So the Legacy ‘s Never Give Up Never Surrender move seems kind of weird to me. The new clause seems to, and in play has, made the move more or less useless for a Legacy choosing some of the iconic packages (the detective one less so). But it’s an even more amazing move for Beacons now, since their whole thing is being less powerful than… everything.
I think codifying power levels into allowing you to use a move or not is a bad idea. There should be a more entertaining and evocative requirement for the move if you don’t want it to just be a replacement move, that doesn’t make it a better move off skin than on skin.
Power levels and who is strongest should remain only info in the narrative, and shouldn’t influence what the mechanical abilities of someone are. Otherwise you get weird things like a Beacon being told they can’t take Unstoppable, since they’re not actually a super strong beast.
A more evocative requirement could be something like ‘When the image of your legacy is on the line, and you push past the pain to live up to their expectations’.
I think it is a clear flag from the player that they want to engage with things that are more powerful then them or that can negate their powers and advantages.
So hit them hard, they have a move just for that moment.
I don’t see the problem.
It feels like a good thematic fit to me. A Legacy will always have powerful enemies that come with their history – there’s one built right into the playbook, even!
Not every move has to fit every character – that’s why there are options to choose!
Liked the move before. I do feel the requirement to “far greater power” is unnecessary – but I do think it will work for us as our Legacy is basically a Doc Savage power level.
It’s a very Superman move, where it’s assumed the Legacy is battling adult level threats. That’s why it synergizes so well with Fight the Good Fight; it gives a duality of ‘dealing with huge alien threats’ and ‘being merciful to weaker forces’.
Every time someone in comics has said “I usually hold back…but for you, I won’t!”, and that’s “Never Give Up Never Surrender”. You get better benefits (on a hit, 1 condition instead of 2), you can presumably get teamwork as a bonus to the roll…
And you’re not penalized for having conditions!
Yeah, but it’s actually bad for Superman type characters. Like, a character who is Batman can use it on more threats than a character who is Superman, which seems like a weird decision. You end up with Hawkeye being better at getting hit and standing back up than Thor.
When mechanically, the difference between Hawkeye and Thor is entirely in the labels. Narratively they might have different things they can do, but this one move introduces mechanical references to an otherwise narrative thing in game.
I’m not opposed to the idea of the move, I’m opposed to the fact that it turns ‘power levels’ into a quantifiable thing, and opens the road to bonuses or penalties for being ‘too powerful’ in future moves.
But Superman faces different threats then Batman. They will always have opponents that are stronger then them. That is the whole point.
But Superman and Batman face the same threats on the Justice League. Except Superman has Darkseid as stronger than him, and Batman has basically everyone. My whole point is that it’s weird for a playbook specific move [Never Give Up Never Surrender] is
worse on the Playbook it is inthan it is on other playbooks.