... I was shocked to read that he was a founding member of the JLA.


----------



## Kafen (Jun 10, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> Yeah, they're mostly fairly vintage. AFAICT, the newest character listed is Prometheus, and I think he's the only one less than 40 years old. The Nightwing persona is 26 years old, but Grayson's been around since the Golden Age, and the name Nightwing dates from the Silver Age. Oh, and according to Wikipedia, Darkseid debuted in November 1970, so I guess he's just barely less than 40 years old, too.





Hmmm, what was Lex and Batman doing in the 80s?

The Super Powers Team: Galactic Guardians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Super Friends: The Legendary Super Powers Show - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1983 seems to be where Lex first gets his armor with a quick wiki search. I wonder if they are going back to that time period for a starting point on the armors and 'mortals'. It would place Batman below the others with his lack of power armor at the time. Plus, it seems to place Darkseid in the right place on the power scale. The mid 80s is my best guess - it looks like the comic book version of them more than the tv edition.


----------



## Emirikol (Jun 10, 2010)

I'm looking forwards to this at my local game conventions, Tacticon & Genghis Con.  Everybody tells me it's great.

jh


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 10, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> ...
> 
> Can Martian Manhunter turn into anything, the way Plastic Man can?  I don't know much about the character, as I've always stuck pretty close to the Bat-books and the Titans on the DC side ... I was shocked to read that he was a founding member of the JLA.




His solo series from Ostrander / Mandrake was great.

From wikipedia (including bolding of shapeshift and mental powers by me):



> The Martian Manhunter possesses a wide variety of superhuman powers  and abilities, which have been shown inconsistently throughout the  years.
> In the current DC continuity, many of his powers are similar to those  of Superman,  including super strength, super-speed, flight, invulnerability,  super-breath, and "Martian vision" (a term designating both the ability  to see through solid objects and the ability to project beams of energy  from his eyes). Superman once said of Manhunter, "He is the most  powerful being on the face of the earth".[26]
> During the 1990s, it was stated that the source of his flight and  "Martian vision" is a limited form of telekinesis[_volume & issue needed_]  (he had occasionally[_volume & issue needed_]  demonstrated more traditional uses of telekinesis to levitate and  animate objects during his _Detective Comics_ and _House of Mystery_ appearances). His "Martian Vision"  energy beams have sometimes been shown to knock foes backwards, which  could (theoretically) be due to their telekinetic nature[_volume & issue needed_].  On most occasions, however, these energy beams are depicted as heating  objects rather than delivering a concussive impact.[_citation needed_]
> *The Martian Manhunter possesses the power of shapeshifting,  which he employs for various effects (adopting human or monstrous  appearance, elongating his limbs, growing to immense size, altering the  chemical composition of his body, etc.).*
> ...




DCU RPG Powers:



> Powers:
> Longevity 3D, Microwave Projection (eyes) (Martian Vision) 12D, *Shapechanging 15D*, Superattributes:
> Reflexes, Coordination 7D each, Superattributes: Physique 28D. *Telepathy 10D*, Flight 13D, Invulnerability 10D, Density Manipulation 10D (Limitation: Self Only) ,Light Manipulation (Invisibility)
> 8D, *Matter Manipulation (absorption , dispersion) 5D (Limitation: self Only, linked to Shapechanging)*, Speed Manipulation (supermobility, superactions) 7D each.
> All powers also have the limitation: Vulnerability (fire).


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 10, 2010)

Martian Manhunter is the poster boy for randomly rolled powers.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 10, 2010)

But he would make a great sample character for the next Design Journal. Many different powers


----------



## Princesskeyblade (Jun 10, 2010)

I am really happy with the list! 

Especially the addition of Tim Drake as Robin and Dick Grayson's Nightwing... and Gorrilla Grod!


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 11, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> Martian Manhunter is the poster boy for randomly rolled powers.



And apparently lots and lots of them.

I have to admit to being a little nerd-peeved that the two most powerful superheroes on Earth are both aliens.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 11, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> And apparently lots and lots of them.
> 
> I have to admit to being a little nerd-peeved that the two most powerful superheroes on Earth are both aliens.




Superman's PL 15, but Martian Manhunter is PL 14, while Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel are also both PL 15. At least according to the list posted earlier. So two of the top 3 are humans (mostly, kinda).

I can't think of any DC heroes off the top of my head that I'd say were more powerful than Supes, so they should be the top of the heap.

Personally, I'm perplexed by the idea that Black Adam is more powerful than Superman & Capt. Marvel. And as powerful as Darkseid!


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 11, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> Superman's PL 15, but Martian Manhunter is PL 14, while Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel are also both PL 15.



My nerd-peeve wasn't actually based on the M&M3E PLs.  Superman himself we can all agree on, right?  And Superman himself says that Martian Manhunter is the most powerful being on Earth.

Thus, the two most powerful superheroes on Earth are aliens.

(BTW, I of course don't know how the DC book will do it, but Taliesin's Superman build is on the assumption that Superman is always holding back.  The assumption is arguable, but plausible.  There is absolutely no way -- _no way_ -- that Wonder Woman is actually in his sheer power class.  70, 75 percent, tops, and that's just because of what she wears to the office.)


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 11, 2010)

Wonder Woman is not human. She is the Spirit of Truth and her body was formed of clay from her 'mother'.
But she got a much better fighting training that Supes and has some fits of rage.

If Black Adam is PL 16 and Supes PL 15, what PL has Superboy Prime???

The Martian Manhunter maybe doesn't hit as high level PL caps as Supes, but he could always can become non sense-able even to Superman's senses and just mindcontrol him...

Yes, Billy Batson is a human kid... or is Freddy Freeman the iconic Capt Marvel?


----------



## pawsplay (Jun 11, 2010)

I think I can live with a PL 12 Batman, provided he has some kind of Ultimate Skill thingie for his investigation and analytical abilities.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 12, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> If Black Adam is PL 16 and Supes PL 15, what PL has Superboy Prime???




Most of the high-end Silver Age-level characters would be unstattable, I think. They'd count as Cosmic Menaces or whatever M&M uses for it's 'assume they can do anything' characters.



Jeff Wilder said:


> I have to admit to being a little nerd-peeved that the two most powerful superheroes on Earth are both aliens.




You, and Lex Luthor...



Greg K said:


> Hmm. I was expecting (and would have preferred seeing) Atom and Hawkman in place of Robin and, due to space, Nightwing.




At the same time, Atom (Ray Palmer) hasn't had his own book for many, many years and 5-6 years since Hawkman had one. Nightwing only recently went away and Robin is still around; I think we can look for a relaunched Nightwing next year, sometime.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 12, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> I think I can live with a PL 12 Batman, provided he has some kind of Ultimate Skill thingie for his investigation and analytical abilities.




Well, Bats is PL12, but with the power points of someone who's PL19. And I'm pretty sure he'll have Ultimate Skill in two or three things.


----------



## Kenson (Jun 14, 2010)

pawsplay said:


> I think I can live with a PL 12 Batman, provided he has some kind of Ultimate Skill thingie for his investigation and analytical abilities.



Batman has sufficient Investigation skill and Skill Mastery to routinely accomplish DC 32 checks without his player even rolling the die, and near-impossible ones are not out of his reach.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 14, 2010)

Mr Kenson, could you confirm if the Martian Manhunter have powers similar to the old DC RPG write up, please:



> Powers:
> Longevity 3D, Microwave Projection (eyes) (Martian Vision) 12D, *Shapechanging  15D*, Superattributes: Reflexes, Coordination 7D each, Superattributes: Physique 28D. *Telepathy  10D*, Flight 13D, Invulnerability 10D, Density Manipulation 10D  (Limitation: Self Only) ,Light Manipulation (Invisibility) 8D, *Matter Manipulation (absorption , dispersion) 5D (Limitation:  self Only, linked to Shapechanging)*, Speed Manipulation  (supermobility, superactions) 7D each.
> All powers also have the limitation: Vulnerability (fire).



I'm a concerned because the design diary mentioned Plastic Man for his shapechanging and Grodd for not having touched mental powers with the other builds.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Kenson (Jun 14, 2010)

I think we properly represented all of J'onn's diverse powers, yes.

Apologies if the Design Journal comments were misleading: Plas is better known as a stretchy shapeshifter, whereas J'onn tends to use his shapeshifting more for disguise, and Grodd filled in the role of villain with mental powers, not to imply that the Martian Manhunter doesn't have any.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 14, 2010)

Kenson said:


> IPlas is better known as a stretchy shapeshifter



Did y'all do Plastic Man's "must remain red and gold" as a Drawback, or as a Flaw?  It seems too big to be a Drawback, but not big enough to be a Flaw.  That particular "Drawback or Flaw?" question seems to come up a lot in my game, so I'm just curious.


----------



## Kenson (Jun 14, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Did y'all do Plastic Man's "must remain red and gold" as a Drawback, or as a Flaw?  It seems too big to be a Drawback, but not big enough to be a Flaw.  That particular "Drawback or Flaw?" question seems to come up a lot in my game, so I'm just curious.



It is a Limited flaw on his Morph ability, since it does cut down on Morph's disguise capabilities a fair amount (barring a clever monologue about "BRIGHT PRIMARY COLORS!!! SIR, YES, SIR!" as it were).


----------



## TikkchikFenTikktikk (Jun 14, 2010)

Does anyone have a link to an actual play log or pod/videocast?

I've never played a superhero game, and have a hard time imagining how it doesn't devolve into brokenness and/or ridiculousness.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 14, 2010)

Superhero games- at least the well-designed ones, run competently- are no more or less likely to devolve into brokenness and/or ridiculousness than any other game with the same caveats.

Poor design or GM control can ruin ANY game.


----------



## Mallus (Jun 14, 2010)

TikkchikFenTikktikk said:


> I've never played a superhero game, and have a hard time imagining how it doesn't devolve into brokenness and/or ridiculousness.



They require a certain degree of cooperation/mutual restraint between the participants to keep things on the playable side of crazy... meaning they're no different from every other role-playing game I'm familiar with.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 14, 2010)

TikkchikFenTikktikk said:


> I've never played a superhero game, and have a hard time imagining how it doesn't devolve into brokenness and/or ridiculousness.



Of course it's ridiculous, it's superhero. Two characters in my last campaign had an iceberg hurling competition near the Arctic circle. The PCs scaled an infinite tower in Fairyland and fought space nazis on the moon. They were awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for the last one.

Brokenness is quite a problem with 'wide open' systems like M&M and Hero. Much more so than with D&D. It was my first time running M&M and I found I had a tough job making the game work to my satisfaction. The PL system (intended to balance PCs and opposition) is worse than useless imho. Hopefully it will be better in 3e.


----------



## Kenson (Jun 15, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> The PL system (intended to balance PCs and opposition) is worse than useless imho. Hopefully it will be better in 3e.



Possibly upgraded to "merely useless".


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 15, 2010)

How about "Mostly Harmless"?


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 15, 2010)

Kenson said:


> I think we properly represented all of J'onn's diverse powers, yes.
> 
> Apologies if the Design Journal comments were misleading: Plas is better known as a stretchy shapeshifter, whereas J'onn tends to use his shapeshifting more for disguise, and Grodd filled in the role of villain with mental powers, not to imply that the Martian Manhunter doesn't have any.




Oh, I see, more the shapechange (M&M 2e: Morph) in the Grant Morrisson JLA run, where his abilities didn't changed much with his form and less the dynamic shapechanger (M&M 2e: Shapeshift) in the later JLA issues and in his solo series by Mandrake and Ostrander. If he has only Morph  (2e), I hope for a variant sidebar...




Doug McCrae said:


> ...
> 
> The PL system (intended to balance PCs and opposition) is worse than  useless imho. Hopefully it will be better in 3e.




I think it is quiet good for standard Powers, like Blast, Armor etc. Not so much for things like Transform and the other more freeform powers.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 15, 2010)

TikkchikFenTikktikk said:


> I've never played a superhero game, and have a hard time imagining how it doesn't devolve into brokenness and/or ridiculousness.




How would you imagine it would be broken? Being able to do fantastic things is part and parcel of the genre, though it does require restraint on the part of the players to stick to genre. In other words, just because you _can _pick up the office building and hit someone with it doesn't mean you _should_. Of course, that advice applies to pretty much every genre.



Doug McCrae said:


> The PL system (intended to balance PCs and opposition) is worse than useless imho. Hopefully it will be better in 3e.




Describe? It's hard to imagine how being unable to go past PL for pretty much anything you have to roll for is _not _balancing.


----------



## Silvercat Moonpaw (Jun 15, 2010)

Doug McCrae said:


> The PL system (intended to balance PCs and opposition) is worse than useless imho. Hopefully it will be better in 3e.



My prediction is that it won't, because that's not one of the bigger complaints that have been going on over at the M&M forums, those complaints being what the designers said they were listening to.

I'm curious: what would you expect them to be able to do to make it better?


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 15, 2010)

WayneLigon said:


> Describe? It's hard to imagine how being unable to go past PL for pretty much anything you have to roll for is _not _balancing.



The Limits of PL explains the problem in detail.

The problems I experienced were Autofire and Power Attack, combined with All-Out Attack, invisibility and Master Plan. Together these increase the 'to hit' for a PL 10 character by +13 (assuming +3 from plan and a defence 10 foe so halved defence and +2 to hit from invis), a huge value in a d20 system. Putting five of that 13 into power attack still lets the character hit a defense 10 opponent on a 2 or better. That means autofire will give +5 damage almost half the time, meaning the character was often dealing 20 damage instead of 10.

That same character, a speedster, was able to do slam attacks, which also ignore the PL cap, dealing +10 (his speed value), or +14 depending on one's interpretation of the rules, damage *on top* of all that. It's quite hard for the bad guys to make a toughness save of 49. Even if you don't allow autofire with the slam and interpret the rule as not including the +4, that's still 25 damage, or a toughness save of 40.

I banned slam attacks and eventually realised that I should ban this PC from using All-Out Attack, as he would use Move-By Action to hit his foes then run about 20 miles away, meaning he was unlikely to experience any drawback from A-A A, it was essentially a free +5 to hit for this character. The player wasn't happy with this at all, as we'd been playing for about ten sessions by this point and doing a lot of damage had, in his eyes, become an integral feature of his PC.

This is what I mean by having a tough job making the game work. Dealing with all this took a lot of my GMing time. Going thru the numbers to try to explain to the player, fairly unsuccessfully on my part, that this was a problem, considering solutions, etc.

Incidentally, builds intended to take advantage of Slam - flying cannonball types - with high movement powers, Move-By Action and lots of Immovable to negate slam's weakness, seem to be fairly common from what I've seen.

Another very cheap and effective damage booster is Improved Critical. Nine ranks of this, for a cost of nine points, will make every hit against a defence 10 opponent a critical, increasing damage by +5. This also ignores PL. One could even combine it with the tricks above, though that didn't happen in my game.

Dropping opponents from a great height, achieved with teleport in the game I ran, also ignores PL and has a maximum damage of 20.

This is why I think the PL system is worse than useless, because at first glance it seems to provide balance but once one has greater familiarity with the system it becomes apparent that it doesn't.

What it does do however is make certain types of PC - those that can justify Imp Crit, autofire, PA + AAA, slam builds, etc - *much* more effective than those that can't. In M&M, the Human Torch's nova flame doesn't do a lot of damage, because it doesn't get any of these PL breakers. Even the Hulk only gets Power Attack, making him far feebler than a slam build, and equal to a teleport-dropper. And that's assuming the Hulk goes for a +5 to hit, +15 damage split.

A better way to do it, imo, would be to look at the final damage values the system is outputting, rather than the initial, pre-PL breaker ones. Alternatively, just dispense with PL altogether and look at the final character, taking all abilities, including non-combat, into account and making a judgement call. This is hard to do though. It's very hard to give the players a sense of what power-level you are expecting this way. Also often a PC's power won't be immediately apparent, it can take a few sessions. And by that time the player may have got too attached to his PC as is.


----------



## Silvercat Moonpaw (Jun 15, 2010)

Seems a pretty easy fix, then: just enforce PL caps on all forms of damage.  Requires maybe one line added.  Maybe allow a break of max +5 for crits and Autofire only, and don't allow the Improved Critical feat.

(And I'm not pointing this at you, Doug.  This is for the system.)

EDIT: Actually don't forget to remove All-Out Attack.  And dodge bonus could be changed to only a -2 Defense + any Dodge Focus feat the player chooses to buy.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 15, 2010)

FWIW, you don't add Slam damage on top of another attack's damage; "Use this *in place* of your normal Strength damage". There's nothing under Slam that exempts it from PL caps, either, so I've always assumed it's capped.

Invisibility, OTOH, I will agree can be a problem. It's fairly well out of genre for an invisible superhero to have an attack equal to their non-invisible teammates, with the possible exception of Invisible Woman. I haven't read FF in a decade, so she might be running around fully invisble, blasting folks with force fields nowadays; but last time I checked, she didn't do that all the time. 

The thread on ATT had some very good points, re: PL.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 15, 2010)

coyote6 said:


> FWIW, you don't add Slam damage on top of another attack's damage; "Use this *in place* of your normal Strength damage". There's nothing under Slam that exempts it from PL caps, either, so I've always assumed it's capped.



Good point. He had another 10 speed as one of his Super-Speed alternate powers, for a total of 20. It may have been that and the +4 for an accelerated move plus Power Attack for a total of 29 damage.

Interesting question regarding whether an ability ignores PL limits if there is no mention of it. Some feats, Dodge Focus for example, say they are affected by PL limits, whereas others such as Master Plan specify that they are not. I'm not sure what the rule is when it says nothing.


----------



## AllisterH (Jun 15, 2010)

Ironically...I find that the supers game stayed "true to form" the more of a RUMBLES (*) type comic book fan was playing 

Mainly becuase they INTENTIONALLY limit themselves.

* RUMBLES is a popular subforum on CBR where posters do not only the typical "who would win vs" battles but esoteric things like "just what does it mean that the Flash can circle the world in under a minute".

What I found more of a problem was the "casual" comic book fan who when given the opportunity to actually be in control of the character instead of reading it, actually start thinking about what they can do with their powers.


----------



## kaomera (Jun 16, 2010)

WayneLigon said:


> How would you imagine it would be broken? Being able to do fantastic things is part and parcel of the genre, though it does require restraint on the part of the players to stick to genre.



While this is true, to a point, of any genre / system, I think this is exactly what causes problems in supers games. Personally I like PL, it's the tightest such system I've seen in a supers RPG, and it's specific enough that IME you don't get players trying to ignore it or work around it as in some other systems. But PL is not the same thing as Level in D&D.

Concept has to come first in M&M character creation, and PL is part of that concept. This isn't a concept that I found easy to come to grips with simply from reading the M&M rules, and I kind of wish they had done a book specifically on character creation for 2e. I found reading the ATT, and especially the Roll Call forum to be very enlightening. Specifically, seeing different builds of the same character at different PLs. PL8 Batman is a different character from PL10 Batman, or PL12 Batman.

The problem that I found I was having when I ran a bunch of 3.5 players through M&M character creation was that some of them where not really trying to make a supers / comic-book character. And even among those who "got it" no two players had the same idea of what the genre entailed. There's a lot of different sub-genres represented in comics, and they all have different expectations regarding the characters you'd find in them. Even a given character is often depicted at many different levels of power and possibly in different sub-genres within different books.

One thing about M&M is that GM approval is a much more important step in character creation than in most other games. Usually in D&D the DM can simply disallow elements he feels might be or might become (or even just are) a problem. Supers games are generally open-ended enough that this can become a much more significant issue. In M&M, for example, there are a lot of ways to push past PL limits, that's a deliberate part of the game's design. But a character who's hitting multiples of them, like the speedster Doug McCrae mentioned, is a problem waiting to happen. The optimal solution, I think, is to re-design the character.

I had one player who was really enamored of autofire, and really wanted to make a martial-artist with an autofire punch, a high attack bonus, and a very consistent ability to feint. I was willing to allow it, but only on an attack that was otherwise below the PL cap, and I wouldn't let him buy more than one "point" of autofire (ie: no 1/1 ratio or +10 max). He grumbled a bit, but I think the character turned out well.

The thing is - you don't need to do this sort of thing (or at the very least not much) in most non-supers games. If every player shows up with an X-level character, and no-one's used any rules sources I asked them not to, I can be pretty sure that everything's going to work out, most of the time. I find that supers-games as a rule are less robust that way. What I like PL for is, as I mentioned above, part of the character concept. It helps define which Batman (ore Spiderman or whomever) you're working with. And it also fills in some of the numbers for you, which given all of the possible choices in M&M is rather helpful in and of itself.

There was another player that I had an even more serious problem with. After a whole lot of discussion I came to the conclusion that he was only ever going to compare his character to the other PCs, and as a result would never feel that his character was a "real superhero" unless it was just flat out a higher PL than the other characters. I ended up having to un-invite him to the game because, despite his protests otherwise (which all included the caveat that I just let him play the character he wanted), I didn't feel that I could make the game fun for him and the rest of the group at the same time. (I know you can totally run a game with different-PL characters, but there where two other players who flat-out didn't want to give that a try and I think the character he wanted would have been too much above the other PCs for it to work well.)

Anyway, to get back on the topic of 3e: it really helped me to have the builds on the Atomic Think Tank forums to look through, seeing how different things could be done with characters I knew something about. Seeing Batman or Superman statted up is more useful to me than looking at the Costumed Adventurer or Paragon archetypes. So I'm hopeful that character creation in 3e will be that much easier to show / teach with the DC roster books.

But I'd still love to see a full-on "secrets of successful M&M character creation" book. I would also, especially given that M&M is usually a team game while most comic-book superteams are made up of characters that have or at least had their own books, like to see something more in regards to making a functional team as opposed to a bunch of loners. Something like the Roles in 4e D&D would interest me very much, although I freely admit that I have little to no idea how to bring that concept to M&M...


----------



## Elric (Jun 16, 2010)

Design journal #4 for DC adventures is up and includes Green Lantern's stats: DC ADVENTURES Design Journal #4 - DC ADVENTURES

Informed speculation: The Atomic Think Tank • View topic - DC Adventures Design Journals



			
				The Shadow said:
			
		

> Jameson said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 17, 2010)

ok, so lets see what we have here now that we have an example...




> Green Lantern                            PL14




ok, pl 14 is a good starting spot.... more of the same...



> Abilities 42
> Powers 100
> Advantages 3
> Skills 33
> ...




so I wonder is this a really experanced level 14, or does level 14 start near 216pp???


> Abilities
> Strength 2     Fighting 5
> Stamina 2      Intellect 1
> Agility 2        Awareness 3
> Dexterity 3    Presence 3




and that is diffrent...

so 8 abilities, I wonder what makes agility and dex diffrent, most systems use one or the other, and fighting just seams weird...

we already knew that the score is now the mod, so that looks like:


> 14 Str  15 Dex  14 Con 12 Int 16 Wis 16 Cha



more or less... but how does fighting work, is that your attack bonus like 2e???

If you add them up it is 21, so 2pts per (cost 42)




> Powers
> Power Ring: 124 points, Removable (-24 points) • 100 points



ok, removable instead of device, I wonder if that is the end of the device set???



> AI and Database: Features 2 • 2 points
> Communication: Senses 1 (Communication Link to Central Power Battery) • 1 point



pretty straight forward, no suprise there....



> Flight: Flight 14 (32,000 MPH), Movement 4 (Environmental Adaptation: Zero-G, Space Travel 3) • 36 points



nice no real suprise there



> Force Field: Protection 12, Impervious 12; Immunity 9 (Life Support) • 33 points



I like the life support built into the force field, and it looks like those each cost 1 pt (same as 2e)



> Force Manipulation: 36-point Array
> Force Blast: Ranged Damage 18 • 36 points
> AE: Force Constructs: Create 18 • 1 point
> AE: Lifting: Move Object 18 • 1 point



I like this, hopefully more of what it means will be leaked soon, but it does seam easy on the reader so far...




> Scanning Beam: Senses 6 (Analytical Auditory, Chemical, and Visual) • 6 points
> Universal Translator: Comprehend Languages 4 • 8 points




again no real suprises there...



> Advantages
> Fearless, Teamwork, Ultimate Will




I think we just found the new feats... and all three seam straight forward...



> Skills
> Athletics 4 (+6), Close Combat: Unarmed 3 (+8), Deception 4 (+7), Expertise: Law Enforcement 8 (+9), Expertise: Military 8 (+9), Insight 8 (+11), Investigation 4 (+5), Perception 4 (+7), Persuasion 4 (+7), Ranged Combat: Power Ring 7 (+10), Vehicles 12 (+15)




ok, this seams pretty much par for the cource, except notice that close combat:unarmed adds the 5 fighting, but the ranged combat power ring adds only +3 (Dex maby)




> Offense
> Initiative +2
> Power Ring +10, Ranged, Damage 18
> Unarmed +8, Close, Damage 2



 ok, so I am a little bit lost here, the damage unarmed looks like str and the ring damage appears to be the rank of the power...



> Defense
> Dodge 12
> Parry 10
> Toughness 14/2*
> ...




I wonder what parry is, but boy do I love AC and ref being combined )like saga rule)





> Complications
> Guilt: Hal feels at least partially responsible for the terrible acts of Parallax while the fear entity controlled him.
> Power Loss: The power ring needs periodic recharging and issues a warning as its power runs low.
> Reputation: Hal Jordan is a maverick in nearly all aspects of his life and known for having issues with authority. He is also both famous and infamous as Green Lantern.
> Weakness: Green Lantern power rings depend on the willpower of the wearer; the maximum rank of the ring's effects is equal to the wearer's Will rank, and moments of self-doubt or hesitation can cause the ring to fail.




I am not sure if this is just fluff or part of the stats, I wonder how this all figures in...


did anyone notice something I missed?


----------



## ValhallaGH (Jun 17, 2010)

GMforPowergamers said:


> so I wonder is this a really experanced level 14, or does level 14 start near 216pp???



Really experienced PL 14.  If you read the previous preview (number 3), it talks about how these characters have a _lot_ more points than a starting character of their PL (Batman, at PL 12, has almost as many points as a starting PL 19 character would).


GMforPowergamers said:


> I am not sure if this is just fluff or part of the stats, I wonder how this all figures in...



It's both.
Complication is a game mechanic for specific fluff.  It's in 2e, and looks to be the same in 3e.
Those are the Complications of Hal Jordan, Green Lantern.  So he gets a Hero Point when his ring is running out of juice and will need to recharge, or when his guilt over the Paralax incident comes up, or when his Reputation as a maverick kicks in, or when he has a moment of self-doubt and he loses some (or all) of his ring's powers.

It's actually very instructive.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 17, 2010)

Steve Conan Trustrum said in a podcast (http://mikelaff.podbean.com/2010/06/09/  ... n-trustum/) that he plans to support 2E beyond the  end of the Superlink line.

Will he (or someone else) try to pull a 'Pathfinder' of M&M 2e? Just adding fixes from Pathfinder (CMB/CMD) and best options from the supplement books to make another core? I would be interested! (Even to work on it )


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 17, 2010)

GMforPowergamers said:


> ...
> 
> so 8 abilities, I wonder what makes agility and dex diffrent, most systems use one or the other, and fighting just seams weird...
> 
> ...




M 2 cents: The changes were made to make all abilities to be of similar worth.

In D&D 3.5, in most builds, Dex and Con were much more important than Int or Cha.

M&M moved a bit away from it and 3e takes the next step.


I really hope for a sample combat soon.


---

What I really miss a bit is the crunchy part about the powers. I hope the core book builds are 'simple' to make them easier to understand for new gamers, but are not the end of power customization.
(Am I the only one who wants to know how they handled M&M2's variable powers? If they are not included, that could be a breaking point for me.)


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 17, 2010)

ValhallaGH said:


> Really experienced PL 14.



Not necessarily.  If they kept 15 PP per PL, a PL 14 is 210 PP.  Pretty close to GL's 216.

And they did say that the numbers between 2E and 3E would be almost completely interchangeable.

I'd say that this GL is very experienced ... but that his PL has kept up with his experience, not that he started at PL 14, got a lot of PP, and stayed at PL 14.


----------



## ValhallaGH (Jun 17, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> I'd say that this GL is very experienced ... but that his PL has kept up with his experience, not that he started at PL 14, got a lot of PP, and stayed at PL 14.



Which is what I was trying to say, though not nearly as well as you did. 

I did forget to do the math (it was a long day before that post) about how many power points a PL 14 was recommended to start with.  So, I missed that he's actually really close to the recommended 210 / PL 14 starting character, though it seems safe to say that he's totally _not_ a starting character.  I mean, he's at the second-highest hero PL in the book!


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 17, 2010)

ValhallaGH said:


> Which is what I was trying to say, though not nearly as well as you did.



I was just re-reading, and realized you could have meant what I said.  Sorry for not catching it earlier and giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I dunno why, but I like GL, even though I normally hate "gimmick" characters.  For some reason, the power-ring thing just doesn't bother me ... maybe because it's so reliant on the user's willpower.  (I don't like his book, giving up on the latest relaunch a year or two back now.)

I'm not too pleased with the casting of the movie.  For _years_ I've been saying that Tahmoh Penikett would be the perfect Green Lantern, so much so that it became a running joke as my buddy and I would watch "BSG" or "Dollhouse" ... "Dude, don't mess with him!  He's _Green Lantern_!"


----------



## ValhallaGH (Jun 17, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> I was just re-reading, and realized you could have meant what I said.  Sorry for not catching it earlier and giving you the benefit of the doubt.



No harm, no foul.


Jeff Wilder said:


> I dunno why, but I like GL, even though I normally hate "gimmick" characters.  For some reason, the power-ring thing just doesn't bother me ... maybe because it's so reliant on the user's willpower.  (I don't like his book, giving up on the latest relaunch a year or two back now.)



Hal is a great character.  Even with his obscene power, he's never actually bothered me, either.


Jeff Wilder said:


> I'm not too pleased with the casting of the movie.  For _years_ I've been saying that Tahmoh Penikett would be the perfect Green Lantern, so much so that it became a running joke as my buddy and I would watch "BSG" or "Dollhouse" ... "Dude, don't mess with him!  He's _Green Lantern_!"



... 
I never would have come up with that one.  I can see it, though.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 17, 2010)

ValhallaGH said:


> Really experienced PL 14.  If you read the previous preview (number 3), it talks about how these characters have a _lot_ more points than a starting character of their PL (Batman, at PL 12, has almost as many points as a starting PL 19 character would).




that is kinda my thought though, 14x15=210... so batman has around 300pp witch is over a 100 over his level, but hal is only at his level...



> It's both.
> Complication is a game mechanic for specific fluff.  It's in 2e, and looks to be the same in 3e.
> Those are the Complications of Hal Jordan, Green Lantern.  So he gets a Hero Point when his ring is running out of juice and will need to recharge, or when his guilt over the Paralax incident comes up, or when his Reputation as a maverick kicks in, or when he has a moment of self-doubt and he loses some (or all) of his ring's powers.




cool so they did keep it that way, I was worried that might have changed...


----------



## Elric (Jun 17, 2010)

From M&M's official boards:



			
				dirkgentry2000 said:
			
		

> Just posted this podcast interview with Jon Leitheusser, where he delves a little bit into the Green Lantern statblock and into some of the changes in 3E




For what it's worth, my original post on the hardcover/softcover issue (addressed in the podcast) was here and Jon addressed the issue here.  



			
				Elric said:
			
		

> As I understand it, hardcover versus softcover books cost only slightly different amounts to produce (as opposed to black and white versus color, which is a bigger difference).
> 
> If this is true, why is the M&M Hero's Handbook coming out in softcover as a first print run (http://mutantsandmasterminds.com/dc_adventures/2010/06/dc-adventures-design-journal-2.php)?






			
				JonL said:
			
		

> Hardcover vs. softcover is an interesting thing.
> 
> The actual cost per book isn't particularly high, but when that cost gets multiplied out to calculate the retail price, it makes a BIG difference.
> 
> ...




I find this method of pricing strange, as mentioned here.


That using 2d10 instead of 1d20 was considered (and they decided to stick with 1d20) was mentioned in the podcast- if anyone is interested in my simulation results on the topic, they're first, second, and third.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 18, 2010)

They posted pdf's pf the Black Avenger for 2e and 3e. Enjoy!

BlackAvenger2e.pdf
BlackAvenger3e.pdf




			
				The author said:
			
		

> Two things:
> 
> I made a mistake (which I notice now, after posting him) -- delete Elusive Target from the M&M3 version.
> 
> ...


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 23, 2010)

New DD up

DC ADVENTURES: Design Journals Archives

Small news on Powers:



			
				http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=12372222&postcount=13 said:
			
		

> You want...
> *Sticky Surface:* Affliction (hindered & impaired,  immobilized & defenseless), Concentration Duration, Extra Condition,  Limited to Two Degrees, Reaction (being touched), Resisted by Strength​It costs 5 points per rank and automatically affects anyone  touching you.
> 
> ... Oh, M&M _Second_ Edition ... sorry, my mind is elsewhere.  Well, the stuff other folks have suggested sounds good, too.




New podcasts

http://www.gamershavenpodcast.com/?p=2320


----------



## Walking Dad (Jun 30, 2010)

New Design Diary up!

DC Adventures Design Journal #6 - DC ADVENTURES

Example play!


----------



## Leatherhead (Jun 30, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> New Design Diary up!
> 
> DC Adventures Design Journal #6 - DC ADVENTURES
> 
> Example play!




"Routine" Stealth, Perception, AND attack checks against minions?

Well, that is interesting.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 30, 2010)

Walking Dad said:


> Example play!



The "degrees of success" thing looks interesting.

I wonder if the "see what the dice tell you, then ask the player for description" thing is explicitly recommended in the GM section of the book?  I personally tend to waffle back and forth between that and the "tell me what you're trying to do, then roll" method of narrative.  Sometimes one seems to fit better than the other.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jun 30, 2010)

Leatherhead said:


> "Routine" Stealth, Perception, AND attack checks against minions? Well, that is interesting.



Keep in mind that Batman might have an "advantage," analogous to 2E's Skill Mastery feat, that makes Stealth and Perception always "routine" (that is, a Take 10 check) for him.

Being able to Take 10 when attacking a minion is also in 2E.


----------



## Leatherhead (Jun 30, 2010)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Keep in mind that Batman might have an "advantage," analogous to 2E's Skill Mastery feat, that makes Stealth and Perception always "routine" (that is, a Take 10 check) for him.
> 
> Being able to Take 10 when attacking a minion is also in 2E.




Well actually, I was pointing out how this looks more like passive perception.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 30, 2010)

It's the same concept -- your skill modifier +10 (for an average d20 roll). In 3.xe and M&M 1e & 2e, it was "taking 10"; in D&D 4e, it's "passive [skill] value"; and in M&M 3e, it's apparently "routine value".


----------



## neceros (Jan 2, 2011)

I just bought the pre-order and got the PDF.

Pretty freaking cool.


----------



## ZenStorm (Dec 16, 2011)

What gets on my nerves about M&M is the fact that everything funnels down through that d20 (the most random die) and it tends to make everything you create for that system, no matter how detailed or crunchy, seem very bland in play. All powers are the same in terms of resolution. No matter what you have, you're just adding to or subtracting from a modifier to a d20 roll and that's it. As good as those books look, all of the crunch is an illusion that dissipates very quickly once you start playing. It's disappointing.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 16, 2011)

I'm not a huge fan of MnM 3e (I prefer 2e) but I'll disagree with that statement. One of the great joys about MnM is that it's an effects based system. If I have a mystic blast that does 12 pts of damage, I get to decide what that means. Does it turn people into rabbits once they're knocked unconscious? Pick them up and bang their head into the ground? Summon a demon who bites them? It's all in the descriptions and the special effects, and the rules just give you a nice robust framework to form your adventure with.


----------



## ValhallaGH (Dec 16, 2011)

ZenStorm said:


> it tends to make everything you create for that system ... seem very bland in play.




Can you elaborate on this, because I honestly don't see what you're talking about?


----------

