SUPERS power levels

[Refplace]

Ok so my copy of GURPS Supers is in storage at the moment so I dont recall the levels listed there. Just using Basic.
It has been quite awhile anyhow and lots of changes so I would like to see a discussion on relative power levels.
My jumping off point is....
Street Scale; gritty and pulp 250
I Scale 500 points
D Scale ¥10 1,000 points
C Scale ¥100 4,000 points
M Scale ¥1,000
Basic has Supers from 500 to 1k points and Legendary from 300 to 500 points.
Monster Hunters seem pretty close to Street level at 400 points with Action and DF at 250.

Example combat scales..
I Scale: Black Canary, Black Widow, Daredevil, Green Arror, Hawkeye,
D Scale: Captain America
C Scale: Fantastic Four (each), Iron Man
M Scale: Hulk, Heralds, Superman, Thor

Feel free to scoff or critique my examples.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Ok so my copy of GURPS Supers is in storage at the moment so I dont recall the levels listed there. Just using Basic.
It has been quite awhile anyhow and lots of changes so I would like to see a discussion on relative power levels.
My jumping off point is....
Street Scale; gritty and pulp 250
I Scale 500 points
D Scale ¥10 1,000 points
C Scale ¥100 4,000 points

I'm fairly sure I didn't actually define any such scale. The point of I, D, C, and M scales is that they cannot be equate to point values; points represent overall capability, whereas the scales represent purely combat capability. GURPS can work with both, but they aren't interchangeable.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I'm fairly sure I didn't actually define any such scale. The point of I, D, C, and M scales is that they cannot be equate to point values; points represent overall capability, whereas the scales represent purely combat capability. GURPS can work with both, but they aren't interchangeable.

Thank you, I wasnt sure. Thought point levels were based off "Age" like Silver, Golden and Four Color.
I am building a structure for Supers and think some easily understood benchmarking would help.
Sure you could have a super like Mr. Fantastic who is more I scale in physical capability built on C scale points so its not a perfect representation.
But we need to start somewhere and combat ability is something easily understood and worked with.
Points are never a good way to compare effectiveness but similar point totals should get us closed to balanced.

So I was thinking, start with a brick who can take it and a hitter who can dish it out at each scale and using Basic as a guide see where I end up.
Once you have a good working budget the rest is easy.

[Phantasm]

What I do is basically set caps on traits. For example, the following is what I use in one setting:

Maximum Super-Attributes:
- Damage Resistance: 200
- Injury Tolerance (Damage Reduction): /50
- Innate Attack Dice or Basic Swing Damage: 35d (7d×5)
- Super ST: +13/+300 (max ST 33/320, or bench-press ~80 tons)

Not sure if this counts as I-scale or D-scale; it kinda-sorta straddles the line between them.

I also say "150 points before powers (super-normal attributes and cinematic traits count as 'powers')" making the characters competent even without their special traits, and then allocate from 350 to 1350 points depending on proposed powerset and concept (bricks tend to get more because the Super ST, DR, and IT:DR needed to make a proper brick tends to be expensive, while blasters can be built on less because Innate Attack is relatively cheap).

If I was running a game where players were expected to do stuff like take on Darkseid and Galactus on a regular basis, I'd probably raise those caps, and give out greater points.

There are always exceptions, after all. Mimic I ended up doing at about 25,000 points....

[Anaraxes]

Point-wise, Supers defines four levels: Wild Talent, Low-Power, Moderate-Power, and High-Power.

The I/D/C/M combat scale is there as a guideline to the amount of damage players should build to deal, and DR they should take to survive those builds. It's something like the campaign rules you need when using Ultra-tech to balance weapons versus defenses, as throwing the door wide open to bring whatever you want could leave the guy with 5 DR looking at the guy with the 200D Innate Attack, which wouldn't be fun.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

What I do is basically set caps on traits. For example, the following is what I use in one setting:

Maximum Super-Attributes:
- Damage Resistance: 200
- Injury Tolerance (Damage Reduction): /50
- Innate Attack Dice or Basic Swing Damage: 35d (7d×5)
- Super ST: +13/+300 (max ST 33/320, or bench-press ~80 tons)

Not sure if this counts as I-scale or D-scale; it kinda-sorta straddles the line between them.

I would call it D Scale, though a little light defensively.

Originally Posted by Phantasm

I also say "150 points before powers (super-normal attributes and cinematic traits count as 'powers')" making the characters competent even without their special traits, and then allocate from 350 to 1350 points depending on proposed powerset and concept (bricks tend to get more because the Super ST, DR, and IT:DR needed to make a proper brick tends to be expensive, while blasters can be built on less because Innate Attack is relatively cheap).

If I was running a game where players were expected to do stuff like take on Darkseid and Galactus on a regular basis, I'd probably raise those caps, and give out greater points.

There are always exceptions, after all. Mimic I ended up doing at about 25,000 points....

And this is where I like GURPS but I think it suffers in the general population as regards Supers.
Templates are too restrictive, you need variety more in a Supers game then anywhere else. However you need guidelines that most people can understand and work with to make it as playable as possible.
Since I plan on submitting it to Pyramid I dont want to go into too much detail but I used a mix of point range and setting caps like you did above in all my Supers games (even Hero Systems) and will continue to do so.
Point ranges above are budgets but not a plan for spending.
Thats covered elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Point-wise, Supers defines four levels: Wild Talent, Low-Power, Moderate-Power, and High-Power.

The I/D/C/M combat scale is there as a guideline to the amount of damage players should build to deal, and DR they should take to survive those builds. It's something like the campaign rules you need when using Ultra-tech to balance weapons versus defenses, as throwing the door wide open to bring whatever you want could leave the guy with 5 DR looking at the guy with the 200D Innate Attack, which wouldn't be fun.

Exactly right, and why I started this discussion using the scales.
You need a lot more then that but I think its an important consideration.
It also is easy to work with as you have something to measure attacks and defenses against so can see how many points that costs. Then work from there

[ericthered]

Supers is indeed tricky. In large part because Gurps lets you build bad ideas. Gurps also lets you buy great ideas, unique ideas, wacky ideas, and deep ideas, but the fact remains that when playing supers you should NOT interpret super powers as 'no holds barred character building'.

An expected damage range is a superb idea. I find I,D,C to go too far too quickly: There is a huge difference between 20-40 per attack and 40-80 per attack.

The expected range should be about both maximums and minimums: If we're playing a 20-40 game and someone shows up with a 100d attack, they should be told to go back to the drawing board.

I'm personally fond of decreasing the price of strength and DR when playing supers. Or using a wounding system. (wounding systems tend to make high HP worth it)

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Supers is indeed tricky. In large part because Gurps lets you build bad ideas. Gurps also lets you buy great ideas, unique ideas, wacky ideas, and deep ideas, but the fact remains that when playing supers you should NOT interpret super powers as 'no holds barred character building'.

Which is why Templates and Lens can be a good idea, though they can easily go too far as variety is pretty much required for Supers.
I have an answer for that, in fact it was required to break the Brick meme that seems so popular.

Originally Posted by ericthered

An expected damage range is a superb idea. I find I,D,C to go too far too quickly: There is a huge difference between 20-40 per attack and 40-80 per attack.

The expected range should be about both maximums and minimums: If we're playing a 20-40 game and someone shows up with a 100d attack, they should be told to go back to the drawing board.

Good point on the Scale setup, We need a framework if were going to build a template or recommended power level or just balanced example builds.
But its worth calling out you can opt for minimums and caps as a separate item. Higher caps tend to go for more combat types and lower caps allow the more exotic builds. I think every Supers GM does this but it should be mentioned anyway.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I'm personally fond of decreasing the price of strength and DR when playing supers. Or using a wounding system. (wounding systems tend to make high HP worth it)

Changing prices is pretty much a deal breaker towards publishing a system though. Alt Pyramid is the only place that could work and I doubt a Supers article would be published in one. Even using optional rules from the Alt Pyramid issues would probably kill it, so I would settle for references to things like Armor as Dice and the optional ST rules.
But things from regular Pyramids like natural weapon are cannon so I intend to use them.

Defenses are not really a problem IMHO. ST can be, as its very inefficient compared to Innate Attack but I feel this is still more a problem of perception then reality.
IT:DR is very good for bricks, for 450 points you divide injury by 100 and can reliable bounce up to 30d attacks. Points in ST have increased value as HP so the power works better for bricks then other types as well.
And by RAW you can just about double your damage dice for ST, even without things like Power Blow, so its just the high end scaling problem.
And again I think bricks are a lot more doable then seems to be the prevailing opinion. I may be wrong, but building to specific budgets rather then just building conversions will show that better.