SilvercatMoonpaw

Thanks for that, but I'm just not that creative.

Thanks for that, but I'm just not that creative.

Thanks for that, but I'm just not that creative.

Sorry, I meant personally. I am perfectly aware that villains aren't all about being simple "bad guys", what I'm saying is that on my own I'd never be able to create any meaningful schemes. Trust me, I've tried.

Sorry, I meant personally. I am perfectly aware that villains aren't all about being simple "bad guys", what I'm saying is that on my own I'd never be able to create any meaningful schemes. Trust me, I've tried.

Sorry, I meant personally. I am perfectly aware that villains aren't all about being simple "bad guys", what I'm saying is that on my own I'd never be able to create any meaningful schemes. Trust me, I've tried.

I'm just saying I'd be willing to play a villain, except the only things I can think of to do are steal random stuff and cause senseless destruction.

I'm just saying I'd be willing to play a villain, except the only things I can think of to do are steal random stuff and cause senseless destruction.

I'm just saying I'd be willing to play a villain, except the only things I can think of to do are steal random stuff and cause senseless destruction.

I see it as a couple of problems: 1) Yes, people like to play the hero. In my case it's just nearly impossible to figure out good reasons for doing villainous things. 2) Villains need to be pro-active. Being a hero is easy (in terms of playing a game) because you only have to react to what happens around you. It's more brainwork to come up with your own actions. 3) Villains are currently mis-matched for the heroes. According to the Mastermind's Manual a PL 10 villain is only going to last against a single PL 10 hero, and will likely cream a group of 3-4 PL 6s. Unless we get some team-ups, villains need to be of a higher PL than heroes to go solo. 4) The most important villains (at least as far as I see it) probably can't take on the heroes solo without serious equipment. I'm talking the Unscrupulous Billionaire and Mad Scientist types, the Guys Behind The Scenes. These guys just aren't going to cut it in head-to-head play, but they're the ones who create most of really big schemes, and this game needs them. My proposal: The Mercinary system. Create some mastermind-type villains and have them give out "jobs": steal stuff, create chaos, beat up hero Z for revenge, whatever. Mercinary villain A (who is played by someone who has no idea what to do to be villainous) comes along and chooses a job. Now suddenly Mercinary villain A has something to react against to define what to do and doesn't have to rely on his own limited ideas. Of course, maybe it's just me who has this problem. But I think it would also simulate how villains organize in cartoons: minion thug types can't come up with a good plan to save their brains, and mastermind types are all plans but don't have the brawn to carry stuff out themselves. So the minions go to work for the mastermind. It's a symbiotic relationship.

I see it as a couple of problems: 1) Yes, people like to play the hero. In my case it's just nearly impossible to figure out good reasons for doing villainous things. 2) Villains need to be pro-active. Being a hero is easy (in terms of playing a game) because you only have to react to what happens around you. It's more brainwork to come up with your own actions. 3) Villains are currently mis-matched for the heroes. According to the Mastermind's Manual a PL 10 villain is only going to last against a single PL 10 hero, and will likely cream a group of 3-4 PL 6s. Unless we get some team-ups, villains need to be of a higher PL than heroes to go solo. 4) The most important villains (at least as far as I see it) probably can't take on the heroes solo without serious equipment. I'm talking the Unscrupulous Billionaire and Mad Scientist types, the Guys Behind The Scenes. These guys just aren't going to cut it in head-to-head play, but they're the ones who create most of really big schemes, and this game needs them. My proposal: The Mercinary system. Create some mastermind-type villains and have them give out "jobs": steal stuff, create chaos, beat up hero Z for revenge, whatever. Mercinary villain A (who is played by someone who has no idea what to do to be villainous) comes along and chooses a job. Now suddenly Mercinary villain A has something to react against to define what to do and doesn't have to rely on his own limited ideas. Of course, maybe it's just me who has this problem. But I think it would also simulate how villains organize in cartoons: minion thug types can't come up with a good plan to save their brains, and mastermind types are all plans but don't have the brawn to carry stuff out themselves. So the minions go to work for the mastermind. It's a symbiotic relationship.

I see it as a couple of problems: 1) Yes, people like to play the hero. In my case it's just nearly impossible to figure out good reasons for doing villainous things. 2) Villains need to be pro-active. Being a hero is easy (in terms of playing a game) because you only have to react to what happens around you. It's more brainwork to come up with your own actions. 3) Villains are currently mis-matched for the heroes. According to the Mastermind's Manual a PL 10 villain is only going to last against a single PL 10 hero, and will likely cream a group of 3-4 PL 6s. Unless we get some team-ups, villains need to be of a higher PL than heroes to go solo. 4) The most important villains (at least as far as I see it) probably can't take on the heroes solo without serious equipment. I'm talking the Unscrupulous Billionaire and Mad Scientist types, the Guys Behind The Scenes. These guys just aren't going to cut it in head-to-head play, but they're the ones who create most of really big schemes, and this game needs them. My proposal: The Mercinary system. Create some mastermind-type villains and have them give out "jobs": steal stuff, create chaos, beat up hero Z for revenge, whatever. Mercinary villain A (who is played by someone who has no idea what to do to be villainous) comes along and chooses a job. Now suddenly Mercinary villain A has something to react against to define what to do and doesn't have to rely on his own limited ideas. Of course, maybe it's just me who has this problem. But I think it would also simulate how villains organize in cartoons: minion thug types can't come up with a good plan to save their brains, and mastermind types are all plans but don't have the brawn to carry stuff out themselves. So the minions go to work for the mastermind. It's a symbiotic relationship.

I'm still rather confused: what desire does playing a villain fulfill for you?

I'm still rather confused: what desire does playing a villain fulfill for you?

I'm still rather confused: what desire does playing a villain fulfill for you?

The thread title says it all: once we've used the die roller program, then what?

The thread title says it all: once we've used the die roller program, then what?

The thread title says it all: once we've used the die roller program, then what?

Trust me, a good idea is never unique to one person.

Trust me, a good idea is never unique to one person.

Trust me, a good idea is never unique to one person.

I guess I always see taking over the world in four voices: 1) Superiosity: "Dude, you are so much smarter than everyone else. You could solve all the world's problems in 2 minutes flat if you had absolute control." 2) Practicallity: "You'd suck, because people are stupid, and you are a people." 3) Paranoid: "Oh, yeah, sure, that's a great idea: get them all mad at YOU." 4) Lazy: "Ugh, work. Just sit back and watch them debate about nothing. It's free." For these reasons when a villain gives their whole monologue about what grand reason they have for wanting to lord it over everyone it actually makes less sense to me the more real their character is. I think this even extends to regular bad-guys like gangsters and such. When you have a cartoony villain who is obviously made to silly and they give some totally wacky reason they're doing everything it just somehow becomes real because it's giving in to my vision of the stupidity of being a villain. I guess I'm just weird that way. :D

I guess I always see taking over the world in four voices: 1) Superiosity: "Dude, you are so much smarter than everyone else. You could solve all the world's problems in 2 minutes flat if you had absolute control." 2) Practicallity: "You'd suck, because people are stupid, and you are a people." 3) Paranoid: "Oh, yeah, sure, that's a great idea: get them all mad at YOU." 4) Lazy: "Ugh, work. Just sit back and watch them debate about nothing. It's free." For these reasons when a villain gives their whole monologue about what grand reason they have for wanting to lord it over everyone it actually makes less sense to me the more real their character is. I think this even extends to regular bad-guys like gangsters and such. When you have a cartoony villain who is obviously made to silly and they give some totally wacky reason they're doing everything it just somehow becomes real because it's giving in to my vision of the stupidity of being a villain. I guess I'm just weird that way. :D

I guess I always see taking over the world in four voices: 1) Superiosity: "Dude, you are so much smarter than everyone else. You could solve all the world's problems in 2 minutes flat if you had absolute control." 2) Practicallity: "You'd suck, because people are stupid, and you are a people." 3) Paranoid: "Oh, yeah, sure, that's a great idea: get them all mad at YOU." 4) Lazy: "Ugh, work. Just sit back and watch them debate about nothing. It's free." For these reasons when a villain gives their whole monologue about what grand reason they have for wanting to lord it over everyone it actually makes less sense to me the more real their character is. I think this even extends to regular bad-guys like gangsters and such. When you have a cartoony villain who is obviously made to silly and they give some totally wacky reason they're doing everything it just somehow becomes real because it's giving in to my vision of the stupidity of being a villain. I guess I'm just weird that way. :D

I guess I always see taking over the world in four voices: 1) Superiosity: "Dude, you are so much smarter than everyone else. You could solve all the world's problems in 2 minutes flat if you had absolute control." 2) Practicallity: "You'd suck, because people are stupid, and you are a people." 3) Paranoid: "Oh, yeah, sure, that's a great idea: get them all mad at YOU." 4) Lazy: "Ugh, work. Just sit back and watch them debate about nothing. It's free." For these reasons when a villain gives their whole monologue about what grand reason they have for wanting to lord it over everyone it actually makes less sense to me the more real their character is. I think this even extends to regular bad-guys like gangsters and such. When you have a cartoony villain who is obviously made to silly and they give some totally wacky reason they're doing everything it just somehow becomes real because it's giving in to my vision of the stupidity of being a villain. I guess I'm just weird that way. :D