A knock at your door. When you open it and peer outside, there's no soul in sight, but a parcel - heavy and rigid, wrapped in nondescript paper, and labeled with your name - has been placed on your welcome mat.
You retreat into your home and cautiously unwrap the package, revealing... a brand-new Superhero-themed RPG? The cover portrays caped heroes and dastardly villains locked in mortal, cosmic combat while a city burns in the background. The back of the book promises everything you ever wanted in a Supers book, and much more.
Curious, you crack open the book and peruse its contents...
- What elements are you expecting to find - elements you consider mandatory for a Superhero RPG to be worth your trouble?
- With the basics covered, what topics and concepts specific to Supers-themed environments are you hoping to discover have been fleshed out in the game?
- Finally, as you finish reading through the book, what are some bits you're glad aren't present in it - either topics that weren't covered or aspects that were left undefined?
I expect something pretty similar to this... https://www.d20herosrd.com/ (https://www.d20herosrd.com/) ... but with fixes to the few janky rules bits and some sort of default setting with some pre-built hero and villain examples.
A real necessity though is explaining the differences between the superheo genre and what makes a fun ttrpg (ex. heroes regularly split the party, get beaten, captured or mind-controlled or lose their powers for significant lengths of time, etc.). There's a huge difference between what's fun to read about and what's fun to play as.*
If they were really being ambitious, the book would include some system quick-building opponents and a means beyond adding raw levels to enable major villains to challenge whole teams without just overwhelming them (which is what tends to happen in the above if you just add power levels to villains... stuff akin to legendary/lair actions in D&D 5e or the tricks added to Solos in D&D 4E in MM3 and later).
At this point the formula for superhero games is pretty established; the only question is where you put the dial on complexity vs. speed of play. HERO/Champions is on the extreme of complexity, something based on FATE would probably fit the fact that most people interested in comic rpgs are looking to emulate a genre/storytelling more than a hard and fast setting. Mutants & Masterminds falls somewhere in the middle.
* If you do want to play more of the tropes straight, I've found going more Claremont X-Men level and having each player actually have 2-3 PCs is the way to go; when one of two or three PCs succumbs to the beating, capture, mind control, etc. it's less disruptive to the fun as you aren't essentially sidelining the player for vast swaths of a session just to match genre expectations.
I lean towards developing unorthodox ways of handling common situations. If a certain aspect of gameplay is boring or alienates some of the players, then it needs to be revisited and redone. If, as the tropes tend to suggest, group-splitting and PC-bashing is a fairly regular and necessary occurrence at Superhero tables, and if that's often seen as odious or tedious, then it needs work.
One thing I try to do is reward players for what I consider to be "quality" play - and quality might not be what we tend to think it is. Getting beat down and "defeated" isn't any more or less valuable than kicking an enemy's face in and saving the day. The former might feel "worse" and the latter might feel objectively "better" but that's mainly because we're preconditioned to superimpose reality onto our games. Something I learned years ago in roleplaying as a whole is that there's no such thing as bad outcomes, just wasted opportunities. In fact, one significant game element - character death - is such anathema for many gaming groups that DMs will bend over backward to avoid it; I personally consider character death neither penalty nor a poor outcome, but instead a valuable resource that is oftentimes squandered tragically.
Hailing back to my original statement of rewarding players for playing their characters and their roles well, aspects like "loss" and "sacrifice" are not only necessary contrast to victory (and in fact often sweeten it in the end) but opportunities to create some truly iconic moments in a character's story. Comics (and other Superhero literature) are chock-full of twists, turnabouts, tragedies, and triumphs: All Might is at the limit of his strength when fighting a seemingly superior Nomu, until his heroic spirit surges forth defiantly and he demonstrates the true nature of "Plus Ultra"; Bucky Barnes went missing in action during a valorous sortie in WW2, later coming back as the brainwashed Winter Soldier; Goku seems all but beaten and defeated by Frieza, when he finally reveals the legendary "Super Saiyan" power which hasn't been seen in generations; Tommy Oliver lost his Green Ranger powers during a final, fatal conflict with Rita and Lord Zed, only to return later as the redeemed, more powerful White Ranger. All of these heroic and iconic moments were sweetened by their contrasting defeats. These setbacks were fundamental to the value of the production, in fact - otherwise, you'd have a never-ending cycle of beneficial and victorious outcomes that would get samey and boring - like a Superman that never met an opponent he couldn't easily trounce, or a problem he couldn't easily solve, or a sacrifice he couldn't easily avoid.
My idea is to gamify that cycle.
I'm still in the drawing board stage, but right now I'm envisioning a sort of short-term currency that players accrue when they act true to their character's spirit, lore, motive, or nature, and especially if it puts them at significant peril or loss. This currency can be used as momentum to pull off some iconic turnabouts or incur favorable plot twists - and if/when the "worst" happens and significant, permanent loss occurs, I want to look at developing some "The End...?" or "To be continued..." mechanics to fuel the game forward. If a player wants to let a character's story come to a fitting end (at least, for now!), it should have a measurable impact on the world and the whole gaming table - even cascading to new characters or new plot points further down the road in the current or later gaming sessions.
It's not uncommon to see these kinds of events and outcomes occur in standard RPG fare, but I want to take a crack at developing these iconic, legendary hooks into an actual game mechanic. I'm already taking a different approach to the typical "kill and loot" cycle you might find in your standard grindy OSR environment - compiling things like contacts, favors, blessings, special items, resources, uniques, etc. together as "Boons" that are collected through gameplay (in much the same way as loot and gear would be collected by your typical D&D adventurer). In a similar vein, I think it won't be too challenging to represent tangibles and intangibles caused by significant setbacks and sacrifices. I look forward to the challenge, actually.
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 09:54:05 AMI'm still in the drawing board stage, but right now I'm envisioning a sort of short-term currency that players accrue when they act true to their character's spirit, lore, motive, or nature, and especially if it puts them at significant peril or loss. This currency can be used as momentum to pull off some iconic turnabouts or incur favorable plot twists
If players gain a currency by intentionally putting their character in peril but can spend that currency to get the same character out of peril, I don't see the benefit of putting such a system in the game in the first place. It looks like it will just go around in circle and leave the players back where they would have been had they chosen to do nothing (which, IME, is what happens most of the time anyway).
I guess the issue here is that in a comic, Batman is always trying to solve the case and capture the villain before that villain can do too much damage. Batman isn't deciding to intentionally put himself in peril or cause himself some significant loss. Those events come naturally during the course of the story. All of this type of story mechanics causes the story to move in unnatural ways with individual players sabotaging the group to gain points while the rest of the party typically has to pay the price to make up for it.
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
What elements are you expecting to find - elements you consider mandatory for a Superhero RPG to be worth your trouble?
First and foremost: it supports -my- ideas. HERO, M&M, GURPS Supers, and even the Fate version of Kerberos Club all do a wonderful job of giving me a toolset to make dang near anything I could want, no matter how absurd. Ghost aliens? Sure. Magical cowboys? No problem. Giant mecha pilots? Doesn't matter if the mech is the giant or the pilot is, either way a good system will have me covered. Games like Aberrant and AMP and Godlike rein things in, requiring players to share a common origin, but they provide a solid framework to support me within their constraints. I won't be making any vampire samurai in Aberrant, but I can make a bio-manipulating master swordsman for example.
That said, IMO, the best supers achieve this goal of supporting player ideas by giving them effects driven rulesets (HERO, M&M) rather than exception driven ones (Aberrant, AMP). Systems where players can design their characters' powers themselves, rather than picking from an approved list (which are of course helpfully expanded with a series of supplements you are expected to buy).
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
With the basics covered, what topics and concepts specific to Supers-themed environments are you hoping to discover have been fleshed out in the game?
Honestly, M&M and HERO have pretty well done all the history and navel gazing aspects at this point. What I like are unique new villains, organizations, and weird world aspects. I idea mine the heck out of HERO books for M&M games for example, but you can always use a setting book as an alternate universe for example.
That said, one thing to establish early on if you're making your own setting is: is this four color or realistic? Are you going for more of a Marvel/DC supers feel, where the status quo never really changes and the world isn't struggling from PTSD after countless near destructions*, or are you looking for more of an Astro City vibe, where heroes actually get old and retire and the average person on the street knows a charm or two to protect themselves while in "that part of town".
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
Finally, as you finish reading through the book, what are some bits you're glad aren't present in it - either topics that weren't covered or aspects that were left undefined?
The more I think on it, the more a metaplot is probably a bad move. They seldom (if ever in supers RPGs?) get finished, and really make the world feel like the publisher's/freelancer's than my own. Like signature NPCs, world history, organizations, new nations, etc. are all good things. But then telling me "in the next book, we blow up 90% of this stuff, but you'll have to wait to find out which" is just bad marketing and makes me feel like I'm reading a failed comic rather than playing in a game world. It's my bias though.
(*one of these days, I keep telling myself, I'm going to work on a system free sourcebook that's nothing but super-hero apocalypses the heroes failed to stop, and what the different worlds look like afterwards. A whole chapter devoted to supers-and-zombies for instance, exploring the difference between Marvel Zombies and the eX-Heroes novels for example, and how to work those different ideas into your own campaigns. And then other chapters would explore more unique disaster scenarios.)
Quote from: hedgehobbit on October 29, 2021, 04:05:36 PM
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 09:54:05 AMI'm still in the drawing board stage, but right now I'm envisioning a sort of short-term currency that players accrue when they act true to their character's spirit, lore, motive, or nature, and especially if it puts them at significant peril or loss. This currency can be used as momentum to pull off some iconic turnabouts or incur favorable plot twists
If players gain a currency by intentionally putting their character in peril but can spend that currency to get the same character out of peril, I don't see the benefit of putting such a system in the game in the first place. It looks like it will just go around in circle and leave the players back where they would have been had they chosen to do nothing (which, IME, is what happens most of the time anyway).
I guess the issue here is that in a comic, Batman is always trying to solve the case and capture the villain before that villain can do too much damage. Batman isn't deciding to intentionally put himself in peril or cause himself some significant loss. Those events come naturally during the course of the story. All of this type of story mechanics causes the story to move in unnatural ways with individual players sabotaging the group to gain points while the rest of the party typically has to pay the price to make up for it.
You're absolutely right, sir. Done improperly, any system that rewards players for putting their characters in peril can be
problematic - although, digressing here, it occurs to me that players do that all the time for experience points and loot. But, yes, that's a consideration I'm going to have to keep in mind while I design this - or any - mechanic. I may very well change my approach to what I want to accomplish, but I definitely want to the players' efforts to generate some sort of tangible momentum - even if the devil
is in the details.
I appreciate your insight. It adds another consideration to the development list.
What I expect from any Supers RPG is a complex system on how to build powers. I feel like it's an unspoken rule at this point that you're supposed to let people build their own powers instead of giving them a big ass list of predetermined powers.
Most of them do this. Wild Talents, GURPS Supers (granted, it is GURPS), Champions, Mutants & Masterminds...probably a lot more. There are exceptions to these, like Mutant City Blues (a weird one, honestly), Heroes Unlimited (a personal favorite of mine) and Aberrant (don't get me started on that one...). I actually like the "Give you a huge list of powers instead of making you take your own" since it makes me feel like I'm looking at something tangible instead of being told "Here's a bunch of numbers, do whatever with them".
I'm doing such with my own system. Though it's not quite a Supers game if you ask me.
As for what makes or breaks a game...I'd have to say its options. Superheroes are diverse; in the real sense, not the SJW one. I could have a computer randomly select a handful of superheroes/villains and get incredibly different results, more if you include adjacent stuff like TMNT and all those different anime series that have superhero trappings. One of them would be an alien who was sent to Earth to escape their home planet's destruction (Superman, or Goku if you prefer). Another could be a mutant with ridiculous healing abilities who had adamantine surgically grafted onto his body (Wolverine) while yet another could be a teenage girl who got the power to control bugs after some really severe bullying (Skitter from Worm).
Speaking of Worm, I would recommend it.
Quote from: Habitual Gamer on October 29, 2021, 05:28:46 PM
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
What elements are you expecting to find - elements you consider mandatory for a Superhero RPG to be worth your trouble?
First and foremost: it supports -my- ideas. HERO, M&M, GURPS Supers, and even the Fate version of Kerberos Club all do a wonderful job of giving me a toolset to make dang near anything I could want, no matter how absurd. Ghost aliens? Sure. Magical cowboys? No problem. Giant mecha pilots? Doesn't matter if the mech is the giant or the pilot is, either way a good system will have me covered. Games like Aberrant and AMP and Godlike rein things in, requiring players to share a common origin, but they provide a solid framework to support me within their constraints. I won't be making any vampire samurai in Aberrant, but I can make a bio-manipulating master swordsman for example.
Sensible. No one wants to play a genre that's sandbox in nature without the ability to truly customize the super they're making down to the tights, ticks, and tiara. A litmus test I use to determine if a Supers RPG is worth its salt is to take an iconic superhero from comics - Wolverine, Superman, Thor, Batman, Squirrel Girl -
don't judge me - and see how accurately I can emulate them in the system. One of my favorite systems to create characters out of (although incidentally I've never had the chance to actually
play it) is
Heroes Unlimited. It covers just about every power, origin, and archetype you can imagine and even has roll charts for everything so you can simply let the dice create a completed character from scratch.
My vision attempts to remain fairly faithful to OSR mainfaire. While your traditional class/race/etc system is fairly archetypal and limited in terms of creativity and customization, I believe I've touched on a good basis for having my cake and eating it as well.
Players will build their characters by choosing
Origins or
Archetypes (haven't decided on naming convention yet, but they stand in logically for classes), such as
Mutant or
Bio-Experiment or
Alien or
Cosmic, to name a few off the top of my head. This serves to isolate the nature of their awesomeness and offers a growth template partly to determine what powers they get, but more typically
how characters (and their powers) grow, change, or improve over time. Much as a D&D/PF character class grows stronger, gaining new abilities and empowering old ones, characters will acquire new powers, strengthen existing ones (and possibly evolve or change them), acquire Feat-like options to customize and compliment their existing capacity, and more through their Origin/Archetype's growth track.
Quote
That said, IMO, the best supers achieve this goal of supporting player ideas by giving them effects driven rulesets (HERO, M&M) rather than exception driven ones (Aberrant, AMP). Systems where players can design their characters' powers themselves, rather than picking from an approved list (which are of course helpfully expanded with a series of supplements you are expected to buy).
I'm not familiar with the terminology, or perhaps your usage. Would you elaborate on the relevancy of "effects-driven" vs. "exception-driven" here?
Quote
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
With the basics covered, what topics and concepts specific to Supers-themed environments are you hoping to discover have been fleshed out in the game?
Honestly, M&M and HERO have pretty well done all the history and navel gazing aspects at this point. What I like are unique new villains, organizations, and weird world aspects. I idea mine the heck out of HERO books for M&M games for example, but you can always use a setting book as an alternate universe for example.
That said, one thing to establish early on if you're making your own setting is: is this four color or realistic? Are you going for more of a Marvel/DC supers feel, where the status quo never really changes and the world isn't struggling from PTSD after countless near destructions*, or are you looking for more of an Astro City vibe, where heroes actually get old and retire and the average person on the street knows a charm or two to protect themselves while in "that part of town".
When it comes to setting, I'm actually thinking about being generic enough to cover most of your tropes and tables/generators to draft up new ones. No sense in creating a system that's so versatile but then limiting it to, say, 60's-era capes and cowls. I'm outsourcing opinions right now to get a better idea of what kind of elements I might need to cover in the book so that the DM and players can have the resources they need to do handle whatever kind of theme and feel they want.
Quote
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 28, 2021, 05:14:59 AM
Finally, as you finish reading through the book, what are some bits you're glad aren't present in it - either topics that weren't covered or aspects that were left undefined?
The more I think on it, the more a metaplot is probably a bad move. They seldom (if ever in supers RPGs?) get finished, and really make the world feel like the publisher's/freelancer's than my own. Like signature NPCs, world history, organizations, new nations, etc. are all good things. But then telling me "in the next book, we blow up 90% of this stuff, but you'll have to wait to find out which" is just bad marketing and makes me feel like I'm reading a failed comic rather than playing in a game world. It's my bias though.
I couldn't agree more. I want to provide as much help in generating and simulating a system as I can to help get - and keep - the ball rolling for a GM, but I honestly feel like a preset meta-environment would be a detractor. They don't add much and they unnecessarily alienate players who might want to do somthing different.
Quote
(*one of these days, I keep telling myself, I'm going to work on a system free sourcebook that's nothing but super-hero apocalypses the heroes failed to stop, and what the different worlds look like afterwards. A whole chapter devoted to supers-and-zombies for instance, exploring the difference between Marvel Zombies and the eX-Heroes novels for example, and how to work those different ideas into your own campaigns. And then other chapters would explore more unique disaster scenarios.)
Cool! Post-apocalyptical supers where "It All Went Wrong" ala
Dark Sun sounds like a great environment to explore!
Quote from: PsyXypher on October 29, 2021, 06:07:34 PM
What I expect from any Supers RPG is a complex system on how to build powers. I feel like it's an unspoken rule at this point that you're supposed to let people build their own powers instead of giving them a big ass list of predetermined powers.
Most of them do this. Wild Talents, GURPS Supers (granted, it is GURPS), Champions, Mutants & Masterminds...probably a lot more. There are exceptions to these, like Mutant City Blues (a weird one, honestly), Heroes Unlimited (a personal favorite of mine) and Aberrant (don't get me started on that one...). I actually like the "Give you a huge list of powers instead of making you take your own" since it makes me feel like I'm looking at something tangible instead of being told "Here's a bunch of numbers, do whatever with them".
I'm doing such with my own system. Though it's not quite a Supers game if you ask me.
As for what makes or breaks a game...I'd have to say its options. Superheroes are diverse; in the real sense, not the SJW one. I could have a computer randomly select a handful of superheroes/villains and get incredibly different results, more if you include adjacent stuff like TMNT and all those different anime series that have superhero trappings. One of them would be an alien who was sent to Earth to escape their home planet's destruction (Superman, or Goku if you prefer). Another could be a mutant with ridiculous healing abilities who had adamantine surgically grafted onto his body (Wolverine) while yet another could be a teenage girl who got the power to control bugs after some really severe bullying (Skitter from Worm).
Speaking of Worm, I would recommend it.
Heroes Unlimited is actually the first Superhero RPG I cut my teeth on. Incidentally, I've probably generated hundreds of characters with it, but I've never actually
played it (which might say more about my hermit existence than it does about the system, honestly). The fact that you can take a d100 and randomly generate a complete super-powered individual was a narcotic-grade draw for me. I was actually pleasantly surprised to find that the generated characters
made sense and some of them served as the basis for really interesting heroes, villains, and story machines in my games going forward.
HU is absolutely a source of inspiration that I pull from as I work on this system.
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 29, 2021, 06:26:21 PM
Heroes Unlimited is actually the first Superhero RPG I cut my teeth on. Incidentally, I've probably generated hundreds of characters with it, but I've never actually played it (which might say more about my hermit existence than it does about the system, honestly). The fact that you can take a d100 and randomly generate a complete super-powered individual was a narcotic-grade draw for me. I was actually pleasantly surprised to find that the generated characters made sense and some of them served as the basis for really interesting heroes, villains, and story machines in my games going forward. HU is absolutely a source of inspiration that I pull from as I work on this system.
Heh. Glad to see I'm not the only one!
The top thing I look for is flexibility. Superheroes as a genre tend to incorporate clones of classic superheroes. Some players want that.
However, I like a system that lets me break out of those themes if I want.
For me, the best ever superhero game is Hero System 5th Edition (with or without Champions). It is a fantastic toolkit that lets me build just about anything I want.
I did participate in the S5E kickstarter (one of several DND based superhero games) but I am viewing it more for a possible pulp heroes type game, like a souped up d20 modern. But I just don't see how a class based game is really going to give the utility of Hero System.
Quote from: Lynn on October 29, 2021, 07:21:22 PM
...But I just don't see how a class-based game is really going to give the utility of Hero System.
I agree. Typically, anyway. I tend to find, however, that
too much freeform can be counterproductive to designing a good character. Take
GURPS for example: the character creation potential is absolutely staggering, but the lack of innate structure all but requires the Storyteller to set limitations in order to curtail the abject chaos that is not only possible but commonplace in such an unrestricted environment.
In my design method, form follows function and structure serves as a template to foster creativity. In much the same way a blank page can be a writer's worst nightmare, poor structure in an RPG tends to be a hindrance rather than freeing. My "thinking outside the box" approach is, essentially, to take a good hard look at the box and reshape it, rebuild it, recreate it, reinvent its purpose - but to always remember that there is good reason for there to be a box in the first place.
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 29, 2021, 05:32:42 PMYou're absolutely right, sir. Done improperly, any system that rewards players for putting their characters in peril can be problematic - although, digressing here, it occurs to me that players do that all the time for experience points and loot.
The difference with normal XP and loot in that in a D&D game, the adventure is usually set pretty much in stone with the DM knowing exactly what enemies inhabit the dungeon. But a superhero game is more give and take as the villain will react to the heroes' actions. So, there's much more chance for the GM to fudge, making up the enemy strength as needed which means that giving the heroes bonus points to succeed isn't as needed.
I'm curious is you've seen the old Marvel SAGA game that used the deck of cards? In it, you had a hand of cards that you used instead of dice. In the deck were Doom cards (named after Dr. Doom) which had the highest values but if you used those cards they went into the hands of the GM. This is sort of what I'm thinking about; players are given bonuses for each of their weakness (Aunt May, Lois Lane, Batman's code, etc). If the player uses these bonuses, then it trigger their weakness and a villain will try to use it to their advantage. This way it's the villain's action, not the player's direct decision, to cause problems for the hero team.
Chris hit the nail on the head: HOW to Enjoy a Supers Conceit.
All the typical bromides for a successful dungeon crawl game ("filled with caution as death is everywhere") are tossed aside for melodramatic conceits because Heroism! Even basics, like low trust, betrayals and traps in other games need to be walked into with open eyes and arms because it is Buy In of the Supers genre. I myself still have trouble doing it. :-[
So the mechanics, to be honest, the world really doesn't need any more. What we do need are "HOW to be a Supers Player," like "HOW to be a GM" books. We need to train players to adjust expectations and modulate behaviors to the genre.
Quote from: Opaopajr on October 29, 2021, 10:49:04 PM
All the typical bromides for a successful dungeon crawl game ("filled with caution as death is everywhere") are tossed aside for melodramatic conceits because Heroism! Even basics, like low trust, betrayals and traps in other games need to be walked into with open eyes and arms because it is Buy In of the Supers genre. I myself still have trouble doing it. :-[
Honestly, I don't know that I can agree. That's certainly
one way to play Supers, but it's certainly not the only way. About the only mandatory difference between a Supers game and a traditional dungron crawl setting is that the PCs are typically super-human. There's no reason why players or characters need to willingly be oblivious to intrigue and danger. In fact, outside of a very tropey, soap-opera-esque melodrama, I don't think that approach would ever make any sense.
If you have an argument to the contrary, I'm all ears.
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 29, 2021, 09:17:22 PM
I agree. Typically, anyway. I tend to find, however, that too much freeform can be counterproductive to designing a good character. Take GURPS for example: the character creation potential is absolutely staggering, but the lack of innate structure all but requires the Storyteller to set limitations in order to curtail the abject chaos that is not only possible but commonplace in such an unrestricted environment.
In the last Hero System game I played, we had two very experienced gamers play that had never played Hero System. They understood the genre well and, that there were plenty of examples available it wasn't hard for them to come up with genre appropriate characters. But pure point buy powers by itself might be hard for baby's first RPG.
Hero System 5 for me at least, was its last incarnation in its best monolithic single book in which it held everything you really need.
Seen it too many times, Supers played straight doesn't feel or sound like comic book Supers. It just becomes a quick slide into either Principia Discordia or Supers Dystopia.
People kill threats because, well, vigilantes are needed to deal with a broken legal system in the face of superpowers. Dead threats don't tend to return -- and those that do you fling into the Sun or void of space (someone else's problem). Then it becomes an arms race as threats mount, tank captains draw domain, coalitions gather, and a new gov't arises that either now has the super oppressive power of PC supes or becomes screeching murderhobo chaos... and campaign is abandoned. Once a player achieves enough points/powers or a coalition to rule the table, or players cooperate to bully the GM into subjecting their world to their scenery chewing whim, the game ends abandoned everyone sad & bored.
I have yet to play a good Supers game. No point buy system or traditional level system ever seemed to steer away from this repeated dissolve. Maybe Marvels Super Heroes with its karma system is the trick to adhering to genre restraints, but I haven't played that one. I just know M&M, Champions, HERO, Exalted, GURPS, ICONS, Stooper Powers (admittedly a joke rpg), and a few others I am likely forgetting all left a very unpleasant aftertaste in my mouth. Like Zombie Apocalypse Survival (or FATE :P ;D) I think the flaw might actually be baked into the premise; the game power structure vs the play verisimilitude to fiction expectation is broken somewhere and mechanics I have seen so far can not change attitudes.
The only real exception I think I have tried *might* be BESM and its anime games. But even most of those imploded mighty fast with much IC killing, bullying, and OOC tears. (Brave New World had promise in its premise, but I only played less than a handful of sessions and then heard the material dropped the ball and people stopped playing.)
I am sure you have much hope and dreams and success with Supers in your circle, and I wish your project well. :) But I just cannot share your enthusiasm. Something's broken in the beginning ask of players and I cannot quite place my finger on it. I think Chris' point is worth repeating and exploring.
I appreciate your candor, Opaopajr. Like the other points made, your statements aren't going to fall on deaf ears. Ignoring the shortfalls that lay ahead would be a great way to derail this thing before it even takes off.
You seem to be onto something, and if you ever put your finger on what thing or things specifically throw a major monkey wrench into all of your super games, let me know.
Though, I think special attention needs to go into checks and balances. Everything needs structure, including the PCs, the setting, the game environment, the whole nine yards. I'm on a mobile phone at work right now and I can't write a small essay on some of the issues you brought up, but I should be able to later.
I appreciate your listening. :)
Not to taint you game development, but a previous poster here was working on their Supers heartbreaker/labor of love: Tristram Evans working on Phaserip, IIRC the spelling. It is mostly based off of MSH and karma principles.
Some of their posts should still be here on this forum. They also post elsewhere in an offshoot forum (a falling out, off-topic, not important), including design notes. It may help you.
We've had a similar back and forth with my dislike, and confusion for my dislike, for Supers for this forum and the other. It was a surprisingly fruitful exploration in what makes a Supers game and a superhero. Part of it may be that I have trouble connecting to American Superheroes in any way beyond camp or farce. Not a big fan of 1980s deconstructed grim superheroes making bizarre gestures of grace & mercy to supervillains that perpetuates a vicious cycle. Goofy Silver Age boyscouts or 1960s Adam West Batman is more passable. Loved animated series "The New Adventures of Batman" & "X-Men" but still too hard to play as an RPG seriously... there's an undefinable disconnect.
If you don't mind, what is more preferable to you than "Western" supers, and what makes that really stand out to you?
I can stomach the antics of anime games, like BESM stuff, moreso. Maybe because it is often less serious, or at least has more windows of opportunity to allow levity in mood & conceit breaches? Also I can accept In Nomine SJG, even played seriously, because death is not always on the table as the best solution against angels & demons... accepting the human world is different and must be respected supercedes practical, logical mayhem.
That is what came out of the discussion previously. It also could be that I have gamed with many a power gamer constantly and never saw anything different. Any experience has to take into consideration selection bias and sheer luck. So perhaps every Supers I played failed either because of the players/GM, or perhaps just me. :( I thought I tried to curtail myself, as I actively avoided power gaming for most of my gaming now. But maybe subconsciously I cannot suspend disbelief in doing a boneheaded in-genre Supers comic book action, like returning a repeat offender escapee mass murdering terrorist to Arkham Asylum.
My dream supers game is a game that really embraces the physics of comic book super action... The only games that have come close to this, in the past, are rpgs like DC Heroes 2e, Hero System 5e, and adjacent to these is Heroes Unlimited 2e.
Then I backed the Kickstarter for Ascendant and it is specifically designed to emulate comic book physics supers action. The base dice system is way more elegant than it probably should be... It uses the numbers structure of DC Heroes rpg but uses the percentile color system from TSR Marvel Super Heroes to resolve all dice actions. It's brilliant.
Making characters is definitely up there with the above systems but instead of focusibg on just Effects like in Hero System, you really have to pay attention to the plausible realism of just how strong and agile your character is. Because this game uses the MEGS structure where every number is double the previous number in scale, someone with a Srength of 7 is twice as strong as someone with Strength 6, for example. Everything in the game is balanced on this. If you're doing an action with a Time of 4 its twice as long as a Time 3 action. A object that weighs a Weight 6 is twice as heavy as an object of Weight 5. Speed 10 is twice as fast as Speed 9. Things like that.
Combat uses a Panels and Page structure, to emulate comic books. You can do what you normally see in normal comic book pages, which is like a Movement, a Attack, and something else that's neither. Resolution is a percentile on a simple colored table. When you Attack you compare your Attack rating to the Defenders Defense rating, find the difference on the chart, and roll d100. You can end up with 5 gradients of success, from White (Fail) to Red (Did I just kill you success)... The colors go from White (can't you hit the wall of a barn? Idiot) - Green (normal hit, base damage) - Yellow (good success, double damage) - Orange (Great success, 4x damage) - Red (8x damage).
This applies to non-combat too. Anytime you want to do something you compare your Action rating to Difficulty rating, find difference on chart, and roll.
Basically each color threshold is double the success of the previous color.
This game has rules for things I've never seen before in a supers rpg. Some of it made me scratch my head because it's so grounded in the physics of comic books. It's apparent the designer either really loves comic books, really studied comic books (and a lot of them), or both. It's incredible (to me) how he systemized things in this game.
So if you like DC Heroes but always wanted a simpler dice system, here you go.
Quote from: RebelSky on October 30, 2021, 07:40:17 PM
So if you like DC Heroes but always wanted a simpler dice system, here you go.
I'm still going to pick up Ascendant, but the added color layer and damage system you describe does not sound more simple than MEGS.
"What Makes or Breaks a Supers TTRPG?"
Can I make Superman?
If I can't then the rpg isn't complete. I need levels "Mundane to Ridiculous" for a Supers rpg. The GM will determine how far I can go but I should be able to design anything within that boundary. Superboy if not Superman. Most Supers rpgs grant the lower level without truly reaching the upper level.
TSR's Marvel Superheroes and the FATE-based rps get close if not right there. Villains & Vigilantes, Mutants & Masterminds and Champions and GURPS Supers get a degree closer.
Quote from: Theory of Games on October 30, 2021, 10:42:28 PM
"What Makes or Breaks a Supers TTRPG?"
Can I make Superman?
If I can't then the rpg isn't complete. I need levels "Mundane to Ridiculous" for a Supers rpg. The GM will determine how far I can go but I should be able to design anything within that boundary. Superboy if not Superman. Most Supers rpgs grant the lower level without truly reaching the upper level.
TSR's Marvel Superheroes and the FATE-based rps get close if not right there. Villains & Vigilantes, Mutants & Masterminds and Champions and GURPS Supers get a degree closer.
I would even go so far as to state that MSH (the advanced rules box set) with the Ultimate Powers Book is the gold standard to compare other supers games to.
Quote from: Theory of Games on October 30, 2021, 10:42:28 PMCan I make Superman?
How would a game even work with Superman? He's a character that can only be threatened if the player forgets 95% of his established powers. You would have to put some sort of a "Usable only once every 5 adventures" tag on things like his ability to out run bullets (and, thus, almost ever attack anyone uses against him) or his ability to travel through time to solve any problem.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on November 01, 2021, 04:49:34 PM
Quote from: Theory of Games on October 30, 2021, 10:42:28 PMCan I make Superman?
How would a game even work with Superman? He's a character that can only be threatened if the player forgets 95% of his established powers. You would have to put some sort of a "Usable only once every 5 adventures" tag on things like his ability to out run bullets (and, thus, almost ever attack anyone uses against him) or his ability to travel through time to solve any problem.
Then you might not be playing the supervillains effectively... Lex Luthor isn't strong or fast or have the ability to fly. But he's a super genius with the fatal flaw of having to rely on minions. He himself can outsmart Superman for a while, at least.
If you ignore the DC/Marvel divide, a Superman-like hero would likely be challenged by a Galactic us or Thanos villain...
Quote from: FF_Ninja on October 29, 2021, 06:20:26 PM
Quote from: Habitual Gamer on October 29, 2021, 05:28:46 PM
Quote
That said, IMO, the best supers achieve this goal of supporting player ideas by giving them effects driven rulesets (HERO, M&M) rather than exception driven ones (Aberrant, AMP). Systems where players can design their characters' powers themselves, rather than picking from an approved list (which are of course helpfully expanded with a series of supplements you are expected to buy).
I'm not familiar with the terminology, or perhaps your usage. Would you elaborate on the relevancy of "effects-driven" vs. "exception-driven" here?
May be my usage.
Anyway, as I understand it, effects-based systems give you a single rule framework to build anything with (HERO, M&M) while exceptions-based give you a rule framework and then make everything exceptions within it (Aberrant, Heroes Unlimited). And while I feel strongly that effects-based systems are superior, I respect that some folks really prefer exceptions-based games.
Put another way: how do you make Wolverine in Heroes Unlimited RAW? In HERO or M&M it's numbskull easy, but in HU mutant cyborgs aren't a class option (or wasn't last I knew). Now, there's probably a special class or multi-class rule in some supplement somewhere, but that's the "supplement treadmill" feature of exceptions-based systems that publishers (and some players) have come to love.
(That said, as much as I hate HU, the ability to roll up a random character when you have no ideas of your own is an attractive feature. But it's a feature M&M 3ed has in its core book as well, so effects-based systems can do random character generation too)
Anyway, another "must have" feature is the ability to have differently scaled characters work together. How does your game handle Batman on the same team as Superman? M&M handled it by making Batman a high end human with a ton of skills and advantages and gear. Superman could still drop a building on Batman's head, but Batman is more useful for anything Superman can't do (disguise, knowledge skills, socialization, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum). If I recall correctly Truth & Justice (by Atomic Sock Monkey Press) could let you go one step further and recreate those Superman and Jimmy Olsen team ups.
When people make games that don't scale well, you end up with Exalted crossover problems (the World of Darkness games got around that by not being a shared setting, except when they were).
Quote
(*one of these days, I keep telling myself, I'm going to work on a system free sourcebook that's nothing but super-hero apocalypses the heroes failed to stop, and what the different worlds look like afterwards. A whole chapter devoted to supers-and-zombies for instance, exploring the difference between Marvel Zombies and the eX-Heroes novels for example, and how to work those different ideas into your own campaigns. And then other chapters would explore more unique disaster scenarios.)
Cool! Post-apocalyptical supers where "It All Went Wrong" ala
Dark Sun sounds like a great environment to explore!
[/quote]
I see it as more of a toolbox, exploring all sorts of different scenarios. The key caveat is the idea that "supers have failed to protect the status quo", and what that means when the status quo truly was preferable and can not be simply handwaved back by the end of the story arc.
I've been avoiding this thread because I figure it'll end up sucking my time away from work... but lemme wade in here.
I'm a Supers junkie. I used to write comics (indies, and for Image), been collecting since the late 60's until the One More Day event pretty much broke me out of the hobby. I own well over 30k comics (probably closer to 40). That said - I'm saying this only to establish when it comes to comics, I definitely have some opinions that have informed my gaming habits.
I *never* intended to ever run Supers RPG's, but when the MSH game dropped in the early 80's, naturally I was in. My sensibilities were very different than they are now, I thought the Basic System was a little TOO basic - but that's largely because I was used to the relative heavy rules of D&D. I wasn't *really* prepared for the sheer scale of MSH offered. When the Advanced Rules dropped, it clicked. Now, almost 40-years later, MSH has outlived *every* game-system at my table, even D&D. And this is not because of the system, it's not because other non-Supers systems suck, or anything, it's because my players get a taste for it after playing, and they demand it over everything else. And when it comes to systems, yes MSH is my goto, but not for want of trying others. I have learned a few things of what works and doesn't.
As someone currently working on their own in-house system, your concerns are definitely my concerns.
What Makes or Breaks a Supers TTRPG?
As you can see from the various responses that answer can be very subjective. My hot take is this - Your system must support all of the sub-genres of Supers play simultaneously. It *must* scale, and do so as effortlessly as possible.
There is a LOT to unpack here because much of this depends on understanding of genre conventions that have shifted over the decades which is why everyone's opinion of "what are Supers" shifts. The Ages of comics (Golden, Silver, Iron, Modern, heh now Post-Modern) all have very distinct conventions that you'll generally see most TTRPG systems emulating in one form or another. There is usually some "ball" that is dropped because the publisher doesn't address these conventions mechanically or narratively.
1) The system must scale from normal people to Cosmic (Superman+) level of play.
2) Maximal support for genre convention emulation based on the Age of play (with obvious rules to explain what those conventions are).
3) Minimal mechanical calculations. Nothing glazes players eyes over faster than trying to calculate velocity of the Flash trying to punch someone with the density of Superman's jaw, while running at .5 liminal speed, while calculating the friction burns in a 100-yard radius of his charging distance of 10-miles in one round. This means a solid unified task resolution that handles Moverment, Action, Defense, Outcome in as few rolls as possible.
4) Crafting - Yeah a lot of people don't think about this until it's too late. A phenomenal amount of supers make gadgets, or are mechanical in nature. This system should extend *beyond* that - to include other forms of "building things" and it should be as unified as possible by adjudicating cost based on effects, material, and strength which parallels the stats of the PC's as a yardstick. Trust me, this is the easiest way to do it. (and I'd be happy to explain in depth).
5) Non-Supers play must be supported. Contrary to what a lot of people (or no one, as I'm the only one apparently that ever says this) believe, one of the most important aspects to Supers play is what the characters do as civilians. Now... I run sandbox games, and my contention is that even IF you don't run sandbox, having content in your system that supports civilian play, only enhances your episodic games. From a sandbox perspective having civilian identities is where some of the best RP opportunities rise, and enhances the stakes of the Super's side of the game. Superman's weakness is Lois. Peter Parker warranted his own comic AS Peter Parker (Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spiderman) and his Super's identity was secondary. All the relationships, jobs, etc. that a Superhero has to contend with is part of the tension that makes the genre sing, beyond wearing tights and beating the shit out of each other and throwing people through buildings.
6) Setting verisimilitude - Whether you're playing in Gotham City, MCU NYC, Marvel's Earth 2, or whatever, you need to have the standards set on what is assumed and what the system reinforces. This gets back to understanding the Supers Conventions based on the Age. My opinion is that most people concerned with morality issues today ask the inevitable question of "Why aren't Supers killing these bad guys." Which is an obvious question to ask. But the conventions of the Silver Age, Iron Age, Modern era, all respond to that in different ways - and your system should too. These can be optional - or all happening simultaneously. Shit that goes down in Gotham isn't the same as Metropolis. One could argue that this is based on the capacities of the Supers there - or one could say that as set-locations things *are* different. Just like Detective Batman isn't really the same Batman as in the Justice League. Your system needs to be flexible enough to address these things individually or simultaneously.
7) Tropes over Realism - The design of your system should emphasize the tropes of Supers, not mechanical rigidity trying to emulate real physics. Supers is *not* about realism. It's about AMAZING! FANTASTIC! shit that could never happen, but would be awesome as fuck to see/do. Superman is not carrying a jet on his hands, he would punch a hole right through it, and it would fall apart under the stress. The Flash running at lightspeed around NYC would destroy the entire city, Batman's Utility belt could not possibly have all that gear contained within it etc.
Those are the high-points for me. The Devil is in the details, of course. My goto Supers game MSH, falls short in many of these aspects, but shines like a star in others. Hero, DC system, M&M, do the same. The REAL sauce is you as a the GM - can you master the system enough to make it all as seamless as possible? So consider ease of play in your design.
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 11:32:17 AM
I've been avoiding this thread because I figure it'll end up sucking my time away from work... but lemme wade in here.
(snip lots of good stuff)
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 11:32:17 AM
4) Crafting - Yeah a lot of people don't think about this until it's too late. A phenomenal amount of supers make gadgets, or are mechanical in nature. This system should extend *beyond* that - to include other forms of "building things" and it should be as unified as possible by adjudicating cost based on effects, material, and strength which parallels the stats of the PC's as a yardstick. Trust me, this is the easiest way to do it. (and I'd be happy to explain in depth).
This was a big problem in Aberrant. You had super smart characters who were expected to hand wave any non-gamey creations because the rules didn't support PCs actually making stuff (at least not until a later sourcebook was released). But once you allow crafting (be it technology, or magic, or something else), you need to consider how game breaking it can be. If the super-inventor/super-sorcerer can just create what they need on the fly, they risk overshadowing the rest of the PCs. And if they can mass produce their inventions for others, they'll be changing the world before the first session ends. Balance in supers games is already a bit of pipe dream, but super crafting just begs to be abused.
Still, super crafting is a crucial element of any good supers game.
There is a happy medium in using Handwavium and more hard-core mechanical representations.
One of the best ways is to establish "Super Gear" as Powers themselves and using the normal task-resolution you'd give to Powers to the gadgets. Special considerations should be -
Destructibility/Durability - Gear should be damageable. To be impervious to damage is a Power unto itself (Cap's Shield). But this idea should not be just for gear/gadgets, but it should be applied to *everything*. Breaking things is a big part of the tropes of super-powered combat.
Scarcity - The capacity to create this gear should be clearly outlined. Even if it's limited by resources (money, material rarity) or handwavium (special machine that only Tony Stark or Ray Palmer has created), should be in line with whatever downtime tasks are established for the game, I'm specifically speaking about civilian life. It also should apply to things like special ammos, fuels etc to justify that gear. I don't mean this to sound TOO complex, you should have shorthand ways of handwaving this. In MSH - your Resource rank will let you purchase anything a couple of ranks or lower with no check. Tony Stark doesn't make resource rolls for fueling up his private jet.
Cost - whatever you're using to determine resources, your crafting system should be plugged into it so people can easily eyeball the cost of things. The more you tie it to the stats and material rarity of your items the easier it is.
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 03:07:42 PM
There is a happy medium in using Handwavium and more hard-core mechanical representations.
Agreed.
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 03:07:42 PM
One of the best ways is to establish "Super Gear" as Powers themselves and using the normal task-resolution you'd give to Powers to the gadgets.
I was actually thinking of the maxim for a good effects-based system: "there's at least three ways to do the same thing, but differently." So like crafting in M&M can be reflected by either using the existing crafting rules, taking the Variable power and claiming everything is a gadget in your utility belt (when it's actually just the Variable power in action), or spending a Hero point to have the gadget your gadgeteer needs (an expensive, but viable, approach).
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 03:07:42 PM
Destructibility/Durability - Gear should be damageable. To be impervious to damage is a Power unto itself (Cap's Shield). But this idea should not be just for gear/gadgets, but it should be applied to *everything*. Breaking things is a big part of the tropes of super-powered combat.
I'll be honest, I like to go the other route and have "special gear" be indestructible by default, but breakable either through limitations on the power/gear or through "GM Intrusion" style mechanics. I think the end result is the same (indestructible gear costs more), but the base assumption is different.
Quote from: tenbones on November 05, 2021, 03:07:42 PMScarcity - The capacity to create this gear should be clearly outlined. Even if it's limited by resources (money, material rarity) or handwavium (special machine that only Tony Stark or Ray Palmer has created), should be in line with whatever downtime tasks are established for the game, I'm specifically speaking about civilian life. It also should apply to things like special ammos, fuels etc to justify that gear. I don't mean this to sound TOO complex, you should have shorthand ways of handwaving this. In MSH - your Resource rank will let you purchase anything a couple of ranks or lower with no check. Tony Stark doesn't make resource rolls for fueling up his private jet.
In "What If Tony Stark Lost the Armor Wars" the issue ended with an AIM scientist uploading all of Tony's schematics onto the internet for the world to share, so that anyone with the means could make their own Iron Man armor (or armor variant I'd imagine). There was also a Guardians of the Galaxy set in the far future where an alien civilization discovered a suit of Iron Man armor, reverse engineered it, mass produced it, and used it to become a threat to the galaxy (while making Tony Stark their patron god).
Meanwhile, over in the Wild Cards series of novels, super invention was (usually) revealed to actually be a super power tied to the inventor and not the gear. Mr Inventor could build an time machine, but he'd be the only one who could use it because the machine didn't actually do anything, but he was the one providing it with power. Which is one way to make sure super inventing doesn't get out of hand, but also doesn't really mean much (it's "just" another power ultimately).
Point being: how you handle crafting can greatly impact characters and setting alike.
oh there is a bazillion ways to skin the cat. Just some design paths lead to other considerations systemically that have to be addressed, than others.
And at each stage there is always a way to insert handwavium to smooth things over - you just have to figure out where that sweet-spot is.
I'll use MSH as an example...
1) Resources are an abstraction cooked into the Ranking system. The Ranking system demands that anything within 1 Column increases the starting value by +1 Column in value. Anything 2 Column Ranks below are ignored.
2) The Cost of building anything is calculating the highest effective Rank of the item applicable for that thing. So a weapon is defined by its stats: Range, Material Strength, Damage. Whether it looks like a baseball bat, a laser rifle, or boomerang is irrelevant. Each of those stats has a Rank. The highest Rank is the starting cost. For anything within 2 Ranks bumps up the cost by +1. Anything below that threshold is ignored.
Vehicles - Control, Speed, Body, and Protection - same thing.
Powersuits - Material Strength, Stats augmented, Powers etc.
And THAT'S IT.
When the total cost is determined - you have to make a Reason check to build it. Obviously advanced stuff requires the Reason (or powers) to actually make that design work. There are rules for "special requirements" when making stuff that is beyond the normal tech-level of your setting. That's why the Reason score illustrates the level of technology that PC can comprehend (and why Tony Stark and Reed Richards are *really* freakishly smart) that keeps Joe Schmo from making his power-suit work.
Destructibility - I agree with you that it can be a problem when your Tech based guy gets his shit destroyed. Couple of thoughts on that - MOST Tech-based guys tend to have money and facilities to build their stuff. Since I run Sandbox style it's part of the game for my tech-based PC's to deal with those eventualities. MSH is pretty generous with "repairing" destroyed stuff, in that if you have the facilities it's "assumed" that thing can be healed/repaired by the normal rules in such facilities with the appropriate skills possessed.
Savage Worlds has an actual Power (Vehicle) where it's a super-tricked out iconic vehicle (powersuit or whatever) that if it gets destroyed, it gets fixed by next session - via handwavium. This is how Batman destroys the Batmobile (and all the other Bat-vehicles) and is patrolling the streets in it next issue.
Granted as a player you're *paying* for this Power. Savage Worlds is all about tropes and keeping the action rolling, not the granular details.
If you really want Superman, use FATE. A more narrative approach is needed with someone who can move planets and fly through suns. Honestly, M&M, GURPS Supers and Champions don't hit that level of power correctly unless the adventure allows the highest level of capability. Could I design Superman for M&M? Sure but I need PL15+ which kind of breaks any notion of stopping him outside of using Kryptonite.
Weaver Dice (a game made to emulate Worm) doesn't have many hard rules, but it does take the concept of a Tinker from Worm.
Basically, a super genius but only with a narrow focus. Something like biotech, miniaturization, vehicles, etc. Some have wider focuses but downsides. There's one character who can build anything...once, after that it fails to function, often explosively.
You could get some mileage with that. Say your super genius works primarily with anti-gravity and hovertech. You could have them build a flying car, sure, but what else could they do? Build a hammer that sends you back 20 feet? Jump boots? A grenade that sends people up into the air by reversing gravity temporarily?
Lots of possibilities. Would be a pain to make rules for it all, though.
Quote from: Theory of Games on November 06, 2021, 06:55:41 PM
If you really want Superman, use FATE. A more narrative approach is needed with someone who can move planets and fly through suns. Honestly, M&M, GURPS Supers and Champions don't hit that level of power correctly unless the adventure allows the highest level of capability. Could I design Superman for M&M? Sure but I need PL15+ which kind of breaks any notion of stopping him outside of using Kryptonite.
Actually PL 15 was right where they put Superman in the DC Adventures books for Mutants & Masterminds 3e; and the way you challenge him is A) can't be everywhere at once, B) Darkseid, Brainiac and Doomsday all have higher PLs than even Superman while Zod's crew is about equal to Superman and Lex Luthor's PL is lower but has significantly more Power Points than Superman does (same for Batman, who is PL 12, but has more Power Points than literally any other NPC they gave stats for). Wonder Woman, Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter are also around PL 14-15 too.
So the way you play Superman in M&M is just to NOT team him up with with PL 8 Robin or PL 10 Nightwing, but with Batman (who's got way more points in way more categories) and the rest of the Justice League who all have similar Power Point totals and Power Levels and put them up against the forces of Darseid or any number of other global threats.
If you wanna do a lower tier game, use Young Justice; Superboy, Wonder Girl, Robin and Impulse (plus whoever they've been teamed up with in whatever their current iteration of the comic is) as they're all PL 10-12 and have about the same point totals.
yeah PL15 play handles Superman/Bats just fine.
MSH - handles Superman/Thor/Silversurfer level play just fine too. So does DC Heroes.
The ISSUE (no pun intended) is the capacity of the GM to handle that kind of play in a meaningful manner. This where sandbox play for those kinds of games becomes both easier and more difficult than episodic adventure-based fare.
In a sandbox game, my assumptions are you've layed the foundations on the conceits of the world and what players with that level of power mean by those conceits in the world.
Take invincible - pretty solid set of rules. Omni-Man is a Lone Big Gun in national/global threats. When he's not dealing with that kinda shit, he's a family man living his normal life (with huge strings and motives attached). His *real* life is spent making sure no one learns of his true motives.
Superman - is similar in that he's responding to national/global threats in mainline adventures, but unlike Omni-Man, Superman cares about all the little people, so you can throw all kinds of personal stuff at him, bus's flying off bridges, cats in trees, whatever, to the degree that his schtick is solidified in the time-allotment you wanna give him (or whatever analog your PC's are using of him). Plus he has his "day job" which is a natural springboard into all his super-stuff.
The idea is that in a Sandbox you should be paving the infrastructure of the world to accommodate these powerhouse characters with what they do when they're *not* in their tights. This gives you a lot of leeway for lesser-powered/capable PC's who will struggle with stuff that is "trivial" to the Cosmic guys.
And THAT should be something players of Cosmic-level heroes should understand LONG before they get into the campaign. Superman *could* clean up Gotham if he wanted to. He doesn't because well that's Batman's "thing". Sure it doesn't make *real* sense... but you know, Supers are not really about that. In fact the pathos and drama that exists in that weird reality is PART of the genre itself. There is a hidden loathing that Bruce has for Clark *because* he suspects that Clark could *do* more... just like Clark is secretly terrified he's never doing *enough*.
But those boundaries are generally always observed. This is the kind of hidden stuff a sandbox Supers GM has to understand and passively enforce... if you don't...
... this brings us to the disadvantage of running a Supers game episodically, especially with players that don't really grok the genre...
That is "Why am I putting up with this shit?"
In episodic games where the only thing that matters is the adventure, most of the civilian stuff gets chucked out the window. MSH's modules are largely in this vein (which is also why I never use them without great contextualization). So PC's are not really grounded into anything and want to cut loose. At high powerlevels there is nothing really to keep the game from flying off the rails unless you as a GM have a good understanding of how these things can be dealt with. It's common at my table for players that are not that familiar with the Supers genre to fuck up, and cause a lot of inadvertent carnage, but I let it roll by having the world react to it, and make it part of the learning process.
When you're in full adventure mode without any real context outside the adventure itself, it's trickier. I suspect since most people GM like this, it's also why Supers is a huge turnoff since "control" is an illusion such GM's wrestle with, and letting their players have that kind of power is unsettling to them.
Supers *does* require a lot of GM discipline to run, especially long-term. And it requires letting your players have the kind of power that is completely unrealistically attainable in other RPG's. But the cool thing is - that's part of the fun. I get a lot of satisfaction when my players get the realization of how truly powerful their character is (when we're playing at that level). I love letting them indulge in it.
Of course... at some point... the real responsibilities of having those powers comes into play... muahahah.
I'm a fan of supers games. Started with Marvel in the eighties, V&V, Champions, Marvel Advanced and they were all swept aside when DC Heroes came along. Even that isn't perfect though because it groups Attribute Points (APs) into columns and tends to bunch 'street level' characters into a narrow group so they pretty much look the same, give or take an AP.
I house ruled the campaign I run so that every AP counts and ditched the table to make it faster. It uses 2D12 (and more D12s if you spend Hero Points or use Skills, roll a bunch and pick two, discard the rest) and is opposed so you roll 2D12 + Acting Value (Dex) vs 2D12 + Opposing Value (Dex). If the acting value is equal to or higher than opposing value, look on the red column of the table I cooked up, add a modifier to Effect value then Effect - Resistance=Result APs. No Hero Point bidding, no column shifting, no increasing Acting or Effect values. I got rid of the 'massive pile of hero points therefore I win' scenario which was becoming a problem in a long term campaign.
(https://i.postimg.cc/4NRn4jjb/gif-version-LATEST-VANGUARD-TABLES.jpg)
It's much faster and I can rattle fights off in seconds plus compatible with all write ups from 1e to 3e (and Blood of Heroes). Been doing it this way for years and haven't broken it yet.
I guess my point is that with a few simple tweaks your favourite 'almost perfect apart from...' can be closer to perfect. I say closer because the DC Heroes gadget rules still make me frown. Can't please all of the people all of the time...