The Points Just Don't Matter

... that's right, the points are like a role-player in a D&D game :)

More seriously, this picks up from the previous article on Point Systems. There I looked at them from a game design POV with a focus on what is a rather traditional style of play- a GM designing a campaign world and adventures for his group of players (and their characters).

There's another way of doing things however and it's a very simple one. You build everyone (and in a game like HERO, everything) to match the setting and its concepts. It doesn't matter if an ability is useless or not, if they have it- buy it. Hang the points; only add them up if you're curious.

For example, I've ran a re-imagined version of the Marvel Universe for years now with a number of different groups. Every character, weapon, device, etc was built in HERO System first and foremost to match my own view of what my version of the setting was and should be like. Game Balance came in second on the list of consideration.

So Hulk is the strongest one there is. And Hawkeye is just plain not as powerful as Thor in the Avengers. And the points show this. Hawkeye is a 365 point build while Thor clocks in at 655.

And to someone interested in recreating a consistent reality based upon the comic world (with changes to make it truly consistent), that's the way things have to be.

Now what's interesting, is that over the campaigns Hawkeye has been on the same team with Thor in the same adventures. And he wasn't useless by any means. Sometimes niche is more important than power, and Hawkeye can do things Thor can't for the simple reason that their niche is different. In fact, I've had more people want to run Hawkeye than run Thor- they think he's more fun.

I'll come back to niche some day, for niche is the single most important mechanic element in a successful rpg IMO.

But for now, I'd like to suggest that it's ok to run wild with the points if "it is what it is" is your primary concern in campaign design. If you (like me) are still interested in some degree of player balance- find it not in points but in niche. It works.

The Correct Way of judging Point Systems

One of the common threads I see on rpg sites are about the failures of various Point systems for character generation. Be it HERO, GURPS, or whatever.

Sometimes these are on the mark. For example GURPS depressing ability to make an highly experienced but rather average stat character cost far more than an equally skilled high stat but green new comer. The later will find it much cheaper to advance his skills and will in total do more with far fewer points. Most Point based systems suffer from this to greater or lesser degrees, most not approaching the serious foolishness found in GURPS that effectively derails certain character concepts out of the gate. A point system can go seriously wrong with it displays problems with it's own consistency.

But sometimes people just flatly miss the boat on some things. For example this thread where a number of people are whining that rich characters are forced to be incompetent.

Right out the gate one can see the assumption that Point Systems are 'balanced' and one 100 point PC is always equal to another differently constructed 100 point PC. This is simply false and for a very good reason. The designer of the Point System is not the designer of your adventures.

For example, one can buy a wonderful 10 ability in HERO System that prevents your character from being flanked or from taking out-numbered modifiers. Nice huh? Well it's 10 points completed wasted if your GM never has your character flanked or out-numbered. Heck, it's over-priced if the GM tends to focus on single big bad foes vs. the heroic team of underdogs.

And it's under-priced if you're playing Doc Savage vs. the hordes of villainous cannon folder every single adventure. The door swings both ways.

So it’s plain that out of the gate, no game can make the expenditure of those 10 points balanced. Thus game balance can't really be the point of the system design now can it?

So what do those Points actually represent? That's simple- purchasing power in a nearly capitalist sense. It's just as if you had $100 and went to the store.

And now here's the real big kicker on this. And I mean really big.

You're not buying abilities for the mythical completely balanced campaign where every 1 point spent on X is always equal to one spent on Y. You're buying it for the campaign you're actually playing in. And in order to do this, you're buying you're GM's agreement that it will work out that way in his adventures.

So, to return to why so many people at thread above missed the boat. It's because the player who buys 10 points of wealth in HERO is buying an agreement with the GM that he will allow that character to either overcome or deal with problems that 10 points of wealth can deal with.

If the GM doesn't want to include things for that wealth to overcome in his campaign, he of course can declare that. And at the point the 10 point Wealth perk now costs nothing, because that's the effect it's going to have on the important matters of the campaign. Put on your character sheet as background fluff for that's what it is, much like eye color.

And this people is how you get rich characters who are in every way the equal of normal joes in Point Systems like HERO. Just remember, you're not buying wealth. Weath is free, what you are buying is the right to throw Wealth around like it was a 800 lb ape- and changing the direction of the adventure as you do so.