Character power in relation to points?

[Belial666]

Generally speaking, how does actual power level relate (or should relate) to point costs? I.e. how much actual power over the game world and the story should characters have at 100 points, 200 points, 500 points, 1000 points and 2000 points? And given such expected actual power levels, how does the cost of advantages relate with each other?

This line of questions came up in the "what would you do with 1000 points" thread. From the answers given there, we had builds ranging from "highlander-style immortal living with high-tech comforts" to "having your own multi-planet empire" to "kill city-sized target anywhere in the universe with a thought".


So is there an expected relation between point costs for a character and how powerful they should be, generally speaking?

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by Belial666

Generally speaking, how does actual power level relate (or should relate) to point costs? I.e. how much actual power over the game world and the story should characters have at 100 points, 200 points, 500 points, 1000 points and 2000 points? And given such expected actual power levels, how does the cost of advantages relate with each other?

This line of questions came up in the "what would you do with 1000 points" thread. From the answers given there, we had builds ranging from "highlander-style immortal living with high-tech comforts" to "having your own multi-planet empire" to "kill city-sized target anywhere in the universe with a thought".


So is there an expected relation between point costs for a character and how powerful they should be, generally speaking?

Power in what sense? a 50 point thug will beat the hell out of a 300 point accountant in a fist fight.

[Nereidalbel]

Point values only represent the potential limits of a combat monkey. Otherwise, it's all in how you use the points. I actually used a 500 point character to kill a 10,000 point character who wasted most of his points, so...yeah, it's about being efficient more than total points.

[PK]

Character points are a poor measure of "power" -- but only because anything is a poor measure. The concept of "power" is an incredibly vague one. What is power? Social influence? Brute strength? Being remembered generations from now? Advancing humanity, whether you're credited for it or not? There's no way to measure power unless you first establish a specific context and yardstick for it -- and when you do that, you're only measuring one type of power anyway. So there's never going to be a direct conversion between the two.

Instead, what character points measure is what's important to the player. Where a player spends their points is an indicator to the GM what kind of challenges they want to face, and in which areas they want to "be awesome." They're the currency of showing off, of finding time in the spotlight, of having cool stories to tell other gamers.

So in a sense, you could say that character points equate directly to power . . . but not "in-game power." It's meta-game power -- power for the player -- that gives them something to be proud of about their character.

[Nosforontu]

Point totals do not determine a characters power levels they do help indicate the haracterws potential for power. However it is to easy to create outliners in gurps where Character X is built around a concept that signifcantly boosts his power levels compared to the expected norm.

For example a 100 poin character with 50 points in disadvantages could have 100 points spent on wealth another 30 points spent on Status with the rest spent on skills and have use his wealth/status to have a huge impact on the world. Especially compard to a character who is a small town quarterback with decent stats, Game football, and the throwing skill at a good level.

[Crispythemighty]

To echo the other responses, character points are a poor measure of general power specially with mixed concepts like the 50 point thug and a 300 point account example.
Although when using very similar concepts point can be an "okay" measure of ability. A 50 point modern day soldier and 500 point modern day soldier are in very different leagues but have very similar goals for the character. The 500 point soldier has more options through high rank, wealth, advantages, less disadvantages, and should have more reliable skills than the 50 point soldier. But even through a 500 point soldier has more options, a 50 point soldier might win a fist fight cause his points are focused in winning a fist fight and 500 point soldier's point are not. Does that make sense?

Character points are measure of how many options a player has when designing a character but not a measure of how good at character is at a particular activity.

[GodBeastX]

As my own personal findings, as mentioned above, anything can be "Powerful" with any number of points.

For Social?

Drop 20 points on Appearance Transcendant, and 25 on +5 Charisma and you can vampirize most social encounters. Sounds OP? But that's what Nymphs have for stats in Dungeon Fantasy.

Combat?

Anything can be deadly in the right situation. I've seen people default skills in combat and outdo the trained fighters in the party. Right choices, right time with what they had.



Now, so you don't feel completely lost, a personal guideline I tend to have with the "Feel" a campaign takes on based on point values is below:

0 to 50 Points - I wouldn't even call these realistic people. Rolls tend to matter the most here and getting lucky. The story can go all over the place, but the big thing is EVERYTHING is challenging. Characters don't tend to vary as widely as higher points due to stat point limitations and such, but maybe that's good.

Reference Concept: Probably an average face in any story. Nothing remarkable. Can be a fun starting place for long campaigns where players can watch their character's grow.

50 to 100 points - I tend to call this a bit more realistic because you still have a lot of challenges in every day situations but you haven't enough points to go Gung-ho down a broad specialty. Skills tend to be around 11 to 15 for players, 13 being the sweet spot.

Reference Concept: This feels a great deal like more dramatic films or stories where heroes are down to earth or gritty. It's a nice starting place for a realistic game.



100 to 150 points - People can start to build up enough points to focus into things and start to become larger than life. Skill levels in specialties will come up 13 to 17, depending on just HOW focused a player will get, but they will likely be one trick ponies.

Reference Concept: - A lot of challenges that mundane people deal with start to disappear slowly. Probably a good point range for a bit more active setting, as you are touching onto larger than life characters.



150 to 250 - This will start to feel more cinematic for reality. 250 especially people are going to be able to do something VERY well. Skills can get to 18 in this point range pretty easily, but players tend to choose to branch out more in my experience with many skills between 14 and 16.

Reference Concept: - Larger than life heroes. Dungeon Fantasy starts at 250 for example, so you're likely similar to a level 1 D&D character at this point, able to cut down critters, survive explosions and more that you see in quasi-reality cinema.



250 to 500: - Challenges every day people deal with poof all together at this point. You are going to look around and average people will look like small time chumps. Probably lesser super heroes, or seasoned fantasy characters, or strong villains. This will probably never feel realistic and will lead to characters that will need Superscience/Supernatural/Over the Top challenges to deal with. Players will tend to be top tier at what they focus on. Some are probably going to end up with a few skills over 20.

Reference Concept: Power houses, Super Heroes, Big Guns, Street Fighter Characters, Disgaea, All these sorts of over the top ideas fit well in this point range. Takes a group of anything mundane to deal with one person.



500 to 1000: - This is touching on people able to do uncanny feats. High powered superheroes, wizards tossing meteors around no problem, social people who have whole armies to call upon, and more. Good if you want to just go beyond limits.

Reference Concept: Top tier heroes, grand villains, unique big powers, Dragons, something phenomenal.



1000 to 2000: - This gets very crazy and will probably take creative GMs to make it fun. I've made chars in games like this where we were Greek-style gods with utter command over a concept. Fire, Death, Magic, Volcanoes. Expect laws of physics and reality not to apply much to these characters. They'll regen, have huge stats, teleport, and do other nutty things, and still have points for more.

Reference Concept: Still Mortal-ish gods, Cthulhu masters, Super Man probably and Top Tier super heroes.


>2000: - Not sure I'd ever want to imagine. Just take whole sections of advantages and add top levels of them to your character. Attributes? No problem! Want to be a wizard in RPM? Yeah, I don't mind gathering 40 energy every turn. If I take damage, I will regen it anyway.

Now, that all being written, I can tell you, I've seen it time and time again, where you hand someone points and they will say "I feel useless". That's why point values don't equate to power. You can easily build at any point level something that just can give kick to many situations. I am playing a necromancer in a campaign that is 400 points and I couldn't even hurt people in most fights or win most social rolls. A lot of things that just make certain situations difficult, but I love every moment of it :)

[Randover]

I could only agree with other comments adding that I as player and GM greatly favor all-round builds and generalists. I try to norm character with both Social, Fighting, Investigative and Crafting competance. Giving them there share of social time, fighting, playing investigators and creating something new like gadgets. That said it is not alwas easy especialy with less matured players that need to excel in almost everything.

This said, my players usualy need more points to create there characters because of my extra dammands especialy in Social roles. Usualy 250 point warrior needs Contact groups, Patron and little bit of Reputation, Status or Charisma to be considered starting adventurer. Other GMs do favor to ignore social advatages going for fighting power only, So they need fewer points.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by PK

Character points are a poor measure of "power" -- but only because anything is a poor measure. The concept of "power" is an incredibly vague one. What is power? Social influence? Brute strength? Being remembered generations from now? Advancing humanity, whether you're credited for it or not? There's no way to measure power unless you first establish a specific context and yardstick for it -- and when you do that, you're only measuring one type of power anyway. So there's never going to be a direct conversion between the two.

Instead, what character points measure is what's important to the player. Where a player spends their points is an indicator to the GM what kind of challenges they want to face, and in which areas they want to "be awesome." They're the currency of showing off, of finding time in the spotlight, of having cool stories to tell other gamers.

So in a sense, you could say that character points equate directly to power . . . but not "in-game power." It's meta-game power -- power for the player -- that gives them something to be proud of about their character.

...
An insightful post. It's easy enough to optimize a character for a task or set of tasks so that they are better at it than another character not so focused, even if the latter has a few more cp. This could be taken as a contract between a player and GM to honor the differences between player characters (so long as they follow any campaign guidelines) so that characters built with roughly the same number of points should expect equal amounts of meta-gaming 'currency'. 'Course, they all may not value the same things :/

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by Belial666

Generally speaking, how does actual power level relate (or should relate) to point costs? I.e. how much actual power over the game world and the story should characters have at 100 points, 200 points, 500 points, 1000 points and 2000 points? And given such expected actual power levels, how does the cost of advantages relate with each other?

This line of questions came up in the "what would you do with 1000 points" thread. From the answers given there, we had builds ranging from "highlander-style immortal living with high-tech comforts" to "having your own multi-planet empire" to "kill city-sized target anywhere in the universe with a thought".


So is there an expected relation between point costs for a character and how powerful they should be, generally speaking?

With the answers you've received so far, hopefully you realize it would behoove you to rephrase the question. I mean, unless these answers fit exactly what you were indeed asking.

I had a similar question myself, because when I go to "explain" GURPS to others it really helps to give them an idea. The thing is when you're being Generic and Universal, as has been stated there are so many potential characters that can be created, and so many different ways to challenge them, that it is hard to come up with generic, universal guidelines.

At the risk of hijacking the thread (does it count when I am just re-asking what I think the Belial666 was really trying to ask?):

1. What can "focused" characters do and how well can they do it with X points in Y setting and Z other factors?
2. What can "generalist" characters do and how well can they do all other things being equal?
3. What can those that fall in between being a "focused" or a "generalist" character do and how well can they do, again all things other things being equal?

"Z" was intentionally left wide open as a catch-all, especially as a setting may not be homogenous. Just as a 50 point thug could take down a 300 point accountant, but both being designed by competent players as "adventurers", the accountant can just as easily be the thug's equal or superior. Whether that is because he's literally a "thug accountant" because he's working under the criminal element to begin with even pencil-pushers can't be pencil-necked geeks, or because he came from a region where everyone and their dog is expected to be competent with firearms.