PDA

View Full Version : But all the overpowered stuff is labeled!



UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 01:43 PM
This has been bugging me for a while. Mutants & Masterminds is a point-based RPG with many quite powerful abilities. I used to enjoy the game, but nobody believes me when I say it has balance issues. Their most common response is simply "But all the overpowered stuff is labeled! A GM can restrict it!" or "A GM should be taking advantage of your weaknesses and have power negating characters.". This has been driving me nuts.

Labeling the overpowered stuff doesn't seem to help. There are quite a few things that were discovered after the game was initially printed. There also happen to be a number of abilities that are obviously overpowered but aren't labeled at all (I'm looking at you, alternate powers). A GM having to carefully comb over everyone's sheet isn't a self-balancing mechanism, it's invocation of Oberoni's Fallacy.

I don't like flaw-exploitation. Letting a player be overpowered 75% of the time by making him useless 25% of the time just doesn't make sense in my book. And it forces the GM to keep track of another variable since the quarter of the time the player is useless might be against the weakest enemies.

I really just wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure someone will disagree with my opinions. There will probably be someone that proves me wrong on some level. And as the length of the thread approaches infinity, the odds of someone sidetracking me so that I don't even understand what my original post was about approaches 1.


Edit:
I am merely sick of people not listening to me and dismissing me out of hand when I say there are balance issues. I am not passing a value judgment on the game itself. I am merely angry at the fans who don't think I'm worth listening to. If you can enjoy M&M, then good for you. If you can't, you probably have a valid reason. This is my reason.

Edit 2:
I am not upset by the game. I am upset by the individuals who dismiss people who have valid concerns.

Doc Roc
2010-01-30, 01:49 PM
Yeah, it's a terrible system. Sorry to see you found that out the hard way.

Oslecamo
2010-01-30, 01:51 PM
Silly panda. D&D is the only game with balance problems in all the multiverse.

All the "problems" in other systems aren't really "problems", because DM/GM/ST can use common sense and rule zero to solve them. For some reason, the DM trying to fix problems is considered HERESY just in D&D, but in any other system is all fair game. Except if you're using ToB. The only D&D splatbook people are more than willing to houserule and common-sense right out of the bat. Repeat with me, the arcane swordsage, iron hearth surge and every other problem in there are all lies...


Conclusion: You've awoken to the terrible truth. People are biased to their favorite systems, and will ignore their problems when posting reviews. Except for D&D, wich is the Big Boy of roleplaying, so he gets lots of flaming.

Now I have here a red pill and a blue pill. If you take the red pill, you awaken fresh in your bed and ignore all problems with mutants and masterminds and call them creative challenges. If you take the blue pill, you go down the deep optimization hole, and see the horrible naked reality.

Sliver
2010-01-30, 01:54 PM
Now I have here a red pill and a blue pill. If you take the red pill, you awaken fresh in your bed and ignore all problems with mutants and masterminds and call them creative challenges. If you take the blue pill, you go down the deep optimization hole, and see the horrible naked reality.

That sounds familiar.. Where does that come from? :smallconfused:

BardicDuelist
2010-01-30, 01:57 PM
This has been bugging me for a while. Mutants & Masterminds is a point-based RPG with many quite powerful abilities. I used to enjoy the game, but nobody believes me when I say it has balance issues. Their most common response is simply "But all the overpowered stuff is labeled! A GM can restrict it!" or "A GM should be taking advantage of your weaknesses and have power negating characters.". This has been driving me nuts.

Labeling the overpowered stuff doesn't seem to help. There are quite a few things that were discovered after the game was initially printed. There also happen to be a number of abilities that are obviously overpowered but aren't labeled at all (I'm looking at you, alternate powers). A GM having to carefully comb over everyone's sheet isn't a self-balancing mechanism, it's invocation of Oberoni's Fallacy.

I don't like flaw-exploitation. Letting a player be overpowered 75% of the time by making him useless 25% of the time just doesn't make sense in my book. And it forces the GM to keep track of another variable since the quarter of the time the player is useless might be against the weakest enemies.

I really just wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure someone will disagree with my opinions. There will probably be someone that proves me wrong on some level. And as the length of the thread approaches infinity, the odds of someone sidetracking me so that I don't even understand what my original post was about approaches 1.

Quick question: Are we talking first or second edition?

Sanguine
2010-01-30, 01:57 PM
That sounds familiar.. Where does that come from? :smallconfused:

It's a spoof of The Matrix if I'm not mistaken.

Gamgee
2010-01-30, 01:58 PM
It's a spoof of The Matrix if I'm not mistaken.

I thought your avatar was tipping a big hat, and then I looked and seen a giant sword. How silly. :P

Oslecamo
2010-01-30, 01:58 PM
That sounds familiar.. Where does that come from? :smallconfused:

Dunno if you're joking or not, but in case you're serious, it's the infamous scene from:
The first Matrix movie, where Morpheus asks Neo if he wants to keep living in the computer dream or awaken in the post-apocalyptic future.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 01:58 PM
We're talking about second edition, but it doesn't really matter anyway.

Glimbur
2010-01-30, 01:59 PM
Every system can be power-gamed. RISUS (http://www222.pair.com/sjohn/risus.htm) is more a matter of personal charisma, so you can convince the game master that you should be able to use Chef to deal with the formal dinner. Wuthering (http://www.unseelie.org/rpg/wh/index.html) Heights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW3gKKiTvjs) is a combination of making good plans and convincing people that your bad plans are good plans. Most other games have unintended interactions that combine to form interesting and powerful abilities. Games also have powers and abilities that simply were not bent enough in play testing; that's what you found in Mutants and Masterminds.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 02:00 PM
I'm aware that M&M is just like other games. My problem is that I get chewed out whenever I bring it up.

Having low charisma sucks.

Sliver
2010-01-30, 02:02 PM
I thought your avatar was tipping a big hat, and then I looked and seen a giant sword. How silly. :P

Looks like a frying pan to me.. :smalltongue:

Oslecamo
2010-01-30, 02:05 PM
I'm aware that M&M is just like other games. My problem is that I get chewed out whenever I bring it up.


I feel your pain. Whenever someone comes asking for alternate systems to D&D a lot of people jump out singing choirs to M&M like it was some kind of utopic system whitout any flaw. I don't mind they sugesting it, I do mind they acting like it has no problems of it's own and you can just pick up the books and play whitout experience and nothing will go wrong.

Superglucose
2010-01-30, 02:05 PM
Conclusion: You've awoken to the terrible truth. People are biased to their favorite systems, and will ignore their problems when posting reviews. Except for D&D, wich is the Big Boy of roleplaying, so he gets lots of flaming.

The funny thing is, this is so true. Everyone I know who enjoys playing D&D is ruthless when talking about it, but so protective of their other systems, be they Gurps, Star Wars D20, or even video game systems like Dragon Age.

golentan
2010-01-30, 02:10 PM
Well, mutants and masterminds also shouldn't generally be getting into optimization wars. It's a superhero game, survival is usually guaranteed by the narrative, and Aquaman is *still* often an "equal" member of the Justice League.

Yes, it has it's balance issues. I was once able to make a PL 5 character that could use a nuclear submarine as an improvised weapon. Such things should be monitored and controlled, and you're going to run into such problems with any game system. With the possible exception of traveller, where even if you game the system and come up with a ridiculous monstrosity (which I'm not sure how you'd do, apart from making a really, really old character), you still die on the first shot every time with no hope of rescue.

Tengu_temp
2010-01-30, 02:13 PM
I'd say that most of the non-labeled overpowered abilities in M&M, like reducing the action of a power or abusing alternate powers, are easy to stop by the DM. Also, this game doesn't claim to be balanced, it just happens to have pretty good balance for an open RPG. Compare DND, which claims to be balanced and not require DM surveillance over character creation/building, or BESM, where out of two characters built on the same amount of points one will be able to destroy planets in a single action (and have 10+ actions in a round) while the other one will be completely useless no matter the situation.


Yeah, it's a terrible system. Sorry to see you found that out the hard way.

What. He never said it's terrible. He said it has balance issues. Also, way to state your opinion as a fact.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 02:14 PM
Well, mutants and masterminds also shouldn't generally be getting into optimization wars. It's a superhero game, survival is usually guaranteed by the narrative, and Aquaman is *still* often an "equal" member of the Justice League.

Yes, it has it's balance issues. I was once able to make a PL 5 character that could use a nuclear submarine as an improvised weapon. Such things should be monitored and controlled, and you're going to run into such problems with any game system. With the possible exception of traveller, where even if you game the system and come up with a ridiculous monstrosity (which I'm not sure how you'd do, apart from making a really, really old character), you still die on the first shot every time with no hope of rescue.The problems with optimization aren't just that it's harder for the GM to challenge players, but that it makes some players feel useless and upset. How does Green Arrow feel when Superman is fighting Darkseid? Pretty damn useless.


I'd say that most of the non-labeled overpowered abilities in M&M, like reducing the action of a power or abusing alternate powers, are easy to stop by the DM. Also, this game doesn't claim to be balanced, it just happens to have pretty good balance for an open RPG. Compare DND, which claims to be balanced and not require DM surveillance over character creation/building, or BESM, where out of two characters built on the same amount of points one will be able to destroy planets in a single action (and have 10+ actions in a round) while the other one will be completely useless no matter the situation.Just because sugar cane is sweeter than a lollipop, it doesn't mean the lollipop is sour. And while you might acknowledge it has problems, so many other people don't. This thread is to vent frustration, not create converts.

Tengu_temp
2010-01-30, 02:20 PM
The problems with optimization aren't just that it's harder for the GM to challenge players, but that it makes some players feel useless and upset. How does Green Arrow feel when Superman is fighting Darkseid? Pretty damn useless.

There are easy ways of fighting this situation. The DM can oversee the character creation process, to make sure nobody is too weak or too strong (y'know, exactly what M&M advises you to do). The powergamers can help the other players with optimizing their characters (it's an open RPG, there's no character concept that can't be optimized). And that's just the most obvious solutions.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 02:21 PM
There are easy ways of fighting this situation. The DM can oversee the character creation process, to make sure nobody is too weak or too strong (y'know, exactly what M&M advises you to do). The powergamers can help the other players with optimizing their characters (it's an open RPG, there's no character concept that can't be optimized). And that's just the most obvious solutions.And it's extra work that I don't want to do and shouldn't have to be done. I believe an RPG should be designed so that the GM does less work, not more. That's the reason why level systems were invented in the first place, so that GMs could see how strong players were supposed to be at a glance.

Besides, this does not negate the fact that these problems exist in the first place. These "solutions" work just as well for every system in existence and are just as time-consuming.

Oslecamo
2010-01-30, 02:23 PM
There are easy ways of fighting this situation. The DM can oversee the character creation process, to make sure nobody is too weak or too strong (y'know, exactly what M&M advises you to do).
Funny thing, the D&D books also advise the DM to help the players build their characters and keep check of the power level. Most people however ignore such trivial details in balance discussions.

Tengu_temp
2010-01-30, 02:31 PM
And it's extra work that I don't want to do and shouldn't have to be done. I believe an RPG should be designed so that the GM does less work, not more. That's the reason why level systems were invented in the first place, so that GMs could see how strong players were supposed to be at a glance.

Besides, this does not negate the fact that these problems exist in the first place. These "solutions" work just as well for every system in existence and are just as time-consuming.

Well, there is no better way to handle this problem, because as Glimbur mentioned before, you can powergame in virtually any RPG where you have any impact on character creation and advancement. That's doubly true for level-less systems and double true for open systems, which makes it 4 times as true for open, level-less RPGs.

icefractal
2010-01-30, 02:37 PM
While it's certainly possible that there are unlabelled power abuses (haven't played M&M much), I think that labelling the dangerous powers is a perfectly valid strategy. The alternative is not to have any powers that could go out of control, and then you end up with D&D 4E. I'd rather have the option for true summoning or shapeshifting, even if it requires some GM-scrutiny, than to be limited to what can be easily balanced.

Also, I've never seen what the big issue with Alternate Powers is. They're just HERO's Multipower by a different name, and that pricing structure serves an important purpose in balancing "The Weaponmaster" with "The Gadgetmaster" - aka characters with 10 attacks vs characters with 10 different powers that can be used simultaneously.

Zincorium
2010-01-30, 02:40 PM
Point based systems with flaws are, based on the existing evidence, impossible to balance completely. Not that any alternative IS, but in a point based system there isn't even an excuse to go with it.

In pre-3.5 editions, no one ever said that wizards were balanced at higher, and I don't recall anyone saying they should be. You're Gandalf, or Merlin, and while the fighter can kill anyone who plays on his terms, you're the guy who makes his own rules.


Personally, I don't like using point based systems except when there's no functional alternative.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 02:40 PM
Well, there is no better way to handle this problem, because as Glimbur mentioned before, you can powergame in virtually any RPG where you have any impact on character creation and advancement. That's doubly true for level-less systems and double true for open systems, which makes it 4 times as true for open, level-less RPGs.My point isn't that M&M is a bad game. My point is that everyone who plays assumes that you have a GM with hours and hours of free time to spend on character creation.


I think that labelling the dangerous powers is a perfectly valid strategy.You and so many other people assume that everything overpowered is labeled. It's not. I said so in my original post.

So many GMs I've seen immediately house-rule "Don't use too many alternate powers" or think that it goes without saying. This says to me that alternate powers should be restricted. Does the book say it? No.

Sliver
2010-01-30, 02:44 PM
If the DM isn't your bitch, he isn't doing the job he is(n't) payed to do. He is doing it WRONG.

Drakevarg
2010-01-30, 02:46 PM
<<< Is doing it wrong. The PCs are MY chewtoy, and I won't let them forget it.

CarpeGuitarrem
2010-01-30, 02:56 PM
I think the difference has to do with the cultures of the games, and where they originated from.

D&D originated from a wargame. Ever played a wargame? It's intended to be a "fair competition" between players. Armies are balanced, and special abilities are carefully thought out. Everything is supposed to be even, and it's based on beating stuff up in a fair manner. This practically begs for a subculture of powergaming to develop.

M&M, although it utilized the d20 system, originated as a means to simulate the cool powers of superheros. The idea of the system is far more based in players' common sense, and there's not the culture of powergaming so much. Why? Because success isn't measured by how many enemies you beat up, but by how many adventures you have.

At least, that's the way I see it. There's ways that either game can swing the other way, but this, to my knowledge, is the prevailing attitude and typical attitude. There aren't so many complaints about M&M, because it doesn't really matter so much in M&M.

Plus, D&D's been around forever, so it's expected to be criticized far more than the young-uns.

Glimbur
2010-01-30, 02:58 PM
Alright, that's it. Every system has its flaws, so I'm revoking all of them. We are all back to playing Pretend until further notice. That should solve things.

storybookknight
2010-01-30, 03:00 PM
Superhero games are some of the hardest to 'balance' to begin with, so it's not exactly a surprise that M&M has some troubles. Considering the source material, a lot of the balance between superheroes comes from narrative causality rather than an arbitrary notion of power level equality. Green Arrow has to team up with Green Lantern? Trouble only seems to strike when Hal's about to recharge. Or when he has amnesia. Or when the color yellow gets involved. Batman and Superman working together? Either the enemy is tough but has a hidden weakness that Bats can exploit, or Kryptonite is involved. Alternate solutions include magic, which affects both equally, and the Bat-Tank.

With enough narrative causality, Squirrel Girl can cream Galactus and Apocalypse with one hand tied behind her back.

Be that as it may, translating Bats and Supes into numerical stats is probably going to give Superman the advantage eight ways from sunday, and that's all there is to it.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 03:03 PM
Plus, D&D's been around forever, so it's expected to be criticized far more than the young-uns.While your last point makes sense, I think M&M and D&D have the same demographic to begin with. I'm too lazy to do the market research at the moment.

StuffI am not passing a value judgment on the game itself. I'm just mad at the fans.

horngeek
2010-01-30, 03:09 PM
With enough narrative causality, Squirrel Girl can cream Galactus and Apocalypse with one hand tied behind her back.

Yes, but Squirrel Girl can do that anyway.

Oslecamo
2010-01-30, 03:16 PM
Yes, but Squirrel Girl can do that anyway.

Indeed. She has yet to be defeated by anybody actualy.

potatocubed
2010-01-30, 03:30 PM
Any system can be gamed. You either have to trust your players not to abuse the loopholes they find, or you have to exercise GM power to close them.

Drakevarg
2010-01-30, 03:36 PM
Be that as it may, translating Bats and Supes into numerical stats is probably going to give Superman the advantage eight ways from sunday, and that's all there is to it.

Except Batman has the special ability "Crazy Prepared." Spend one week in preparation. You automatically win next encounter.

Viletta Vadim
2010-01-30, 03:39 PM
What, you mean summoning forth 625,000,000 PC-level superbeings in two rounds isn't balanced? :P

No, M&M isn't remotely balanced, but that's the inherent cost of what it's trying to be. A superhero game. Superheroics, by their very nature, are ridiculous, over-the-top, and inherently unbalanced. The system does a good job of imposing some semblance of balance (relatively speaking) in a genre where it would be a blatant violation of the genre if it wasn't possible to conjure fifty-mile-wide death spheres anywhere on the planet.

Ultimately, balance the inevitable casualty of the level of freedom required for the genre, though the system has done damage control quite well. That, and even the folks who aren't all that shiny should still be able to easily manage one big, legitimately useful power that the most powerful member of the party doesn't have.

Group character creation helps, though.

Yeah, it's a terrible system. Sorry to see you found that out the hard way.
It's not a terrible system. It's just not a balanced system.

The problems with optimization aren't just that it's harder for the GM to challenge players, but that it makes some players feel useless and upset. How does Green Arrow feel when Superman is fighting Darkseid? Pretty damn useless.
If you manage to get Superman and Green Arrow on the same power level, either somebody's cheating or somebody's not even trying to make a decent character at all.

My point isn't that M&M is a bad game. My point is that everyone who plays assumes that you have a GM with hours and hours of free time to spend on character creation.
This just strikes me as odd. Character creation is quite possibly the most important part of the game, after all. Is it not something that should be done with great care and cooperation?

With enough narrative causality, Galactus and Apocalypse can cream Squirrel Girl with one hand tied behind her back.
Fixed. :P

sofawall
2010-01-30, 03:43 PM
Fixed. :P

There isn't enough narrative causality in the universe to make Squirrel Girl lose.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 03:48 PM
I am not passing a value judgment on the game itself. I'm just mad at the fans.

Then... if you're not interested in why we're not interested in your opinions on this matter, why are you attempting to castigate us over that? That doesn't even make sense.

Starbuck_II
2010-01-30, 03:48 PM
Even then she can't save her Squirrel allies (if she cares).

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:00 PM
Then... if you're not interested in why we're not interested in your opinions on this matter, why are you attempting to castigate us over that? That doesn't even make sense.I'm not aiming this at people. I'm just annoyed. I'm venting, that's all I'm doing.

And as people keep saying, any system can be screwed up. I'm just annoyed by the people who don't realize that and keep shouting catch phrases at me.
If you manage to get Superman and Green Arrow on the same power level, either somebody's cheating or somebody's not even trying to make a decent character at all.It was an hypothetical situation. When you state hypothetical situations, you have to use hyperbole in order to make sure people understand. Otherwise you get sidetracked by the people who say stuff like "But Aquaman has super-strength!" which is irrelevant.
This just strikes me as odd. Character creation is quite possibly the most important part of the game, after all. Is it not something that should be done with great care and cooperation?Yes, but most people do not have that much free time (comparatively), thanks to jobs and homework. And some people don't care about their crunch and just want to get it over with. Then there are the new players who might end up either overwhelmed or with weak characters.

I play RPGs to relax, I don't want it to feel like work.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 04:04 PM
I'm not aiming this at people. I'm just annoyed. I'm venting, that's all I'm doing.

Okay...


And as people keep saying, any system can be screwed up. I'm just annoyed by the people who don't realize that and keep shouting catch phrases at me.

Most people who play M&M realize this - the thing is, M&M's flaws aren't relevant to how it's intended to be used. If you don't have the time to use a system that requires more time to keep up but provides a completely different experience as compared to, say, D&D - why would you use it if you're expecting D&D out of it?

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:10 PM
Most people who play M&M realize this - the thing is, M&M's flaws aren't relevant to how it's intended to be used. If you don't have the time to use a system that requires more time to keep up but provides a completely different experience as compared to, say, D&D - why would you use it if you're expecting D&D out of it?I can't conduct research polls. The portion of the fanbase that's annoying me might simply be an outspoken minority. But they are still outspoken and still bug the living hell out of me.

And I'm not expecting D&D. I'm just expecting to have fun. Feeling useless is never fun. Having a confused and easily misled GM is not fun. You can't just dismiss people because they were "expecting D&D". There are still basic assumptions that RPGs should abide by.

Hell, these types of players are annoying regardless of the system. It doesn't matter what system you're playing, you should recognize that there are flaws and that you might need extra work. But having players state that there aren't flaws and you should always do the extra work and that people who don't do lots of extra work are playing it wrong just gets me mad.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 04:24 PM
You can't just dismiss people because they were "expecting D&D". There are still basic assumptions that RPGs should abide by.

The basic assumptions for an RPG are fulfilled in M&M, no doubt about it.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:28 PM
The basic assumptions for an RPG are fulfilled in M&M, no doubt about it.We're clearly referring to different things.

I'm saying that M&M should at least try to be balanced and that M&M doesn't get a free pass simply due to genre.

From what I can tell, you're saying M&M is an RPG.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 04:34 PM
We're clearly referring to different things.

I'm saying that M&M should at least try to be balanced and that M&M doesn't get a free pass simply due to genre.

Why shouldn't it? Balance isn't as important for the system to handle when what you're attempting to do is create a system that lets you implement just about anything - if the GM isn't willing to do that work, no matter the reason, and the players aren't having fun because of it, why are you playing a system with this sort of assumption? It's not meant for that kind of playstyle.

erikun
2010-01-30, 04:37 PM
What is an example of a good RPG, then?

When I recommend M&M, I generally do so because, A.) It is similar enough to D&D/d20 that most players will be able to make the transition easily, B.) Because it is a point-buy system, something I prefer, yet more concise and less unwieldy than GURPS or Tri-Stat, and C.) Because it is fun. I certainly wouldn't consider M&M to be perfectly balanced, or for all possible builds/options to be strickly equal to each other at all times. To do so would require a level of abstraction bordering on nonsense to get working properly.

(I've actually designed a small system like that, and yes, it is rediculously abstract. D&D 4e also required considerable abstraction to achieve its balance, as do most "balanced" fighting games or video RPGs.)

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:41 PM
Why shouldn't it? Balance isn't as important for the system to handle when what you're attempting to do is create a system that lets you implement just about anything - if the GM isn't willing to do that work, no matter the reason, and the players aren't having fun because of it, why are you playing a system with this sort of assumption? It's not meant for that kind of playstyle.You're attacking me with something that is irrelevant to my problem. My problem is that people dismiss me when they say the game is unbalanced and that this is frustrating. Whether or not anyone cares if it's unbalanced doesn't matter.

If I said a stop sign was red and people kept telling me it was blue, I would be upset. Even if blue stop signs were better, it wouldn't really matter because they still wouldn't be acknowledging that the stop sign is red.

Viletta Vadim
2010-01-30, 04:42 PM
I'm saying that M&M should at least try to be balanced and that M&M doesn't get a free pass simply due to genre.
M&M certainly tries to be balanced, and in fact does a fantastic job at it considering the genre.

That's not a free pass. It's just that, in the superhero genre, there are things more important than balance. Most notably, freedom. They have done a fantastic job balancing the game while maintaining the requisite level of freedom. It's just that you can only get so much balance out of that structure without sacrificing more important aspects of the genre.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:44 PM
Again, this is irrelevant. The whole "does balance matter?" discussion was me getting sidetracked. Whether or not the game is balanced or what we can do to make the game more balanced is a question for another thread.

I care that people keep telling me the game is balanced when so many people have agreed that it is not.

I care that people keep saying that labeling the unbalanced stuff somehow prevents it from existing.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 04:46 PM
I don't care whether or not it's balanced. I care that people keep telling me that it is when so many people have agreed that it is not.

Noone is telling you that. They're telling you that it's not relevant.

UglyPanda
2010-01-30, 04:48 PM
Noone is telling you that. They're telling you that it's not relevant.You telling me it's not relevant is the irrelevant part.

This thread was written because I was annoyed at people who don't believe me when I say M&M has balance issues. I am not referring to anyone in this thread. I am blowing off steam from the repeated instances of this argument.

My opinion is as follows: I do not like it when people dismiss my opinions with statements that are wrong.

That is the sum total of my opinion. Everything else in that post was trying to explain the circumstances leading up to it.

Tavar
2010-01-30, 04:49 PM
Noone is telling you that. They're telling you that it's not relevant.

He's not talking about people on this forum. He's talking about people IRL/on other forums.

Cainen
2010-01-30, 04:54 PM
This thread was written because I was annoyed at people who don't believe me when I say M&M has balance issues.

That's why you illustrate the point to them. It's pretty easy to break it on paper.

Kantolin
2010-01-30, 04:55 PM
It actually bugs me too.

Make a character who can beat the crap out of pretty much anyone in both a physical and social encounter in many games, and nobody sees this as a problem 'eh, the game's not meant to be balanced'.

Do so in D&D and it's because D&D is a failure of a system. >_>

It then bugs me horribly /when/ someone is hugely under/overpowered in almost all systems when this isn't intentionally done. I mean... I've consciously decided to play a character who could only do inefficient healing and thus was basically a character in a superhero game with no real place in a physical, social, or skill-focused setting (that was Aberrant), and a timid goblin who was pretty much just that in a freeform game with dragons in it that could eat him at a moment's notice. Both of those were absolutely cool since I did them on purpose; I had a lot of fun there.

I've then tried to play the novice fresh out of exaltation who has some talent but a lot to learn, and been infinitely better than the battle hardened exalt (who started with more XP than me), because I by total coincidence ended up with infinitely better combat charms charms (which were his focus, and also was far more useful in most noncombat settings since I could talk to people and find out information and he couldn't).

But for some reason, everyone finds that to be perfectly alright, since those aren't D&D...

Doc Roc
2010-01-30, 09:10 PM
Alright, that's it. Every system has its flaws, so I'm revoking all of them. We are all back to playing Pretend until further notice. That should solve things.

Pretend is a terrible system. Imaginations are way over-powered if you play high-level Pretend, and it's not very good for alternative history games. :smallwink:

Beleriphon
2010-02-07, 10:50 PM
I'm aware that M&M is just like other games. My problem is that I get chewed out whenever I bring it up.

Having low charisma sucks.

Part of the problem is that M&M from a design stand point requires a certain level of unbalancing. The other issue that the system does specifically call out that using certain abilities is unfair. Its quite frankly a problem with any point based open system. There are too many variable, which is why the design and genre conceits rely largely on a GM making it very clear before a game starts what's cool and what's not.

The game is reasonably well balanced for what it tries to do, unfortunately the unintended consequences of a nearly unlimited character design system will create problems. It isn't that the balance issues aren't relevant, its that they are unavoidable. If you read the Atomic Think Tank boards you'll find several lively discussions about balance in several of the forums.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-07, 11:20 PM
My opinion is as follows: I do not like it when people dismiss my opinions with statements that are wrong.

Basically, Panda, you're saying that some people irritate you, without being any more specific on who, or a possible solution to be discussed, or workaround?

Join the club. That's about 99% of the world. They're as entitled to their views and opinions as you are to yours.

nyarlathotep
2010-02-07, 11:39 PM
There are easy ways of fighting this situation. The DM can oversee the character creation process, to make sure nobody is too weak or too strong (y'know, exactly what M&M advises you to do). The powergamers can help the other players with optimizing their characters (it's an open RPG, there's no character concept that can't be optimized). And that's just the most obvious solutions.

By that logic no rpg on earth has balance issues. It's the blanket "the DM can fix it" excuse.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-08, 12:15 AM
By that logic no rpg on earth has balance issues. It's the blanket "the DM can fix it" excuse.

He's not excusing it. He's not saying it doesn't have balance issues. What he IS doing is providing a way to minimize the impact of those balance issues, within the framework of the system.

In other words, he's acknowledging the issue, and providing ideas for a solution. Which is pretty constructive, if you ask me.

Fhaolan
2010-02-08, 12:24 AM
With enough narrative causality, Squirrel Girl can cream Galactus and Apocalypse with one hand tied behind her back.


Given that Squirrel Girl's part of a running joke where she defeats many of the serious heavy-hitters of the Marvel Universe 'off-screen', it wouldn't surprise me to find out one of her mutant abilities *is* narrative causality.

Decoy Lockbox
2010-02-08, 02:04 AM
Our playgroup decided to try out M&M a couple years ago, and our GM came up with this crazy cold war supers setting. We all made characters based on historical stereotypes.

We had "Dr. Bong, PHD", a magical hippie who could turn into a cloud of weed smoke and inflict drug-related status effects on people, "Johnny America", a hard drinking, hard smoking baseball playing jingoist who could fly by pulling himself up by his bootstraps, and whose jersey of justice kept him safe from communist mind control. Last but not least, my character "Monocle Master", was a ruthless (and clueless) super-capitalist who could shoot lasers out of his monocle, discorporate into dollar bills (enabling all sorts of shenanigans), and summon his butler, "Mr. Caruthins", who's special powers were a) teleportation to anywhere on earth, and b) the ability to transmute any matter into either mint juleps or cucumber sandwiches with the crust removed.

We spent several hours making these characters, roleplaying and really having a wonderful time. Then we got into our first combat. 10 minutes later, everybody was frowning. I think we decided to just scrap the game once somebody demonstrated to me that, rather than give my monocle beam +10 to hit, I could have enabled it to automatically hit (I think I could have given it infinite range for a rather paltry cost as well). Then I realized that, since you could boost derived attributes as well as primary ability scores, you could make a character with all ability scores of all "1", and use the massive point gain from strip-mining your ability scores to be an utter badass -- If I recall, you each point of strength was worth like 5 points, while each point of attack was worth 2 points, and each point of damage was worth 2 points, so you could lower your strength by 2, gaining 10 points, then counteract the effects of this by spending 4 points, gaining 6 net points. The fact that there was a hard cap on maximum bonus meant that the ability stripminer wouldn't have a higher attack bonus than the next super-attack guy, but it does mean that everybody will probably have the same numbers for many things if properly optimized.

Another trick I found was the idea of the super-summoner. The sidekick ability acts like a point multiplier, in that the X points you pay for your sidekick are worth something like 3X points to the sidekick. So your super summoner could put half of his points into being an unkillable lump, and then have specialized sidekicks for solving all his problems. Got an enemy with really hard to pierce defenses? Call in your super attacker guy. Got a suicidal civilian who you need to talk down from jumping off a bridge? Call in your empathy guy (or, who are we kidding, your mind control guy). Etc, etc.

We also realized that skills were totally useless (as super powers >>>> skills), and that tactical combat was nigh-impossible, as character's speeds were less "6 squares" and more "6,000 miles per second".

So what I'm trying to say is, thank you for making this thread!

Jerthanis
2010-02-08, 11:01 AM
I think the only game I've played that could be considered balanced is D&D 4th Edition, and that one gets enormous amount of flak for making sacrifices to become balanced, and worse, for not being perfectly balanced.

Every single other RPG I've ever played has had enormous balance issues that your GM has to be aware of and take into account. Mutants and Masterminds is balanced for an RPG with point based character creation. It's not like BESM or Gurps where a character who takes the requisite level of 'defects' that are carefully chosen to not impede the character at all, you can make a character easily twice as strong as someone who abstains.

Early point-based systems like that are why powergamers are sometimes called, "Munchkins"

Viletta Vadim
2010-02-08, 12:03 PM
We had "Dr. Bong, PHD", a magical hippie who could turn into a cloud of weed smoke and inflict drug-related status effects on people, "Johnny America", a hard drinking, hard smoking baseball playing jingoist who could fly by pulling himself up by his bootstraps, and whose jersey of justice kept him safe from communist mind control. Last but not least, my character "Monocle Master", was a ruthless (and clueless) super-capitalist who could shoot lasers out of his monocle, discorporate into dollar bills (enabling all sorts of shenanigans), and summon his butler, "Mr. Caruthins", who's special powers were a) teleportation to anywhere on earth, and b) the ability to transmute any matter into either mint juleps or cucumber sandwiches with the crust removed.
Best. Supers team. Ever.

<snipped mechanical bits>
It sounds like you were using an older version or something. A lot of the numbers sound... very off. Though the stacking of minions is an old trick, known to be cheesy as Hell when abused, but it's something of a necessity of the kind of freedom required in integrating summoning abilities. (In the current version, it's possible for a PL10 character to summon an army of 2,500 PC-level, heroic-caliber supers in a single round for something on the order of fifteen points. Though in getting the price that low, there probably will be the caveat that they all hate you.) So yes, there is a strong oversight element required.

Though on the point of tactical combat? That's a design decision. You're not supposed to be able to handle tactical combat because superfights are cinematic rather than tactical. And it's hard to contain a duel between The Hulk and The Flash to a battlemap.

One of the boons of M&M, I'd say, is that while it does require active GM oversight to keep things from getting out of hand, it gives the GM the tools required to do so fairly easily. Relatively speaking.

kc0bbq
2010-02-08, 04:42 PM
You telling me it's not relevant is the irrelevant part.

This thread was written because I was annoyed at people who don't believe me when I say M&M has balance issues. I am not referring to anyone in this thread. I am blowing off steam from the repeated instances of this argument.

My opinion is as follows: I do not like it when people dismiss my opinions with statements that are wrong.

That is the sum total of my opinion. Everything else in that post was trying to explain the circumstances leading up to it.It doesn't have balance issues if used as intended. Neither is Champions/HERO System, which you don't have to even be at all creative to come up with loops for infinite free points at character creation.

I've never had problems after a session or two in long running games, it may take that long if the power level the characters were built to doesn't actually fit what they turned into. One of my heroes had an AoE snare that turned out to be a die too strong, even though by our usual calculations it should have been just fine.

After a little fine tuning everything works phenomenally well and you can build opponents perfectly suited to the characters with ease. That's what the balance is, not the ability to break a system that needs to be infinitely versatile. If you took the abusable stuff away you'd lose out on the ability to add stupid gimmicks to your character. One hero in a Champions game I played in had the ability to teleport anywhere on the planet at character creation. Normally you'd slap him around for a while, but it was no conscious control, x10 END. We ended up putting a tracking device on him because he'd invariably panic and disappear. It's pretty hard to find someone who's GMOed at some random location on Earth. He was our brick and you need your brick.

Beleriphon
2010-02-15, 12:52 PM
I(In the current version, it's possible for a PL10 character to summon an army of 2,500 PC-level, heroic-caliber supers in a single round for something on the order of fifteen points. Though in getting the price that low, there probably will be the caveat that they all hate you.) So yes, there is a strong oversight element required.

Lets not forget that you probably take feedback damage as well. So sure you can do that, but really its not such a good idea.


Though on the point of tactical combat? That's a design decision. You're not supposed to be able to handle tactical combat because superfights are cinematic rather than tactical. And it's hard to contain a duel between The Hulk and The Flash to a battlemap.

This is something I like. Sure super-speed makes some fights cover city blocks, or even multiple cities, but its genre conventions.

ericgrau
2010-02-15, 01:50 PM
What was that system someone once mentioned, that was supposed to have the most realistic combat system around? The one someone broke down step by step to prove that a hit to the groin was the most optimal combat option under all circumstances?

Yeah, I don't like snobby systems. Best thing to do is to stick to the system you like and try not to break it.

Drascin
2010-02-15, 02:45 PM
And it's extra work that I don't want to do and shouldn't have to be done. I believe an RPG should be designed so that the GM does less work, not more. That's the reason why level systems were invented in the first place, so that GMs could see how strong players were supposed to be at a glance.

Then you shouldn't be trying to even read this system, really :smalltongue:.

Okay, that might have come off wrong. I didn't mean anything offensive by that. It's just... you see, as a DM, I know all systems are unbalanced as hell, and point-systems doubly so, and cinematic point systems (^n)ly so. I remember when I broke BESM completely unintentionally the first time I played, or how my second character in GURPS was stronger alone than two of my party members together. And when I switched to the other side of the screen everything became a thousand times more obvious. Fact of the matter is - point systems are made to be free. Freedom creates imbalance. There is no real way to avoid this. So when I opened the book, I knew the game would have a total absence of balance. And at least not only doesn't M&M try to be balanced, it tells you so. The manual spends quite a few pages telling you straight on that the game can be very, very borked. This is more honesty than most point based games can manage, overall.

So if your assumptions of what a fun RPG is include balance, you really should have closed the manual and got to playing something else as soon as you read that. I mean, for example, I myself recently read a bit of an overview of a system when I was looking at fantasy alternatives to D&D, and in the seventh page it went "...this game attempts to recreate that gritty feeling of low fantasy, where magic is the strange enemy and death is around every corner..." ...so I closed the pdf right there and then and got to reading something else, since I didn't want to run a gritty, lethal game. I'm sure that game might be fun to some, but it's not what I wanted to do, much like M&M seems to be completely counter to what you, personally, want out of an RPG.

So, I guess what I try to say is... is M&M unbalanced? Yes. Worse than most other games, in fact, and that's quite an achievement. Nobody is saying that the game is made with balance, other than general guidelines for sheer power, in mind - and if you find someone who does say that, you have my blessing to smack him upside the head with a copy of the Core Book. Is the unbalance really relevant? ...Not really, no.

nyarlathotep
2010-02-15, 03:05 PM
He's not excusing it. He's not saying it doesn't have balance issues. What he IS doing is providing a way to minimize the impact of those balance issues, within the framework of the system.

In other words, he's acknowledging the issue, and providing ideas for a solution. Which is pretty constructive, if you ask me.

I guess that works as long as you don't complain about other systems, like say D&D 3.5, being unbalanced.

Beleriphon
2010-02-15, 03:24 PM
I guess that works as long as you don't complain about other systems, like say D&D 3.5, being unbalanced.

Its not so much unbalanced, that is to say that a Blast is more powerful than a Strike, or that Teleport is better than Speed, but rather that certain abilities taken in certain combinations are overwhelmingly powerful.

Why are they included? Because, the genre the RPG emulates requires them to be in place. D&D basically setups the situation where the game says to the players: take what you want from the game, its all good because we made sure it was all good. M&M works from a different perspective, it works on the basis of telling players: this probably isn't good for you as a player to use, check with the GM first. The GM section of the rules calls out the fact that you as a the GM should be working with the players to make sure that everything is kosher.

Powers aren't even the real problem. M&M has other intrinsic problems, for example toughness always better than defense. That's a basic problem with the system itself. The question is simply is it overwhelmingly better? Maybe, but at the same time a genre convention is that the quick guy tends to go down like a sack of potatoes if he gets hit. Other issues occur in an open design like have a tank max out their reflex and then taking the ability to never be surprised. So now they take half damage on area attacks, and maxed out toughness means that you save against incredibly low numbers. Is that a problem with the system? Not really, when you consider that the design aesthetic of open design and characters like that aren't normally found in comics. This comes back to the GM being the arbiter of the character design.

D&D's balance problem are different. The balance issue comes in that some characters (wizards, et al) are overwhelmingly more powerful by basic design decisions rather than play decisions. In D&D 3.5 a fighter can never, ever due what a wizard can do, because from the get go I chose my powers. M&M can be the same, the problem of comparison is that the GM is expected to say "no bathroom mentalists", while D&D does tend to go with expectation that bathroom mentalists are normal. The spells in D&D are like M&M powers, but with all the broken extras and such built right in, so the balance issues are there from the get go rather than having to be built, and advised by the GM to change.

People denying that M&M has inherent problems "because its labelled" are goofy. Problem are problems, but the designer were nice enough to point out the more egregious problems and combinations. The balance problems of M&M are actually not that obvious, and not labelled because a good number of people don't realize what they are. Broken powers aren't even 10% of the balance issues with M&M.

I think what my be useful is if UglyPanda mentioned let us now what balance issues he'd encountered, and had problems discussing.

UglyPanda
2010-02-15, 03:30 PM
I'm sick of my own thread already.

I basically just wrote it to vent that I hate dealing with people who suffer from Fan Myopia. That was all. Now this thread gives me a worse headache than when I started.

Just let this thread die.