To elaborate, now that I'm not dying of tired:
I prefer caps of 16. AV's are kind of game breaking if they get out of balance, and too high an AV makes it impossible to do anything meaningful with mooks at all. And as Gideon kindly pointed out last night, a 16 av is incredibly high, a good dice roll away from walking on bullets... Mooks, in the world of Feng shui are above average fighters. People with 12-14 are elite badasses. 15's are among the best in the world. 16 AV is supernaturally potent, and can easily defeat almost any foe. We really don't need to step outside this scale, just to add more skills/atts/schticks.
Further, most of the differences in characters can be represented by Schticks. For example, Gideon made some interesting points regarding mook mowing and the Grammaton Cleric, stating that the 17 AV really isn't necessary to represent his actions, just high carnival of carnage and such. Both Guns Blazing is nice but also not necessary for the build (replaced with 10k Bullets it makes more sense). And when taken in perspective of the movie, the mooks were weak, and the other named characters very limited. In his own movie he was awesome, but there isn't a solid basis for comparison between other movies...
Anyway, the point is that this rational can be applied to most of the characters.
I think characters should be classed in tiers for AV's, with a hard cap for each that we don't bother changing:
A - This is generally for chars that are focused on a single combat AV, or are recognized badasses in their area of expertise... Characters like John Preston or Duncan McCloud would fall into this category, and cap out at 16.
B - These chars are still elite, but not the greatest to ever live... just merely some of the best in the world at what they do. They tend to have multiple high AV's, and may have some unique schtick combinations to make up for the lower AV's. Riddick's MA AV, Willow's magic, and McClain's Drive all would fit this category. B's skills cap at 15
C - This category is mostly for characters that have many lesser combat AV's supplemented by many good schticks, and those characters that have a more "gritty" feel to their combat. Bond (new, can't talk about the old one), McClain and Rigg's guns/martial arts, and most of the Terminator's abilities, would all fall in this category.
I think that we should set the AV's where we want them on given characters, and leave them there. While I do like the idea of advancing the characters, I think we should leave the general balance of things alone, with the characters that are more skilled in a given area just staying that way, at least relative to the rest of the party.
A Note on Characters and AV's
I remember when I first was helping to concept these characters. I said to myself, "These aren't just generic action heroes, they're THE action heroes."
I used that to justify huge AV's, and generally to make them larger than the average character. Having had roughly a year to contemplate it however, Feng Shui builds are based upon being one of THE action heroes, not an average guy. Their AV's are actually awesome. Now granted, they are schtick light, and a bit light on the Attributes, but they tend to improve those as their given franchise progresses, while their AV's often remain exactly the same.
A Note on Attributes:
Western action characters tend to be more about the attributes than HK Action characters. The Terminator is a great example of this, as though he hits like a mack truck, and has immense attributes, he actually has trouble with accuracy, especially in comparison to Hong Kong action characters. In light of this, I think that generally increasing attributes on many of the characters, rather than giving higher AV, might be a good idea.
Oh, I also don't think Attribute increases should Increase AV's.
A Note on Schticks:
Playing last night showed me yet again why schticks need to be carefully balanced. Jason played a killer with BGB 3. Nothing fancy, pretty standard build. But he tore through characters at roughly double the rate of everything else. Gun schticks combo easily, and far outstrip non-gun builds if careful attention is not paid to balance. And there are other combinations that can get out of hand too... Anything that reduces shot time for example, should be seriously examined before being put on a character.
A Note on XP:
Having looked at where Legends was at the last time we played, and having contemplated the characters, I'm leaning towards not giving a shit about handing out xp. Roleplaying is the point, story is the point. We play one shots and enjoy them. Why do we need xp for this game? The point is to make the characters into exactly what they are on screen, and then play that character. Adding XP changes them, and eventually makes them into something else entirely. While I do like character growth, I'm sort of wondering if it wouldn't be better to just make character growth a story element, rather than an XP thing.
And of course, XP results in characters getting out of the balance that makes them all able to contribute meaningfully to a fight. If you don't hand it out, or hand it out sparingly, you end up not having to deal with power creep, and constant attention to balance.
This is something where I would definitely like some input, I'm not sure how other people feel.
Since most people have lost their characters anyway, I think that the next time we play this we should take a look at remaking these characters from scratch with these things in mind. Or whatever rules we come up with that we can all agree on anyway.
Threading the Gerbil since 1982