05-19-2011, 10:37 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
|
Re: Taking the whole word as dependents
It was an idea. Of course no GM would let me do it. I was just wondering if dependents gave enough points to make up for themselves and stress tested it.
__________________
knowledge is power |
05-19-2011, 11:14 AM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: Taking the whole word as dependents
Quote:
Nor I think *should* they. All of the social relationships that vary with point cost of the other person are fundamentally broken if you push them very hard. In the case of Dependents, if your point total is high enougy, you can get points back for "Dependents" who are so competent they are pretty much immune to anything that's not the core threat of an adventure, and in most cases are effectively valuable allies, which is pretty ridiculous. Or on the flipside interpretation since your dependents are so capable on their own, anything they actually need your *help* to be rescued from is so ridiculously powerful it's automatically the core threat of an adventure.... I personally prefer to implement dependents as a higher level of Sense of Duty (individual) and let you take it for anybody at all you feel the necessary emotional attachment at a flat -5 points. In most settings it's not helping them out with adventure-worthy threats that is the real disadvantage; it's the time requirements. Really, it's only in cinematic Supers settings that constant individual threats to your Dependents make much sense. Most adventuring careers insulate them pretty well - sure you can usually work in *one* story in almost any setting, but after that it gets pretty unbeievable.
__________________
-- MA Lloyd |
|
05-19-2011, 02:17 PM | #13 | |
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: Taking the whole word as dependents
Quote:
It's not so much the genre as it is the characters. Characters that draw attention to themselves will have dependent issues, where characters that do not, will have fewer. It's a staple of Supers games to have dependents grabbed and held for death traps, but it's also common in police story literature. If you're rich and/or famous, and have dependents, there is a very real possibility that someone might kidnap one of them for ransom. If your dependent is someone important, they might get kidnapped or assaulted. Just being a supers game doesn't mean that it has to be Villain of the Weak doing bad things to your dependents. And sometimes, that makes for a more interesting story: how does a 750 point super deal with a 50 point normal without looking like a bully? |
|
05-20-2011, 11:05 PM | #14 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Taking the whole word as dependents
The only person who could reasonably take the whole world as dependents is a superhero or a head of state or both.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
Tags |
challenge |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|