An EB by any other name...

[Dust Raven]

So I'm reading and posting and thinking through these drop something or add something or change something in the Hero System, and I thought, what would you change the name of and why?

Basically, I've noticed a lot of confusion (to put it mildly) over what something is called. Either the name seem to imply something it's not meant to, or otherwise doesn't actually convey the proper meaning in the first place.

One clarification though... I'm not asking for redefinitions... just new names. What do you think is poorly named and what do you think it should be called?

Personally, I'd rename Stunned to Dazed. Stunned sounds too much like STUN. Dazed means the same thing and there's absolutely nothing in the game that sounds like that word.

A long time ago I might have renamed Phase to simply Action, but over the years I kinda like Phase. In any case, it makes more sense to say you spend your phase doing nothing rather than your action. How can doing nothing be an action?

So what would you rename?

[Mark Taylor]

Energy Blast to Ranged Attack.

Ditto on that. Energy Blast can be agaisnt Physical or Energy Defense, so the name quite simply isn't appropriate. RA is consistent.

[Ben Seeman]

Ditto on that. Energy Blast can be agaisnt Physical or Energy Defense, so the name quite simply isn't appropriate. RA is consistent.
Same here. I ran my younger brother through his first combat over the holiday's and he had a little trouble grasping the fact that Energy Blast was a generic term for "attacks that do normal damage". And he's a nuclear engineer at GE. :)

He did have fun though, until my nephew started attacking his own teammates. (see my sig)

[Mark Taylor]

Another one I'm not keen on the name of is Entangle. To my mind it's too evocative of a certain narrow range of special effects rather than the actual game effect, which bascially is to stop a target from being able to act. I don't have a great suggestion for an alternate name though. Anybody have an idea?

[Ben Seeman]

Another one I'm not keen on the name of is Entangle. To my mind it's too evocative of a certain narrow range of special effects rather than the actual game effect, which bascially is to stop a target from being able to act. I don't have a great suggestion for an alternate name though. Anybody have an idea?
Entrap? Ensnare? That's the best I can come up with.

[Mark Taylor]

Entrap? Ensnare? That's the best I can come up with.

Ensnare is pretty good actually. It's better than the thoughts I had, which were along the lines of Impede, Hinder, and similar, none of which sound right. Probably the most technically correct term in the English language would be Arrest, but unfortunately that just really doesn't sound right, probably because of the police-related connotations.

[Mark Taylor]

It only just occured to me, Restrain fits quite well.

[Kristopher]

Nothing.

I wouldn't change any of the names.

There's no need, and no reason, other than pedantry.

[Kristopher]

Personally, I'd rename Stunned to Dazed. Stunned sounds too much like STUN. Dazed means the same thing and there's absolutely nothing in the game that sounds like that word.


Stunned? So you mean out of STUN, or CON Stunned?

This is the only proposed name change I've seen so far that makes much sense to me.

[Kristopher]

I would rename:
Armor to Tough [armor implies focuses such as knight's armor or Ironman].


So we should start renaming powers based on the things that you infer? When someone speaks of armored dinosaurs, do you picture a large creature in chainmail? Does a reference to an armadillo's armor confuse you?

Armor makes a lot more sense than "tough". "Tough" isn't a noun, it's an adjective, at least as used here. I think it would be the first Power name that isn't a noun, IIRC. Naming a power using the noun variant of "tough" would make even less sense.



Damage Resistance to Resistance.

Why? Isn't there already a power or talent with that name? And it's not like the old name or your proposed truncation are crystal clear on what the Power really does.



Energy Blast to Ranged Attack.

Or people could read the first paragraph of the power's description, which gives multiple examples of physical attacks built using EB.



Hand-to-Hand Attack to Hand Attack.

Why?




Ego Attack to Mental Attack.

Mind Control to Mental Control.

Mind Link to Mental Link.

Mind Scan to Mental Scan.


I guess I'm neutral on those, since they'd all be together alphabetically in the book. **shrug**

[Dust Raven]

Stunned? So you mean out of STUN, or CON Stunned?

This is the only proposed name change I've seen so far that makes much sense to me.
That's the issue that confuses most of my players. At home, I tend to call it CON Stunned, even though there is no such term in the rulebook. At conventions I deliberately call it Dazed in hopes of getting other players in that habit and perhaps force the writer editor to do the same some day in a future edition of the rules.

[Dust Raven]

So we should start renaming powers based on the things that you infer? When someone speaks of armored dinosaurs, do you picture a large creature in chainmail? Does a reference to an armadillo's armor confuse you?
Actually, that reminds me of an illustration in Transdimension Turtles for TMNT by Palladium. I think it was a triceritops, but I'm not sure... all I remember is that he didn't need a helmet.

[lemming]

That's the issue that confuses most of my players. At home, I tend to call it CON Stunned, even though there is no such term in the rulebook. At conventions I deliberately call it Dazed in hopes of getting other players in that habit and perhaps force the writer editor to do the same some day in a future edition of the rules.
That might be the best explaination I've seen of why people say CON stunned yet. I still hate the term, but maybe I'll see if I can start using Dazed.

[Lord Liaden]

I changed "Energy Blast" to simple "Blast" a long time ago - actually that's what the ranged Normal Damage attack power was called in the first edition of Fantasy HERO. I just stick Physical or Energy in front of it on the character sheet as appropriate.

Otherwise I don't have a serious problem with the system's naming conventions, although I'd like a change to either Normal Characteristic Maxima or Non-Combat Multiplier, just because the acronym's are exactly the same. Without clear context that can be confusing.

[Vurbal]

Or people could read the first paragraph of the power's description, which gives multiple examples of physical attacks built using EB.That assumes that everyone wants to read through the descriptions of every power before they start playing. A lot of people would rather look for the powers they need for their first character. If someone new to Hero is trying to build a ranged physical attack like a gun he's not likely to think a power called Energy Blast is what he needs. Also, if he already knows that energy and physical defenses are separate he's likely to assume from the name that an Energy Blast is related specifically to Energy Defense.

It also makes sense for internal consistency. The killing equivalent to a Hand To Hand Attack is a Hand To Hand Killing Attack, but the equivalent to an Energy Blast is a Ranged Killing Attack not a Killing Energy Blast.

[rjcurrie]

That might be the best explaination I've seen of why people say CON stunned yet. I still hate the term, but maybe I'll see if I can start using Dazed.
Yeah, I hate CON stunned as a term too. I've never understood how people could get confused by Stunned. It was certainly never a problem in the groups I played with.

[Fitz]

My votes would go to:

Energy Blast ==> Ranged Attack
Entangle ==> Restrain
Paramedic ==> First Aid
I've never really had any problem with confusing STUN and Stunning, though I've noticed that others have. Maybe a terminology change might help, but I suspect it would be more trouble than it's worth.

[Lord Mhoram]

CON Stunned?



Pedant mode on:

There is no such thing as CON stunned.

If the damage exceeds your CON you are stunned. That is stunned.
If you lose all your stun you are unconcious.
Repeat - There is no CON stunned.

Pedant mode off:

Sorry. Pet peeve.

[Lord Mhoram]

Yeah, I hate CON stunned as a term too. I've never understood how people could get confused by Stunned. It was certainly never a problem in the groups I played with.

Yeah. I never ran across the term till I hit the net.

[Southern Cross]

I'm with Lord Liaden on renaming Energy Blast just Blast.

[Silbeg]

Yeah. I never ran across the term till I hit the net.
I first heard it at a convention. However, it sort of stuck (especially since we have added players that we met at the same convention to our gaming group).

I kind of like "Dazed" myself, right now... Granted, that "Stunned" is still technically correct, I understand where the confusion is, with the STUN characteristic.

As for the others...

I would agree with

Energy Blast -> Ranged Attack (matches up with RKA well)

However, I would go with:
Hand-to-hand Attack -> Melee Attack
Hand-to-hand Killing Attack -> Melee Killing Attack

Granted, this causes an acronym issue w/ Martial Arts, but nothing is perfect. :)

[Derek Hiemforth]

DISCLAIMER: I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if I'm duplicating any ideas here.

At this point, I probably wouldn't change the name of anything. None of the names are desperately bad, IMO. Just kinda sloppy. And if it's not desperately needed, I'd generally prefer not to change it.

The new names might be simpler for new players to grasp, but -- as evidenced by the fact that there are still hordes of players who call the game system "Champions" -- many of the current players wouldn't adopt the new names. And having the experienced players calling concepts one thing, while the book calls them another, would probably confuse the newbies as much as or more than the current names do. ;)

Having said all that, there are a lot of names I think are less than ideal. And if I was just now creating the game, I might name them differently.

Ones I can think of off the top of my head... Endurance --> Stamina
Disadvantages --> Drawbacks
Limitations --> Disadvantages
Package Deal --> Package (the word "deal" implies a lessened cost that doesn't exist)
Energy Blast --> Normal Ranged Attack
Killing Attack - Ranged --> Killing Ranged Attack
Hand-To-Hand Attack --> Normal Melee Attack
Killing Attack - Hand-to-Hand --> Killing Melee Attack
Haymaker --> All-Out Attack
Seduction --> Enticement? (not sure... just think Seduction is a bit misleading)
Stunned --> Dazed
Force Wall --> Barrier
Force Field --> Defense Field

[Hugh Neilson]

Count me in for "Blast" and "Dazed".

And the term CON Stunned creates its own problems as people then think there's yet another condition, in addition to Stunned (hit for more than your CON) and Knocked OUt (out of Stun).

[Frenchman]

I like Dazed, woks much better than stunned. In my game, thought, we lean towards Clobbered. It's just more evocative.

The only other ones I see as having any point to changing are seduction (I'd call it Befriend, or somesuch. The name is misleading) and Damage Resistance (DR is used for Damage Reduction and it'd be nice to have an acronym for both).

Other than that, none of the names ever really confused me.

[Trebuchet]

I like Dazed a lot as a replacement for Stunned.

Ranged Attack instead of Energy Blast.

Restrain instead of Entangle.

I'm OK with the other terms as is, although replacing Hand to Hand Attack with Melee Attack makes sense too.

[Lord Mhoram]

I don't mind dazed.

Entangle is fine by me thought.

RKA
HKA
RA - ranged attack
HA - hand to hand attack

Would be just fine for me on that front.

And whenever I've used a ranged attack that does damage against PD I've always refered to it at "Physical Blast" rather than Energy Blast.

[tracer]

Or instead of "Dazed", we could rename CON Stunned to "Fazed."

There's no possible chance of confusion with that word! ;)

[bblackmoor]

Personally, I'd rename Stunned to Dazed. Stunned sounds too much like STUN. Dazed means the same thing and there's absolutely nothing in the game that sounds like that word.

I agree with that. That's a source of confusion every time with every new player. Even with experienced players, you have to clarify whether by "stunned" you mean "reduced to zero Stun" or "have taken more Stun damage than the character's Con".

I'd rename "Energy Blast" to simply "Blast", for obvious reasons.

I'd rename "Desolidification" to "Intangibility" or "Density Decrease", because "Desolidification" is the kind of word a six-year-old or an illiterate would make up, thinking that it means something. That kind of thing irks me.

[bblackmoor]

Ones I can think of off the top of my head...

That's a great list, Derek. Most of those hadn't occurred to me, but seem obvious now that you've mentioned them.

[bblackmoor]

That might be the best explaination I've seen of why people say CON stunned yet.

An old game group of mine used to call that "instantly stunned", referring to the fact that the character was only "stunned" for an instant (a phase, really, but you know what I mean). I'm not sure if that phrase was ever in the Champoions rules, though. It might have been, at some point.

[Christougher]

Repeating myself from the 'what would you drop' thread. Succor needs to die, Boost is a much better name.

[Dust Raven]

I've always hated the term CON Stunned, but it's stuck. I don't remember where I first heard it, or even if I just said it by mistake one day. I'm trying really hard to either used Stunned or Dazed when in play.

[Dust Raven]

Repeating myself from the 'what would you drop' thread. Succor needs to die, Boost is a much better name.
I actually like Succor. It's a nice contrast to Suppress, it's opposite.

[lemming]

Yeah. I never ran across the term till I hit the net.
I had the great pleasure of having it introduced in a Convention game. I'm thinking "The character has been played too much at this con?"

So me and my friends started getting INT, EGO, & COM stunned.

[lemming]

I agree with that. That's a source of confusion every time with every new player. Even with experienced players, you have to clarify whether by "stunned" you mean "reduced to zero Stun" or "have taken more Stun damage than the character's Con".
We never had that problem. You were either Stunned or Knocked Out.

[Dust Raven]

INT, EGO, & COM stunned.Is that like a really bad hangover (:idjit: :sick: ), or the actual after con party? :celebrate

[Rapier]

Pedant mode on:

There is no such thing as CON stunned.

If the damage exceeds your CON you are stunned. That is stunned.
If you lose all your stun you are unconcious.
Repeat - There is no CON stunned.

Pedant mode off:

Sorry. Pet peeve.
Got your back, LM. I've never understood the need either.

[Kristopher]

Pedant mode on:

There is no such thing as CON stunned.

If the damage exceeds your CON you are stunned. That is stunned.
If you lose all your stun you are unconcious.
Repeat - There is no CON stunned.

Pedant mode off:

Sorry. Pet peeve.

**shrug**

It's what everyone I learned HERO from called the thing.

EDIT: And even though a character is knocked out when they run out of STUN, I've seen too many people use "stunned" to describe that state, so I've kept using "CON Stunned" to avoid confusion.

[Rapier]

I actually like Succor. It's a nice contrast to Suppress, it's opposite.
DUH! Everyone knows that the opposite of SuCCoR is RoXXoR!

[zornwil]

Excellent ideas. I do like the idea of adopting Dazed given the lack of relationship to STUN. That one gets my vote.

So do these:

Energy Blast to Ranged Attack.
Disadvantages --> Limitations, and as a side note move them in the book just after Perks - or roll them into the same grouped section and call it "Character Modifiers"
Limitations --> Disadvantages
Package Deal --> Package
Haymaker --> All-Out Attack
Force Wall --> Barrier
Force Field --> Defense Field

I do think it's annoying/stupid that we call the good modifiers "Advantages" but then use "Disadvantages" for something completely different.

Armor is borderline. I don't like "Tough" or "Toughness", they're so generic they can easily be applied to Damage Reduction. I think another term would be nice, but I can't think of a really good one. Perhaps "Inherent Defense Force " (if Force Field becomes Defense Field, this is sort of what Armor really is).

As to the notion it's pedantry to change the names, I disagree. The idea is to have a generic universal system (yeah, I know, that's close to a proper noun there...). It is confusing for people to see "Energy Blast" and then be told their thrown club is an "energy" blast versus "physical" defense.

I also think as Derek notes Seduction should be called something else. People get very hung up on that loaded term. Personally I'd call it Charm. I think that's easier to grasp and readily distinguishable from Persuasion or other such things.

I don't think Desolid needs to change per se, but one thing I'd grant bblackmoor and would be nice - Intangibility will pass spell-check whereas Desolid won't!

[Katherine]

It only just occured to me, Restrain fits quite well.

Restrain is good.

I would also suggest "Immobilize"

[zornwil]

Restrain is good.

I would also suggest "Immobilize"
I wasn't keen on any suggested Entangle changes, but Immobilize really is a good idea, it best represents the goal of the power. Good one!

[Kristopher]

Of course, none of the proposed names for Entangle reflect he ability to make barriers with it.

[Kristopher]

That assumes that everyone wants to read through the descriptions of every power before they start playing. A lot of people would rather look for the powers they need for their first character.


**shrug** Their loss.



If someone new to Hero is trying to build a ranged physical attack like a gun he's not likely to think a power called Energy Blast is what he needs.


I did.



Also, if he already knows that energy and physical defenses are separate he's likely to assume from the name that an Energy Blast is related specifically to Energy Defense.


Or he could avoid making assumptions...

[Trebuchet]

Of course, none of the proposed names for Entangle reflect he ability to make barriers with it.I suppose "Impede" might do the trick.

"Restrain" or "Immobilize" still are both better than Entangle. (I prefer "Restrain" myself.) And Entangle certainly doesn't reflect the ability to make barriers either. I would dump the ability to make barriers from Entangle and make it a subset of Force Wall anyway.

[bcholmes]

Yeah, I hate CON stunned as a term too. I've never understood how people could get confused by Stunned.

That surprises me. Knowing that you're a technical writer, I kinda thought that you'd be much more attuned to the dangers of giving things confusable names.


It was certainly never a problem in the groups I played with.

Obviously I know nothing about your con experiences, but I think I know a number of the people you've gamed with. My perception is that they're:

- mathematically/technically inclined
- read a lot
- long-time rpgers
- who have their own copies of the rulebooks

It doen't surprise me that a group like that doesn't have a problem with a very math-like way of organizing information ("We define 'stunned' as...").

I often play with a lot of first-time gamers, and even when I have players with RPG experience, it's almost never with the Hero rules. I struggle, regularly, with trying to simply and easily communicate Hero concepts to these people.

I really grok the original point of this thread -- trying to identify potential areas of confusion and looking for alternative ways of communicating the concepts. (This also overlaps a lot with what my job is about -- trying to design computer applications in a way that ensures that people who are nothing like me can take them over and change or support them relatively safely).

[Vurbal]

**shrug** Their loss. I disagree. If they decide it's too confusing to make a character it's DoJ's loss when they lose a potential customer and my loss when I can't find players.

I did. Wasn't it you arguing that a single person's perception shouldn't be used to guage whether a name should or shouldn't be changed? Since you do "get it" clearly we're not talking about you. Nobody's saying these names don't make sense to anyone. That doesn't mean they're the best names or that they don't confuse some (or maybe a lot of) people who are just learning the system.

Or he could avoid making assumptions... Everyone makes assumptions. We all see things through the lense of our own experiences. For example, you're making one right now - that others won't have problems understanding these things because you didn't.

I definitely like Restrain for Entangle, Ranged Attack for EB and Dazed for Stunned.

[Kristopher]

No assumptions, just expressing my utter disdain for the constant undertone of "change this, change that, change half the game" that seems to wax and wane like the eternal tides on these forums.

Making major changes to the game is just as likely to lose existing players as it is to gain new players. Note how Fuzion bombed like crazy. If all the changes that are regularly proposed on these boards were actually made, it wouldn't even be HERO any more.

[Trebuchet]

I hardly think adopting less confusing terms for a few of the powers constitutes a major change to the game system. Even long time players can get confused by Stunned vs. Stun.

No changes are to be undertaken lightly. That's why we are discussing this.

[Vurbal]

I hardly think adopting less confusing terms for a few of the powers constitutes a major change to the game system. Even long time players can get confused by Stunned vs. Stun.

No changes are to be undertaken lightly. That's why we are discussing this. Exactly!

[bcholmes]

No changes are to be undertaken lightly. That's why we are discussing this.

Well said.

I'm always surprised when people can't get the difference between "Here's something that I'd like to talk about" and "You must do this thing because I'm complaining."

[rjcurrie]

Giving the responses on this thread, I am willing to concede that "Stunned" does seem to be a troublesome term. "Dazed" is the best suggestion that I have seen. I use the term myself when I want to avoid "game-speak". For example, "Dr. Destroyer appears to have beeen dazed by that shot." :)

[Silbeg]

Giving the responses on this thread, I am willing to concede that "Stunned" does seem to be a troublesome term. "Dazed" is the best suggestion that I have seen. I use the term myself when I want to avoid "game-speak". For example, "Dr. Destroyer appears to have beeen dazed by that shot." :) Exactly! The one thing that I hate, both as a player, and a GM, is the tendency to describe everything in game terms. I know I have used many different descriptors for when a villain has been "stunned". Dazed would be one, but as often would be "Ogre seems a bit out of it... not quite focusing at the moment". I prefer to let the players make their assumptions on that kind of terminology, rather than...

GM: Kid Comet, it looks like you stunned Ogre with that shot!
Kid Comet: Cool!
Chaos: Ok, now that he is at ½ DCV, I attack him...
Shugokon: Me too!
Aegis: Sure, why not. Get him out of the action.

HOwever, if the reason he is a little out of it has to do with the fact that the mastermind Ogre is working for is a mentalist who was using the mind link they established to order Ogre to do something, then they may be surprised to find Ogre at full DCV (ok, maybe Ogre is a bad example, since his DCV is already low, but you catch my drift!)

[Christougher]

Of course, none of the proposed names for Entangle reflect he ability to make barriers with it.

Combining the barrier aspect of Entangle with Force Wall is a very common suggestion for change/argument. Call it Barrier, give it adders or advantages for increased shape control, it becomes the power to create physical objects.

I like the suggestion of Immobilize; removing the barrier aspect leads to interesting thoughts. I think the DEF+Body mechanic should probably change(not sure to what), but that takes away the chance for someone else to free the target.

[Dust Raven]

DUH! Everyone knows that the opposite of SuCCoR is RoXXoR!
:think:
I don't get it.

[Dust Raven]

I do think it's annoying/stupid that we call the good modifiers "Advantages" but then use "Disadvantages" for something completely different.
I always thought that Advantages should be called Enhancers or something similar. Either that call Limitations Disadvantages and Disadvantages Restrictions or Drawbacks.

Then again, I've never really had a problem with any of those named as it, nor have anyone I've ever played with.

[Dust Raven]

Exactly! The one thing that I hate, both as a player, and a GM, is the tendency to describe everything in game terms. I know I have used many different descriptors for when a villain has been "stunned". Dazed would be one, but as often would be "Ogre seems a bit out of it... not quite focusing at the moment". I prefer to let the players make their assumptions on that kind of terminology, rather than...

GM: Kid Comet, it looks like you stunned Ogre with that shot!
Kid Comet: Cool!
Chaos: Ok, now that he is at ½ DCV, I attack him...
Shugokon: Me too!
Aegis: Sure, why not. Get him out of the action.

HOwever, if the reason he is a little out of it has to do with the fact that the mastermind Ogre is working for is a mentalist who was using the mind link they established to order Ogre to do something, then they may be surprised to find Ogre at full DCV (ok, maybe Ogre is a bad example, since his DCV is already low, but you catch my drift!)
I tend to do the same. I describe the action as I might if witnessing a real life situation.

Then again, I'm a gamer-geek who tends to describe real life situations in game terms. :stupid:

[Mark Taylor]

I always thought that Advantages should be called Enhancers or something similar. Either that call Limitations Disadvantages and Disadvantages Restrictions or Drawbacks.

Then again, I've never really had a problem with any of those named as it, nor have anyone I've ever played with.

In GURPS (which has the equivalent of Power Modifiers, though they're not as core a part of the system as in HERO) they are called Enhancements and Limitations. Whereas Disadvantages are still Disadavantages and Talents and Perks are both classed as different types of Advantages.

To my mind, the naming of these and indeed many other elements in GURPS is rather more logical and consistent than in HERO, But HERO is still a far better system overall IMO.

[zornwil]

Of course, none of the proposed names for Entangle reflect he ability to make barriers with it.
Good point.


I suppose "Impede" might do the trick.

"Restrain" or "Immobilize" still are both better than Entangle. (I prefer "Restrain" myself.) And Entangle certainly doesn't reflect the ability to make barriers either. I would dump the ability to make barriers from Entangle and make it a subset of Force Wall anyway.

I like Impede, that makes a lot of sense on many levels, even better!

...staying away from whether barriers should be made from Entangles or not. I have a related (but not identical) thread idea.

[zornwil]

I always thought that Advantages should be called Enhancers or something similar. Either that call Limitations Disadvantages and Disadvantages Restrictions or Drawbacks.

Then again, I've never really had a problem with any of those named as it, nor have anyone I've ever played with.
That approach is okay, too, re Enhancers, I could see that. Perhaps it's better, as Disads are just so ingrained as a term.

[Dust Raven]

Thought of a new name for Entangle:

Barrier. As I explained in another thread, all an Entangle does is create barriers. Either as a stand alone wall, or around a target.

Then again, I like the name engangle, as it makes me thing of webs, which are used by spiders to create barriers that catch prey, rather than using them on a specific target and entrapping them like Spiderman does.

[zornwil]

Thought of a new name for Entangle:

Barrier. As I explained in another thread, all an Entangle does is create barriers. Either as a stand alone wall, or around a target.

Then again, I like the name engangle, as it makes me thing of webs, which are used by spiders to create barriers that catch prey, rather than using them on a specific target and entrapping them like Spiderman does.
I think the problem is that Barrier suggests Force Wall, at least to me.

[Dust Raven]

I think the problem is that Barrier suggests Force Wall, at least to me.
True. But in my mind, so does Force Field.

In any case, I'm not suggesting a change in name of any given Power/Skill. Maybe a few terms, such as Stunned, but that's about it. I like the names of the Powers as is.

[Mark Taylor]

Thought of a new name for Entangle:

Barrier. As I explained in another thread, all an Entangle does is create barriers. Either as a stand alone wall, or around a target.

No, it stops characters from being able to move or act. Physical barriers are just a special effect. Out of the three characters in the two campaigns I'm currently running who have Entangle based abilities, all three are built with the Cannot Form Barriers Limitation, and from what I have seen of characters posted online, Entangles built that way are just as common as Entangles with a physical barrier type special effect.

[Dust Raven]

No, it stops characters from being able to move or act. Physical barriers are just a special effect. Out of the three characters in the two campaigns I'm currently running who have Entangle based abilities, all three are built with the Cannot Form Barriers Limitation, and from what I have seen of characters posted online, Entangles built that way are just as common as Entangles with a physical barrier type special effect.
I guess you and me differ then. In my entire history of gaming using Hero, I've only every seen two, maybe three, Entangles that didn't/couldn't/shouldn't form barriers. One of them was handcufs, another one one was a clunky mental paralysis.

So I would say yes, it creates a barrier that the attacker can either form on it's own, or around a target to immobilize it. Anything else is a Limited version of that (Like an EB that can't spread or an HKA that doesn't add STR).

[Mark Taylor]

I guess you and me differ then. In my entire history of gaming using Hero, I've only every seen two, maybe three, Entangles that didn't/couldn't/shouldn't form barriers. One of them was handcufs, another one one was a clunky mental paralysis.

So I would say yes, it creates a barrier that the attacker can either form on it's own, or around a target to immobilize it. Anything else is a Limited version of that (Like an EB that can't spread or an HKA that doesn't add STR).

I think we just differ in the genres we play. I am guessing you mostly play Champions. In the heroic (as opposed to superheroic) genres Entangles which do not form barriers are IME actually more common than ones which do. Any kind of paralysis effect from a Martial Artists' paralysing nerve strike ability, to a paralysing poison, to a Wizard's spell of mystic bonds, to a Sci-Fi Tangler weapon is generally built using an Entangle which Cannot Form Barriers. OTOH if a player wants to build an ability which is purely intended to form barriers, he's more likely to employ a Force Wall than an Entangle, since in most cases he gets more value for his Character Points that way.

[lemming]

I've run across a bunch of entangles that don't do barriers as well. The ice slick that freezes the feet to the ground type for example. Ropes, Glue Guns as well.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Oh, I thought of another one that could stand to be changed...

Elemental Control.

The current name implies a connection to "elemental" powers that doesn't exist. I would propose the name "Megapower." It drives home the concept that this Power Framework is used in cases where a character has a single "power" (small-p) in the context of the campaign world (such as "produces flame" or "projects force"), but this single power requires multiple Powers (big-P) in terms of game mechanics in order to simulate all of its facets or applications.

[zornwil]

I guess you and me differ then. In my entire history of gaming using Hero, I've only every seen two, maybe three, Entangles that didn't/couldn't/shouldn't form barriers. One of them was handcufs, another one one was a clunky mental paralysis.

So I would say yes, it creates a barrier that the attacker can either form on it's own, or around a target to immobilize it. Anything else is a Limited version of that (Like an EB that can't spread or an HKA that doesn't add STR).
FWIW, I've almost never seen a PC who could do Entangles also do any sort of barriers, including VPP-based ones. Perhaps actually never. I'm not suggesting right or wrong, just indicating experience.

[zornwil]

Oh, I thought of another one that could stand to be changed...

Elemental Control.

The current name implies a connection to "elemental" powers that doesn't exist. I would propose the name "Megapower." It drives home the concept that this Power Framework is used in cases where a character has a single "power" (small-p) in the context of the campaign world (such as "produces flame" or "projects force"), but this single power requires multiple Powers (big-P) in terms of game mechanics in order to simulate all of its facets or applications.
It's funny you mention this, I thought about it but I still consider "element" to be a good basis.

[Hugh Neilson]

FWIW, I've almost never seen a PC who could do Entangles also do any sort of barriers, including VPP-based ones. Perhaps actually never. I'm not suggesting right or wrong, just indicating experience.

I think most PC's underestimate use of barriers. Whether chicken or egg, they also tend to ramp up Defense at the expense of Dice (eg. 3d6 6 DEF, or 4d6 8 DEF, but never 6d6 3 DEF or 8d6 4 DEF). This reduces the ability to create barriers.

In Fantasy Hero, I've been using a 6d6 3 DEF Entangle which works very nicely for creation of barriers. A 3 hex wide barrier doesn't last too long, but it does slow down archers. And if I keep replenishing the barrier, my teammates have a lot of time to prepare for a counterattack. Alternatively, my teammates can hold until the barrier drops, then fire at the opponents. After which, I can create a new barrier.

[Dust Raven]

I don't really understand why so many people/campaigns/players don't use the Barrier aspect of Entangle. Or worse, don't see how some SFX wouldn't form barriers.

Never tied a rope across a doorway? Never formed a wall of ice? Never had a mage cast some force bonds just out there to block someone? Even a glue gun can make a barrier in a doorway or over a trap door.

As for martial artists, poisons and such, I almost never use Entangle for these effects. I use something that's more appropriate to the SFX of what's actually causing the paralysis. I end up using Transform often, but then again, I've never heard of anyone using Entangle to so simulate turning someone to stone so I guess I'm okay. I also like using weird combinitation of Suppress/Drain STUN or SPD to cause paralysis effects.

[Mark Taylor]

I don't really understand why so many people/campaigns/players don't use the Barrier aspect of Entangle. Or worse, don't see how some SFX wouldn't form barriers.

Never tied a rope across a doorway? Never formed a wall of ice? Never had a mage cast some force bonds just out there to block someone? Even a glue gun can make a barrier in a doorway or over a trap door.

A rope accross a doorway doesn't form any kind of barrier anybody can't get past in half a second unless it's strung back and forth several times and pretty well secured in place. An action that's going to take a lot of Extra Time, so it's hardly a valid use for, or a natural part of the powers of a lasso, for example. As for mystic bonds, for example, again that's highly SFX dependent. It depends hugely on the nature of the spell and how it's visualised. I'm not sure how a 'glue gun' could reliably form any kind of barrier which couldn't easily be passed, without an awful lot of time and effort or exactly the right circumstances.



As for martial artists, poisons and such, I almost never use Entangle for these effects. I use something that's more appropriate to the SFX of what's actually causing the paralysis. I end up using Transform often, but then again, I've never heard of anyone using Entangle to so simulate turning someone to stone so I guess I'm okay. I also like using weird combinitation of Suppress/Drain STUN or SPD to cause paralysis effects.

There's nothing inappropriate to these SFX (except the turning to stone one) about an Entangle which can't form barriers. That's why the limitation exists. For my part, using Transform for such powers is somewhat against the spirit of the power, and runs contrary to the guideline that it shouldn't be used to simulate existing Powers. I'm going to suggest that you read the description of Entange again. I'm not trying to be rude, just trying to draw your attention to the fact that the actual description of the power strongly emphasises its restraint / paralysis effects and keeps the ability to form barriers very much secondary.

I'm not saying in any way that your way of doing things is "wrong", but I am pointing out that it's your personal taste and not in any way a HERO System standard. You may almost never use Entangle for those effects but you don't seem to be typical in that respect. Official HERO System products provide many examples of Entangles which don't form barriers (two out of four of the examples given in the main rulebook, for starters). OTOH correct me if I'm wrong but I can't recall seeing a single example of a Transform used to paralyse in a HERO book, except in cases where the paralysis is the side-effect of an actual physical transformation, such as petrification.

[bblackmoor]

I'm not sure how a 'glue gun' could reliably form any kind of barrier which couldn't easily be passed, without an awful lot of time and effort or exactly the right circumstances.

Maybe if it has a "spray" attachment, it could be used like Spider-Man makes his Entangles into barriers.

[Mark Taylor]

Maybe if it has a "spray" attachment, it could be used like Spider-Man makes his Entangles into barriers.

Sure, but my point was that it doesn't strike me as a natural capability of an unmodified "glue gun" type weapon or power.

[bblackmoor]

Sure, but my point was that it doesn't strike me as a natural capability of an unmodified "glue gun" type weapon or power.

I don't see why not. Spider-man is the archetypal Entangle-using character, and that's what he has: wrist-mounted glue guns.

[Mark Taylor]

I don't see why not. Spider-man is the archetypal Entangle-using character, and that's what he has: wrist-mounted glue guns.

Then where we differ is what we define as 'glue'. Spider silk (http://www.xs4all.nl/~ednieuw/Spiders/Info/spindraad.htm) is a bit more sophisticated a material than just glue. For a start it forms threads. All glue is going to do is form a heap, and in order to form a barrier it would have to be an extremely large heap.

[Dust Raven]

A rope accross a doorway doesn't form any kind of barrier anybody can't get past in half a second unless it's strung back and forth several times and pretty well secured in place. An action that's going to take a lot of Extra Time, so it's hardly a valid use for, or a natural part of the powers of a lasso, for example. As for mystic bonds, for example, again that's highly SFX dependent. It depends hugely on the nature of the spell and how it's visualised. I'm not sure how a 'glue gun' could reliably form any kind of barrier which couldn't easily be passed, without an awful lot of time and effort or exactly the right circumstances.I don't see how a 'glue gun' could even keep people from moving in the first place, so I don't see how forming a barrier is any more of a stretch.





There's nothing inappropriate to these SFX (except the turning to stone one) about an Entangle which can't form barriers. That's why the limitation exists. For my part, using Transform for such powers is somewhat against the spirit of the power, and runs contrary to the guideline that it shouldn't be used to simulate existing Powers. I'm going to suggest that you read the description of Entange again. I'm not trying to be rude, just trying to draw your attention to the fact that the actual description of the power strongly emphasises its restraint / paralysis effects and keeps the ability to form barriers very much secondary.No rudeness taken. I completely agree that these powers should be read in detail and fully understood before being used.

I just would like to know how Grond can help littly granny out of a poison attack. If the poison is bought as an Entangle, all Grond has to do is walk up and pull it off of her. And how would Grond reverse the paralysis of an Atemi strike that impairs a target's nerual pathways to keep them from moving? Again, if the paralysis is bought with Entangle, he can. Hell, a VIPER agent can just shoot the Entangle and break it off, and I hardly see how that would be appropriate for poisons and martial arts Atemi paralysis strikes.

Mental paralysis I'll buy as an Entangle, for I rule that it can be ripped off and targeted by Mental Powers/Target's EGO.


I'm not saying in any way that your way of doing things is "wrong", but I am pointing out that it's your personal taste and not in any way a HERO System standard. You may almost never use Entangle for those effects but you don't seem to be typical in that respect. Official HERO System products provide many examples of Entangles which don't form barriers (two out of four of the examples given in the main rulebook, for starters). OTOH correct me if I'm wrong but I can't recall seeing a single example of a Transform used to paralyse in a HERO book, except in cases where the paralysis is the side-effect of an actual physical transformation, such as petrification.
You are right on all accounts. All I'm saying is that many of the published write ups are wrong. The just don't work as described. It's like buying an RKA to blind someone in my opinion. It just don't do that, but if you hit them in the eyes and you're using the disabling rules... I understand the spirit of why these were written up in these ways, but I think that spirit has been taken too far. There's nothing wrong with using Images or Change Environment for concealment, though Invisibility would seem obvious. I simply marvel why Entangle seems to be taken as the only Power than can be used to hold someone still... especially when we have Telekinesis, Change Environment, various Adjustment Powers and even Transform that all do the same thing. I might be going against published material, but just because it was published doesn't mean its the most appropriate way of doing things.

[Mark Taylor]

I don't see how a 'glue gun' could even keep people from moving in the first place, so I don't see how forming a barrier is any more of a stretch.

Then why use it as an example?



No rudeness taken. I completely agree that these powers should be read in detail and fully understood before being used.

I just would like to know how Grond can help littly granny out of a poison attack. If the poison is bought as an Entangle, all Grond has to do is walk up and pull it off of her. And how would Grond reverse the paralysis of an Atemi strike that impairs a target's nerual pathways to keep them from moving? Again, if the paralysis is bought with Entangle, he can. Hell, a VIPER agent can just shoot the Entangle and break it off, and I hardly see how that would be appropriate for poisons and martial arts Atemi paralysis strikes.

Mental paralysis I'll buy as an Entangle, for I rule that it can be ripped off and targeted by Mental Powers/Target's EGO.


You are right on all accounts. All I'm saying is that many of the published write ups are wrong. The just don't work as described. It's like buying an RKA to blind someone in my opinion. It just don't do that, but if you hit them in the eyes and you're using the disabling rules... I understand the spirit of why these were written up in these ways, but I think that spirit has been taken too far. There's nothing wrong with using Images or Change Environment for concealment, though Invisibility would seem obvious. I simply marvel why Entangle seems to be taken as the only Power than can be used to hold someone still... especially when we have Telekinesis, Change Environment, various Adjustment Powers and even Transform that all do the same thing. I might be going against published material, but just because it was published doesn't mean its the most appropriate way of doing things.

I see your point here. I think Takes No Damage From Attacks should include an option where another character cannot damge the Entangle at all, not even by targeting it at a penalty to OCV. Personally this is how I generally interpret the situation anyway in such cases, based on special effects.

I still think there are plenty of valid uses for Entangles that can't form barriers though. And in many cases in which they can, they could only reasonably do so in doorways, passages or other situations where they have something convenient vertical surfaces to cling to, and the rules do not reflect that either.

I only just remembered it now, but a particular villain (actually a demon) that appeared in my Ninja HERO game had a cinematic "piledriver" attack (the campaign is not exactly 100% serious in tone). The character jumps high in the air and lands with his feet on the victim's shoulders. This is just a sort of "jumping move-through" and as such could do quite a lot of damage, but on anything other than hard ground it could also drive a victim into the ground, trapping him. That part was built as an Entangle, Cannot Form Barriers (among other limitations). Just wondering if you would have built it a different way.

[Sean Waters]

Random thoughts:

1. Many of us will have been playing the game that long that changes of name might be confusing. In any event, as to commenting on confusion, I'd imagine new players would be the best judges. After you've been playing for a while it becomes difficult to properly determine if a label is confusing because you are so used to using it.

2. Why use just one name? There's no reason to assume one name is best, and, indeed, if we were to use several names you could pick the one that best suited the power that you are building. Using multiple names for a power would also, IMO, remove some of the pre-judgement of what a power does.

ENTANGLE
aka Arrest, Immobilise, Impede, Restrain

3. If you were to rename the powers I'd be inclined to do it in a way that grouped related powers together. Using the 'Mental' pre-fix for ego attack, telepathy and mind control (etc...) has been suggested. You could then have
Attack: killing,
Attack: melee, and
Attack: ranged,
for example for Killing attacks, HtH attacks and EB. They'd all appear together in the listings which might make deciding exactly which one you wanted easier.

[zornwil]

To TheRealLemming's point, one cool thing in SAS was they had a cross-reference where you could look up power names and find it in their book. It was more geared towards competing preexisting games though - it included many of the HERO-specific terms such as Elemental Control, which I thought was neat.

That would be helpful in HERO, particularly a GURPS and other systems' cross-reference.

[rjcurrie]

Random thoughts:

2. Why use just one name? There's no reason to assume one name is best, and, indeed, if we were to use several names you could pick the one that best suited the power that you are building. Using multiple names for a power would also, IMO, remove some of the pre-judgement of what a power does.

ENTANGLE
aka Arrest, Immobilise, Impede, Restrain

Can't say I care for the multiple name idea. I think that might be even more confusing. However, it did spark another idea. What about a one line summary that would describe the power's function.

<COMPUTER GEEK MODE>
For those of you familiar with UNIX or Linux man pages, think of the one line description that appears at the top of each command's man page.
</COMPUTER GEEK MODE>

For example:

ENTANGLE
Immobilize characters or create barriers.

[zornwil]

Can't say I care for the multiple name idea. I think that might be even more confusing. However, it did spark another idea. What about a one line summary that would describe the power's function.

<COMPUTER GEEK MODE>
For those of you familiar with UNIX or Linux man pages, think of the one line description that appears at the top of each command's man page.
</COMPUTER GEEK MODE>

For example:

ENTANGLE
Immobilize characters or create barriers.
That's a great idea in any case. Surprised it hasn't come up before.

[Dust Raven]

Then why use it as an example?It's a common SFX used in the source material and in the published material. Binder of the Ultimates has a glue gun and it CAN form barriers.

In any case, if the villain or hero can stand there and soliloquy for a while and no one's allowed to attack him while he's ranting, then why not build your entangle-wall out of rope or other things. It's all part of simulating the genre (thought other genres might not allow for this).





I see your point here. I think Takes No Damage From Attacks should include an option where another character cannot damge the Entangle at all, not even by targeting it at a penalty to OCV. Personally this is how I generally interpret the situation anyway in such cases, based on special effects.I think that would make Entangles far too Powerful. It's like making a Drain STUN & REC to keep a target under, then not allowing other characters to use Aid or Healing to bring him back up. He stays there FOREVER unless he can break out himself normally.


I still think there are plenty of valid uses for Entangles that can't form barriers though. And in many cases in which they can, they could only reasonably do so in doorways, passages or other situations where they have something convenient vertical surfaces to cling to, and the rules do not reflect that either.
I agree there are plenty of SFX for Entangle that can't form barriers; I'm just saying I think there are more SFX for Entangle where they can (including a glue gun and rope). Some might need something to lean against or hold on to (like a doorframe or between two parked cars) but that's okay. I don't think that's so much of a limitation, as a wall out in the middle of nowhere doesn't really stop anyone.


I only just remembered it now, but a particular villain (actually a demon) that appeared in my Ninja HERO game had a cinematic "piledriver" attack (the campaign is not exactly 100% serious in tone). The character jumps high in the air and lands with his feet on the victim's shoulders. This is just a sort of "jumping move-through" and as such could do quite a lot of damage, but on anything other than hard ground it could also drive a victim into the ground, trapping him. That part was built as an Entangle, Cannot Form Barriers (among other limitations). Just wondering if you would have built it a different way.No, I would have written it up the same way. Neat effect and I might borrow it at a brick trick for a villain I'm creating.

[Dust Raven]

2. Why use just one name? There's no reason to assume one name is best, and, indeed, if we were to use several names you could pick the one that best suited the power that you are building. Using multiple names for a power would also, IMO, remove some of the pre-judgement of what a power does.
Brilliant! There's even a precidence for this with Multipower slots. The "official" names are Fixed and Flexible slots, but we commonly use Ultra and Multi slots, and FREd even mentions these as alternate names.

[zornwil]

Brilliant! There's even a precidence for this with Multipower slots. The "official" names are Fixed and Flexible slots, but we commonly use Ultra and Multi slots, and FREd even mentions these as alternate names.
Are "ultra" and "multi" now gone???? I believe HERO Designer still puts a "u" or "m" in front, doesn't it?

[Silbeg]

Are "ultra" and "multi" now gone???? I believe HERO Designer still puts a "u" or "m" in front, doesn't it?
Well, that is probably better than putting an "f" or an "f" in from of them.. even better than "fi" or "fl"...

Can you imagine?

As I don't have 5ER (yet), nor do I have any materials in front of me... but how do published books deal with this issue?

[rjcurrie]

Are "ultra" and "multi" now gone???? I believe HERO Designer still puts a "u" or "m" in front, doesn't it?
In 5ER, it is still as Dust Raven says, the names "Fixed" and "Flexible" are used with "multi" and "ultra" given as well. The letters "m" and "u" are used in character write-ups and the Genre by Genre chapter contains the same sidebar found in most (if not all) Hero books with character sheets that explains the use of these letters.

Rod

[zornwil]

Okay, I thought he was saying the m and u were no longer referred to.

[Kristopher]

Regarding the word "energy" in Energy Blast...

Moving physical objects do damage because of their kinetic energy...

[proditor]

Regarding the word "energy" in Energy Blast...

Moving physical objects do damage because of their kinetic energy...
Yeah, but that's not what people think of when they consider what did the damage. You don't hear people say "The Kinetic energy of those bullets really tore that guy up!" You hear: "Damn, he got ripped to shreads by the bullets." Same applies to hitting someone with a thrown ball, slugging them with a bat...sure, the kinetic energy imparted does the damage, but no one thinks of things that way. It's X object inflicted the damage.

[Dust Raven]

Yeah, but that's not what people think of when they consider what did the damage. You don't hear people say "The Kinetic energy of those bullets really tore that guy up!" You hear: "Damn, he got ripped to shreads by the bullets." Same applies to hitting someone with a thrown ball, slugging them with a bat...sure, the kinetic energy imparted does the damage, but no one thinks of things that way. It's X object inflicted the damage.
That, that the rules specifiy a difference between Physical and Energy damage.

But I'm still okay with the name Energy Blast. I'd also be okay with Normal Attack - Ranged. I'm not too sure about the shorthand RNA though...

[proditor]

That, that the rules specifiy a difference between Physical and Energy damage.

But I'm still okay with the name Energy Blast. I'd also be okay with Normal Attack - Ranged. I'm not too sure about the shorthand RNA though...
Oh I have no issue with the name, I kinda get a kick out of defining a thrown Billy Club as an EB actually. :) I'm just saying that just because it doesn't bug me doesn't mean it's intuitive.

[Sean Waters]

Of course we could look at it the other way round and say that 'physical' and 'energy' are SFX, and we shouldn't have PD and ED, just DEF at 2 points per point. Of course you can buy it to only work against physical attacks or energy attacks at a -1 limitation...

[PhilFleischmann]

Forming barriers or not, I still don't see what's wrong with the name Entangle. It isn't merely "hold a character immobile" because there are many ways to do that in HERO - Suppress/Drain/Dispel of movement powers, Change Environment, some kinds of Transform, doing enough damage to stun (daze) them, Force Wall, or a good old Grab. An Entangle is a specific kind of immobilization - one which (in its default form) creates a physical substance or force that has DEF and BODY and must be broken out of, and the physical substance/force hangs around until broken without additional END. A physical substance wrapped around a person - what better word for that than Entangle?

Dazed instead of Stunned is a great idea. Most players I know still say CON Stunned. Yes, I know it's not an official term, but it was made necessary by the use of easily confused similar terms.

Seduction is a perfectly fine and appropriate word for the skill it represents. It may be the influence of horny, woman-deprived gamer geeks to assume that "seduction" always refers to something sexual. It does not. "Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force."

And you can't call a ranged attack "Blast" because that might imply to some an explosion.

Kristopher is correct to point out that all damaging attacks are "energy" attacks. Bullets do damage by kinetic energy, fire does damage by heat energy, lightning does damage by electrical energy, etc. And yes, I know that we never say, "He was killed by the kinetic energy of a bullet." We say, "He was killed by a bullet." But by the same token, we never say, "He was killed by the electrical energy of a lightning bolt." We say, "He was killed by a lightning bolt."

The only terms I might change are those: Energy and Physical, both misleading and unscientific terms for what they're intended to represent in the game. As was said, all damage is energy. And all forms of energy are physical phenomena. Physical could be changed to Kinetic. I can't think of a term off hand that subsumes all non-kinetic forms of energy. Perhaps "Non-Kinetic" is the only accurate one, though it is a bit klunky.

There may be plenty of more accutare/appropriate words for various game elements, but, apart from Dazed, the benefit of changing them is too trivial to warrent the effort.

Aid -> Enhance (Aid sounds like you're helping a little old lady cross the street)
CON -> STUN (the amount of damage it takes to stun you)
STUN -> CON (the amount of damage you can take an remain CONscious)
BODY -> Hit Points
Growth -> Increase Size
Area Effect, Radius -> Area Effect, Hexagon
Area Effect, Cone -> Area Effect, Triangle
Speed -> Actions
Running -> Moving your legs really fast
Swinging -> Swinging, Baby, Yeah!
Armor -> Chainmail (because you shouldn't be allowed to build anything else with it, not leather armor, not plate armor, not armadillo hide, not toughness)
Dispel -> Turn Off
Champions -> Super HERO
Dark Champions -> Dark HERO
Steve Long -> Steven S. Long
Turakian Age -> Kalian Age
Takofanes -> Kal-Turak
Grond -> G'Ronnd
Foxbat -> Batfox
Doctor Destroyer -> Doctor Happykitty

I also don't get the SuCCoR/RoXXoR bit.

[Sean Waters]

We could change entangle to Delay. A bit. Sometimes.

Dr Happykitty? I like it! Lets make it official; YOU LISTENING STEVEN S. LONG?

Mayby whoever it was meant SuCCoR/RoXXoFF? Or possibly SoCCeR/ReFFerEE? Not that either of those would make much sense either. I can add my name to the list of luminaries who don't get it too, only I'd probably be making it a bit dimmer. What is the opposite of a luminary, anyway?

Oh, and Phil,
"Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force.", what makes you think that wasn't sexual? I've got the security tapes, and it looked pretty steamy to me.