# Superhero style RP Brainstorm



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Thinking of starting a Superhero RP where in a world of no heroes, some furs rise to take up the call.

Haven't fully fleshed out this idea yet, so give me some potential thoughts ^^

- Thinking a modern approach
-High tech most likely
- Big Hero 6, Kickass and Tiger&Bunny Inspired

Will probably be looking for interested participants too afterward ^^

No idea how villains would work yet, for the record XD


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

Maybe something like the anime Boku no hero academia but the villains are the prominent force and the school for hero training has been shut down for a long time because of it. A group of heroes decide to use it as their base or start up the school again to gather heroes is what comes to mind reading this. Maybe some players are villains but i can imagine the salt.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> No idea how villains would work yet


I'm up for the challenge and brutally end the RP in 3 pages or less


----------



## lyar (Sep 29, 2016)

Yaruzaru said:


> Maybe some players are villains but i can imagine the salt.


I'd love to be a villain, so long as the heroes do not have obvious plot armor or are somehow completely immune to harm. Also don't end fights in a sentence, give people a chance.   

Anyway, I think the setting/set up of the story is the most important part is the villain(s) going to be drug lord/gang leader who runs the city (Like Gotham in the Batman series)? Is the city going to be in peace until the villain(s) emerges out of nowhere and disturbs the peace? Is it going to be story of betrayal or a story of corruption? Did the characters (protagonist(s) and villain(s)) have a relationship before hand? What kind of powers exist? Are those powers intertwined? These are all pretty good questions to get started with and I hope they help.


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

Yeah, it would be nice if there could be players as both heroes and villains, i think it will naturally progress the story between the villains schemes and the heroes trying to stop them. Though there will likely be plot armor as no one likes to lose. Even i get carried away sometimes.


----------



## lyar (Sep 29, 2016)

Yaruzaru said:


> Though there will likely be plot armor as no one likes to lose. Even i get carried away sometimes.


Well of course there will be plot armor, the heroes _have_ to win. But its not so much about the villain_ losing_, but it _how_ they _lose. _That being said, villains should be stronger than heroes depending on the ratio of heroes to villains and defeating the villains should take some thought instead of brute strength.


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

I would actually like it if there was an even chance of the villains winning as well. Would make it more interesting seeing how it goes, like if the heroes fail to do "this" or stop "that" they lose. I guess whichever side has less players can be the side that has the money/tech/supplies etc.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

*brings in all the black hole, white hole and wormhole bs and gives both sides a bad time*


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Yaruzaru said:


> I would actually like it if there was an even chance of the villains winning as well. Would make it more interesting seeing how it goes, like if the heroes fail to do "this" or stop "that" they lose. I guess whichever side has less players can be the side that has the money/tech/supplies etc.


I think it'd be really cool if both sides a chance at winning too. It'd really up the stakes and make the RP have some gravitas.



Yaruzaru said:


> I would actually like it if there was an even chance of the villains winning as well. Would make it more interesting seeing how it goes, like if the heroes fail to do "this" or stop "that" they lose. I guess whichever side has less players can be the side that has the money/tech/supplies etc.



Also, yeah We'd obviously have to think balance for the smaller side... if there's a ridiculous villains after all >_>

Think we'd allow defection/corruption/redemption and side switches to occur? And how would someone go about that?


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

Yeah, adding something like a villain/hero boss for the smaller side or something to help them out like an npc team of sorts or a guild of villains they can call on for help i guess.

Side switches could happen just like they happen in anything else i think. Maybe the villain knows something about them and blackmails them to keep it secret. Maybe one of the enemies has an ability to switch their perspective of right and wrong with a device or something and the other heroes need to remove the device on them. Redemption for villains is always good, if they decide to try to atone and such they can i guess. Though yeah that again has the potential of throwing the teams around a lot. One minute it's even then the next everyone is Horde.


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

The problem with allowing players to pick a side is the separation of players. It would cause chaos as all these replies would be coming in from both sides, and the one in charge of the role play will be overwhelmed with it all.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> if there's a ridiculous villains after all >_>


If I get to be the villain, I'm bringing in everything in the attached file 



InpuOsirisson said:


> The problem with allowing players to pick a side is the separation of players. It would cause chaos as all these replies would be coming in from both sides, and the one in charge of the role play will be overwhelmed with it all.


Good point... even if most of the players only pick one side, chances are things will get out of control super bad


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

But this kind of role play would be fun. I want to try it.. However, I prefer 2 to 3 player role plays where they are less chaotic, and there isn't a risk of falling behind on replies..


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> The problem with allowing players to pick a side is the separation of players. It would cause chaos as all these replies would be coming in from both sides, and the one in charge of the role play will be overwhelmed with it all.



Yeah, that's true. I have been wondering about that a fair bit.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> But this kind of role play would be fun. I want to try it.. However, I prefer 2 to 3 player role plays where they are less chaotic, and there isn't a risk of falling behind on replies..


Same for me ; only 2-3 people to keep things easy to follow


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Maybe it's easier for people to play competing hero's, that way the RP has the potential to run by itself?


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Maybe it's easier for people to play competing hero's, that way the RP has the potential to run by itself?


Oooor... side-plot
Or, "side quests" in RPG games, along with the main quest line, y'know ; just... not too much to distract everyone away from the main plot/quest, of course


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Maybe it's easier for people to play competing hero's, that way the RP has the potential to run by itself?




Well it may be hard for it to run by itself.. If there is nobody specific to take responsibility for the immersive experience for the other players ( Controlling the universe, background characters, plots, lore, locations, events, all that and more), then players will all just throw random junk into it, and that could lead to the rp losing itself. People will get confused, and they will throw in random stuff all at once, and it just wont handle well without a proper GM.


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Jin-Lust-4-Sin said:


> Oooor... side-plot
> Or, "side quests" in RPG games, along with the main quest line, y'know ; just... not too much to distract everyone away from the main plot/quest, of course


Yeah, we could do that XD Oh potential, potential.



InpuOsirisson said:


> But this kind of role play would be fun. I want to try it.. However, I prefer 2 to 3 player role plays where they are less chaotic, and there isn't a risk of falling behind on replies..


Plus for simplicity, 3 or 4 people is probably the best way to do it ^^


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Jin-Lust-4-Sin said:


> Oooor... side-plot
> Or, "side quests" in RPG games, along with the main quest line, y'know ; just... not too much to distract everyone away from the main plot/quest, of course




This actually got me thinking about my recent reply.. Perhaps if the players collaborated, and took turns GMing.. Then that could work.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

As for the world and lore and whatnot... unless it's fantasy and/or sci-fi, if you just do with what you got in the modern era (basically the 21st century forward), then you just need to keep in mind the "technology" part (I dunno how else to put it)


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> This actually got me thinking about my recent reply.. Perhaps if the players collaborated, and took turns GMing.. Then that could work.


I'm a pro at throwing in side plots and relevant ideas to keep the RP going, hehe


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> This actually got me thinking about my recent reply.. Perhaps if the players collaborated, and took turns GMing.. Then that could work.


I think I'd prefer going with the 3 or 4 person setup, with one person acting as a GM actually ^^


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Unless people wanna take turns that is XD


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> I think I'd prefer going with the 3 or 4 person setup, with one person acting as a GM actually ^^


Seems like a good way to go at it


----------



## lyar (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> This actually got me thinking about my recent reply.. Perhaps if the players collaborated, and took turns GMing.. Then that could work.


Yeah but then the GMing would be inconsistent. A story is lost if it isn't consistent.


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

As long as the GM is good at keeping everything together and the players follow the GMs rules i wouldn't see a problem as long as no one tries to run away with the plot.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Rule number 1...







Ok ok I'll stop for now


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Rule 1. No fucking Heimskr. (Literally or figuratively) 

So, that sounds like a plan. Gonna have to come up with some general rules to keep things sane-ish ^^


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Rule 1. No fucking Heimskr. (Literally or figuratively)


The son of a bitch just won't STFU, that's for sure XD



Dyrra said:


> So, that sounds like a plan. Gonna have to come up with some general rules to keep things sane-ish ^^


Rule number 2...






Never let that kind of chaos happen XD


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

I am considering joining this.. However, my concern is how often I will be able to play. And well.. When there are multiple people playing and one or two aren't on, yet the others are continuing the rp.. Well.. It's kinda chaotic.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> When there are multiple people playing and one or two aren't on, yet the others are continuing the rp.. Well.. It's kinda chaotic.


Indeed it is... you go to sleep for just 6 hours or so, then wake up, and be like, "Where the heck am I (in this thread) ???" XD


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

You can always be that guy that takes care of the hideout, that way you can jump in and out with the "I stay back and look after the hideout/give everyone information" plot armor, even though you may be capable of going out and fighting if need be. When you need to go offline you just go back to the hideout.


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Yaruzaru said:


> You can always be that guy that takes care of the hideout, that way you can jump in and out with the "I stay back and look after the hideout/give everyone information" plot armor, even though you may be capable of going out and fighting if need be. When you need to go offline you just go back to the hideout.



That would mean the group would have to be in one location for the whole role play. Maybe in the middle of a combat scene, any of us can decide to just walk home. " See you later guys, goodluck. I'd rather be taking shots and masturbating to homemade porn with that one guy who doesn't pay rent for staying in our hideout." That would break character.. So bad, and would limit the role play.


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

Well finish a battle if you are in it of course, otherwise you are basically like watchtower.


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

I at least like the watchtower/home base idea for when people are offline. Either that or make an excuse when you're going offline, like you're "going to investigate" or something ^^

And that with the guy who's in the watchtower handing out communications and etc, that person could be GM at the time. Of course it would mean that you'd have to be both Villains/control.


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Yaruzaru said:


> Well finish a battle if you are in it of course, otherwise you are basically like watchtower.




Just me? So, am I the only person here who can't be on all day every day? Lol


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> I at least like the watchtower/home base idea for when people are offline. Either that or make an excuse when you're going offline, like you're "going to investigate" or something ^^
> 
> And that with the guy who's in the watchtower handing out communications and etc, that person could be GM at the time. Of course it would mean that you'd have to be both Villains/control.




Perhaps when there are very important events, there should be a session planned so everyone can participate.


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> Perhaps when there are very important events, there should be a session planned so everyone can participate.


So whoever's on GM duty sends out a PM to everyone so that important events are not missed. Something like that?


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> So whoever's on GM duty sends out a PM to everyone so that important events are not missed. Something like that?




I'd imagine everyone who is part of the rp should come into some sort of chat and discuss a date and time of day.


----------



## lyar (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> I'd imagine everyone who is part of the rp should come into some sort of chat and discuss a date and time of day.


Making it sound like an actual dnd game


----------



## Yaruzaru (Sep 29, 2016)

InpuOsirisson said:


> Just me? So, am I the only person here who can't be on all day every day? Lol


Well it would be for anyone that is too busy to play really at the time i think. If you are busy, you can probably just tell the group you won't be on until "this time or day". As long as everyone is fine with waiting.


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Sep 29, 2016)

lyar said:


> Making it sound like an actual dnd game




Just thinking about what is fair for everyone.


----------



## Dyrra (Sep 29, 2016)

Well, I'll try drawing up a plan with all your guys suggestions. I'll probably post it tomorrow ^^


----------



## Dyrra (Oct 4, 2016)

So I figured out a few rules for the superhero RP, let me know what you think:

Rule 1. _Praise Mighty Talos!_ No fucking Heimskr. (Literally or figuratively)

Rule 2. _The bigger they are, the harder they fall. _No perfect/gamebreaking powers, if you have a stronger power, make it have a larger weakness.

Rule 3. _There ain't enough room in town for the both of us _Not everyone's gonna be able to be the King of heroes or whatever, plus we're probably gonna have a set number of people.

Rule 4. _Leadership is the art of giving people a platform for spreading ideas that work_ Someone's going to have to lead, in a GM-like fashion. Most likely, taking turns is the best option, the GM is the hero who's in base/watchetower and runs the Villains too. Big Responsibility. 

Let me know what you think and give me feedback. I wanna know what you all think


----------



## lyar (Oct 4, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Most likely, taking turns is the best option, the GM is the hero who's in base/watchtower and runs the Villains too.


This is the only thing I am not okay with. I have an idea and it will preserve the fact that we will take turns as GM and that the GM controls the villains. If there is only one villain that guy or gal will be the GM the entire time if there are multiple villains, the villain that is GM will turn into a hero after being defeated and will pass the GM role to another villain who will continue the cycle. If there are any problems with that I can explain further but this seems like the best way to stop bias that would possibly exist if a hero controls the villains.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Oct 4, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Rule 1. _Praise Mighty Talos!_ No fucking Heimskr. (Literally or figuratively)


FUCK TALOS ! I bend the universe to my will, baby !



Dyrra said:


> Rule 2. _The bigger they are, the harder they fall. _No perfect/gamebreaking powers, if you have a stronger power, make it have a larger weakness.


The traditional "drains health/stamina/mana" mechanics, if I'm right



Dyrra said:


> Rule 3. _There ain't enough room in town for the both of us _Not everyone's gonna be able to be the King of heroes or whatever, plus we're probably gonna have a set number of people.


I don't need to be the king or heroes ; I can be a simple wandering samurai looking for odd jobs, LOL



Dyrra said:


> Rule 4. _Leadership is the art of giving people a platform for spreading ideas that work_ Someone's going to have to lead, in a GM-like fashion. Most likely, taking turns is the best option, the GM is the hero who's in base/watchetower and runs the Villains too. Big Responsibility.


I... got no comment on this one ; normally, I just follow people's RPs


----------



## Dyrra (Oct 4, 2016)

lyar said:


> This is the only thing I am not okay with. I have an idea and it will preserve the fact that we will take turns as GM and that the GM controls the villains. If there is only one villain that guy or gal will be the GM the entire time if there are multiple villains, the villain that is GM will turn into a hero after being defeated and will pass the GM role to another villain who will continue the cycle. If there are any problems with that I can explain further but this seems like the best way to stop bias that would possibly exist if a hero controls the villains.


Sounds interesting, do tell me more on this.



Jin-Lust-4-Sin said:


> FUCK TALOS ! I bend the universe to my will, baby !
> 
> 
> The traditional "drains health/stamina/mana" mechanics, if I'm right
> ...


In regards to rule 2. Sure it can be that, but I was also thinking logical weaknesses. Fire hates water. Ice melts. Speed means you might run out of energy or the inertia of objects like rain killing you etc.


----------



## Jin-Lust-4-Sin (Oct 4, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> In regards to rule 2. Sure it can be that, but I was also thinking logical weaknesses. Fire hates water. Ice melts. Speed means you might run out of energy or the inertia of objects like rain killing you etc.


Sounds good to me~


----------



## lyar (Oct 4, 2016)

Dyrra said:


> Sounds interesting, do tell me more on this.


Another thing I had in mind was if villains or other characters wished to GM and or become villains(again) it would be possible. So to give an example, lets say there's a villain called Buttmunch and Buttmunch is defeated thus becoming an ally to the heroes. Buttmunch is indeed a good guy for a bit but then decides to go back to a life of crime and does so becoming the GM once again. I want the morality to be a gray area for the players, so they can choose and not be stuck on either side. Of course there has to be one consistent hero and one consistent villain but I think morality/alignment should be up to the players. However there should be a limitation, I would advise that if players want to defect they can only do it after defeating the villain or before they encounter the villain.


----------



## Dyrra (Oct 4, 2016)

lyar said:


> Another thing I had in mind was if villains or other characters wished to GM and or become villains(again) it would be possible. So to give an example, lets say there's a villain called Buttmunch and Buttmunch is defeated thus becoming an ally to the heroes. Buttmunch is indeed a good guy for a bit but then decides to go back to a life of crime and does so becoming the GM once again. I want the morality to be a gray area for the players, so they can choose and not be stuck on either side. Of course there has to be one consistent hero and one consistent villain but I think morality/alignment should be up to the players. However there should be a limitation, I would advise that if players want to defect they can only do it after defeating the villain or before they encounter the villain.



Mmmm, something to consider there. I'll have a good think about how this GM-ing works. That and defection. It's definately something which needs a close look at.


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Oct 4, 2016)

I think I have a hero in mind. For me


----------



## InpuOsirisson (Oct 4, 2016)

But you need to tell us more about this world.


----------



## Dyrra (Oct 4, 2016)

Once I've worked out a the rules and how this is going to work, I'll start cooking up a setting. I'll let you know ^^


----------

