PDA

View Full Version : What is the best overall mood to be construed?



randomhero00
2011-04-25, 06:31 PM
In relation to power? Super hero-ness? Hero-ness? Footsoldier-ness? Commoner?

I personally like super hero play.

dsmiles
2011-04-25, 06:33 PM
I prefer the Footsoldier to Hero levels of play, myself.

Mastikator
2011-04-25, 06:48 PM
Trainee to legend. By legend I mean something like Achilles, he was unbelievably skilled, but not supernaturally.
I prefer it when power is a nuanced concept, it's not just about how hard you can hit or how much hp you have or how hard your fireball blasts, but also your wealth, reputation, cunning, knowledge, resourcefulness. By that I mean, I want power to be so nuanced that it's hard to tell someone's powerlevel.

Eldan
2011-04-26, 02:36 AM
That entirely depends on what you want to achieve. Rule system also tends to influence this. I've found that I like power levels all across the board, really. I've played everything from kobold commoners to gods, and I've DMed a variety as well.

Cespenar
2011-04-26, 04:41 AM
That entirely depends on what you want to achieve. Rule system also tends to influence this. I've found that I like power levels all across the board, really. I've played everything from kobold commoners to gods, and I've DMed a variety as well.

This.

But if I really had to make a choice, I'd say "footsoldier". It's gritty but not bland, with a fair enough ground for players to grow.

Haarkla
2011-04-27, 05:40 AM
I prefer badass normal myself.

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-27, 06:05 AM
I think the best answer is "the one that fits the story".
Sometimes it's fun to play a rogue-like where you have almost no power, other times it's fun to put a fist through superman. The important parts are that everyone's on a similar level and that the characters are treated like they're on that level (ie you shouldn't have godslayers hunting wolfs even if their stats have been boosted to the point that they're a threat [oddly enough the reverse can work]).
Basically see above and you'd be better off asking your group.

Yora
2011-04-27, 06:08 AM
I don't understand the question.

Psyborg
2011-04-27, 03:29 PM
Within the general bounds of what you find enjoyable, the one you're going to enjoy most is whatever mood your DM is most skilled at evoking and your group at maintaining, so long as it's not totally at cross purposes with the system being used (e.g., Mouse Guard lends itself poorly to Superhero; Exalted is less than ideal for commoner and footsoldier; DnD works [with varying degrees of awkwardness] for all of them plus "Invincible Overdeity"; etc., etc.).

For me personally, I enjoy everything from "footsoldier" to "superhero", with the upper end of that range slightly preferable; I've never really played a "commoner"-level game, so I couldn't really say if I'd like it. (I'd definitely be interested in trying it at some point, but *shrug* I'm not going to worry about it unless a chance presents itself.)

EDIT: Rant spoilered for length.I also want to point out that the question is a gross oversimplification. "Power level" is only one aspect of "mood", and even within "power level" there are at least six spectra on which the PCs power can be measured at least approximately:
A1: Relative Power: Modern Homo sapiens Baseline -- How far above or below the average modern-day Earth-native human's capabilities are the PCs' knowledge, powers, abilities, resources, and influence? Note that magical and technological or pseudo-technological enhancements are equal for these purposes.
A2: Relative Power: In-Setting Baseline -- As above, but compared to the average character in the setting, not modern-day humans. For example, a far-transhumanist-future setting will have a much higher baseline than 21st-century Earth, whereas Mouse Guard has a much, much lower one.
B: Absolute Power: In-Setting Ranking -- Are the PCs the most powerful things in the setting? The third most powerful? The nineteenth? Are they the faceless mooks/corporate drones/oppressed underlings? Deities and similarly powerful entities with little direct influence on daily life can usually be excluded (though they can be highly relevant in, say, Exalted or Planescape games, where they do have such influence). Basically, the first two compared the PCs to current and in-setting averages; this one compares them to the in-setting maximum.
C: Characteristics of Power: Consistency & Controllability -- Is this power, whatever it is, a surgical laser, or chaos magic? How likely is it to go botch, cause side effects, or otherwise go horribly wrong? Do the PCs actually know what these side effects or chance for error even are? Is the power cursed, causing additional effects beyond the PCs control, or can they literally define every aspect of its effects? At the mortal level, a scalpel is more precise than a hatchet is more precise than a machine-gun is more precise than a thousand-pound bomb. At the blatantly supernatural level, a wizard's scry-n-die or a target-specific nanotoxin is more precise than a Fireball or a Mountain Hurling Technique is more precise than a Great Contagion or artifically-induced supernova. In Mouse Guard, assassinating a single ferret at home is more precise than poisoning the stream where the ferrets drink is more precise than getting a wildcat's attention and getting it to chase you to the ferrets. Etc.
D: Characteristics of Power: Flexibility -- Self-explanatory. How many things can you do at the highest possible level? Only one (as Ubercharger)? Two or three (as Sorcerer or Wilder)? Any two or three on any given day, as Wizard? All of them at once, given a couple months to prepare, as Artificer?
E: Characteristics of Power: Transferability -- How easily can you empower others, and to what degree? Will your lieutenants be mere mooks, or nearly as powerful as you?
F: Characteristics of Power: Freedom of Use -- Becomes less relevant at extremely-normal and extremely-powerful levels, but basically: Can you use your powers whenever you want, as much as you want? Note that this covers all potential restrictions, from legality/social acceptability/need for secrecy to spells-per-day limit to you-can-only-carry-so-much-weight-of-ammunition.

And all these are without even considering the emotional mood. Call of Cthulhu vs. CthulhuTech illustrates the effect that power level can have within an emotional mood (namely, supernatural-horror); but compare the 3e White Wolf Ars Magica to the current Atlas Games one to see how the emotional tenor of the game can be shifted without changing the power level much at all. (For those who aren't familiar, ArM3e had demons, infernalists, or demonic influence of some kind lurking in every corner. ArM5 has them a lot of places, yes, but also a lot, lot less. Evil people who aren't demonically inclined actually exist now. Granted, I exaggerate, but only slightly.)

RndmNumGen
2011-04-27, 05:27 PM
Anything from Hero to Commoner. Hero works well when I just want to beat up some baddies, Footsoldier does a good job of providing an "adventure" feel to things where danger lurks around every corner, and Commoner is awesome for survival horror games.

Superhero feels too awkward for me.

Bang!
2011-04-27, 05:54 PM
Any power level is fine, but even with large-scale heroes, I prefer to deal with small-scale problems.

I like games with superheroes, but they're more interesting when they're in group therapy than when they're saving the planet. I also like games about dirt-poor fry cooks who only wanted to kick their lazy roommates out of the apartment, before the situation spirals out of control and everybody's found dead in the reservoir.