Something I've noticed about comic book superhero storytelling over the years: often the solution to the obstacles faced don't have their solution in the direct application of the hero's most powerful trait. Superman, for example, may use his strength or other powers in overcoming the central problem in one of his stories, but the powers alone are seldom sufficient. It's not accident Superman foes are often smart/clever guys like Luthor, the Toyman, or Mister Mxyzptlk because they facilitate these kinds of stories. Even in clashes with villains that have vast powers like his own like Phantom Zone criminals, the key to his victory brains not superhuman brawn. Sure there's his tussles with Doomsday and maybe Mongul where this maybe isn't true or is less true, but I think those are the exceptions.
I feel like the same thing is true of other heroes like Spider-Man and the Flash. Again, their solutions to problems will include use of their powers, but its less often the obvious, most direct use of their powers. Spider-Man, known for his agility, maybe have to bring his intelligence or just brute strength to the table.
There are exceptions. Interestingly, I think this is not true of nonpowered/low powered heroes--or at least less true. It seems like Batman and Hawkeye generally achieve victory by just...doing their thing. The Hulk, though hardly low powered, may be another outlier, but I would need to read more Hulk comics to judge.
Does this have application to superhero gaming? It could, but it's obviously much harder to implement there. The game becomes unfun when it's about "guess what the GM is thinking" to accomplish your goal. Still, I think GMs could be mindful of this when playing adventures, making sure to introduce obstacles that might suggest out-of-the-box thinking and reliance on less used traits.
Tricky subject. A lot of the tropes that work wonderfully in actual comics don't translate well to TTRPGs, but "challenge the heroes to work outside their comfort zone" is probably one of the ones that adapts best. And heroes are generally expected to be determined and unwilling to give up (that's as much a factor in that Spider-Man panel as his spider-strength) so there's an expectation that if the obvious solution to a problem doesn't work they'll regroup and try something else until they find an approach that works. Even the Hulk and the Thing (whose powers are very one-trick) do have a fair few stories where they have to think outside the box when their strength and toughness aren't enough.
ReplyDeleteMister Mxyzptlk is an interesting choice of example here because (unlike Lex or even more so, the Toyman) he is actually much more powerful than Clark, to the point where obvious uses of powers just won't get rid of him. You have to beat the imp by tricking him, not punching away. Clark's powers help do that, but only when used cleverly as part of a plan. I can't recall any stories where Mxyzptlk really interacts with other "brainy" heroes (aside from Bruce, and that was due to a rivalry with his own imp) despite the fact they're not really at any less of a disadvantage than Clark is in terms of overall power. A shame, really - watching the Question or Ralph or Mister Terrific easily make a chump out of Mxyzptlk would be kind of hilarious.
Using too many challenges that target a hero's weaknesses is unfun at the table, but throwing ones that don't play to their strengths is fine, I think. Much better solution than every Superman foe having kryptonite or magic or living under a red sun or something.
ReplyDeleteYeah. I feel that for the average "super-powered" hero, their power is just a description of the character (being able to fly is an identifier like having red hair or something), and that the MAJORITY of their stories...at least, over the long run...boil down to a question of "what do you do when your power is circumvented?" Because, otherwise, the comic series would get boring (i.e. if every problem was resolved in a similar manner).
But most (traditional) superhero RPGs are about player wish fulfillment. "I want to play Spider-Man" (or whoever)...and circumventing their powers in order to challenge the PC is antithetical to why they're playing in the first place.
I think, for the RPG form, a different paradigm of challenge is necessary than the standard Super Story formula. Assuming you're not playing a game with an angsty, inner psychology premise (for example, "With Great Power") then the game has to be about resource management: pushing one's luck (or abilities) in risky ways. That's a very war-gamey approach, and doesn't always work well when power levels between characters are incredibly disparate (trying to model DC characters using the original MSH system, for example), but that's about the only way to make the genre GAME-able.
A lot of really nifty RPG systems have failed over the years, IMO...including some that I really liked, including Aberrant and Wild Talents...because they tried to emulate the story telling of the genre, rather than working on making their system game-able. It's unfortunate, because they try SO HARD.
But then, there may be a bit of a misunderstanding of the genre itself. Supers comics really are a lot of different genres masquerading as a single one, just because they all involve Earthly human-types (or characters with identifiable human thoughts/emotions) solving problems with supernatural resources. But Green Lantern/Silver Surfer isn't really the same genre as Green Arrow/Daredevil, regardless of team-up and super-group, you know? And game designers writing superhero RPGs really need to stop trying to create systems that can model EVERYTHING for EVERYBODY.
Interesting. I'm not sure that resource management is what a supers game needs to be about to be gameable, though maybe we mean different things by resource management? To me, that means counting and conserving expendable things. I don't really think that's a big part of a lot of supers games that work pretty well as games.
ReplyDeleteI do definitely agree, though, that a lot of different types of stories are included in the genre. Watchmen doesn't need the same sort of rules as Avengers. Both are different from Captain Carrot. I think most supers games aim for something vaguely in the Avengers/Justice League sort of axis with supplements perhaps, for things like Golden Age characters or gritty, street level.
Well, “resource” is just a system mechanic. It doesn’t have to mean gold pieces (dollars), torches, and oil. It’s just a numeric counter that can be increased and spent (or hoarded or risked). For a supers game it could be health or karma, “power points,” or even the Good Will of the people (probably decreased by causing property destruction and bystander casualties!).
ReplyDeleteIn the game Capes, each ability/descriptor is a resource that is risked in bids for narrative control of the story. It’s not bad (in fact it’s fairly nifty), but it’s a little too loosey goosey for my taste (because nothing is ever permanently gained or lost…another comic book trope, but fails to contribute to the “wish fulfillment” aspect of the genre).
I think something like 1st Edition Heroes Unlimited…with a stream-lined combat/skill system and a few resource additions (that is, additions BESIDES hit points)…has a lot of potential. One of these days I’ll get around to writing it up.
; )
I think of "resource management" as including budgeting renewable resources, which isn't a bad fit for some supers games - rapidly-returning health, injuries that heal at the speed of plot, energy reserves, that sort of stuff. Anything that you have so much of in a given period but can't accumulate beyond some cap, basically. The Sentinel Comics RPG primarily does that with its advancement system - your collections and hero point bonuses are all basically one-use-per-session benefits, making the choice to use them meaningful but disallowing hoarding from game to game. Works pretty well IME.
ReplyDeleteThere's also a design goal question about how broad you want a game to be. Like you said, "supers" means many things and most rule sets have traditionally tried to cover as much of the meta-genre as they can. Looking at games like Masks there's definitely something to be said for specializing and writing you mechanics to fit a narrower goal. Masks is hands-down the best supers game about young (high school/college age) supers who are still trying to decide who they really are, but its rules don't really do any other type of story beyond coming-of-age at all well. They trimmed away unwanted mechanics to emphasize the core concept, which limits the things you can use it for. Compare that to the big names like Champions and M&M where a single engine is built to (hopefully) cover everything you can think of. I like both of them, but (despite M&M having its own dedicated Hero High sourcebook) I'd pretty much always choose to play Masks for high school supers.