Mutants & Masterminds

[Scorpina]

My regular D&D group, looking for a change of pace and not ready to shell out £60 each for Fourth Edition just yet, have decided that we're going to run a Mutants & Masterminds game. I have the core rulebook (and nothing else), and by reading that have (I think) got me a good grasp on the rules.

However, I would like an general tips for the system you, my fellow Playgrounders, happen to have to offer.

[geez3r]

Spend the first session to create characters and discuss the theme of the game. The character creation process is very good, but time consuming and because the system is so versatile, concepts can clash. Be on the look out for game breaker powers. This is most commonly variable powers, Drains, boosts, and transform. Note that these powers are not inherently over powered or broken, but they are easier to break than other powers, so make sure you give all the characters a good once over. Also, don't be afraid to play villains as villains so long as you give the players hero points to compensate. Hero Points are very much a good thing, so make sure the players understand the rules for Hero Points and Extra Effort, make flash cards if you have to. And, IMO M&M gets much better when Hero Points are flying every which way.

Also, concept is key. Concepts are your guiding light. With concepts also comes descriptors, which most of the time are just background fluff, but there is always that one situation where power X is exactly what you need.

[BizzaroStormy]

Yeah, first have your players start off with a concept then assign appropriate powers. The first game we played, I ended up having a set of powers that had about 100 copies of me jumping out of the walls, attacking, then going right back in.

[PnP Fan]

When you sit down to design your campaign, make it clear what it is you are looking for. If you are going to run "four color supers, silver age style", and one of your players comes up with "Iron Age-ninja, skin the person alive to find out if they're a cyborg-Man", you're going to have problems. It'll be funny, and you be able to give the guy grief for YEARS if he's got a good sense of humor, but his character won't fit in your four color world.

Also, read the grey boxes in the powers section and keep an eye out for those situations.

It's been my experience that NPCs equal level to the PCs will be a fair fight, generally ending in the PCs favor. Tough fights need about two levels higher on average in favor of the villains. And then, someone will generally have the opportunity to escape.

I've not tested this, but the 10th level character w. 150 build points seems to be the sweet spot for the game. Lower power levels w. 15 pts/level will wind up with weaker characters (duh!), that wind up specializing more because they can't get breadth with fewer points. Higher level characters, at 15 pts per level, wind up with all the basics that your 10th level characters had covered, and then a handful of higher level things that are the character's focus. Others may have differing experience with this, however.

[wodan46]

One thing I found amusing after giving Mutants and Masterminds a look through is that many of the intelligent balance/simplification changes from D&D 3.5e to D&D 4e are not present from 3.5e to Mutant 1e and Mutant 2e. I think they should probably take a hint and combine sections of the feat/combat bonus/skill system into the equivalent of Martial Powers, and use the AC/Fort/Ref/Will defense system 4e has. I do like the damage system a lot.

[Kyeudo]

Wodan, that's like criticizing submarines because they wern't nuclear powered during World War I. 4th Edition was a dream (or nightmare, depending on where you stand) when M&M 2nd Edition was made. It's mechanics weren't around to be used.

[PhallicWarrior]

He has a point though, in that the next edition of M&M should use those mechanics. (Although I'm not the biggest fan of those "powers" in anything but a fantasy game.)

Anyway, like the others said, make the first session charater generation.

You'll need the whole session if they don't have a ton of experience with Point Buy systems. Make sure they understand the tone of the campain, otherwise you'll end up with characters who don't quite fit. Make use of Fear the Boot's group template if you need it. It'll help keep the group from killing each other.

[PnP Fan]

Kyeudo, an excellent point. I didn't quite follow Wodan's post, because it didn't occur to me that he may not know that MnM 2.0 was published 2, maybe 3 years ago. Though, incidentally, some (but not all) of the options he brought forth are actually addressed in the Masterminds Manual (Skill groupings, alternate atts for saves). Though, personally, I think it's WotC that should take the hint from Green Ronin, since they managed to create one of the most balanced supers games I've ever seen, without significantly changing the basic mechanics.

Whether MnM 'should' use 4E mechanics or not (a highly debatable topic), Green Ronin didn't sign on for the latest version of the OGL. Apparently the new OGL doesn't protect the signee (Green Ronin) from lawsuits or something by the parent company (WotC). That, combined with a clause that indicates that the signee would have to pay for any legal fees incurred to WotC in any legal disputes means that, win or lose, the signee is out all court costs/legal fees. There's more info on Green Ronin's site.

In short, I think the OGL's days are numbered, because no one would sign up for a deal like that. It's not good business. Which, IMO, is a good thing. I like doing d20 stuff, but I'll be glad to play another game that doesn't wind up feeling like D&D because of the similarity in mechanics. Learning new mechanics might be annoying, but I do like a little variety.

[Scorpina]

Thanks very much for the advice everyone, I will suggest having the first session to create characters to the GM. Who is someone else. I should probably have made that clear in the first post. Sorry.

[wodan46]

Wodan, that's like criticizing submarines because they wern't nuclear powered during World War I. 4th Edition was a dream (or nightmare, depending on where you stand) when M&M 2nd Edition was made. It's mechanics weren't around to be used.

I was aware that it came out first. I'm not criticizing it, but noting the irony that Mutants and Masterminds 2e has many archaic leftovers from d20 D&D that D&D itself finally did away with in 4e.

[Nerd-o-rama]

That's not ironic, it's just coincidental.

[Pauwel]

I was aware that it came out first. I'm not criticizing it, but noting the irony that Mutants and Masterminds 2e has many archaic leftovers from d20 D&D that D&D itself finally did away with in 4e.

What exactly is wrong with the mechanics in M&M 2e as they are?

(I don't own 4e, I'm just a Mutants and Masterminds fan and would like to know how you could improve it.)

[wodan46]

For starters, one thing I notice is that out of the various sample PL 10 builds, different character archetypes spent points in entirely different categories, be they ability scores, skills, feats, attack/defense, or powers, for example, the Batman tended towards skills, the Superman towards Powers, the Kung Fu dude towards Feats 4e made it so that both non-magical and magical characters both use powers (another irony) which are formatted and designed in a similar manner for both, except that the magical characters run on a Divine or Arcane Power Source, while non-magical characters used a Martial Power Source.

Hence, using 4e logic, the Batman/Kung Fu Dude type builds would be using their own set of Martial Powers, which run off their skill/training/awesomeness rather than on power suits and green rings. Feats, Skills, and Combat Bonuses could have been for the most part removed and simply been made a part of the overall Power mechanics. The system would be a lot less confusing, and have a much more unified aspect to it. When I looked at Mutants and Masterminds 2e, I cringed at all the different pieces and parts from different toolboxes that you had to throw together to make a character.

Also, in 4e, Fort/Ref/Will are not saving throws, but defenses that can be attacked like AC, usually by magical rather than physical attacks, and are based off the higher of Str/Con, Int/Dex, and Cha/Wis respectively.

[sombrastewart]

When I looked at Mutants and Masterminds 2e, I cringed at all the different pieces and parts from different toolboxes that you had to throw together to make a character.

I, personally, see this as a strength. M&M 2e is incredibly versatile.

[Nerd-o-rama]

M&M isn't a class-based system nor, in spite of the presence of archetypes, a strictly role-based system like 4e, hence the free interchange between Feats, Powers, and Skills. Handling Fort/Ref/Will as Defenses, though, that'd be a good trick and make things a little more consistent.

Maybe if they do an M&M 3e, they'll raid D&D 4e for ideas. I like it as it is, though.

[Da Beast]

For starters, one thing I notice is that out of the various sample PL 10 builds, different character archetypes spent points in entirely different categories, be they ability scores, skills, feats, attack/defense, or powers, for example, the Batman tended towards skills, the Superman towards Powers, the Kung Fu dude towards Feats 4e made it so that both non-magical and magical characters both use powers (another irony) which are formatted and designed in a similar manner for both, except that the magical characters run on a Divine or Arcane Power Source, while non-magical characters used a Martial Power Source.

Hence, using 4e logic, the Batman/Kung Fu Dude type builds would be using their own set of Martial Powers, which run off their skill/training/awesomeness rather than on power suits and green rings. Feats, Skills, and Combat Bonuses could have been for the most part removed and simply been made a part of the overall Power mechanics. The system would be a lot less confusing, and have a much more unified aspect to it. When I looked at Mutants and Masterminds 2e, I cringed at all the different pieces and parts from different toolboxes that you had to throw together to make a character.

Also, in 4e, Fort/Ref/Will are not saving throws, but defenses that can be attacked like AC, usually by magical rather than physical attacks, and are based off the higher of Str/Con, Int/Dex, and Cha/Wis respectively.

Doing this would require you to rewriter a system that already works just fine. All the character creation choices can be daunting for a newbie, but once your familiar with the system the versatility is a lot of fun. The bit on defenses would be easy enough to implement and I'm pretty sure that it's been covered in the Mastermind's Manuel, which came out years before 4E.

[fireinthedust]

yeah, read Masterminds manual. It's got all the stuff you're complaining about as options.

Also: M&M isn't about powers or combat options. 4e is basically like playing Magic: the gathering. It looks fun, but it's about buying ability options you can play (ie: more books). M&M is about building the character you want to play, not buying a pre-packaged set of traits someone else made up.

as for 4e: what the heck is AC supposed to be, general unharmableness, or is it avoiding being touched, or withstanding damage? M&M has toughness and Defense (ie: take a shot and walk, like the Thing, or dodge it entirely, like spiderman).


Scorpina: also, tell the GM to stamp out stupid concepts. I had three of six players pitch dumb ideas. I've run so many games that saying No is a survival skill. My current group is amazing (right here on the boards). However, I had one guy pitch a PC whose power was a magical Beard that entangled foes and attacked them. I still have nightmares.

I as a DM don't like some hero point things (ie: auto take 10+ on a roll), and Impervious bugs me when it gets too high (ie: 5+ ranks is waaaaay too much).

[nobodylovesyou4]

snip However, I had one guy pitch a PC whose power was a magical Beard that entangled foes and attacked them. I still have nightmares. snip



That wouldn't be piratejesus, would it? because i came up with that character. in my defense, its an awesome character in play.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I liked that concept...

Oh, damn, it's my GM. I'll post again...eventually. When the time is right. Okay, I'll go do it now.

[PnP Fan]

For starters, one thing I notice is that out of the various sample PL 10 builds, different character archetypes spent points in entirely different categories, be they ability scores, skills, feats, attack/defense, or powers, for example, the Batman tended towards skills, the Superman towards Powers, the Kung Fu dude towards Feats 4e made it so that both non-magical and magical characters both use powers (another irony) which are formatted and designed in a similar manner for both, except that the magical characters run on a Divine or Arcane Power Source, while non-magical characters used a Martial Power Source.

Hence, using 4e logic, the Batman/Kung Fu Dude type builds would be using their own set of Martial Powers, which run off their skill/training/awesomeness rather than on power suits and green rings. Feats, Skills, and Combat Bonuses could have been for the most part removed and simply been made a part of the overall Power mechanics. The system would be a lot less confusing, and have a much more unified aspect to it. When I looked at Mutants and Masterminds 2e, I cringed at all the different pieces and parts from different toolboxes that you had to throw together to make a character.

Also, in 4e, Fort/Ref/Will are not saving throws, but defenses that can be attacked like AC, usually by magical rather than physical attacks, and are based off the higher of Str/Con, Int/Dex, and Cha/Wis respectively.

I can see where you're coming from, but I respectfully disagree that this would be an improvement. What you are describing would pigeon hole people into playing the exact archetypes in question. I don't even really like that in my fantasy games, but it seems to be so widely accepted that I don't really have a choice. Characters that don't easily fit into the defined archetypes would cease to exist (superpowered detectives are the first thing that comes to mind). Because the super hero genre is much more open to the imagination and breaking of archetypes, a flexible system is very helpful in modeling characters of such variety. 4E may be a lot of fun, but it's not versatile enough to represent a superhero game (not a very interesting one anyway).

Incidentally, what if I want a power suit or a green ring? What if it's a part of my concept, and not just some random limitation I accept in order to gain more power?

The only problem I see with turning F/R/W saves into defenses in MnM is that many of the effects of the powers are dependant on how much you fail the save by. And I can honestly say that my players wouldn't go for being forced into "always rolling 10" for their save. That would mean that even Schmucko with a Glue Bomb power of rank 1 and a roll of 20 would cause my higher level character some concern. You'd have to add the equivalent of a toughness save in for Fort/Ref/Will saves, thus complicating the game further.

Also, source of powers is almost irrelevant in MnM. Not entirely, but under 95% of all circumstances, whether you are a magically talented striker, or a chi powered striker, or a plain 'ole boxing striker makes no difference. There are specific instances when you are countering powers where it matters, sort of.

As I mentioned before, there are optional rules in the Mastermind's Manual that give options for using alternate saves (best of two attributes). Works great for high powered campaigns where the PCs are supposed to be nigh-invulnerable.

Honestly Wodan, looking at your post, I get the impression that you've read the book a bit, but have never actually made a character or played the game. You've analyzed the material in the book a bit. Try coming up with a character independant of archetype. Go create it in the rules, and you'll see how flexilble the system is. Try starting with a premise that isn't related to "how my character behaves in combat". Then work forward from there. Heck, some of the best concepts (IMO) start with a non-combat power, and seeing where it goes from there. Those are the characters that break the archetypes every time.

[Pauwel]

For starters, one thing I notice is that out of the various sample PL 10 builds, different character archetypes spent points in entirely different categories, be they ability scores, skills, feats, attack/defense, or powers, for example, the Batman tended towards skills, the Superman towards Powers, the Kung Fu dude towards Feats 4e made it so that both non-magical and magical characters both use powers (another irony) which are formatted and designed in a similar manner for both, except that the magical characters run on a Divine or Arcane Power Source, while non-magical characters used a Martial Power Source.

If you want powers with specific effects for your martial characters in M&M you can just buy them. Nothing is stopping you.
And what is the problem with different characters focusing on different areas? Sounds perfectly logical to me.


Hence, using 4e logic, the Batman/Kung Fu Dude type builds would be using their own set of Martial Powers, which run off their skill/training/awesomeness rather than on power suits and green rings. Feats, Skills, and Combat Bonuses could have been for the most part removed and simply been made a part of the overall Power mechanics. The system would be a lot less confusing, and have a much more unified aspect to it. When I looked at Mutants and Masterminds 2e, I cringed at all the different pieces and parts from different toolboxes that you had to throw together to make a character.

I count only Abilities, Combat Skills, Skills, Feats and Powers. That's not very much and character creation really is perfectly simple compared to most other RPGs. D&D 3.5 along with most other d20 games are a lot more involved, for instance, as are games like Shadowrun and GURPS. Not to mention the super-complex ones like HERO and Via Prudensiae.


Also, in 4e, Fort/Ref/Will are not saving throws, but defenses that can be attacked like AC, usually by magical rather than physical attacks, and are based off the higher of Str/Con, Int/Dex, and Cha/Wis respectively.

Can't really comment on this, since I don't know 4e.
I do think it's silly to have both a Reflex save and a Defense score when the two things represent basically the same. Other than that, I think the saves are fine in terms of concept.

[wodan46]

I think that Feats, Combat Skills, and some regular Skills could be converted into Powers, which are then given the Martial label rather than the super label.

Granted, I'll admit that I haven't played the game, but is just seems as though it would be easier if the Batmans and Green Arrows also used powers, albeit with a martial training/practice motif rather than an explicitly super motif. Powers with labels like Superb Marksman, Hand to Hand Specialist, Gadget Expert, or Survivalism.

[Da Beast]

I as a DM don't like some hero point things (ie: auto take 10+ on a roll), and Impervious bugs me when it gets too high (ie: 5+ ranks is waaaaay too much).

Can't you just target their other saves or is really that problematic? It can certainly make a one on one fight pretty one sided but when fighting a group fight their ought to be at least one person who can power attack to over come high ranks in impervious (say, PL+2).

[Nerd-o-rama]

Granted, I'll admit that I haven't played the gameI think, if you did, it would really help the analysis of the game and how to improve it that you are so intent on giving. Think of it as research.


Can't you just target their other saves or is really that problematic? It can certainly make a one on one fight pretty one sided but when fighting a group fight their ought to be at least one person who can power attack to over come high ranks in impervious (say, PL+2).Shh! He's talking about us!

Not that I have any Impervious myself...

[PnP Fan]

I think that Feats, Combat Skills, and some regular Skills could be converted into Powers, which are then given the Martial label rather than the super label.

Granted, I'll admit that I haven't played the game, but is just seems as though it would be easier if the Batmans and Green Arrows also used powers, albeit with a martial training/practice motif rather than an explicitly super motif. Powers with labels like Superb Marksman, Hand to Hand Specialist, Gadget Expert, or Survivalism.

Your "super-norms" do use powers. It took me a little time to wrap my head around it, but you absolutely can use powers to define your super normals. For example, take the recently deceased Captain America. You can go to a lot of trouble to buy him a shield, and give him some throwing skills, and try and figure out how to make his shield ricochet, and how it factors into his defensive abilities. And that's fine, there's nothing wrong with that approach.

Or you can do it the easy way and realize, everytime he throws his shield, it comes back so he can use it again. Heck that's a lot like an Energy Blast Power that does physical damage, purchased through a Device (the shield). For all the nifty ricochet stuff, you take an Alternate Power (Area Attack, using the 'specific squares' option). Since the shield returns after being thrown, you can also buy Defense rating through the device.

The thing to keep in mind with MnM, versus a lot of other supers games, is that the tag line of "powers" is really just a game effect. It's completely up to the person using the game to come up with their own fluff to describe what's happening. Superb Marksman? Probably a guy with lots of Ranged Attack Bonus. Same with Melle Expert. Gadgets? There's the Device Power, which emulates gadgets/super equipment. Spontaneous Gadgets? There's something for that in the Masterminds' Manual. Survivalism, that's a skill called Suvival, I believe.

And just so we're clear on things, I'm not a 4E hater. I've not even had a chance to play it yet, so I don't have really strong feellings one way or another (okay there are a few things that look strange to me, but might work out fine in use.). And I'm not coming down on you in particular. I'm just of the opinion that class-based supers games aren't a good thing for this genre.

Seriously though, if you have a copy of the book, join a game, try it out. I'm sure someone has a PbP game of it going on. You might like it. :-)

[JMobius]

I'm contemplating starting a core-only M&M game with my players soon.

I've only skimmed the rules so far, but as I did not see any resource within it actually explaining this, just how powerful is a power level? I'm curious just how mighty the average PL 10 hero is, for example. What would be the average level of the X-Men, or Heroes?

[Beleriphon]

I'm contemplating starting a core-only M&M game with my players soon.

I've only skimmed the rules so far, but as I did not see any resource within it actually explaining this, just how powerful is a power level? I'm curious just how mighty the average PL 10 hero is, for example. What would be the average level of the X-Men, or Heroes?

The average PL for the X-Men would probably be right around PL10, not necessarily built on 150 points, but PL10 almost for certain. Spider-Man is another good one for PL10 building, and you can generally get away with 150 points on him to boot.

Heros, from the TV show? Probably PL7 through PL9.

Keep in mind that Power Level is directly related to combat effectiveness. It may limit other factors, but its biggest contributer how good your character is in combat.

[fireinthedust]

Can't you just target their other saves or is really that problematic? It can certainly make a one on one fight pretty one sided but when fighting a group fight their ought to be at least one person who can power attack to over come high ranks in impervious (say, PL+2).

You can't overcome impervious with Power Attack (at least the way I understand it). It's entirely based on the Strike rank of the attack (ie: str bonus, strike rank, blast rank) before modifiers. Power attack makes the save DC higher, but unless the attack form is strong enough you can't penetrate the impervious whatever the modifiers are.

So for my fantasy game in RL, you could grab a longsword (strike 3) and hit the werewolf, but you're not damaging him unless it's silver or penetrating.

[Ecalsneerg]

No, you can overcome Impervious with power attacks and crits. I don;t have a source, but I've never seen in played otherwise. honestly, if you don't allow it, Impervious becomes so undercosted it's ridiculous; attack-shifted characters already suffer slightly in comparison to DC-shifted ones, why make it pointless for them to even try to fight one another?

[Project_Mayhem]

Heros, from the TV show? Probably PL7 through PL9.

Peter-Plot device excluded.


Actually, checking the book, all he needs is average stats and a pimped up mimic

[fireinthedust]

Beleriphon: Didn't you do the official 2nd ed. version of Crooks?

Ecalsneerg: Autofire (p. 112) and especially Autofire Attack (p.160):
"if an Impervious defense (force field or Protection, for example) would normally ignore the attack before any increase in the save DC, then the attack has no effect as usual; a volley of multiple shots is no more likely to penetrate an Impervious defense than just one"

autofire is an extra (ie: costs +1pp per rank), while Power Attack is a Feat (costs only 1pp ever). If Autofire doesn't penetrate impervious because the attack isn't "harder", power attack won't either. Reading the entry on Power Attack, also note: it increases the save DC, not the rank of the power itself. Impervious (p. 96) states that:

"if an attack has a DAMAGE BONUS less than your protection rank (I read Impervious score, as I let PCs and NPCs have smaller impervious ranks than their prot. score, or even buy it up for their Con bonus to toughness), it inflicts NO damage."

so yeah, you could have the PC with high Strength and the Mighty feat wail on someone, as that's a higher rank for the attack. However, if they use feats to fiddle with the DC, or other stuff like that, it doesn't work. Like hitting Superman with a spoon, or your broher with a pillow: the spoon will break, the pillow will *poof*.





I think that Feats, Combat Skills, and some regular Skills could be converted into Powers, which are then given the Martial label rather than the super label.

Granted, I'll admit that I haven't played the game, but is just seems as though it would be easier if the Batmans and Green Arrows also used powers, albeit with a martial training/practice motif rather than an explicitly super motif. Powers with labels like Superb Marksman, Hand to Hand Specialist, Gadget Expert, or Survivalism.

I see what you're saying, but you can already do that with M&M. In fact, for those characters, they already can.

See, the whole mechanic is about the d20. You roll the die and add modifiers, then compare to the DC for a save or the opposed roll of your foe; check how bad the fail was, and figure out the outcome.

if you have Batman tripping a Thug with a trip line, you'd have him use the Snare power. The power source is Martial or Gadgetry (whatever you feel works).
If it was spiderman (from the movie) tripping the same thug with his webbing, his power source would be Genetic Mutation.
If it was Backlash (who rocks) you'd say "psionics".
however, the mechanic is the same, it's a power.

Feats only grant improvements to maneuvers, or minor bonuses. This is the same as in d20 games, and in 4e.
Same with skills: roll d20 and see if you succeed.


Also: you can make up D&D characters using M&M. I'm playing a group like that now. We get who we want to play, and ignore LA and other problems like that. It's easier to keep it all in my head.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Mm, I disagree on Power Attack vs. Impervious, fitd. Autofire doesn't work because they decided to apply logic to it (it's smaller hits that add up to larger damage), and because there's no penalty to it. Power Attack represents actively hitting harder, or in a more vulnerable spot, and results in a hit penalty. I think it's perfectly fair and reasonable to allow it to get past Impervious.

But then, targeting the opponent's other saves and vulnerabilities is probably more fun. I just tend to play combat monkeys because I'm lazy.

[Da Beast]

attack-shifted characters already suffer slightly in comparison to DC-shifted ones, why make it pointless for them to even try to fight one another?

What makes you say that?

[Ecalsneerg]

What makes you say that?

Having a high toughness but low defence (usually with Impervious) is normally better than a low toughness and high defence, simply because it's easier to roll really high (or All-out Attack) than penetrate Impervious with low-DC attacks. I'm not saying it's fighter-wizard better, but it does hold its advantages.


autofire is an extra (ie: costs +1pp per rank), while Power Attack is a Feat (costs only 1pp ever). If Autofire doesn't penetrate impervious because the attack isn't "harder", power attack won't either. Reading the entry on Power Attack, also note: it increases the save DC, not the rank of the power itself. Impervious (p. 96) states that:
Power Attack also takes a penalty to get it's increased DC, basically trading off attack and DC on the fly. Autofire, on the other hand, is paying its points not to increase damage alone, but to increase damage beyond the PL and thus can't penetrate Impervious.

Besides that, paying 6-7 points on Impervious makes you immune to most minions in the game, in what way is that balanced?

[PnP Fan]

Having a high toughness but low defence (usually with Impervious) is normally better than a low toughness and high defence, simply because it's easier to roll really high (or All-out Attack) than penetrate Impervious with low-DC attacks. . . .

. . .
Besides that, paying 6-7 points on Impervious makes you immune to most minions in the game, in what way is that balanced?

My Edit, for focus.
IMO, if you are actually worrying about minions in the game, then you're doing something wrong. Minions are there to hurt normals, to keep the good guys busy while the villain escapes, to stand in the way of the heroes while the Mastermind accomplishes his dastardly plot, and, of course, to give the heroes easy fodder. Any PL 10 character shouldn't be more than slightly annoyed at a typical minion (I'm calling typical PL 1-5, which is where most of the npc's seem to be.)
Now, if you're playing PL 6 to 8 characters, then yes, minions should be a concern.

[Ecalsneerg]

That's part of my point though, in the PL 6-8 games I prefer, even without trading off you can easily grab that level of Impervious, which plain doesn't suit that level of game. At PL 10 I'll admit it's not so much of a problem, but it still makes certain types of villains (like the Kung Fu killer) unfeasible against a team with a Paragon in it.

[PnP Fan]

The average PL for the X-Men would probably be right around PL10, not necessarily built on 150 points, but PL10 almost for certain. Spider-Man is another good one for PL10 building, and you can generally get away with 150 points on him to boot.

Heros, from the TV show? Probably PL7 through PL9.

Keep in mind that Power Level is directly related to combat effectiveness. It may limit other factors, but its biggest contributer how good your character is in combat.

I concur with your assessment of PL and pts. You imply, and I think it's a good thing to keep in mind, that PL 10 characters don't need to be based on 150 pts. Most of the X-Men, typically being human with 1 or 2 nifty powers, are probably PL 10, with say 100 pts. The more powerful mutants might be as much as 200 pts, PL 10, with characters like Phoenix being of a significantly higher PL (possibly PL X, as a plot device). Just emphasizing something you touched upon, Beleriphon.

[fireinthedust]

My current RL game is PL5, 50pp. They made up level one PCs, basically.

thing is, I disallow some powers and limit what the PCs can buy for others. Impervious I limit to 2 max, sometimes 3, as it cuts off other characters and minions.

It's the question of the genre and what the GM is willing to ban. the players shouldn't have access to every single power option they can afford: transform, for example, or variable power, or even super strength in some instances.

It's a flexible system, but genres are not as flexible. You decide what you want in that game, and what crunch the PCs and NPCs are made of.

It's almost a different mentality than 3.5 and 4e in that you're not attempting to buy bigger powers, you're attempting to build a specific character. campaigns are designed around the PCs, rather than having adventures you can use for any group.

[PnP Fan]

That's part of my point though, in the PL 6-8 games I prefer, even without trading off you can easily grab that level of Impervious, which plain doesn't suit that level of game. At PL 10 I'll admit it's not so much of a problem, but it still makes certain types of villains (like the Kung Fu killer) unfeasible against a team with a Paragon in it.

Fair enough. I've only used the game for superhero games, I've often wondered how it would work doing low powered games, and it sounds like you have to pay a little more attention to those sorts of details. Genre conventions probably have to be introduced for it as well. I'd like to see them put out at MnM supplement for Fantasy, just to see how they would bring in the genre conventions associated with Fantasy.

[JMobius]

So I've got a question.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the mechanics, slightly, but it looks like the Alternate Power feat basically allows you to get another power on a similar or related premise, at the same PP level, for 1 pt. Isn't that... ridiculously cheap?

[Da Beast]

Yes, it does. The trade off is you can't be using both of them at the same time. It may look unbalanced at first, but in play it's really not. Without alternate powers, building a character with more than one or two powers would be way too expensive for the recommended number of power points.

[Scorpina]

Um, where exactly does this 'Alternate Power' feat come from?

[Ecalsneerg]

Core rules, end of the powers section.

It looks overpowered until you realise it is such a major part of the system that a load of characters tend to have them, they're a staple use of hero points and generally thesystem was balanced to include them.

[fireinthedust]

Alternate powers are specifically for instances where one power can do a bunch of different things. You don't just have an array and put all your powers on it.

example: A wizard has Magic 10 (blast (fire)). They pay 1pp for an alternate power (snare) allowing them to cover their target in webs. They buy another AP for blast (lightning) and can switch between snaring an opponent in webs, frying them with flames, or zapping them with lightning.

example 2: Iron Man (or a female version "Iron Maiden") has a single power cell for his blasters and for his shields. He can choose to fire a laser at his enemy, or protect himself in an impervious force field (10 force field, impervious 10). For another AP he can gain ranks of Super Strength, allowing him to lift tons of rock. So: he can either zap the hulk, or have a force field to take a punch from him, or drop his defenses and hold up the building before it crushes that school bus. However, he can only do one

But you have to have a reason the array works the way it does. Also, you're recycling pp to buy the power, so if you have one power that costs 1pp/rank, and another power that costs 2pp/rank, you get the first at rank 10, then the AP for the second (using the 10pp for the first one) would be rank 5.

it works really well, and is great for dilemmas.

[Beleriphon]

Beleriphon: Didn't you do the official 2nd ed. version of Crooks?

Me? Not at all.