I loved the way that was handled in Watchman.

In reply to The Guardian (msg #17):

I will be working on it piece by piece, getting a framework together. Once that is done I will open it up for 6 players methinks...it will be a somewhat slower posting rate though, probably about twice per week, as I have a number of other obligations keeping me busy as well...

Sounds interesting man.  Room for an old comrade (and his character, and his giant winged dog)?  :D

In reply to Shimakaze (msg #19):

I hadn't given any thought to people importing any existing characters into the game once it starts.....hmmmm.....definitely something I will need to mull over. (I am always curious to see new characters come together *grin*)

Oh I know, half the fun of V&V is rolling up new characters.

Of course, it's always a bummer when the old ones are orphaned too early.  But c'est la RPOL... ;)

While I am open conceptually to the "VnV world" concept, my current game had a few requests from players who wanted to bring in previous characters.  I declined their requests -- but only b/c I had required the other players to create their characters 'in-game' using the dice roller.

Frankly, I like the characters in this game anyway -- sometimes it's good to be required to make someone new.

But it could be really fun to specifically make a "Marvel Team Up" style VnV game on here where two pre-made heroes (from VnV Unite) join up & tackle a couple villains, or optionally two heroes take on another two heroes -- like in those annoying comics where 'The Watcher' or 'Annihilus' bring together heroes to battle things out.

Maybe I'll ask the GM here to make a thread for that in here & we can have some fun stuff happening?  :D

The character on this board were all rolled on rpol to the best of my knowledge. One was not and I wrankled feathers when I asked he remove it.

That's awesome.  As I was saying, it was more b/c I started the game before this started & made all the players follow that rule.  If someone were to add now, I'd still make them roll up in the game b/c everyone else had to.

I'd totally be down for another game where people's RPOL characters hop in.

Not all V&V GM's are equal, though, and figuring out BodyPowers/MutantPowers/PsiPowers and so on can vary widely.

Perhaps each game could rebalance characters so they'd be 'hi-power' or 'lo-power', depending on the game?

I think the GM of a particular game would always decide doe that game. Perhaps the one here is the bench mark. But the GM could make changes for their own game.

Just like in a comic book when the heroes powers are more or less in a crossover.

I was trying to decide whether you could do a pulp fiction era V&V game?

What kinds of modifications would you make?

Well, one thought would be to (mostly) require rolls on the "DEVICES", "ITEMS" and "SKILLS" table...

Definitely you can do it.  Very little modification needed IMO, just have players pull any tech back to steam power & similar.

We've got a game set in the 50's, works well.  Actually any tech/items work in that genre, b/c you can say they are from the future or secret research program or aliens etc....?

Good fun!  ENJOY!

I setup a 'co-GM' Villains & Vigilantes Council game -- link to another game

Any interested V&V GM's are invited to co-GM.  GM's should have (at minimum) the game rules (pdf/book) and at least a general idea of how the game mechanics work.  You can RTJ and pick a 'Chancellor' name; all GM's will be Chancellors in the V&V Council.

---

re-posted from 'V&V Players Wanted' thread here:

How about a V&V game where we have 3-4 GM/s?  We post in a few 'z' threads our general ideas & thoughts, & try to get on same page, and then invite some players & just run a regular V&V game?  We can collaborate/compare/share plot ideas in the 'z' threads & so on...?

We would agree not to 'undo' or 'counter' another GM's post, and we all attempt to post 1x a week or so?
GM's could optionally also have an NPC that levelled at same rate as players (ie no exp received)...?

Not sure how that idea sounds to you?
I'd like to see 3-4 GM's interested & then start posting our ideas...?

This message was deleted by the player at 02:13, Sun 02 Dec 2012.

I don't know if anyone has seen this, but it looks like it could be useful.

http://www.rpg-geek.net/tabletop/vandvturn.html

First I've seen it!  I've been using an XL spreadsheet to track mine...

Real question ... how do you deal with the reality of heroes having different power levels and ability to take punishment.

I find I usually have to do some meta-gaming and not hit the more frail heroes with the nastier villains. I figure this is the villains going after the toughest foes first, but there is no reason why they could not choose to pick off the weak ones first and then focus on the big guys.

I find that in order to make an encounter challenging for heroes, at least one of the bad guys has to be pretty darn nasty ... which seems to always make at least one player whine about how tough the bad guys are.

I normally just let the villains wallop whoever's nearby, and not worry about it.
For some reason my biggest issue is keeping players on board.

I am one of the whiners in this instance, I will admit it. One must admit it *is* a little rough having the baddie get 3 or even 4 actions in before everyone else gets to go.

But I digress.....headshots headshots, yup I have used them. I try to play my villains tactically and I encourage the players to do the same. That said I don't use headshots ALL the time, just in certain places. When the rules for KO are removed *except* for a headshot it becomes a total war of attrition with whoever gets out the most damage wins. So in the instance the KK mentioned above; tactically....*logically* that baddie should go for headshots. With his attack power and accuracy he would only miss on a 19 or 20.

Herein lies the dilemma: If said villain uses the tactically advantageous attack to go for headshots the team could potentially all be KO'ed within 2 turns. In and of itself that is not a problem *but* the villains stated tactics were (and I quote): "Shut up the both of you," Breen says. "Let's just kill them and get the keystones." If they knock out the team, by their own words they should kill the team otherwise why would they bother saying it in that way. Is the GM prepared to kill off the team? I don't know, but logically it makes sense....these baddies seem much less evil masterminds putting the team in a completely escapable deathtrap and more a blow them into chunks type. If that is how things are meant to end then that is what it is. My guy is trying to headshot the villain because he has so many accurate attacks and I certainly don't expect any less retaliation. Although can one *really* target the head even with a special attack when the person is invisible? I don't know, in my mind (and my game) no, but I am not the GM. What he or she decides goes.

In my game I will be honest that I am still struggling with how to balance the encounters and that is complicated by the utter bi-polarness of the dice roller. I really HAVE been trying to make the encounters challenging but winnable but the dice have been nasty to the players. I do also use my villains tactically as mentioned in my previous post; using movement, holding action to chain them together, etc. I think that, the dice roller, and my still inexperience GMing V&V end up having my encounters turning out much tougher than I thought.

I understand your thinking.

I don't like the KO% because it adds more dice rolls to an RPOL game. In face-to-face that is different. That is why I don't use the "wild shot" roll either.

I agree that Breen could wallop the party pretty quickly if he were taking head shots. Disintegration Ray has a base 15 to hit someone without any defenses. But I don't think most characters would meta-game that much. He is trying to take down the enemy and the torso is the biggest target he can see.

For my money, there is a difference between thinking tactically and building tactics around the rules mechanics. And Breen, by the way, is called Son of Chaos for a reason. Careful tactics are not his strong suit.

His first idea was to hit the biggest thing he was facing -- the ice wolf. It was only when Fate got all up in his grill that he changed his mind.

I would say you can't take a special shot against an invisible target to hit the head, but the rules don't say and another GM might rule it the other way.

Just to chime in:

GENERALLY, I think it's much better to not have villains have much Height Agi or extra Init.  If they do, suddenly all the regular INIT heroes are super slow -- which is how it feels anyway in PBP.

Worst is when a player has a Height Agi / Height Speed character & they don't post often enough.  Can hang the whole game.

As I stated in other thread (as Oscillator), combos are key.  In one game, 2 villains worked our heroes brutally -- but neither was particularly great, but together they worked well (Shroud (ranged shooter with teleport) and Red Sledgehammer (tank)).  I thought it was a great fight, but we were unable to hit the shooter -- while the tank was laying our heavies out and taking a lot of hits too.

As for the killing shot --> maybe it's bad of me to say, but if a player drops out of a game I'm GM'ing, that hero is probably gonna get killed pretty quick.  Makes baddies worse, motivates heroes, I don't wanna NPC them most of the time, etc etc.  Not all will get killed, of course -- some get sucked down a time-vortex and return 50 years older with new costumes and names, etc.  HA HA HA

Onto 'special attacks' for NPC villains -- I think it's fine, but their regular attacks should be regular, and maybe 1 out of 20 could be 'special'.  But that one special could be their first attack...?

I agree with killing dropped characters for effect, but you cannot announce it to the players. You have to trick them into thinking he player is still on board and then waste 'em.

That is some scary shit.

In one of my face to face games I had a friend who could not play regularly play a character with the agreement I was going to kill him before the end of the session. He and a great character, and when he was killed it sent a message and really raised the tension.
This message was last edited by the GM at 03:56, Wed 30 July 2014.

Player characters get deathtraps, near death experiences, saved by alien teleporter, etc etc.

Former PC's get ...

• the first special attack from the baddie,
• caught in the feedback loop as the doomsday device implodes,
• the zap from the 'normalizer' beam which removes superpowers,
• the 'mind control' blast that becomes permanent or makes them crazy (ie bad),
• the 'super absorb' (a la Rogue vs Capt Marvel) which permanently steals powers/memories,
• their devices get magnetically stolen by supervillain,
  OR
• cape caught in the jet engine.

God, I hope Pixar makes an Incredibles 2.

Or heck, how about *ANY* CG superhero movie that is really really well written!

:D

In my game, because of the setting (mid-Cold War) it is on the grittier side. Thus the Soviet and Soviet-backed villains have military-type training and will use tactics. The villain Shroud really isn't super-tough as far as taking damage BUT his power suite is perfect for his role as an assassin (there are a couple secrets that are as yet unknown in my game). Also, *because* he is an assassin he is much more likely to go for called shots to the body. Between Invisibility, accuracy, training, and a sniper rifle yes he can hit pretty easily. That being said 1d10+6 damage really isn't that much compared to the damage most of the team can deal out. The team has also run into trained spec-ops that were tougher and better-trained than your average soldier (I have stats for those too now).