So... any Original superhero games out there?

[Xenolord]

I had plans on starting a hero/villain RP myself, based in the now, sadly, dead City of Heroes universe. Dunno if I'll actually get it up, though.

[Blinkin]

Sadly, I don't do PVP. I usually prefer a GM directing a story in some minimal way and providing challenges to be overcome. It eliminates the PVP and PITA that I always seem to get from it.;)

[Foxy DeVille]

Hmmm... how about something like this. A Silver Age setting taking place in 1969 (yes, I have a juvenile sense of humor). There could still be true-blue heroes running around. But the social issues of the time could also play a part, if so desired.

[Blinkin]

Tell us more.

[Foxy DeVille]

Tell us more.

No.

Actually I don't have too much right now, I was just looking over the responses and trying to find out what would have the most appeal. What I was thinking is something more sandbox to allow player freedom. If people want to form a team, cool. If they want to be solo, cool. If they want to be campy like the Batman TV show, cool. If they want to deal with social issues like Green Lantern/Green Arrow, cool. It would take place in a thriving metropolis, maybe calling it Silver City, that's large enough to have areas with different moods. I thinking maybe it would have a lot of collaborative world building.

[HairyHeretic]

Sure, let's see what you got...

Very, very much WIP still

https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=200249.0

Just fleshing out the setting, and I have a bit of a mishmash of ideas for a system to go with it.

I had plans on starting a hero/villain RP myself, based in the now, sadly, dead City of Heroes universe.

One of the best games I ever played, and a influence on my own idea no doubt.

[TheBlackThrone]

I am a fan of super hero RPs, especially original ones, which is why this topic caught my eye. Even in cannon verse I still play originals because I enjoy my own work and watching my characters develop. If anyone can take the helm and make an original verse and I mean original, then drop me a line.

The biggest issue I see with most of the games and why there are so many is the GM rarely knows where he or she wants to go with the plot. They dive into the idea and don't think it through beyond its introduction or even beyond the first scenario. There have been many instances with consistency issues where a small, first fight or battle turns into The Apocolypse because everyonewants to dive into the cconflict at once. I, personally, join super hero games for action and drama and if it has a point. Games that flounder tend to only be cool for awhile and then they just fall apart because there are some writers who rely on character interaction and GM guidance in order to do anything. So if there is a GM out there that can iron out these problems and who has a general outline of what they're going to do beyond the introduction and first scenario, let me know. I have GMed games before but with my current schedule, I can only drive shotgun for now. I would have jumped on this idea, but unfortunately cannot. If anyone is out there who thinks they won't make the same mistake as every other game, PM me. If I find your story interesting I'll join.

[HairyHeretic]

Coming up with scenarios for lower level heros shouldn't be that tough, and let's face it, those characters shouldn't be jumping to world shattering threats within a few weeks of gaining their powers.

If you have a look at the lower level story arcs on here

http://cityofheroes.wikia.com/wiki/Hero_Story_Arcs

that sort of mission could easily be adapted to something suitable for players who want less sandbox and more structure in a game.

[Blinkin]

Sandbox is nice, but I've found that Sandbox, unless you have lots of dedicated and proactive players who will aggressively take on storylines of their own and include just about everyone, falls apart in relatively short order. You end up with players who don't know what to do, or are waiting for someone else to do the hard part and provide them with an opeining... and then everyone is waiting for someone, usually a specific someone in their mind, to open a scene just for them. I've always seen a high turn-over rate in sandboxes like this and filling lost ranks in active stories becomes more work for the GM than it's worth.

Structure is good, and while it suffers from lost players as well, it doesn't seem to be as bad mainly because there's an over-arching story to try to follow. You also don't have 20 different people going off in 25 different directions.

On the topic of villains being stronger than heroes in a one-on-one situation. I have to strongly disagree. villains shouldn't be as strong because they always have the offensive. The hero is almost always reacting to something, the villain is almost always acting. They have the advantage of planning, henchmen and fiendish traps that they can employ far before the hero even knows that something is being done... so making them stronger in power and brute unbalances that. They can certainly be as powerful, smarter and ruthless, but not over-powered on a one-on-one basis. The true villain is already at a significant advantage simply because he's three steps ahead if he's using more than his head for a hat rack.

As the man in the food lion commercial keeps saying, "That's just my two cents worth."

Give me a nickle, and I won't bother the next 3 people who I cross paths with. ;)

[Niki315]

If you were responding to my post about the player run game the reason why the villains were supposed to be a little more powerful than the average hero was to encourage player interaction and require it for success (unless a hero was particularly clever of course).  So villains aren't required to be more powerful in all games, but for my framework it would help move things along.

[Blinkin]

Not your post specifically, no. I've seen it often enough that I decided to comment on the concept. In player run games, it's more important, to my mind, that if you must have players portraying villains, that they have no more power or capability than the heroes. They can make up for the balance by actually thinking like smart bad guys and scheming as opposed to being bigger and badder. The heroes will have to work just to catch up to, and counter the villains plans. If the hero is smart, and rarely seem to be, using allies makes sense, but again, it's one of the faults of sandbox in that getting that kinda interaction is difficult.

anyway, I'm just throwing my point of view out there. I far prefer that a GM handle the bad guys as there is no chance of cheating by saying, "Ah ha! I planned for that!" when you're just pulling shit out of your ass to try to make sure you win. The GM can do that, it's his/her job, but unless you want to lay it out out and hope that no one goes OOC, it's too easy to do it off the cuff and counter the hero.

[Foxy DeVille]

OK, so we need to nail down what sort of setting and structure we're going with. A few people have made pitches. I've made two, one with a more structered plot and one looser. So let's pick a direction and go from there.

[HairyHeretic]

Sandbox is nice, but I've found that Sandbox, unless you have lots of dedicated and proactive players who will aggressively take on storylines of their own and include just about everyone, falls apart in relatively short order. You end up with players who don't know what to do, or are waiting for someone else to do the hard part and provide them with an opeining... and then everyone is waiting for someone, usually a specific someone in their mind, to open a scene just for them. I've always seen a high turn-over rate in sandboxes like this and filling lost ranks in active stories becomes more work for the GM than it's worth.

Very true. Sandbox games do allow a lot more freedom, but as you say, you do need players who are willing to play in that sandbox, and help drive the stories. Pro active, as opposed to reactive. Giving players a definite plot to follow does give more engagement, I think.

Structure is good, and while it suffers from lost players as well, it doesn't seem to be as bad mainly because there's an over-arching story to try to follow. You also don't have 20 different people going off in 25 different directions.

Yeah. Though its a given that the players will sometimes go off on a complete tangent anyway, however much the GM plans :)

On the topic of villains being stronger than heroes in a one-on-one situation. I have to strongly disagree. villains shouldn't be as strong because they always have the offensive. The hero is almost always reacting to something, the villain is almost always acting. They have the advantage of planning, henchmen and fiendish traps that they can employ far before the hero even knows that something is being done... so making them stronger in power and brute unbalances that. They can certainly be as powerful, smarter and ruthless, but not over-powered on a one-on-one basis. The true villain is already at a significant advantage simply because he's three steps ahead if he's using more than his head for a hat rack.

True, to a degree, but the villain shouldn't be able to completely dominate a scene unless they've invested significant time and effort into setting it up, and luring the hero(s) into it. Even then, smart heros can frequently find loopholes the villain hasn't anticipated. And lastly, good old fashioned never-to-be-relied-on luck can always lend a hand (or a banana skin) :)

[Florence]

Heroes don't always have to be physically on par with the villains, though. Just look at how many super-powered asses Batman and Green Arrow have kicked through tactics and gadgets.

[Xenolord]

A true villain can act without being discovered. But aren't we getting off topic?

[Florence]

Topic: ... we need a game? xD

[Rajah]

Anyone familiar with J. C. McCrae's Wormverse?

It's a superhero world with power tiers for easy regulation, unified background and "why powers are powers" explanation that has actual logical coherency (no "I got spider powers, because a spider bit me"), and an enormous amount of development and flavor. Covers every type of superhero from the mystical to the superscience guys, explains why the guy who summons rocks can't do it inside your lungs, et cetera. Amazingly well done. http://parahumans.wordpress.com/about/