Super powers; by theme or by effect?

I've been collecting RPGs for decades, especially superhero ones. Recently I got a copy of Mutants & Masterminds (third edition) and I'm enjoying it. However it once again brings a question to mind: should superpowers in games be described by what they do, or by how they work? Example: in GURPS SUPERS (originally) a Lightning Bolt and a Laser were separate things. Later editions however preferred to just allow the player to buy them as "Generic Ranged Attack" with the actual definition left to the player. This is an approach taken by the majority of RPGs I've seen.

Now, I understand why they do this. First, there's a lot of redundancy. If two powers have basically the same effect, why list them separately? That requires more space, and thus more money. Also, some people feels it limits their options, if they can't find a power that fits the *exact* one they want. In that sense, the "toolbox" approach is more practical.

However, this just isn't how it works in the comics. A lightning bolt is not the same as a laser. Often they have side effects beyond just damage eg. the laser might cause blindness, the bolt overloads circuits, etc. In the games this is often handled by buying these effects separately for every power, sometimes linking two or more powers into one. While this works, it does feel like more work for the player. I remember the first time I saw a CHAMPIONS character book and couldn't make heads or tails of the power descriptions (without reading the rules first) because of all the abbreviations they had to come up for the power modifications (such as NND = No Normal Defense attack) Don't get me wrong, I really liked CHAMPIONS and even admired its power system, but personally, I always felt there should be a more balanced medium.

Now, in Mutants and Masterminds, I noticed they had sort of done both things- the descriptions are still very much "rules based" but they also included several ready-made powers based on typical ones from the comics. Very helpful, thought they should have kept the examples in a separate section (I got confused and thought they were separate powers on their own.)

My favorite option is to have the powers come pre-built, including any extra effects, and then give the players the option to mess around with them. Makes it feel more like part of a setting instead of a collection of parts. But that's just me. How about you?

edited 12th Oct '13 9:56:39 AM by Sijo

I like effect better, MURPG's system (My favorite superhero game) was general effect for a price and then you could add on extra effects to customize it to the difference between lightning bolt vs laser.

edited 12th Oct '13 10:14:53 AM by Soban

I think it comes down to how the system describes what the power does besides doing damage. If there really isn't any, I'd just do it by effect and have the theme be there for color.

The way I usually end up playing, though, it would have to be by theme, because I almost invariably try to figure out alternate uses for my powers. If I had electric powers, it'd be inevitable that I'd try to power an electromagnetic device by myself. I'd see if I could use incoherent light if I had a laser power. I'd use fire or ice powers to assist in healing checks (reduce swelling or fight off infection as appropriate). And I've found that when powers are done by theme, they tend to price them out fairly to accommodate tinkers like myself.

That is precisely my point- half the fun in the comics is watching heroes find clever ways of using their powers. The problem with doing this in an effect-based game usually means you have to think ahead all the possible power stunts and buy them as collateral effects etc. It's a lot of work. Note that some games have specific Power Stunt systems that allow you to imitate different powers (within reason and GM approval). My two favorite games in this respect are the Marvel Universe one (the original one) and Silver Age Sentinels.

I prefer effect-based design of the Mutants and Masterminds style. Specific powers are available as examples, but the mechanics are based on the effects and you get what you pay for, the differences between a lightning bolt and a laser can be handled by modifiers, and there's rules for stunting if you want to do something thematic that's not in your effects.

Preset powers lists are better for settings where powers need to come in specific forms for a setting reason. Most supers settings don't work like that; the average supers game is a kitchen sink, and even settings where there's a common Super Hero Origin or Mass Super-Empowering Event usually have such widely variable abilities that each character is unique.

Of course, part of this is because I'm a pretty good hand with crunch and can usually set up the typeflags I want to easily get the power that I want to design.

The way I would do it (if I were designing my own game) would be like this: each power would represent, not a single, specific effect, but a system, a combination of target and process ex: Energy Control would represent a type of energy (the target) and what you can do with it (the process.) The description would cover some basic effects (to continue the example, Energy Control would for starters only redirect energy) with more possible as Power Stunts that can be learned through practice, like skills (a heat manipulator could drain heat off an object to freeze it, for example.) They would be up to the player and the GM to agree on in a case-by-case basis. This gives a lot of flexibility like in the comics. Of course I would allow the modification of powers (such as "Energy Control:Heat- only for boosting heat attacks") as well.

You might want to look up the magic system for Mage The Ascension. It sounds much like what you're proposing.

To put it simply, the kinds of effects a mage can create depends on their mastery of various Spheres, while the magnitude of the effect they can create depends on their Arete. There are no set spells or effects (though the book gives many suggestions as to what you can do), you can just make it up on the fly.

Along those lines, while I haven't actually tried it myself, I've heard people say similar things about Ars Magica and its magic system (and, specific to this, how it adapts to super powers).

Mind you, that could just be that I know some really dedicated fans of the game, but I am inclined to believe them.

Oh Yeah, I'm familiar with Mage, I've seen it (though I don't own any of the games myself.) Yeah, it would be a similar concept, except mine would be more science-based eg. Energy Projection: Electricity would come with built-in characteristics (such as "stuns target" and "doesn't work on insulated targets") based on known physics (or at least, comic book physics.) Magic of course would also be a Power, in its case with the built in limit "requires ritual" with the specific ritual depending on the type eg. magic words, using a totem, etc. Any of these are subject to being further defined by the player (with GM approval.)

Note I'm not saying an effect-based system cannot be fun. I myself have had fun combining powers, enhancements and limitations and seeing what comes out, it's like playing with legos. However I feel a thematic approach is just more practical, especially for players who just want to start play ASAP rather than spend hours assembling their characters.

In general, I think tabletop RPG's allow for impromptu inventiveness on the part of the players that would otherwise be a logistical nightmare for developers of a video game RPG. It just depends on the GM and the players actually exercising that right (if they so choose).

Exactly. Technically, you don't even *need* a ruleset to roleplay; the players can just make up everything on the fly if they want to. Of course rules are useful to save time if issues come up, not to mention that many games are about playing on specific settings and having an "official" source helps with that (and reduces research that has to be done.)