Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574520I've seen games where the players whine about wanting the same points for everyone.  So everyone gets the same points to start with.  Then they whine because one of the players has min/maxed their character using stuff from the books that do not really make sense to have in the game's setting.  Such players are going to create problems for the other players no matter what the GM tries to control.

I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

I mean, fine. The wizard character has trained for years blah blah blah. The starting skill points represent the life the character has led before the first play session begins (Because PC's rarely spring into being as soon as a player shows up, they've lived in the game universe for all their lives before then, and will continue to do so when the player stops playing them... unless they die or whatever).

So you're giving the wizard extra skill points to represent all the time that he's spent learning to wizard, and also giving him the same skill points that the other characters got for the lives they've led before the session starts. The wizard is effectively getting to count his life experience twice. I don't think that makes any sense either in-game (Unless we're giving character points based on character age, which is okay but needs to be paired with ageing rules) or out-of-game ("You had to make tradeoffs in your character build to buy your nice things, I got a bonus to get the things I wanted. So nice!").

Hey, my character has spent the same amount of time training as the wizard has, but I've spent my time becoming a master at arms. Could I have another 150 - 200 points to become the best fighter ever, please? What about if I became a master engineer, able to build a trap out of junk in a few minutes?

(All this is just to do with freeform points-based systems! I'm not talking about random-generation or pick-x-of-y systems, because they're self-balancing.)

Quote from: Ladybird;574543I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

Ha ha.  If that happens, then the other players are going to have to have a really good explanation for why they should have such and such.  I'd be running a sandbox for them, so in theory they can be whatever they create at the end of the day.  My NPCs scale up or down in points depending on how the players act with them.  I don't mean the NPCs change their points during a game (they stay static).  But they're generated to match the player's point change.

Quote from: Ladybird;574543Hey, my character has spent the same amount of time training as the wizard has, but I've spent my time becoming a master at arms. Could I have another 150 - 200 points to become the best fighter ever, please? What about if I became a master engineer, able to build a trap out of junk in a few minutes?

The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But... depending on the wizard, if age is a problem they do not get extra points to be a wizard.  They steal points from other things.  Part of the aging process.  If age is not an issue (long lifespan?) they get the extra points to be wizard-like.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574574The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But... depending on the wizard, if age is a problem they do not get extra points to be a wizard.  They steal points from other things.  Part of the aging process.  If age is not an issue (long lifespan?) they get the extra points to be wizard-like.

I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574488If, out of the bunch of players, one is planning on using magic (or The Force) on top of what their character can normally do, I as a GM would give that player another 150 - 200 points to spend so they can have the type of magic they're going for.  Why not?  Those points would just be for magic and not mixed in with the points their character has assigned already.

Why not? How about, because you're allowing them to be unequivically better than the rest of your players, based on favoritism?

Seriously, who's going to choose being Han Solo, when you can be Han Solo with Force Powers!, if you butter up the GM rightly.

Quote from: Ladybird;574543I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

A thousand times this.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574574The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But...that's exactly what you're doing for Wizards! :banghead:
You're allowing them to build a master-of-arms, then tacking on spellcasting as well. Mattering on the game world, more useful than neurosurgery...

Quote from: Ladybird;574657I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

If a player says they want to play a 21-year-old that will eventually become a wizard some day, they start with no wizardly skills.  So they get no extra points.

If a player says they want that same 21-year-old character to be a wizard already, they get extra points so they can buy wizardly skills.

I let players decide the age of their characters.  They then need to have a good backstory explaining how they got to be.

An older character with the same wizardly powers as the 21-year-old would get more points just for being alive longer.  Those points would go for non-wizard stuff and non-attribute stuff and more for life experience stuff.  If the player wants to take actual aging into account (for role-play purposes), I'll take points away from their attributes and health.

Quote from: Novastar;574703Why not? How about, because you're allowing them to be unequivically better than the rest of your players, based on favoritism?

Are you saying that I favor one of my players over the others?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574718Are you saying that I favor one of my players over the others?

If they're playing a wizard, pretty obviously.
400 pts versus 250 pts is pretty severe (at least in HERO, and I imagine GURPS is much the same). It's the difference between a street Superhero (Captain America, Batman) versus a cosmic superhero (Silver Surfer, Green Lantern).

Quote from: Novastar;574732If they're playing a wizard, pretty obviously.
400 pts versus 250 pts is pretty severe (at least in HERO, and I imagine GURPS is much the same). It's the difference between a street Superhero (Captain America, Batman) versus a cosmic superhero (Silver Surfer, Green Lantern).

I'm still not sure why you think I favor one player over the other.  And when you say "versus", what do you mean?  Why are you comparing Captain America with the Silver Surfer?

Quote from: stouty;574380I prefer systems with degrees of success myself, but that's a personal preference. Just like your preference is inspiration inferred from the dice rather than looking up a table.

Um, that's what degrees of success ARE, they're just a far more limited version of it.

In almost every system I have seen, Degrees of Success/Failure have been used to add things which were a product of events outside of the character's direct control, such as a gun jam, or an official being open to bribery, or a princess finding a painted picture pretty, or a warlord being very impressed with how gracefully you leapt over a 3 foot wall, etc.

And that's exactly what Edge of the Empire claims to do, which you have a problem with, which doesn't make sense. Unless you handle Degress of X differently.

Quote from: stouty;574380Is getting bashed by Chaosvoyager a RPGsite right of passage, do I get an achievement or anything?

Quote from: jeff37923;574502PM me your address, I'll send you a copy of the Star Wars Introductory Adventure Game as a prize.

Wait, I'm not only a culturally signifigant part of theRPGSite, but I get people free shit too?

I ROCK!

Quote from: chaosvoyager;574742In almost every system I have seen, Degrees of Success/Failure have been used to add things which were a product of events outside of the character's direct control, such as a gun jam, or an official being open to bribery, or a princess finding a painted picture pretty, or a warlord being very impressed with how gracefully you leapt over a 3 foot wall, etc.

In a few games, I'm starting to hear where players get automatic critical success results.

Quote from: Ladybird;574657I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

Depends, but usually yes. If I'm running the scenario premise of a novice jedi, veteran older rogue, and a young twelik dance troupe of victims, yes they're going to have different starting pools. Same applies to assumed profession competency: a fresh out of med school intern will not have the same pool as the veteran instructing surgeon.

(I should also add, to the second question about "starting" characters, that I do, but it's based on the setting and premise. In In Nomine playing a mixed party of Celestials with usually less powerful beings like Ethereals, Undead, or Humans assumes a power differential. Not everyone likes that, but I'm fine with it; it's a setting conceit, you either get it or you don't. Same applies to other settings and premises.)

Note, I also do this for class based systems. If the premise is asymmetrical, it will have differing class levels. Further, if a player willingly takes Middle Aged or Venerable, with the according +/- and knowledge of increased chance of early PC retirement, then I talk to the table and the player to determine an acceptable starting level greater than the premise average.

I understand it is a matter of taste, but I've had no problems with it.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574740I'm still not sure why you think I favor one player over the other.  And when you say "versus", what do you mean?  Why are you comparing Captain America with the Silver Surfer?

I'm going to proceed as you're honestly asking, rather than being willfully obtuse (but it is a close thing).

You're favoring one players choice of archetype over everyone else's choice. It'd be like telling everyone at a D&D game to make 3rd-level characters, except for John, since he's playing the Wizard, so he starts at 9th-level. Your skewing the game, to favor your chosen archetype.

Versus is, as you yourself comment in the next sentence, a comparison of two things.

Because it's a valid comparison. While Cap is a heroic superhero, a paragon even, he does not have the same options as the Surfer, who wields the Power Cosmic and can handle situations that Cap is out of his league in. That is because their power levels are different, which in a point-buy game is the difference between their starting points (Cap is a regular superhero, where as the Surfer is Cosmic level).

Quote from: Novastar;574806You're favoring one players choice of archetype over everyone else's choice.

Actually, I'm letting players make whatever character they want.

Quote from: Novastar;574806It'd be like telling everyone at a D&D game to make 3rd-level characters, except for John, since he's playing the Wizard, so he starts at 9th-level. Your skewing the game, to favor your chosen archetype.

If a player wants to make a wizard, they can.  I don't force players to make characters that I like.  I'm going to have plenty of NPCs to play with.

Quote from: Novastar;574806Versus is, as you yourself comment in the next sentence, a comparison of two things.

Because it's a valid comparison. While Cap is a heroic superhero, a paragon even, he does not have the same options as the Surfer, who wields the Power Cosmic and can handle situations that Cap is out of his league in. That is because their power levels are different, which in a point-buy game is the difference between their starting points (Cap is a regular superhero, where as the Surfer is Cosmic level).

And so...?



I don't see where the problem is.  You've read Jack Kirby's work, correct?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574710If a player says they want to play a 21-year-old that will eventually become a wizard some day, they start with no wizardly skills.  So they get no extra points.

If a player says they want that same 21-year-old character to be a wizard already, they get extra points so they can buy wizardly skills.

I let players decide the age of their characters.  They then need to have a good backstory explaining how they got to be.

I'm sure it works at your table, and I'm trying to understand in good faith what you're doing, but it really does sound like you're letting players talk you into giving them extra character points, because they have a good backstory. Could my 21-year-old who is already a master of combat get extra points to spend on his fighting skills? His millionaire parents were killed by thugs, and he's used their fortune to walk the earth, seeking the tutelage of the mightiest warriors and rogues alive.

I'm not actually objecting to giving characters varying power levels; obviously your table is happy with it, and unlikely to care what a Man From The Internet says. I just don't see the need to quantify exactly how much more powerful some party members are than others; I don't see a real reason to use GURPS for that game (Or even assigning a character points limit), instead of something lighter or more freeform, or just saying "take what you feel the character needs" and trusting your players to be reasonable.

From rpg.net where someone hath the rules

QuoteThe group rolls for Destiny Points by each PC rolling a Force Die at the start of a session. Light side points and dark side points are tallied. The players spend the light side points and the GM the dark side points. When a point is spent, it moves to the other side. Force users and some Talents call on Destiny points as well.

The Force will ebb and flow between light and dark every session.

Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?