A couple of my players who've read the ICONS rules seem to feel that the advancement system, such as it is, provided therein is not particularly good. At the same time, the designers do hit on a salient point, namely that comic book heroes don't "advance" in the same linear structure that D&D characters advance.
What do you think about the Advancement system in ICONS? And if you don't think it passes muster, what would you do to make it more suitable?
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;433124A couple of my players who've read the ICONS rules seem to feel that the advancement system, such as it is, provided therein is not particularly good. At the same time, the designers do hit on a salient point, namely that comic book heroes don't "advance" in the same linear structure that D&D characters advance.
What do you think about the Advancement system in ICONS? And if you don't think it passes muster, what would you do to make it more suitable?
RPGPundit
Well, that's the thing: Supers DON'T advance in the same way...they get sudden spikes in power, new power sets, etc...but very rarely do they "work up through the ranks"...of the issues that I do have with ICONS, this isn't one of them...BASH has the same philosophy (with an optional system that falls under a more "traditional" advancement scheme). I think it's just one of those things you have to look at as part of the "buy in" with the supers genre.
I can see the designers' point. Supers especially should be competent out the gate, able to do wondrous things without much(if any) need for advancement.
More broadly, I think advancement is such a big deal in most games because characters in a lot of games aren't particularly competent right out the gate. I'd like to see more games in a number of different genres developed on the principle that PCs are competent - very competent by their in-game world's standards - by default, with very little need for advancement. It'd sure as heck make the book-keeping less tedious.
I bolted on a simple XP system to ICONS roughly based on the Marvel Super Hero Karma rewards chart. So preventing or solving a crime is worth somewhere between 25 to 100 XP, ditto defeating a super-villain.
Players can spend 50 XP for a one-use Determination Point or 500 for a "refreshing" Determination Point.
The rest is as written and players can trade in refreshing Determination Points for permanent improvements to their characters. So really all this change does make the experience gain more granular and give the players the sense that they are working towards the next advance rather than, as by the rules, the GM simply deciding when to award a refreshing Determination Point to the players based on his instinct alone.
For what it's worth it took about 7 sessions for the players to earn their first refreshing Determination Point and I suspect by the end of session 12th before they get their next one.
There are other games who follow the same approach. IIRC Dresden Files is a recent and rather well-known example.
To be fair, there often is a time, when super heroes do become more competent. That's usually the first episode when they find out, how their powers work.
Golden Heroes, from the golden 1980s, has Campaign Ratings and DUP's (day utility phases). The former represent the effects of the character's behaviour and how the world perceives him as well as detective ratings for thigns such as approachability and reputation. DUP's were accrued to allow the player to improve aspects of the character, such as the effects of a mutation caused by something from the adventure, or managing the affairs of your billionaire alter ego, or inventing something, or
I think there is a great opportunity here to take an example from Amber's advancement system; that is, changes that happen in actual play might alter one of your aspects or whatnot, but actual advancement in the sense of net gain happens not once each session, but after the end of a significant period of multiple sessions marking the closing of a "saga" or whatever you'd want to call it. At that point, you can give people an extra determination point or two, or the chance to get a new power, or to raise an existing power.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;433425I think there is a great opportunity here to take an example from Amber's advancement system; that is, changes that happen in actual play might alter one of your aspects or whatnot, but actual advancement in the sense of net gain happens not once each session, but after the end of a significant period of multiple sessions marking the closing of a "saga" or whatever you'd want to call it. At that point, you can give people an extra determination point or two, or the chance to get a new power, or to raise an existing power.
RPGPundit
Indeed, and that change may be good (new aspect, slight character tweak, major character change, or loss of an aspect.)
Yes, I think that aspects are one area where change can be utilized highly.
RPGPundit
Arise!
Now that Assembled Edition has been out for a bit, any thoughts on the advancement system there?
If anything, it seems like it might be too fast.
I never got this edition.
Quote from: RPGPundit;834814I never got this edition.
If your first post from 4 years ago still matters at all, you should check it out. I think it resembles a bit of what you describe from Amber.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;433318Golden Heroes, from the golden 1980s, has Campaign Ratings and DUP's (day utility phases). The former represent the effects of the character's behaviour and how the world perceives him as well as detective ratings for thigns such as approachability and reputation. DUP's were accrued to allow the player to improve aspects of the character, such as the effects of a mutation caused by something from the adventure, or managing the affairs of your billionaire alter ego, or inventing something, or
Golden Heroes is one of my favorite games. The DUP system was great. I like many things about that game. The Campaign Ratings were great as well, and a great way to have a PC advance in ways other than getting more powerful. Public acceptance, cooperation from law enforcement, and so on.
Super heroes getting more powerful as in D&D doesn't emulate the source material. In the comics they may suddenly gain new powers or just as suddenly be powered down as they did to Superman in the '80s. It has no rhyme or reason other than sales gimmickry. I find it works better for me, if not generating randomly, to let a player create the hero he wants and not worry about whether his Thor knockoff will increase his Strength stat or his Flash knockoff will run faster after beating up Captain Cold a few dozen times.
I take exception to the notion that advancement is not true to comic books, or that characters only have occasional big power leaps or transformations of powers.
I read a lot of Silver Age comics with my sons. Iron Man in the 60s, 80s, and 00s are very different in terms of power levels.
Some characters don't "advance" much, but most of the big names clearly show power advances over the decades.
This is why I am wondering if ICONS Assembled Edition advancement feels good in actual play.
Quote from: drkrash;834945I take exception to the notion that advancement is not true to comic books, or that characters only have occasional big power leaps or transformations of powers.
I read a lot of Silver Age comics with my sons. Iron Man in the 60s, 80s, and 00s are very different in terms of power levels.
Some characters don't "advance" much, but most of the big names clearly show power advances over the decades.
This is why I am wondering if ICONS Assembled Edition advancement feels good in actual play.
Almost all characters have increased in power from the '60s to today but not because of "experience." Remember the publishers keep changing the start dates of he characters' careers so they are always just about as experienced as they were way back when but just started in a later era. They have increased in power owing to fanboys taking over the industry and publishing their fantasy versions of the heroes they love, which is sales gimmickry.
Iron Man's higher power level is because he now started his career in 2005 with 2005 technology rather than 1963 with 1963 technology. Not because he accrued a million XP.
This is why Spider-Man is perpetually portrayed as inexperienced, despite having more adventures than anyone outside Batman and Superman, and gets mentored by less experienced characters like Iron Man or Captain America in the comic books, whereas in an RPG Spidey would be a good dozen levels up on those guys. Yet he never got more powerful than Thor or more capable than Cap.
Quote from: Matt;834950Almost all characters have increased in power from the '60s to today but not because of "experience." Remember the publishers keep changing the start dates of he characters' careers so they are always just about as experienced as they were way back when but just started in a later era. They have increased in power owing to fanboys taking over the industry and publishing their fantasy versions of the heroes they love, which is sales gimmickry.
Iron Man's higher power level is because he now started his career in 2005 with 2005 technology rather than 1963 with 1963 technology. Not because he accrued a million XP.
This is why Spider-Man is perpetually portrayed as inexperienced, despite having more adventures than anyone outside Batman and Superman, and gets mentored by less experienced characters like Iron Man or Captain America in the comic books, whereas in an RPG Spidey would be a good dozen levels up on those guys. Yet he never got more powerful than Thor or more capable than Cap.
Sure. And there is obviously a translation issue across mediums in that regard. But from a comic reader's perspective who is also a gamer, it *appears* these guys earn experience. As a middle-aged comics reader, I *never* conceptualize that start dates of heroic careers are re-set except for the occasional moments when it is explicitly mentioned by the characters (and then I basically ignore it). And that's why games are right to have advancement.