Three or more Eyes

[Dr Divago]

if a character want a third eye or more (think about an "indian god"-like superhero, an alien with more eyes or a cyborg a la Appleseed's Briareos)
how can he build this third eye?
just a special effect or some other power?

[Hugh Neilson]

Distinctive Features.

Then buy any powers you want usable because of the third eye - once we get over the unusual nature of the feature, it's just SFX.

[Markdoc]

If it gives him some extra powers, it's a power, with the eye simply being the special effect.

If it just means he has three eyes, then it's maybe a disadvantage (distinctive appearance).


cheers, Mark

[Mister E]

I would say 5 character points for any extra eyes... which is just like Extra Limbs, and similar to the 5 point doubling rule for equipment.

[Hugh Neilson]

I would say 5 character points for any extra eyes... which is just like Extra Limbs, and similar to the 5 point doubling rule for equipment.

Extra arms can be used to punch while Grabbing with two hands. Extra equipment can be used as equipment. What added functionality do extra eyes provide? I'd say spend the 5 points on (say) +1 sight PER roll and a bit of flash defense.

[Fox1]

It could be a special effect of various powers, all depends upon the character. If there are no powers or advantages, it's just SPX for the character.

Unless the existance of the third eye causes actual problems for the character (i.e people are afraid of him, won't assist him, ruins his attempt to go undercover freq, etc.) it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage.

[Black Lotus]

I would say 5 character points for any extra eyes... which is just like Extra Limbs, and similar to the 5 point doubling rule for equipment.

That doesn't make any sense. An extra arm is a clear advantage. A third eye is not, since unless it has special Powers bought with it as the SFX, it has no benefit, only a Distinctive Features drawback.

EDIT:
Extra arms can be used to punch while Grabbing with two hands. Extra equipment can be used as equipment. What added functionality do extra eyes provide? I'd say spend the 5 points on (say) +1 sight PER roll and a bit of flash defense.

Yeah, what he said.

[Black Lotus]

Unless the existance of the third eye causes actual problems for the character (i.e people are afraid of him, won't assist him, ruins his attempt to go undercover freq, etc.) it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage.

Unless there are three-eyed people wandering around everywhere in the GM's campaign, I can say with confidence that you are mistaken about "it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage." I know you qualified it with "unless it causes actual problems for the character," but there's no way, in a campaign full of normal Humans, that the eye could do anything BUT be distinctive.

[Fox1]

Unless there are three-eyed people wandering around everywhere in the GM's campaign, I can say with confidence that you are mistaken about "it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage." I know you qualified it with "unless it causes actual problems for the character," but there's no way, in a campaign full of normal Humans, that the eye could do anything BUT be distinctive.

First, Disadvantages must cause problems to be worth any points. Simple flat rule core to the system.


Second, I don't know what the campaign setting is. Hence I phrased my advice the way I did.

I do know that in my Marvel setting where norse thunder gods and green androids are public heroes, a guy with a third eye may be marked as a superhero- but that by itself doesn't cause him 'problems' anymore than colorfull tights do.

[Hugh Neilson]

Unless the existance of the third eye causes actual problems for the character (i.e people are afraid of him, won't assist him, ruins his attempt to go undercover freq, etc.) it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage.

This depends on your game, of course. In my view, however, the lower levels of Distinctive Features are quite suited for a character who finds it tough to be incognito.

It's difficult, for example, to go undercover as a VIPER agent if your character has an extra eye. Most VIPER recruiters tend to notice these subtle details.

[Mister E]

Extra arms can be used to punch while Grabbing with two hands. Extra equipment can be used as equipment. What added functionality do extra eyes provide? I'd say spend the 5 points on (say) +1 sight PER roll and a bit of flash defense.


That's a good question. I'm speculating, but I suppose if you had extra eyes, you chould continue seeing after certain Flashes... that would be nice. If the character were blinded in one eye, you would still have depth perception, and shouldn't have any penalties for Ranged combat. There may be more...

None of these benifits are extremely common, or useful... but I think they are on par with having extra limbs, or doubled equipment.

As an example, Grond has extra limbs, and took the Extra Limbs power... but he also took extra SPD, to be used only for attacking. So sure, also give yourself +1 or more to Perception Rolls, and some Flash DEF.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a number of other powers that could be accredited to having extra eyes, but when you get right down to it, if having extra eyes was really all that useful, from an evolutionary stand-point, we would all have one or two more than we have. So that's why I think, at a mimumum, having extra eyes should cost 5 points, and that having extra eyes should give you no more benifit than the ability to see should a few get impaired.

Honestly, that's just my two cents. I'm not married to my opinion. :)

[Black Lotus]

First, Disadvantages must cause problems to be worth any points. Simple flat rule core to the system.

Second, I don't know what the campaign setting is. Hence I phrased my advice the way I did.

I do know that in my Marvel setting where norse thunder gods and green androids are public heroes, a guy with a third eye may be marked as a superhero- but that by itself doesn't cause him 'problems' anymore than colorfull tights do.

Ah. Well, Dr. Divago is running a Cyberpunk game, as you may know from the dozen or so posts he's been making over the past 2 weeks. :rolleyes:

At the very least, a third eye makes someone VERY easy to recognize in a police lineup, or anywhere else, for that matter. It's worth a smidgen of Disadvantage for that, at least. Hard to blend into a crowd and all that.

[Fox1]

Ah. Well, Dr. Divago is running a Cyberpunk game, as you may know from the dozen or so posts he's been making over the past 2 weeks. :rolleyes: .

Didn't have a clue until now. His example specific referenced both superheroes and cyborgs (cyborgs exist in a number of settings), so even if I noticed- it wouldn't have made a difference in my post.





At the very least, a third eye makes someone VERY easy to recognize in a police lineup, or anywhere else, for that matter. It's worth a smidgen of Disadvantage for that, at least. Hard to blend into a crowd and all that.

Those small issues are not typically worth that disadvantage unless the character is expected to appear in lineups or needs to be unrecognized as part of his concept.

Check the rulebook. It agrees with me.

[Dr Divago]

Ah. Well, Dr. Divago is running a Cyberpunk game, as you may know from the dozen or so posts he's been making over the past 2 weeks. :rolleyes:cough cough :rolleyes:
Ops, it's only a coincidence... can i call my lawyer?? :) :cool:
this is a general post... not only to cyberpunk...
...
...
Okay okay you're right...
i'm thinking about my cyberpunk-hero conversion... :)

At the very least, a third eye makes someone VERY easy to recognize in a police lineup, or anywhere else, for that matter. It's worth a smidgen of Disadvantage for that, at least. Hard to blend into a crowd and all that.You're right, but if tricloptics (implant to insert a third eye on the head) is buyable by everyone, is not-so-distinctive (distinctive are drawback of all cyberware)

Speaking of Tricloptics in particular: this give possibility to install a third cybereye (defined like a VPP 30+15...). And this is sufficent ('cause ordinarily PC are limited to only two eyes, this give a third possibility...)

But... I must give some other power? like a FD, bonus to PER or similar? Do you think that a Distinctive Feature are mandatory? (and in this case: building is like a Side Effect?)

[Blue Rose]

If it gives him some extra powers, it's a power, with the eye simply being the special effect.


I read in a book once where there were creatures with three eyes. They explained that in order to see three dimensions one needs two eyes, so in order to see four dimensions one needs three eyes. The reason why we couldn't see those creatures was based off of the "Flat Land" concept that a two dimensional creature would have trouble conceptualizing a three dimensional creature. Therefore by extrapolation a three dimensional creature would have trouble conceptualizing a four dimensional creature.

So, getting off of tangent. A possible power that a three eyed individual might have is to see four dimensionally. Time has been called the fourth dimension, but the GM can choose to call the fourth dimension the higher (or lower) planes if he/she wishes (i.e. something out of "The Mystic World").

---Blue Rose

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

if the third eye was in the back of their head or something, you might buy them increased field of perception (like 240 or 360)

[Black Lotus]

The final word on it is this:

If something offers no quantifiable advantage or disadvantage, it is worth 0 (zero).
If something offers a quantifiable advantage, it costs character points.
If something causes a quantifiable disadvantage, it gives bonus character points.
If something offers both advantages and disadvantages, it usually costs at least 1 character point, but may cost 0 if the disadvantage outweighs the advantage. Specific disadvantages can be worth many disadvantage points.

If the eye is just there -- if it has no game effect -- it costs 0. If it offers mainly advantages, it costs character points. If it offers mainly disadvantages, it gives bonus character points. Simple. (It shouldn't cost 5 just to have a third eye unless it offers 5 points of advantages).

[Hugh Neilson]

Those small issues are not typically worth that disadvantage unless the character is expected to appear in lineups or needs to be unrecognized as part of his concept.

Check the rulebook. It agrees with me.

Especially the part about "Is noticed and recognized" being less points than "causes extreme reaction", but still being worth points, right? :rolleyes:

Honestly, if I have to ask "Did you see three guys in casual clothes here yesterday", how many replies do you think I'll get that are useful. Now add in "One of them had three eyes." Seems to me this guy is a lot easier to track doewn, and doesn't disappear into a crowd very well.

[Old Man]

Check the rulebook. It agrees with me.

Uh...maybe you should read the book again....

[Fox1]

Uh...maybe you should read the book again....

Let's see... from page 333 5th revised:

"Just looking odd isn't enough to earn the character any points - his unusual features have to hinder him somehow."

It's even in Italics to drive the point home. Three eyes is odd alright.

But what does it do to earn him points that looking odd doesn't as looking odd means standing out in crowds and picked in line ups? The answer to that is campaign specific and a GM's call.

[Fox1]

If an UNTIL or VIPER uniform [something which can be removed] hinders a character 5 points worth DF then I would say a third eye hinders just as much, if not more. The fact that you look like an outcast to many people is hindrance enough, IMO [think mutants in Total Recall].

A uniform makes you a target for those who want to whack you. In this case (the CU setting), UNTIL wants to arrest VIPER and VIPER will typically fire at UNTIL rather than be arrested.

A third eye doesn't come with those sorts of problems unless the GM puts people in the game that arrest/shoot people with 3 eyes.

See the difference?

[Fox1]

No, I don't see the difference

I feel sorry for you.




A distinctive feature is something that makes you appear different then the general populus to the point where they react around you a little differently then they do other people without your distinctivness.

The rules are specific, it has to be more than just 'odd' or 'different'. It must cause real problems for the character.

We don't have any information about problems a 3rd eye may or may not have in the campaign in question. For all we know, it may be no more of a issue than having red hair.

It's up to the GM to define the problems of having a third eye and to detemine if they merit points.

That's the rule given in the book. I'm sorry if noting that has ruined your day and forced you into making wild claims counter to rules and concerning campaigns you don't even play in.

[Fox1]

Fox1, being a sarcastic toward people with differing views doesn't make you right. It only lessens you and your opinions in other's eyes. Try to keep that in mind.

I'm soooo heart broken.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

if you have 3 eyes but 50% of the population has 3rd eyes, then it's not distinctive, i agree with Fox1 that the GM has to rule on this one.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

right. The rules let the GM decide if it's worth points or not. In one game i'm helping run, we have to submit all our disads for value, and the GM tells us the value based on how likely they are to come up.

[Fox1]

Of course it has to be decided by the GM. The point is the rules don't disallow it as Fox1 says.

Please don't make stuff up.

[transmetahuman]

I read in a book once where there were creatures with three eyes. They explained that in order to see three dimensions one needs two eyes, so in order to see four dimensions one needs three eyes. The reason why we couldn't see those creatures was based off of the "Flat Land" concept that a two dimensional creature would have trouble conceptualizing a three dimensional creature. Therefore by extrapolation a three dimensional creature would have trouble conceptualizing a four dimensional creature.

So, getting off of tangent. A possible power that a three eyed individual might have is to see four dimensionally. Time has been called the fourth dimension, but the GM can choose to call the fourth dimension the higher (or lower) planes if he/she wishes (i.e. something out of "The Mystic World").

---Blue RoseI don't buy it, but it's a cute idea. Maybe justification for a mystic type to have arachnophobia...

"They spy on us for their extradimensional overlords!" :sneaky:

My two cents - I'd say the lineup thing is more likely to come up than someone poking you in the eye with a stick, regardless of genre. I've never been in a game where someone lost an eye, myself. Well, unintentionally (yes, Eye of Vecna). If he can take the implant out, it's Easily Concealable, so I'd give it a net cost of zero. If he can't take it out, maybe a 5 point DF unless lots of people get that same kind of implant. If it gives him bonuses or Flash Defense, add that in. Of course, if it doesn't really give him abilities, why did he get it in the first place? Are there a lot of pointy stick wielding gangs in the city, or is he on a quest for Vecna's 80,000 year old tomb?

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

i like it, then with no eyes you see in 1 dimension

[Onyxclaw]

if having a third eye makes you the target of instant death on site I'd give you even more points than 5 for it. It is entirely based on GM decision wether or not it is a limitation and how much it is worth.

If it's common then it would probubly just be special effect.

If looking odd can get you killed or hinder you then why not give them points. It's not like 5 points will break the game.

I give characters points in my game for being Albino when their species usually isn't. That's not a huge life threatening disadvantage. But it sure does warrent distinctive features.

Remember that the first rule to this system is to forget the rules if you have to to have fun.

So honestly, there is nothing that is prohibited, other than by GM decision. Some things are just not normally allowed in a "by the book" game.

[Mister E]

I have three eyes, and it's a bitch... let me tell you. :hush:

[nexus]

I actually think everyone is basically saying the same thing. Three eyes will be a variable amount of disadvantages points from 0 on up, depending on the campaign world.

[Onyxclaw]

I actually think everyone is basically saying the same thing. Three eyes will be a variable amount of disadvantages points from 0 on up, depending on the campaign world.

yepperz. bingo.

[Mister E]

i like it, then with no eyes you see in 1 dimensionWhoa... That's deep. :straight:

[Black Lotus]

Of course, a strictly two-dimesnional creature would have no mass. Every physical object must have three dimensions -- no matter how minute one of those dimensions is -- or it doesn't exist. For example, the area of a cube is Length x Width x Depth. So, a cube that is 20 cm on a side has an area of 800 cm3. A cube with one side measuring 20 cm, another side measuring 20 cm, and a final side measuring 0 cm has an area of (20 x 20 x 0) = 0 cm3. All physical objects have three dimensions. Two dimensionality is an "irrational" concept; it can be understood, but true two dimensionality does not exist in real physics.

[Hugh Neilson]

Here we go again...


That's the rule given in the book. I'm sorry if noting that has ruined your day and forced you into making wild claims counter to rules and concerning campaigns you don't even play in.


The point is the rules don't disallow it as Fox1 says.


Please don't make stuff up.

Also amusing:


For all we know, it may be no more of a issue than having red hair.

when

Distinctive Features could be such things as bright red hair, a facial scar, unusual height (large or small), a peculiar walk, a strange voice" Emphasis mine

Maybe I hang with a different crowd than Fox1, but I think a third eye is considerably more disctinctive than any of the examples above.

[Onyxclaw]

I think what you've marked here is what most of the rest of us have decided...but thanks for using a little more ompf ;)

[Dr Divago]

The answer to that is campaign specific and a GM's call.Okay i think this is the point:
in "A Far Far Away Galaxy" having three eyes is not more distinctive than having blu skin, four arms, huge blob-like body or similar, but is distinctive to wear a lightsaber or a "kimono-like" vestment
in Cycloplandia having two eyes is very distinctive

Now in this specific (my cyberpunk campaign): having three eyes is distinctive, but also having a chromed cyberarm, two rabbit ears, scaly skin or flashing jacket with Illumipanel (TM) inside. So is so distinctive that, i suppose, is not distinctive (all are distinctive, so having three eyes is not more distinctive than in-modern-day wearing sunglasses or leather jacket...)

Advantages? well, nobody install third eye only to say "ehi i'm an indian goddes" (well, i know some people that will be glad to install it for this reason... :rolleyes: but this is another question...)
Installing Tricloptics(TM) is only to have a third cyberoptic (defined like a VPP 30+15 with some implanted optional inside). But my question is: i will give other advantage? (some FD 'cause three eyese are less susceptible to blinding, accurate range detection 'cause three eyes makes binocular vision more accurate, etc.?)

[Fox1]

I actually think everyone is basically saying the same thing. Three eyes will be a variable amount of disadvantages points from 0 on up, depending on the campaign world.

That's certainly been my view since the start.

There are a couple here however who think that it's always worth points for some reason.

One of the sad things about HERO is the fact that its point system leads some people to give points for what are in effect disadvantages that don't cause problems and of course non-limiting limits (the guy who wanted to make Captain America's shield Independent for example).

[Fox1]

Now in this specific (my cyberpunk campaign): having three eyes is distinctive, but also having a chromed cyberarm, two rabbit ears, scaly skin or flashing jacket with Illumipanel (TM) inside. So is so distinctive that, i suppose, is not distinctive (all are distinctive, so having three eyes is not more distinctive than in-modern-day wearing sunglasses or leather jacket...)

I thought this was a possibility, which is why I brought the subject up. I've seen a number of settings where such things would be no more 'distinctive' than a person have a face.

Especially in settings that have facial recognition software or even photographs ("Have you seen this person?").

[Onyxclaw]

well, if I understand what you want here, we can't really helpy you decide that. What the eye is suppose to do is a function of it's creator's desires..in theis case you. You can have the eyes give them access to what ever kind of abilities you want to.

You can also treat them as you would any other focus.

[Onyxclaw]

except you also stated that it was against the rules to give a third eye points even IF it was a true disadvantage. And even if GMs wanted to make it so. It is the job of the GM to enforce disadvantages, if they don't bring them up then they shouldn't have given points for them.

I personally feel that almost all equipment is Independent unless it can not under any circumstance be used by someone else. It was not wrong for them to want to make his shield independent, it just wasn't in genre.

You'd probubly hate the fact that I make all equipment in my games independent for the sole purpose of looting and disarming, unless it has a SFX that requires it to be with the user. You probubly also hate the fact that I frequently destroy my player's equipment, or that I give them an equipment retainer when the game begins to help lighten the loss of chracter points later...

But as a GM it's my decision. So it doesn't really matter.

[Fox1]

except you also stated that it was against the rules to give a third eye points even IF it was a true disadvantage. .

If I did that, I did a major typo somewhere.

This is the complete quote from my first post on the subject, you'll find it on page one:




It could be a special effect of various powers, all depends upon the character. If there are no powers or advantages, it's just SPX for the character.

Unless the existance of the third eye causes actual problems for the character (i.e people are afraid of him, won't assist him, ruins his attempt to go undercover freq, etc.) it is *not* worth a distinctive feature disadvantage.


It looks very clear there to me.

No problems- 0 points. Problems - give DF disadvantage.








I personally feel that almost all equipment is Independent unless it can not under any circumstance be used by someone else. It was not wrong for them to want to make his shield independent, it just wasn't in genre.


Your personal feelings are not the rules. The rules define the concept of universal focus- i.e. a focus that can be used by anyone (a -0 limit).

Independent references only those things (and they need not have the focus limit) that can be lost forever along with the points spent to buy them.





You'd probubly hate the fact that I make all equipment in my games independent for the sole purpose of looting and disarming, unless it has a SFX that requires it to be with the user. You probubly also hate the fact that I frequently destroy my player's equipment, or that I give them an equipment retainer when the game begins to help lighten the loss of chracter points later...

I wouldn't play in your campaign, but beyond that I don't personally care how you run it.

All I care about is incorrect statements here about what the rules offically allow or disallow.

[Hugh Neilson]

This is the complete quote from my first post on the subject, you'll find it on page one:

It looks very clear there to me.

No problems- 0 points. Problems - give DF disadvantage.
************************************************** *******
All I care about is incorrect statements here about what the rules offically allow or disallow.

Now, I don't think Fox1 at any point says "The rules explicitly prohibit allowing a Distinctive Features disadvantage for having three eyes". At the same tuime, his posts seem to imply, by default, that a third eye is really not distinctive in most, if not all, settings. He does acknowledge that, if large groups attempt to arrest/kill three-eyeed people on site, then some slight disadvantage might be merited.

Fox1 does say, in response to the suggestion that ease of identification is not worth any disadvantage, that:


Those small issues are not typically worth that disadvantage unless the character is expected to appear in lineups or needs to be unrecognized as part of his concept.

Check the rulebook. It agrees with me.

I'm waitong for a page citation that ease of recogniotion is not part of Distinctive Features, since the laundry list presented in 5er seems to include a lot of features less distinctive than a third eye which would have no real impact beyond ease of identification.


The rules are specific, it has to be more than just 'odd' or 'different'. It must cause real problems for the character.

We don't have any information about problems a 3rd eye may or may not have in the campaign in question. For all we know, it may be no more of a issue than having red hair.

It's up to the GM to define the problems of having a third eye and to detemine if they merit points.

That's the rule given in the book. I'm sorry if noting that has ruined your day and forced you into making wild claims counter to rules and concerning campaigns you don't even play in.

Interesting that (bright) red hair is included in that previously noted laundry list.


The point is the rules don't disallow it as Fox1 says.


Please don't make stuff up


There are a couple here however who think that it's always worth points for some reason.

I don't believe anyone said that. They did probably proceed with the undocumented assumption that wanting a third eye "like an Indian goddess" and asking what abilities that would mean (abilities differing from the norm for the population, presumably) implied a third eye was not the norm.

BTW, a Uniform is a DF, as mentioned previously, but only if the character wears it even when it would be inappropriate. That would be why the traditional "underwear on the outside" super-suit isn't a DF. The reason someone may target someone in a uniform is typically because the target is Hunted by that person/group, not because a DF has no value unless someone wants to kill you over it.

Always a pleasure, Fox1 :)

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

But as a GM it's my decision. So it doesn't really matter.

:whip: :whip: :whip: who's the GM? you are!

what are you going to do? take away my equipment?

[prestidigitator]

If the third eye is still visible when closed, I would say it merits an Easily Concealable (can probably be hidden just by wearing a hat) Distinctive Feature, unless the setting has a pretty large number of strange looking non-human races, mutants, cyborgs, etc.; in a D&D-type setting, for example, I wouldn't give it a Distinctive Feature if it is a normal racial feature of the character's race and the race itself isn't horribly rare or highly discriminated against.

If it is not visible when closed (some, "mystic," third eyes are like this, and some are described as virtually disappearing into the wrinkles of the forehead), I would probably say it doesn't merit the Distinctive Feature at all.

Some ideas for Powers: Range PSLs (enhanced depth perception), Telescopic Sight/Sight Group or straight bonuses to Sight/Sight Group, Increased Arc of Perception (verticle rather than horizontal, perhaps), Clairsentience, Flash Defense (if the eye is, "normally not open"), Images, Mind Control - Mesmerize Only (Telepathic; Set Effect: "Stand Still and Stare at My Eye").

Some ideas for Disadvantages: Distinctive Features, Vulnerability to Flashes, Susceptibility to Bright Light (penalty SLs or CSLs, Per roll penalties, normal Stun damage, etc.), Watched - Hindus (or some organization of mystics, or whatever).