Is the ICON System too lethal?

Quote:

---

[weapons that] can simply make an enemy disappear... It seems they decided that that was somehow wrong or too dangerous by the time of Next Gen, though.

---

There were a few examples in TNG of phasers vaporizing things and people. Or a whole van in that Voyager episode. So they clearly still have the capability. But I think you are right - they decided it was now too dangerous. Clearly they were being much more careful on what weapons settings they were using.

This actually makes a WHOLE LOT of sense. In TOS, setting your phaser to maximum would create a big hole... but in TNG, a maximum power shot would explosively reduce a small mountain to glowing rubble!!! Which, as has been pointed out on these boards previously, creates a huge danger to the user if it mistakenly hits a target too close to the user at high power.

Clearly, they were being more careful in TNG, for an excellent reason. The technology had changed, requiring increased care.

Don,
I though you were referring to unared combat, not armed combat. Armed combat is a completely different situation in LUG Trek. Weapon Damages for kives is a bit too much for a 2 Fitness character. With a base damage of 2d6+3, adddional damage for Stregth and fighting styles, combined with hit location rules knives become much more leathal than they are in the real world. The fixed modifers virtually elimnate the possibilty of a glacing blow. Ceasar must have had a Fit 5, Vitality +2 and the Toughness advantage in LUG!


[This message has been edited by tonyg (edited 08-29-2001).]

Caesar was probably a lot more fit than the senators. Caesar was a veteran of many campaigns. And that's a pretty extreme example - on the other hand, many people died from a single well-placed knife blow. But many people survive knife blows too. Thus the damage levels seem about right to me.

Plus, don't forget Caesar probably had some courage points. You can spend courage points to increase your resitance for the entire turn (or scene, if the gamemaster is generous). Caesar would certainly have spent what courage points he had- and he was a central enough character with enough adventures behind him to have many- that the senator's multiple stabbings of him could have been perfectly modeled by the ICON system as currently written.

Diamond,

While you can spend courage to raise your resistance, it has been stated on the board bby the LUG staff that doing so soaks up damage on a 1 for 1 basis. So that's about 5-7 points for Julis.

Also, the extra 1 or 2 d6 for a dramtic success combined with hit locations ensure that a well placed knife wound will kill. It's surving the poorly placed ones that difficult in LUG.

Use the tried and true method, don't get hit. Any martial artist will tell you the trick is not to be there when the hit lands. Copious use of the Dodge and Block skills would be in order. I find the LUG system very balanced. Try L5R, now there is lethal system...as it should be with characters running around with 3 foot long razor blades. Weapons kill that is why they are around.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

That's not what the core books say... it says your resistance is increased temporarily. Otherwise, it would never be worthwhile spending courage points on that... far more efficient to spend them increasing your dodge roll.

But in situations where you are being hit a lot for a small amount of damage each time, it makes sense AND models the shows and cinema well (capturing the feel of Kirk roughing it up for several minutes on end) to resolve it as the ICON core book describes.

I agree with you in some respects, tony. In fact I've stated publicall that the damage system in Icon isn't really well-suited for "highly detailed" combat. However, I think it works just fine for cinimatic Star Trek combat.

When I Narrate a game a "miss" (i.e. not making your target number to hit) does not necessarily mean that your knife blow missed--only that it inflicted no appreciable damage.

In hand-to-hand, a "miss" doesn't mean that a punch wasn't landed--only that Captain Kirk rolled with it and followed through with his own right cross. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/smile.gif

Role playing games rely on the imagination of all involved. If you require your system to spoon-feed you all the details, especially in combat, you'll find it a pretty empty experience.

Use your imagination to fill in the blanks, especially when characters "miss" each other.


------------------
http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/sig_don.gif

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phantom:
Use the tried and true method, don't get hit. Any martial artist will tell you the trick is not to be there when the hit lands. Copious use of the Dodge and Block skills would be in order.

---

On AnomalyMUX (hi, Anomaly, if you're reading this, take a bow!), my Andorian Chief Engineer learned way-back-when to buy up Dodge Skill. I have since taught the players in my tabletop game to value it likewise:

"Let me explain this to you, bunky ... Coordination 3, Dodge 4, means that the average difficulty to hit you with that phaser shot at 5m has gone from Diff 4 to Diff 7 or 8. When you consider the average 'extra' thug to have only Coordination 2 and Energy Weapon 2, he's got to roll *really* well to hit you at that point."

And that's as it should be. I am a firm believer -- as I think we all are, though it hasn't really come up as a major thread of this conversation -- in the dramatic art of having-the-PCs-easily-get-past-the-minor-thugs-and-saving-the-real-effort-for-the-main-baddies. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/smile.gif You know, like in 7th Sea, in which NPCs are rated as to whether they are 'brutes' (one hit knocks 'em down), 'henchmen' (can take half the damage a PC can take), or 'villain' (can take equal damage to a PC before going down). I could easily see some kind of co-star/guest-star/extra rating system in DecipherTrek, or in some kind of house rule add-on.


BJ

[This message has been edited by CmdrBluejeans (edited 08-29-2001).]

Diamond/tonyg:

Regarding spending Courage to increase your Resistance, I wasn't very clear. Courage spent in such a manner is for the duration of one round or an entire scene (at the discretion of the Narrator).

Meaning, if you spend 2CP to raise your Resistance from 3 to 5 your Resistance of 5 is against all attacks for that round. In most cases you'll find that Narrators will let you keep that bonus for the entire scene (combat).

It's important to note that you can spend CP at any time, even after you've been hit and told how much damage you're going to take. If you increase your Resistance then through CP then you keep that increased Resistance as per the rules above.

Hope this clears up this point.

And, again, to reiterate what I said earlier in this thread and as Phantom pointed out, the presumption is that you are using Dodge/Block to avoid that telling blow.


------------------
http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/sig_don.gif

I don't care for the ICON wound system at all. Allows to much of a chance for munchkins with all the advantages and stuff.

I use a modified version based on Harn, Babylon 5 and ICON.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kith Qel-Droma:
I don't care for the ICON wound system at all. Allows to much of a chance for munchkins with all the advantages and stuff.

I use a modified version based on Harn, Babylon 5 and ICON.

---

I have yet to see a "munchkin" proof game system. Any system can be taken advantage of by a power player.



------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phantom:
I have yet to see a "munchkin" proof game system. Any system can be taken advantage of by a power player.

---

Trust me, there are several games out there that have nothing available for munchkin players unless they are in the hands of an incompetent GM (I own a few and love them). They tend to be more realistic and alot of gamers tend to avoid them since they can't have "cool" characters in them. They emphasize role-playing instead of roll-playing. The two I compare the most are AD&D and *Fantasy Earth*. In AD&D a dagger does 1d4 damage plus strength and magical bonuses if any. In Fantasy Earth a Dagger has a +8 damage rating, plus strength and magical damage bonus. Your dead at 17+ to head, face, neck, chest, abdomen and groin http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/eek.gif after armor reductions which are not that high to begin with, plus if you are outnumbered, you may never get a chance to attack in a round (first come first serve).

Plus no one in my group can be a munchkin because I run my games with a choker chain collar. I have about half-a-dozen PC deaths in Fantasy Earth alone. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

Diamond,
The topic of spending Courage Points to increase a character's resistance came up on the boards a long time (probably 2 years)ago. Someone at LUG offically stated that increasing a character's resistance DOESN'T increase the number of damage points allowed per wound level, but instead acts like armor.

I remember this because I was running it the other way in my campaign and was surprised by the OFFICAL WORD.

Don,

I have no problems with the misses in ICON. Just how the game handles the hits-epsecially when trying to run Star Trek. Many times in the series chararacter get hit and survive hits that would have players in the ICON system reaching for new character sheets. FOr instance, in the last season of DS9 they had that epidoe where most of the main character were holding a planet against the Jem'hadar ("Siege of AR"-something somthing). At the big fight near the end of the episode, just about everyone gets hit by a shot from Jem'hadar energy rifle. Sisko takes what is obviously a hit that drop him at least one wound level.

In the ICON system the 18+6d6 damage would drop just about any of the characters.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phantom:
I find the LUG system very balanced. Try L5R, now there is lethal system...as it should be with characters running around with 3 foot long razor blades. Weapons kill that is why they are around.

---

L5R 2E is less lethal than 1E, but it's still pretty deadly.

Even deadlier is Cyberpunk 2020 -- A good game, mind you, but VERY lethal.

So is Blue Planet v2 ... and Silhouette ...

Compared to all of these, LUGTrek is very friendly to PC's.

(On a side note, I'm working on a LUGTrek / L5R Conversion to see if I can make it work in a satisfactory manner. So far, the answer is 'no')

Gamethyme

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamethyme:
Even deadlier is Cyberpunk 2020 -- A good game, mind you, but VERY lethal.

---

You want really lethal try Cyberpunk 2013, now that was a lethal system...most people went down with one bullet http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Captain Zymmer
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Visit Star Trek:Lexington at;
http://www.usslexington.net
=-=-=-=-=-=

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Sisko takes what is obviously a hit that drop him at least one wound level.

---

Obviously? Er, no. Maybe to you, but not me.

What obviously happened was an instance of dramatic license that transcends dice rolls and mechanics. It was a matter of dramatic storytelling.

You’re right; 18+6d6 will drop just about any character—it’s supposed to, but that’s not what the final scene in “The Siege of AR-558” was about.

While you’re contemplating rolls, damage points, and wound levels, I’d be Narrating the scene as such:

“Jem’Hadar swarm all around you, threatening to breech your defenses. Munoz and Erickson drop in a heap as shots hit them squarely in the chest, throwing their crumpling bodies in the air. Suddenly, two Jem’Hadar appear in front of you, out of thin air, leveling their disruptors at you! Roll initiative…”

After a couple of rounds of hand-do-hand combat (that’s how I recall the final battle in “The Siege of AR-558”) the following happens:

“You bring down the butt of your phaser rifle on a Jem’Hadar, crushing him into the dirt. Swinging around, you catch another with your rifle, catching a glimpse of the pitched battle going on around you. For every Starfleet personnel you see there are two Jem’Hadar battle them. Your adrenaline rush reaches a feverish pitch as a Jem’Hadar is shot in front of you, collapsing to the ground, its disruptor that was leveled at you moments ago now lays idly on the ground.”

As soon as the player fails initiative (or I deem the time proper to wrap the scene up):

“Unfortunately you’re not quite quick enough. As you bring up your phaser rifle the Jem’Hadar before you growls and fires, his distruptor shot catching you in the shoulder, spinning you around.” (Rolling dice.) “A searing white-hot flame engulfs your arm and white pain fills your vision. As you crash against the rocks behind you, you feel yourself falling into a pit of oblivion. Doing so, looking out across the battlefield, you see the battle rages on and see Jem’Hadar and Starfleet alike fall. Please hand me your character sheet.”

Afterwards, when the player is surprised to be alive, they find out, luckily, that it was only a glancing shot that hit them. Funny that. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/wink.gif

While you may have issues that you can’t accurate recreate every battle seen in Star Trek with the Icon system, I contend that no system will meet your stringent criteria and the Icon system does the job for the cinematic battle scenes seen on screen.

The mechanics will only go so far in recreating the Star Trek experience: the rest is left up to you.

(BTW, it’s evident that you have your opinions of the Icon system and I have mine. You are welcome to yours and if you don’t like the Icon damage system then change it. My point has been to clear up some rules misconceptions and illustrate how the Icon system is more than capable in recreating the battles seen in Star Trek, provided the Narrator and the players are familiar with all the options at their disposal. What you determine is best for your game is your decision.)


------------------
http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/sig_don.gif

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Diamond,
The topic of spending Courage Points to increase a character's resistance came up on the boards a long time (probably 2 years)ago. Someone at LUG offically stated that increasing a character's resistance DOESN'T increase the number of damage points allowed per wound level, but instead acts like armor.

---

Correct. Courage Points spent to increase your Resistance do only that—your effective wound levels do not change.

------------------
http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/sig_don.gif

[This message has been edited by Don (edited 08-30-2001).]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kith Qel-Droma:
I don't care for the ICON wound system at all. Allows to much of a chance for munchkins with all the advantages and stuff.

---

You want to min/max with a Fitness of 5, Vitality of +2 and Toughness in my game for a Resistance of 9? Be my guest! http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

Be prepared for lots of diplomatic away team missions and skill tests—tests you’ll likely fail because you decided to “get away with something” and buff your character up.

There’s no such thing as a free lunch in Icon using a DP-based system. Every character has strengths and deficiencies. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/smile.gif


------------------
http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/sig_don.gif

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Kith,
It is possible to "muchkin" in ANY game. Even in diceless RPGs.

---

Nah, there are a handful of games that you can never "muchkin" in, I own three them. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif TSR Boothill 3rd Edition, Fantasy Earth and Chivalry and Sorcery. In Boothill, whenever you are injured you roll one 1D6. On a result of 1-2 you have a light wound to whatever hit location you have been struck. On a 3-5 you have a serious wound. On a 6, your dead (unless the wound is to the arms or legs, there are different rules regarding those hits). There are modifiers for the Buffalo Rifle and for chest head hits. It is possible to be hit to the chest with a Buffalo Rifle and have a +2 modifier to the wound roll (i.e. an a roll of 4+ your dead, no tap backs). I mentioned Fantasy Earth before, but it is pretty lethal system and munchkins simply don't exist. Chivalry and Sorcery, I will admit that if you play the fantasy version, than it is possible for a rules lawyer to find enough loop-holes to create a potent starting character who will only get stronger as the game goes on, however the game was intended for real world gaming and we are playing in greater Germany during Hohenstaufen Dynasty, 12th Century. The game year is 10th September 1143 AD. No munchkins there either. AS an idea we have a 7th level Witch, but her skills are still in the 60% range, BEFORE penalties. She has been around for about 2.5 game years. Worst injury she had, a war arrow through her right forearm.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Tonyg:
One of the jobs of a GM is to prevent this. Don's example of giving diplomatic mission to players who put too much into their combat stats is a good one. Players "munckin" becuase previous GMs have permitted it. Good GMs will put a stop to this, and provide reawrds for players who don't munckin.

---

I don't agree with the giving a diplomatic mission to the powerhouse character in the group; IF there are diplomatic characters already in that group. Now if ALL the players did this with their characters than fine, but I have a great pleasure that my players are the more down to earth, realistic players. They would never create a powerhouse character, unless the random die rolls create such a character, than they would take the time to explain how the character got that way. They feel that if they cannot explain why their character got such a roll they should not get it.

Example: Our ex-Marine rolled up a fighter character that had a freaking 18/97 Strength score. He had to explain why his character was so big, being only about 17 or 18 years old. Since we were starting the game near a lumber yard, he explained that his character started working there when he was younger and all the lifting of tree logs helped him to build up his body. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

But you are forgetting that if the GM allows the players to assign their stats in the Boot Hill most will put the largest number in the luck trait. You get shot in the head, even with that Buffalo Rifle, character make his luck save, something intervened to cause the shot to miss. Thought the player does need to come up with a convincing reason.

As to games like C&S, IIRC there is die roll method for character stats. My group had a player in it who was uncannyily lucking when it came to roll dice for stats, and he was the very definition of a munchkin (POWER player). So, you see the munch effect can slip into any game. Though I cannot speak for Fantasy Earth. It all depends on, as stated above, how strong the GM wants to be with their players...not the game system. Nothing is foolproof.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Thanks Don. I hadn't. Although I can see how some people might have been confused. The Core book says your wound levels are equal to your resistance. It would have been slightly better to have said that wound levels are equal to your fitness+ vitality.

But it only makes sense to treat courage points as only increasing resistance and not wound levels. Otherwise you get into the situation where you spend courage points, take damage but are still alive. Then the next turn (or scene) your courage-inspired wound points go away but the damage remains, so you fall down dead.

Clearly that involves more clumsy bookeeping and illogical results. To me, spending courage points to increase resistance (only, not wound levels) is clearly the way to go. That's the way I've always run it in my game.

It reminded me of a great scene we had in the Doctor Who game in which excellent drama resulted from that use of the courage point rule. The scene: a wooded hill at Pennsic (a midevial historical re-enactment event) in the 28th century (a time when the Earth Empire was drawing to a close and people were doing decadent stuff like making huge and intricate entertainments, kind of like the bread and circuses of the Roman Empire). The companions nearly capture the War Captain, the right hand man of the War Chief who has been a re-occuring villain. The War Captain (a former SCA-king processed by the War Chief and used to concour primitive planets) fights hand to hand against the companion who is a native to one of the planets the War Captain was invading. So the companion is determined to avenge her people but the War Captain is desperate to escape.

So as they fought, at one point the War Captain got a lucky roll on the drama die... rolled to hit far higher than the companion could block. So it was a perfect time for her to spend courage points to keep from dropping into the next wound category, avoiding the increased wound penalties.

That battle was extremely intense, and courage points were spent by both at critical times. My players have discovered that wound penalties are critically important - once you've got wound penalties pulling you down it is very hard to reverse the course of battle (which is as it should be, very realistic). But this battle the person who had the upper hand reversed twice!

Don,

[In jest}: I suppose an RPG can't be too letahl if you narrate most of the combat.

[ Seriously]: It appears that much of this revolves around differences in style of play as much as anything. You appear to have a more "narrative/storytelling" style of running that I do. I prefer a more "active" style of running.




[This message has been edited by tonyg (edited 08-30-2001).]

Kith,
It is possible to "muchkin" in ANY game. Even in diceless RPGs.

One of the jobs of a GM is to prevent this. Don's example of giving diplomatic mission to players who put too much into their combat stats is a good one. Players "munckin" becuase previous GMs have permitted it. Good GMs will put a stop to this, and provide reawrds for players who don't munckin.

I think you have the wrong definition of Munchkins.

Munchkins, AFAIK, are those who are hideously powerful. Like a AD&D warrior with 200+ hitpoints with immunities out the whazoo from wish spells and a +12 Hackmaster sword that requires the target to save vs. magic with a -4 penalty or die by decapitation; with AC -12 armor that grants 99% magic resistance and regenerates 15 hitpoints per round all at low levels. That is a munchkin, and I have seen a few such characters! I don't want to go to far off topic, but a DM I know loves the Anti-heros like Prince Elric in the Stormbringer stories. He handed out a +5 vorpal sword to a 1st level character, that gave him the hitpoints it sucked from other characters (his version of Stormbringer), he than had the Tarrasque fight us as if it had nothing better to do than track down a starting-out-low-level-party for shits and giggles, oh he handed out massively powerful weapons and armor to low level characters too. My dwarf had been given the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords and the armor of power with a Holy hammer of my patron dwarf god. Everything in his campaign reeked of munchkinism! Even NPCs.

Having high stats IMHO is not munchkinism. Having high stats as the result of random rolls is good rolling and it could help you to survive in my games. I do have the title deadliest GM in my area. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

The only system I know of that produces munchkins like they are going out of style is Cyberpunk.

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kith Qel-Droma:


Munchkins, AFAIK, are those who are hideously powerful. Like a AD&D warrior with 200+ hitpoints with immunities out the whazoo from wish spells and a +12 Hackmaster sword that requires the target to save vs. magic with a -4 penalty or die by decapitation; with AC -12 armor that grants 99% magic resistance and regenerates 15 hitpoints per round all at low levels. That is a munchkin, and I have seen a few such characters!

---

You are lucky, remember that player I mentioned in my last post...your description sounds just like his D&D character when we finished our first campaign together...You laugh because you think I'm joking.

You are right, I believe the proper term, in my area anyway, seems to be twink. I may be wrong. Either way, as far as I have seen...a devious player can take advantage of any system. That player in my group would often borrow a new game that was being run so he could exploit it. The new D&D game came out, what class did he want to take...the Monk which is the most over the top (read unbalanced) character class it has been my sorry pleasure to come across. Talk about your munch or twink, whatever the term is, bait.

As to the GM you mentioned, he should have taken a little more stock in planning his game. Sounds to me like he wanted a high level-high fantasy type game. In this case he either should have started you all out at a higher level...15th at least if he wanted you fight the Terrasque1?!?! Or played Monty Haul with the minor magic and experience to build your characters quickly up to the level he wanted. With all respect to your friend his game seems a little silly to me.

BTW, how did your group fare against the Terrasque? We fought one, TWICE, somehow the wish spell to finish him off fizzeled. Then again we were around 15-16th level at the time.



------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phantom:
You are right, I believe the proper term, in my area anyway, seems to be twink. I may be wrong. Either way, as far as I have seen...a devious player can take advantage of any system. That player in my group would often borrow a new game that was being run so he could exploit it. The new D&D game came out, what class did he want to take...the Monk which is the most over the top (read unbalanced) character class it has been my sorry pleasure to come across. Talk about your munch or twink, whatever the term is, bait.

---

The 2nd Edition Gamer Bible says (not the word of god remember) that "A Twink or "twinkie" is someone who is very proficient with abusing the rules of the game, not just in character creation but even during play." They are also known as Rules Lawyers by older gamers, who min/max their characters. People who know if they take this advantage will give them this skill and if they take this skill they will get a bonus to the previous skill which puts them in the expertise category and when they take this background option they will get bonus development points to buy further stuff. The Palladium system is well known for this. You can get massive bonuses to your attributes by taking certain skills and can increase you starting HP and SDC as well. Talk about Twinkies, HOLY SCHIT!

[/QUOTE]
As to the GM you mentioned, he should have taken a little more stock in planning his game. Sounds to me like he wanted a high level-high fantasy type game. In this case he either should have started you all out at a higher level...15th at least if he wanted you fight the Terrasque1?!?! Or played Monty Haul with the minor magic and experience to build your characters quickly up to the level he wanted. With all respect to your friend his game seems a little silly to me.
[/QUOTE]

ALL of his gamnes tend to go this way, regardless of teh system. He is a goth who LOVES the anti-hero and hopless situations. He reads Poison Elves and loves Anime, not the bug eyed girls with legs that go up to their armpits, but the ones with invincible characters who can take a haymaker punch from Superman and laugh hysterically before mopping the floor with him. Think Goku level 12 super saiyan. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/eek.gif

Quote:

---

BTW, how did your group fare against the Terrasque? We fought one, TWICE, somehow the wish spell to finish him off fizzeled. Then again we were around 15-16th level at the time.

---

Quote:

---

---

The character with the freaking +5 Vorpal sword took it out in the first few rounds, than failed his save vs. possesion and killed the rest of the party. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/mad.gif The rest of us ran for our lives when the thing first appeared (a normal reaction to seeing the "devourer of civilizations"). http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/eek.gif


Just to add in, the Gamer's Bible lists Star Trek LUG game and has this for the ratings, keep in mind this is one persons opinion.

Complexity: 2-
Popularity: 2-
Support: 2+
Completness: 2+
Versatility: 2

DnD 3rd Edition has,
Complexity: 2+ (3 with related books that add more options)
Popularity: 3+
Support: 3+
Completness: 1-
Versatility: 1+

You want low numbers for Complexity, but having high numbers does not mean it is a bad game, just that it requires more detail and understanding to get the full enjoyment out of the game. The rest you want high numbers. They go from 1-3, the - and + represent a downside or plus to it for that category. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

[This message has been edited by Kith Qel-Droma (edited 08-31-2001).]

Kith,

By your definitation of munkins being megapowerful characters, it is easy to munkin in all the games you described. I've run Boot Hill, and it has lots of area where it can be explotied. Characters with high Str and Coo stats who take half of thier skill choices in one weapon for example.

If you don't think part the GM's job is to watch out for munckins & twinks you'll wind up with more of each.

I've seen many game rules be abused by players, as well some very good character idea who just happen to be tough in combat. What makes the difference is the character concept. For instance, in LUG Trek, just about all Andorians wind up being potential combat machines. Same for Klingons. Both species have background reasons for this, since both place great emphasis on combat training, and have many physical advantages.
What detminies if a player is milking the sytem or not is detmined by the Narrator after seeing/hearing about the player's character concept.

What balances such characters out in the ICON system is that unlike many other RPGs, combat isn't the primary activilty of the characters in Star Trek. Being a tough warrior in TREK doesn't do for you what it does in D&D. And even when combat does break out, the weapons of the setting tend to balance out combat. Even a restance of 9 doesn't mean much against phasers and disruptors.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Kith,
I've run Boot Hill, and it has lots of area where it can be explotied. Characters with high Str and Coo stats who take half of thier skill choices in one weapon for example.

---

Having a
Strength of 20
Coordination of 20
Observation of 20
Stature 10
Luck 10
Pistol 3
Fast draw 20
Riding 20
Stealth 20
starting out in Boothill does not constitute a munchkin. Why? Because unlike games where you become more powerful as you gain levels, or combat/dodge bonuses, whatever you get starting out in Boothill is what your character is for the character's entire life, PERIOD! In Boothill you can die by so many ways it is ludicrous to list them all. There are no hitpoints, armor class, dodge rolls, resistance, natural toughness or armor ratings. No Advantages/Disadvantages, Hinderances/Edges which will make your character near invincible, nothing to prevent a bullet, knife, hatchet, spear, 300 foot falls, snake bites, explosions, hangmen's noose from killing you. Keep in mind a Luck check only goes so far as to saving the character. To me a munchkin in Boothill is a character with the following stats either at the very beginning of the campaign or after only a few sessions.
Strength 24
Coordination 25
Observation 22
Stature 21
Luck 18
Pistol 12
Rifle 10
Fastdraw 40
Now that is a munchkin in Boothill and probably means a lame-ass GM and Hack'n'Slash players.

This is not a personal attack, so don't take it the wrong way, but I have played and GM the game for many years now and I have yet to see an actual "Munchkin" in the game. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/wink.gif

Quote:

---

If you don't think part the GM's job is to watch out for munckins & twinks you'll wind up with more of each.

---

Quote:

---

---

I know part of the GMs job is to watch for twinkies and munchkins, I have been doing this for over 15 years and assisting in game design for 10. If a player so much as attempts something like this I come down on them like 100 metric tons of solid bricks. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

Not wanting to go any further off topic but, the only way I could see a munchkin in a Boothill (or Fantasy Earth, or a 'Historical' Chivalry & Sorcery campaign) is if it is in a poorly run game group. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/eek.gif

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

Just want to point out tonyg my previous post is not an attack of anykind. My re-reading of it could be taking as such. Lets just say that we have different views of munchkins and things based on our own experiences with game groups. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

Now to get this back on topic, I would agree that the brawling aspect of the game could be stretched out, otherwise you have people who are being knocked out with one punch each compared to boxing and martial arts fights which can have dozens of glancing and solid hits (yes it is possible to knock people out with one punch, but it should not be as easy as it is in ICON). If you feel it needs to be changed, go ahead, there just guidelines for combat.

Hope this puts it back on topic.

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

It all goes back to two points. When the character is being made up, the player should realize that some points will have to be spent in buyer extra points of Vitality or Fitness, which is not going to be expensive (2 pts for an attribute, 1 for an edge) most characters ought to be able to raise one or both without detracting from skills and other parts of the character.

As to the possibilities of a KO, the martial arts, of which Boxing is one, you a are trained to take an opponent down as quickly as possible. If you know where to hit a KO is very easy to achieve, most normal poeple will be knocked out with one punch, as long as that punch is to a "vital" area such as a long the jaw (there are 3 nerve centers that run the length of the jaw, hit that area and it is good night.) What causes the "glancing blow" is the fact your opponent is good enough to be able to block some of your attacks...which brings in the Dodge/Block skills.

Yes, you are right it is easy to knock out or kill a character in ICON system, if he hasn't spent the points in the attributes...which makes him pretty much the "average guy". Starfleet personel are very seldom average.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Phantom,
I take that you don't use the devlopment pacakages.

I'm not sure I understand the question. I use the generation system in the core book. Are you talking about the packages that are in the Players Guide, if so then I do not as I don't have a copy of the Book.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Phantom,
What I mean is: Do you use packages, tours pof duty, etc. or do you create characters by spending 125 DPs?

If you are using packages, getting Fitness and Vitality up requiring taking the correct packages. There are very few packages that raise Fitness and/or Vitality.

Most PC starfleet officers usually DON'T don't take these packages, and star with at Fitness of 2.

Phontom,
That's my point.

Kith,
I didn't take it as an attack. Just a discussion about RPG mechanics.

Actually the maxed out Boot Hill character doesn't stay the same. The XP awards allow for characters to improve beyond where they start.

As for a character stating with 24s in stats, that's not munchkinism, that's cheating.

Look to me like your biggest complaints are with the concepts of advantages and disadvantages. If your placers have good character concepts these all work themselves out. Most GM/Narrators I know can tell the difference between a good concept that happens to be tough and someone just going for the pluses fairly easily.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Phontom,
That's my point.

---

Oh. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/wink.gif



------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Actually the maxed out Boot Hill character doesn't stay the same. The XP awards allow for characters to improve beyond where they start.

---

Oh he doesn't? I will admit you can increase work skills and weapon skills, even attributes, but do you have any idea how much experience it takes to increase these things?

If you start out with a maxed out character in attributes, work skills and weapon skills; here is what it takes to increase these things.

To increase an attribute above 20 takes 1,500 experience points per point.

To increase a weapon skill above 7 takes 500 experience points per point.

To increase a work skill above 20 takes 300 experience per point.

I don't know how much XP you are getting while you play, but I give out XP pretty much by the book (50 for surviving a gunfight, 40 for bringing in a outlaw, 30 for winning a brawl, 20 for thinking of a brillant idea that saves the group or solves the adventure, 10 for using a work skill (only gained once per session) and 5 per real hour we play) and my group barely has changed in 2 real years of playing (a few points here a few there).

Just to point out the munchkin character I provided would of required 16,500 XP to have Strength 24, Coordination 25, Observation 22 and I have heard of GMs who award that kind of XP in their games, over the course of the campaign. If all of that XP alone was earned in gunfights they would of had 330 gunfights. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/eek.gif

However it costs less to increase work skills and weapon skills, but the amount of XP to put ANY kind of distance from what you start out at is immence. Just to improve your work skills over 20 (if you start out at 20) is 300 per point. To gain even a few points to boost yourself up will take many game sessions in a well run game (saying "well run" is a rhetorical statement on my part, since what constitutes a well run game to me may not to anyone else).

So while you can improve on beginning skills and even attributes, the XP cost is impossible to gain except by a careless GM who will end up creating munchkin characters. I know I have seen them, where do you think the stats I had came from. http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/wink.gif

John Wesley Hardin, run for your life! http://216.40.212.6/Board/ubb/tongue.gif

------------------
"They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? That one fell in the next county!"

I see what you are asking now. Actually I have used both. What I am saying is that anywhere along the generation process you can spend the points on a dev. package or something else an attribute, skill, edge or advantage. Or you can do what we did, the GM can give out a few extra points once the character is complete. We thought the beginning characters were a little "weaker" then the ones in the Adventure in the book, so Our GM "bumped" us up to their level.

It all depends on how you want to run your game.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

Kith,

THe same is true for the ICON system. In fact, it is even harder to write up a character with stats relatively as good as a Boot Hill PC, since the base stat is two, and characerter don't get to add anthing to thier rolls to determine initial attributes (as in BH). And with a limited amount od developeent points, high scores in one area wind up costing the character elsewhere. While players can build characters who excel in combat, the experience awards aren't as much as you might think. Characters tend to progress at a slow steady, rate.

Even if players choose to focus on thier combat skills, it's not going to make that big of a difference. Most TREK scenarios don't revolve around combat, and can't be solved by combat. Even when the occasional fight does take place, it is over very quickly.