I've always loved superhero comics but other than a couple of one-offs here and there, I've never been quite sure how to pull it off. More specifically I'm never quite sure how to structure it. Maybe an example will help.

Say you wanted to put together a quick and dirty fantasy adventure. You could start with the party getting hired in a tavern by a shady figure to fulfil some sort of quest like recovery the Holy Gizmo from the ruins of Castle Bland.You could then do a section with the party travelling to Castle Bland with a few interesting things that happen along the way.Castle Bland itself could be structured as a little dungeon. And in the final room you have your climax, with maybe a little twist. Finis.

The point of this example is not to poke fun at some old cliches. In fact the reason these things became cliches in the first place is because they work. The journey and the dungeon might just seem like padding, but what it does is give room to the adventure to develop, a chance for the characters to get to learn about themselves and ideally about the quest they are on so that by the time you get to the climax, it all has a context. The final victory (or defeat) is meaningful.

So I am thinking, is there some sort analogue story structure for supers, specifically for the generic super-team set-up like the Avengers or Justice League?

I. The Quest (aka the hook)

That is relatively easy. Of course super-heroes don't get hired in taverns, But there are plenty of alternatives.

In my experience 90% of Avengers plots involve an old foe out for revenge. As the campaign is just starting though, that is not going to work too well. Other common hooks include:

1. An event like a giant cube appearing in Central Park or string of crimes with a specific theme.

2. A request for help from an official source or friend.

3. The heroes just happen to be in the right place at the right time.


II. The journey (Padding 1)

The journey doesn't normally play a big part in superhero comics. Sure heroes travel all over the place, but it normally just takes one or two panels to get the heroes from A to B.

Functionally the journey for superheroes is mostly replaced by investigation, whether scientific, mystic or street level. Before the heroes can solve the quest, before they can metaphorically "get there" they need to figure stuff out like who is behind the crime, where are they hiding or how to defeat them. If the combat scenes are the highlights, it the investigation that is the glue of the adventure.

The investigation should not be too hard (supers stories be fast moving) and of course filled with action sequences. They should be multistage things though. It's not much fun if all Batman had to do is ask the Batcomputer where the Joker is hiding. One the other hand Batman might question an associate of the Joker who knows someone who knows where the Joker will be on a specific date. Personally, this sounds rather hard work for the GM, especially if they want to keep it varied.

A personal gripe is that in the superhero rpgs I've seen not much attention seems to be given to investigation, neither in terms of advice to the GM or in terms of mechanics - or at least not to the same degree that combat is supported. Maybe I've just looked at the wrong games or maybe the assumption is any GM worth his salt already knows how to structure a investigation-heavy plot.

Another thing that happens a lot in comics and acts as padding (in the positive sense of giving the story room to develop rather than wasting space) is of course the personal life of the heroes. Reed Richards is tinkering in the lab while the Thing and Human Torch squabble in the living room. These scenes are crucial for the pacing of a story. Evil master plans take time to unfold, and this is the sort of thing that fills in this time. As GM I don't think there is much you can do to encourage this (although I think MSH had Karma rewards for personal stuff) and at the start of a campaign, when the characters are still cold it's not something you can bank on.

Another important thing found in comics (and most fiction) is that you get to see things from the villains point of view. Evil masterplans are complicated, how else are you going to explain what is going on to the reader. I've never been a fan of cut scenes in rpgs, but I am wondering then if supers game might be the exception?

Multi-threading plots is another way to allow time to pass. By definition it takes time for there to be a string of related crimes to occur and a pattern to emerge, but if the heroes busy on one adventure while these crimes are happening in the background then by the time they are finished the pattern has been established. Not so useful at the very start of a campaign but it's very faithful to the comic book style plotting.

III. The dungeon (Padding 2)

I don't think the dungeon model is applicable to supers. sure you can have occasionally a masterminds lair with traps and puzzles, but it's more on an exception than a rule.

However note that in fantasy game, even a small dungeon can fill up a lot of game content. Assuming one is aiming for the same kind of pacing, the implication is that investigation section of a supers game need to be more eventful than the journey in a fantasy game. Or maybe I am just talking nonsense.

IV. The climax

The climax is the climax. I don't think there are any issues regarding the climax that are specific to the supers game.


Conclusions

I am not really trying to make a specific point here, I've literally been brain-storming so it may not all make a lot of sense. Seems to me though that coming up with some sort of evil masterplan is the easy bit, whereas giving the party something to do in between the initial incident and the moment they finally get to thwart the masterplan is the hard part - but maybe I am just stating the obvious.

Anyway I'd love to hear from anyone here experience in running supers games on how they structure their stories, especially at the start of a campaign when you have less to work with.

Well a lot of what I do depends on the heroes and their motivations. It's easier to get someone with say "Thrill of Adventure" into trouble, but not as easy to get them out of it when you want to do poignant moments between PC and NPC.


First thing I do, generally, is find out what foes haven't made an appearance in a while. I take that foe and decide they will appear in a "comic" in the near future. I then work from there: How does this foe operate? What are his aims and goals? I then move forward to the point where they make a mistake. After all a perfect villain would never get noticed or caught. However, many villains have egos that override their sense of planning. If this is the case I decided where and when he will announce to the world (or just the heroes) his grand plan. If this is a subtler less arrogant villain, I will simply have the operatives, agents, or fallout of some part of the plan meet with the heroes daily lives.

The "Being in a Tavern", is essentially the concept that heroes often don't have nearby homes, they're wanderers (akin to Conan early on.) The tavern is just the local watering hole. Superheroes on the other hand usually don't do this--instead they often first meet at the site of some bad things going on. In this case its always fun to simply drop them, costumed up, in the middle of the action. Many comics start in the action then slowly flash back to where they first got roped into this stuff.

A good idea is dropping them in a fight they can easily win if they work together, but one that isn't so easy they can do it without help.  Often this means they have to get past the part where other masked people are involved--because they don't wear "Good guy" labels.  Drop them into a fight, let them figure out who is good, who is bad, and then once they've grouped together, let the players tell YOU how they got to this point.


Another option depends on the players willingly buying into the conceit that they all get powers from the same source or event. This is not the "Wild Card Virus" style big event, but a more localized ala "The Strangers" event where a small group is empowered. My most recent game that was planned began with a TV Reality show, where contestants were vying to become supers. The whole thing was a set up to find good villains, not heroes, but the heroes had someone pulling strings to get them powers as well. (As yet unrevealed, but two government agents were plants also helped out.)

Another game I ran on new years, I simply had people randomly roll powers in old MSH, and the cause source was an old trope unique to another game of mine--badmouthing powerful beings. In this case, Loki. I allowed "Loki" of the Marvel U, to take revenge on my players. (Yes, PLAYERS, as themselves, sucked into the Marvel U.) Fortunatly a beneficial trickster gives them powers to put them on a bit more balanced playing field. It is rather odd to watch players play themselves, with powers, and the choices they make. As not everyone who IS playing will end up on the right side of the law. They may still be good guys, but the line is easy to cross, too easy for gamers whose methods are more brutal than typical heroes. (Which won't be overlooked by the police.)


One of the things to GET heroes involved, is to make sure that the plots don't just involve them. But pick up those their characters care about. Very few heroes (even loner types like Wolverine, and Gambit) are truly distant from those around them. Sure they aren't building a LOT of lasting friendships, but Wolverine falls for Jean, and ends up watching over Kitty Pryde (Early years) and Jubilee (later years), even Gambit ends up getting involved because of a young girl. (An age regressed Storm.)

So getting people they can relate to, or have relations with is a huge way to tangle heroes up into events.

From there don't overlook that most villain plots are usually simple, but with multiple steps that make them appear more complex. Their motivations are JUST as important as the heroes for driving them. Magneto first appeared and just caused havoc---but why he does this is for an unstated cause at first, only revealed after a little bit of time. His methods differ from Dooms, which differ from even others like Dr. Diablo, or the Wrecking Crew. Find the motivation, give it a plan to see that desire fulfilled: ruling the world, making the world "better", or just making someones else's life worse...then make it very complex to get from motivation to fulfillment, and have one hinge mistake that draws the heroes in--give them easy clues to the next one or two things, but make them work for the last connecting pieces.


Dungeons are less a trope in superhero games, but they ARE a trope. Slinking into the bad guys abode? Sure you can punch your way in, but is that really different? Not very much. Albeit what their base is filled with differs. Many deathtraps are just static, fixed "Trap rooms" which the foe is placed into it, BEFORE the trap is activated. Don't forget the death-traps! They're vital, especially when you can't use your typical methods to escape. A superstrong brick trapped in a null gravity field with no ability to touch anything while watching his friends about to fall in acid. A spinning wheel that goes faster and faster that disorients the speedster and forces him to run to keep up as he tries for the exit before poison gas floods the room...

It depends a lot on whether or not this is a world that already had supers before the PCs, are the PCs the first supers, are the PCs already established supers before becoming a group, etc...  The answer to these things will affect the answer to your question.

RPGPundit

My preference would be for a world in which supers are already exist.

A few years ago, I discussed this kind of thing with some friends.

One hated superhero games because, in his perception, they were just unrealistic setups for fights.

But superhero games for my old group were the preferred  genre. I think part of it was because it was an unashamed wish-fulfillment thing - there's no pretense in that sort of game. You're playing a superhuman who is essentially saying "Hell yeah, I rock" rather than hiding behind some Humanity or Angst mechanics.

The problem is in two parts.

1) Superheroes are often dual characters and this can complicate matters unless the GM spends time making it an opportunity.

2) Not enough time is spent in the 'second' identity. It's all spandex and fisticuffs.

There is no structure in most cases. Certainly nothing like the Hero's Journey.

I think that something in this can be learned from Dogs in the Vineyard (there, I said it). See page 97, Chapter 7: Creating Towns. It describes how to start with a premise (Pride) and work that through to Sin, False doctrine, False priesthood, hate and murder.

I know it's pure narrative - but it works really well. In theory.

I found this thread really helpful, as the game we just started is unusually difficult.

I have a little bit of a formula I use in modern supers / supernatural games.

1 - The Event
2 - The Investigation
3 - Two Side Quests / Events
4 - The Decision
5 - The Conflict

I think it is important to always have a mini game or two that involves one or two of the players, and it is important to have them happening at the same time as the main plot. I rotate who is on a mini game for a couple of reason: it only takes one smart player to figure out the puzzle, everyone else are just door stops, and if there aren't multiple things to think about, everyone gets bored.

The decision is also an important step. It goes along with keeping your players off the plot train, if that is important to you. It should rarely be as simple as, "defeat so and so in X time or fail," because that doesn't give you anything to talk about. The right course is obvious. There has to be a sacrifice for both of two or more ways of winning. The bad guy must be useful or important for something, holding another bad guy back, or helping another person. That way, the players can disagree about what to do, and have a conversation about it. The grayer the area, the better. Sometimes, in my games, this can be the longest part of the session.

Finally you have the fight and resolution.

I also like your idea of staging new horrors in the background of a current game.

A final thing I do, and I do it alot, is let the players write up some villain characters. They can be high or low level, but they have something to do with the larger plot. Then the party can play out the construction of a new evil, so that the new baddie doesn't seem sudden and out of place. Better still, you can have one guy's hero show up and attack them. If the bad guys are weak henchmen compared to the party, there is no chance of the pc dying, but half victories are fun to play out. a little good natured pvp can be a lot of fun.

That's my story.

There are a great number of ways to address this. As always, the more information of your intent we have the more accurate our answers will be, the more RELEVANT they will be.

Considerations include your intent. The Pundit, for example, prefers to attempt to emulate the soap opera stylings of the comic books. The good guys will always win because they are the protagonists and the exact mechanics of their powers varies based on the needs of plot, a... for lack of a cleaner term... significantly narrative idea.

Conversely, I for example, prefer the Champions RPG model, where the mechanics of the power, working out its limits and abilities, are a key portion of play and the intent is not to worry about protagonism and soap drama, but the coolness of being able to fly or lift a battleship overhead.   The intent is not to emulate the comic genre but the internal headscape of, I assume, many fans of all ages who want to be out there fighting crime with the dark knight, or wishing we had mutant powers of awesomeness...  

This can be self answered if you've selected a game system in some parts. Capes, I believe, should match the the Pundit style to many peoples tastes, but is (unless I've mixed up my 'indy superhero games'...) not played in the traditional fashion, which champions is a default game, or was before they went to a dull black cover that doesn't stir the comic imagination... historically its still a go-to sort of game.

Either way, I can also suggest that your, and your groups, taste in comics can be important.   There are strong differences between the DC comic books, in feel, and the Marvel comic books, despite often near identical characters and frequent cross polination of ideas.   Of course, you all might prefer Image, or Dark Horse (though this would be less relevant for supers based gaming as DH isn't a supers sort of comic book company....)

Then to there is the unstated assumption: Do you plan to play in an existing, known and populated setting (DC shares a setting, Marvel shares a setting, both have spin off, underpopulated settings, of course but that isn't relevant) or do you intend to create your own?

If teh former: what is the role of established canon, both characters and events.

If the later: What are the assumptions of genre tropes (secret identities, common metaphysic sources of power/weakness, alternate universes and so forth)...

... and of course, power levels.

The idea of getting the players to create their own villains is very cool! Thanks.

Fair questions.

The goal would be to emulate Marvel style comics. Let's take the Avengers as an example becasue they are very generic, perhaps in one of their less powerful incarnations. Once the players have actually created characters, the theme might narrow down a bit.

I am more interested in genre-emulating , what you call "Pundit-style", than the Champions power simulation model.

I though Capes was GMless PVP based game, but I may be mistaken.

I would not play in any canonical universe as I think my players would find that jarring. My default plan would be to play in a "Marvel Lite" kind of universe leaving out household names but plundering for inspiration the second stringers. So I might leave our Dr Doom or Magneto but I probably get away resuing Klaw, Electro or the Skrull.

SG,
  OK, well, Supers games fall into two major tropes I believe:
1) Monster of the week. To use your layout, it might go like this:
a) News of Monster reaches PCs
b) Investigate
c) First encounter
d) Climax
  The tricky part of this trope is somehow the Monster must escape the first encounter (or transform into a new threat when it is over) or that becomes the climax. In fiction, it means the characters brought the wrong tools. in play, this sucks. If you want to pad it better, maybe add more drama, like something that threatens a secret ID

2) Sinister Plot. This gets used more heavily in Supers fiction than it does in Fantasy. To use your pattern:
a) First clue. Ideally, the plot will have been going on for a while before the PCs get their first clue that anything is happening. The best way to introduce these are as fallout from a monster of the week or as info picked up by the secret ID
b) Investigation
c) Minions. If the PCs start to get too close, the BBEG will send someone to "take care" of the problem, right?
d) Follow up
e) Discovery
f) Climax. There are two pitfalls here. One repetition, as in your fantasy RPG trope, it can get cliche. Two, Endlessness, as with some "bad" TV shows, the Climax can get put off for too long and the players will stop caring if it ever resolves. The best cure for this is prep. Don't wing it, otherwise you will always hesitate to throw in the climax. Set a condition that PCs have to reach in order for the climax to be possible. Like if they defeat the BBEG's right hand man, or pierce his computer network, or whatever makes sense to you for this particular BBEG.

  I am sure there are other less used tropes, but this is a good counterpoint to the "you meet in a tevern" fantasy trope.

Thanks for you plot breakdown Dave.

Regarding the "monster of the week" plot, in the most common way for the monster/super villain to get away from the first encounter is that he actually defeats the heroes. So between (c) First Encounter and (d) Climax there is another investigation phase in which the heroes come up with a new plan or discover a weakness in their opponent.

And that actually illustrates perhaps one key areas - in the comics superheroes tend to lose at least as many fights as they win, which isn't something players are necessarily used to.

Mechanically to capture the flavour and flow of comic book story, you can almost see how using the MSH game you could have Karma rewards for losing fights rather than winning them. The early defeats provide the fuel for the future victories.

I wouldn't dismiss Capes as a GM-less PvP game so quickly. While I can't say its an in-accurate description, from what I've heard it works really well at bringing the sort of nemesis/rivalry experience to the table that you see in many comic book lines.  Likewise, like many GM-less games, you still get a GM sort of influence on the game if you are the one pushing it as the game of choice and the mastery of the rules, and I'm sure, by extension you could present and play it with a more traditional format with little effort.

On the other hand, I can also point you to Truth&Justice, which replicates comic books supers by, among other things, the damage mechanics.   As neither game is really my cup of tea (Champions, as stated, gets it most right for me...), I've heard good things about both games from fans.

Truth & Justice is pretty good.

RPGPundit

I am not necessarily looking for advice as to which system to run supers in, but rather discuss how the game is strutured.  So things like:

What do heroes do when they are not figthing?
If you are running some evil mastermind plot, how to you fill the gaps in time between major incidents?
How do the even learn about the evil masterminds plots?

Some of these have already been answered above, but I think there is grounds for discussion.

Quote from: Soylent Green;278475I am not necessarily looking for advice as to which system to run supers in, but rather discuss how the game is strutured.  So things like:

What do heroes do when they are not figthing?
If you are running some evil mastermind plot, how to you fill the gaps in time between major incidents?
How do the even learn about the evil masterminds plots?

Some of these have already been answered above, but I think there is grounds for discussion.

Never forget; "downtime," the moments where the heroes have to be the non-costumed selves. This side of things can be important for the explorations of motives, relationships, and the general slice of life stuff that helps build or challenge the "Why are they heroes?" aspects of a character.  This may be a day job, with its contrasting office romances, good or bad bosses, it could be just chilling with friends--who may or may not be superheroes at a local hotspot. It isn't meant to bore the players, just contrast the heroic and selfless moments.

Don't forget you can also build unrelated relationships (friendships, rivalries, foils) with other heroic people. Spider-Man and Johnnie Storm for example held a pretty good natured rivalry in the past. Always trying to one up each other in many ways.

As for dealing with discovering the villain's plot. There are lots of ways to approach that, depending on the heroes. Investigative heroes may contact someone in the underworld who will give up what they know. Examples include Batman, Moon Knight, Nightwing, and the like.

Some may just be challenged to stop the egotistic mastermind, by video broadcast to the world. This was more common in the comic's code authority days. Mister Fantastic versus Doctor Doom is a common example.

 Some heroes  may seek to locate one of the masterminds thugs and coercing them to give up their boss. Spider-man, Batman, again are examples.


 Another alternate is the psychic/hacker/information heavy contact who can gain information through alternate channels. Examples are Madame Web from Spider-man, or Oracle from DC's Bat-family.

Don't forget more traditional: civilian, non-powered contacts. People like newspaper reporters (Lois Lane) or editors (J. Jonah Jameson), or scientific contacts--who are clued into certain information sources and who can both foil the hero or help him unknowingly.