RPG Systems that allow for characters of diverse levels of Power

[John Dallman]

I really can't think of a system that doesn't embrace characters of different power levels.

The problem comes with games that build "balancing" for combat encounters into the rules, which more or less started with D&D 3e. It makes running games much easier and safer for new GMs, but has this downside. It may have others, but I've rarely played and never run such games, so I don't know.

 

[Theory of Games]

The problem comes with games that build "balancing" for combat encounters into the rules, which more or less started with D&D 3e. It makes running games much easier and safer for new GMs, but has this downside. It may have others, but I've rarely played and never run such games, so I don't know.

Yeah I love how with the Rules Cyclopedia you can play with or without the optional rules for balancing combat. Having the option is great design.

 

[Reynard]

Well I mean "keep your head down" is a trad lifestyle for low-level mages when combat starts. I've been in games where the low-level PC was the session hero.

Sure. Blind squirrels and all.

The odd superhero rpg is the one that doesn't handle differing power levels well. Maybe GURPS Supers because the system is trying to be so sim that Hulk is killing people with a punch and that's not the mainstream experience? But most of the rpgs in that segment can do anything from "Mystery Men" to "Justice League United". Also if I may I'd like to note that not every superhero is meant to fight every villain:

That's not the same thing as Batman and Superman on the same team having equal spotlight time. It works in comics because a writer is in control, and it works in the kinds of superhero games where players take on a writer's role (ie narrative games). If Batman is 150 points and Superman is 450 in Hero, making that work takes real GM intervention.

I know teetee about PF2 but PF1 and I had a short but passionate "thing". It was my weird sort of AD&D 3e and I love running and playing it. BUT it's just D&D. Many editions of D&D have rules for handling "inserting" low-level characters into experienced parties.

You keep saying that but there's no evidence for it post TSR.

Ultimately, I think you are just brushing off the idea of it being an issue because you haven't experienced it. But others have and are telling you that it can be an issue.

 

[nevin]

I've never seen a group of players stick with a game with a more powerful mentor in the group. It always turns into the high level guy is better at everything show and then crumbles to dust and a new system takes it's place. Doctor who is fun to watch not so much to play if you don't get to be Doctor Who.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, I think you need to distinguish between "allows it" and "makes it workable".

 

[Davinshe]

I don't think that is true. If a game has, for example, a tight "challenge" system, having one character vastly more powerful than the rest can make it very difficult to engage everyone in combat without a bunch of artificial guardrails. I think you generally need more narrative systems to make it work, where players use metacurrency or "fail forward/succeed at cost" mechanics to be able to inform how their Scoob helps Buffy fight the Big Bad.

Yknow, while it doesn't support it out of the box I bet it wouldn't be hard to make an archetype in powered by the apocalypse that could support a mentor / powerhouse since the base system has most of the qualities you list

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't think that is true. If a game has, for example, a tight "challenge" system, having one character vastly more powerful than the rest can make it very difficult to engage everyone in combat without a bunch of artificial guardrails. I think you generally need more narrative systems to make it work, where players use metacurrency or "fail forward/succeed at cost" mechanics to be able to inform how their Scoob helps Buffy fight the Big Bad.

My experience with running Scion 1e supports this. I was able to run my campaign of it at Demigod only because both I and my players essentially walked on eggshells about picking which opponents on which spheres they'd each go up against. On the other hand the combination of compression of practical power and other features made it much easier in Marvel Heroic.

I'm personally of the opinion that actual distinctions in power have to be at least somewhat illusory for it to work at all.

 

[Thondor]

My experience with running Scion 1e supports this. I was able to run my campaign of it at Demigod only because both I and my players essentially walked on eggshells about picking which opponents on which spheres they'd each go up against. On the other hand the combination of compression of practical power and other features made it much easier in Marvel Heroic.

I'm personally of the opinion that actual distinctions in power have to be at least somewhat illusory for it to work at all.

That's an interesting point. Narrative magnitude can be a pretty real thing.

In Simple Superheroes #0 people start with a choice of three arrays to pick. Focused, Standard, or Well-rounded.
Focused get fewer higher ranked talents, while well-rounded get more lower ranked talents. Focused characters feel more powerful and indeed in many ways they are at what they chose to excel at. But well-rounded characters also get better relations, which means they regain Strainpoints better, and are a little more willing to spend them to boost their abilities.

Different arrays do feel different. But it's worth noting that because it's a game, I narrow down the range a bit still. There are rules for different power levels (Vigilante-Empowered-Planetary-Cosmic), and you shouldn't mix heroes from different tiers.

 

[Theory of Games]

Sure. Blind squirrels and all.

That's not the same thing as Batman and Superman on the same team having equal spotlight time. It works in comics because a writer is in control, and it works in the kinds of superhero games where players take on a writer's role (ie narrative games). If Batman is 150 points and Superman is 450 in Hero, making that work takes real GM intervention.

You keep saying that but there's no evidence for it post TSR.

Ultimately, I think you are just brushing off the idea of it being an issue because you haven't experienced it. But others have and are telling you that it can be an issue.

"Spotlight time" works fine in tabletop rpgs as long as (1) "spotlight time" is a thing the group wants to do, and (2) the GM and the players are working together to accomplish it. It takes group communication, like most things. Points-wise, I can't imagine why Batman wouldn't have as many as Superman since both heroes operate on the same level against similar foes.

Regarding D&D/PF, all the "post-TSR" GMs would need to do is look at the Rules Cyclopedia to find great ideas like handling players of different levels. There's decades of excellent GM advice available from sources other than WotC. And I'm not brushing off your issue. As a young GM I thought players of different power levels might be a problem, but after studying the many editions of D&D I found the answer I was looking for.

For those having this problem I'd suggest looking at the Rules Cyclopedia's optional rules designed to handle your issue. WotC's "Challenge Rating" rules might provide some inspiration as well. I should note that parties with mixed-level characters is a pretty common thing among the Pathfinder Society (organized play) community.

 

[Blue]

Power balance doesn't have to be important. There are (at least) two criteria for this to be true.

1. Power does not equal spotlight - there needs to be equal spotlight time for characters regardless of relative strength.
2. Character failure isn't unfun. To unpack that, upbeats and downbeats are a natural part of storytelling since before the written word. But systems with unfun failure conditions, such as loss of character, make avoiding downbeats important, and therefore character success is important, and therefore being a significant contributor to that success on a regular basis is important. But in systems where downbeats are still fun, just other forks of the story and ways to build tension and emotion, it doesn't matter nearly as much if any particular challenge is overcome and therefore power balance isn't as important.

One of my commonly used examples for this is Marvel Heroic Roleplay. Thor and Hawkeye can have a buddy night out with twists provided by Loki, and both players can have loads of fun even though their power levels aren't remotely balanced against each other.

Frieren is interesting, because she rarely pulls out the big guns. In some ways she's more of a Gandalf, who has always had a problem reconciling in RPGs how little he does with the Fellowship and soloing a Balor (something only a few of the severly OP Tolkien Elves can do).