Powers Issues -- General Questions

[Steve Long]

Hi folx! Here are some thoughts about Powers in general — their nature, as a game element category, etc. — that have occurred to me over the years, along with my brief thoughts on them. I’m posting them here to stimulate discussion, but not to limit or restrict it. These aren’t necessarily all the general issues about Powers that could be considered, nor the only thoughts about them. Feel free to post anything here that you think is relevant and reasonably constructive; you don’t have to limit yourself to what I’ve posted.

Regardless of whatever opinion I post on an idea, I’m always willing to be convinced otherwise if you think you can do it. ;) The fact that I’m posting an opinion doesn’t necessarily mean my mind’s made up on an issue; it just indicates my current thinking on the subject.

Periodically I may post other questions and thoughts that occur to me.


Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

However, despite my not liking it, and despite having discussed this issue with a lot of people over the years, I’ve yet to come up with anything better.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power

In considering whether to add a new Power, I think we should keep several issues in mind. First, does a new Power make the HERO System easier to learn or use? You can, for example, build a suffocation attack now, but it’s not as easy or effective as it perhaps should be; adding Suffocate as a Power increases ease of use. Second, does a new Power plug a “gap” in the System or provide something that’s lacking? A “Stun you” and “Knock you Out” Powers would fall into this category. Third, can a new Power be expressed relatively “generically” and in a way that makes it useful in enough genres to merit inclusion in the core rules?


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.

[JmOz]

Hi folx! Here are some thoughts about Powers in general — their nature, as a game element category, etc. — that have occurred to me over the years, along with my brief thoughts on them. I’m posting them here to stimulate discussion, but not to limit or restrict it. These aren’t necessarily all the general issues about Powers that could be considered, nor the only thoughts about them. Feel free to post anything here that you think is relevant and reasonably constructive; you don’t have to limit yourself to what I’ve posted.

Regardless of whatever opinion I post on an idea, I’m always willing to be convinced otherwise if you think you can do it. ;) The fact that I’m posting an opinion doesn’t necessarily mean my mind’s made up on an issue; it just indicates my current thinking on the subject.

Periodically I may post other questions and thoughts that occur to me.


Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

However, despite my not liking it, and despite having discussed this issue with a lot of people over the years, I’ve yet to come up with anything better.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power

In considering whether to add a new Power, I think we should keep several issues in mind. First, does a new Power make the HERO System easier to learn or use? You can, for example, build a suffocation attack now, but it’s not as easy or effective as it perhaps should be; adding Suffocate as a Power increases ease of use. Second, does a new Power plug a “gap” in the System or provide something that’s lacking? A “Stun you” and “Knock you Out” Powers would fall into this category. Third, can a new Power be expressed relatively “generically” and in a way that makes it useful in enough genres to merit inclusion in the core rules?


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.

As for new powers I would like to see the F/X based defence from UEP be made standard, I would also like to see FF go away

also and this is a biggie, We need a possesion power, a your body disapears and is in the other person, probably with a -1/2 lim for personality switch

[Andrew Cermak]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?



I, for one, am indifferent to name changes of any kind. While they might make the system more "universal," they'd also hinder backwards-compatibility.



Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?


Most definitely. While the existing system can simulate any effect, it can't always do it elegantly; sometimes, it can't even do it very sensibly.



Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)

If Hero Points are included in the system, this Power might become redundant. If they aren't, then I would favor this Power or some variation being included in 6th.



Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)


I'm somewhat in favor of including this Power because it limits the dependence on Transform to model effects, which sometimes gets out of hand. Perhaps it could be expanded to allow for the creation of Green Lantern-style Force Objects.



Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)


I think this Power needs to be included, and also needs to be explictly expanded to allow for the Activation of non-mechanical Powers.

Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)



—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks


I'm in favor of each and every one of these. The "Stun" Power should perhaps have levels of effect: at the most basic level, it costs the target a Phase of actions but doesn't inflict any other penalty associated with being Stunned, while progressively higher levels would inflict the DCV penalty and forcible turn-off of the target's Powers.



—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power


I think the first Power (which I support including) at least partially obviates the need for the second. It's much easier to model Invulnerability when you don't need to worry about blocking massive amounts of Stun damage.


Besides the above suggestions, I think a "Trip"/"Throw"/"Knockdown" Power would be useful.



Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?


Most definitely not. The Power system is, IMO, the essence of Hero, and changing it that much would feel more like a new game than a new edition.

[incrdbil]

I think some tinkering with defense powers, particualrly force field is perhaps called for.

Armor is, to me, a deal, in comparison to FF. Yes, FF does have the advantage of the adder that lets you protect things that are carried.

But the fact that armor is 0 END, its persistant, and has no visible effect seems to counter that. Buying Armor with all the limits to make it act like force field makes it cheaper than force field.

Maybe the solution is to somehow make force field cheaper, or have it too start out as 0 end, but not persitant, counterbalanced by having the adder for carried objects/persons.

[nexus]

I'm really not sure about an "instant stun/knockout" power. There's a way to model those effects currently (large, often NND attacks, for one). Seems like the effect would have to be prohibitively expensive to be balanced and borders on being an absolute.

[Andrew Cermak]

I'm really not sure about an "instant stun/knockout" power. There's a way to model those effects currently (large, often NND attacks, for one). Seems like the effect would have to be prohibitively expensive to be balanced and borders on being an absolute.

The problem is that under the current system, for example, putting someone to sleep is essentially the same as damaging them. Injured people fall asleep faster, and when you heal them, they wake up. It's very unusual and means that powers with that special effect just don't feel right.

[Balok]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?I can't see making this change. Admittedly I spent only a few minutes mulling ideas, but everything I came up with was either lame, ambiguous or suggested some other genre that comic books. Unless you hit on something clearly superior to Power, I'd leave it alone.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTHWell, I agree with Ego Attack -> Mental Attack, and I'd like to cast my vote for Desolidification -> Intangibility if only because the latter is actually a word in the English language. :) I don't see the rest of them as clear improvements, and I particularly dislike "Defense, Passive" and "Defense, Active" which remind me of military procurement forms. I'd think if you went with those names you'd want an entry under the old names Armor and Force Field that directed people where to find these effects. Thinking about it a little more, I do also kind of like "Entangle -> Restrain." People familiar with the system understand what Entangle is, but to new folks the word Entangle sort of implies a physical object.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
I can see a case for each of these. I'm a touch leery of the name "Activation" because it implies you can turn something on and not much else. "Control" comes to mind as a replacement but it has semantic problems, too. I can't offer a replacement name that I like.


—a power that allows characters to suffocate targetsThis seems a little specific for a Hero power to me.


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damageIMO, this seems a little close to absolutism.


—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)Likewise.


—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacksHmmm. I think this would have to be expensive or GMs would constantly be telling characters they can't have it because it's out of concept. It would be the Wii of powers - everyone would want it. ;)


—an Invulnerability powerI see that risk of absolutism, again. I'd have to know what the power entailed - what it brings to the table that can't be simulated with high defenses and/or damage reduction. Maybe I'm missing something obvious?


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?I don't think this would be a good idea for basically the same reasons you cited, and especially as regards helping people learn the system. If every power requires a complex description, new people are going to face a steep learning curve, which I'd guess is the opposite of what you want in a new edition...

[nexus]

The problem is that under the current system, for example, putting someone to sleep is essentially the same as damaging them. Injured people fall asleep faster, and when you heal them, they wake up. It's very unusual and means that powers with that special effect just don't feel right.

I see where your coming from even though I don't feel the same way. Stun (and Body) are abstractions after all but I can see your point.

Edit: Maybe something like Entangle but based on Con, sfx: Target is "stunned" or unconscious?

[incrdbil]

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Sounds interesting, and maybe as a good building block for other powers created by a GM.


Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)

Different from the current transform rules?


Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)

Nuetral feelings. Feels to campaign specific.


Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

No idea, one of those 'I'd have to see it' things.

As for the other suggested, they fall into to the 'we can build these easily already' category for the most part.


—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets

Thats an effect many powers can simulate already, IMO.


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage

Thats any attack bought with a limitation 'can only stun a target, not do any lasting damage.'

If the goal is to achieve a stun effect within active point limits that normally don’t let a combatant achieve that result easily..well, the GM can either let is slide with an exception, rather than have to disallow a power achieving this powerful combat effect within set AP limits. That’s my feel.


—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)

sounds like an FX for many attack powers, or even a mind control.



—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks

Ok, I'm not getting this one. That sounds like buying lots of levels in the block maneuver to me, or dodge.


—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does

Force wall, self only....


—an Invulnerability power

eww. Invulnerability. A very subjective term. 'Nuff said.

[Andrew Cermak]

Ok, I'm not getting this one. That sounds like buying lots of levels in the block maneuver to me, or dodge.


I think it's building the Reflection part that's an issue.

[CourtFool]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Yes, since we are going to roll Characteristics, Perks, Powers, Skills and Talents into one beast. Good luck with a name.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Yes. They are going to have to be far more generic. Attack. Defense. Movement. Alter.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Yes and no. You will have to add some new effects for your Characteristics/Perks/Powers/Skills/Talents thingie.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Are you even listening to me? :p

[Enforcer84]

Changing the names seems unnecessary; and changing them simply so "Heroic" players are mollified is silly. Heroic Players came late in the game, quit yer whinin'. :p
But I generally use HERO for Supers so I could be wrong

[James Gillen]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

NO... I mean, yes, HERO is more than just Champions, but which characters are most likely to use these abilities? Supers. What do supercharacters call their abilities? Powers!

There really isn't a more appropriate name given that the abilities in other genres are too genre-restricted or applicable only to certain categories (e.g. 'Weird Talents' in Pulp are largely Psychic/Mental Powers).



Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,”

Again, I don't see a problem with that, or at least one that isn't a bigger problem than the 'solution.'


Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.

I like "Ranged Attack" for generic EB, "Restrain(t)" for Entangle and Mental Attack for EGO Attack. I also propose that Dirty Infighting be renamed "Make Somebody Stop Living With Your Fist" and Kung Fu be renamed "That Psycho Bruce Lee $#!t" :D



Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Of these, the one I most like is Automaton Powers, given there are some cases where a non-Automaton shouldn't have Hit Locations (assuming the game in question uses those rules).




Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:


—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)

These would be more appropriate if there was a D&D/D20-like "all or nothing" saving throw mechanic; i.e. the character makes this roll or suffers the effect. It's something that HERO is missing, but on the other hand this comes close to violating the 'no absolutes' principle.



—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks

I think this is what's called "Block." ;) Or would this be with a "Ranged" Advantage like standard Missile Deflect?



—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does

We're already simulating this with No Range on FW.



—an Invulnerability power

This falls under the 'no absolutes' guideline.



Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.

"HERO System is as complex as it is because it needs that level of complexity to get the hell out of your way."
-Darren Watts :thumbup:

[Enforcer84]

I'll say that I've never gotten the "No Absolutes" thingy. I mean isn't an NND an Absolute? Either you have the Defense and it doesn't work or you don't and it does?

So why not a similar defense: Immunity to SFX; either the attack is fire or it isn't.

And I don't think the rest of the Hero Mechanics would die from it.

[Comic]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?
Disambiguation is best. Saying what you mean is best. 'Power' is neither.

You can now have an ambiguously X-powered Power; many Powers can be skillful use of minimal power, or of an opponent's power, or are merely absences of anything at all.

We have a word, 'Power', that is both ambiguous and used to mean things it, in common parlance, doesn't.

The sense you seem to be looking for is 'Ability'. And, by coincidence, it's my favorite candidate. Less awkward than 'Capacity', 'Means', 'Aptitude', 'Attribute', 'Characteristic', 'Potential', 'Prowess', or 'Faculty', it's Able to do the job.

A Variable Ability Pool, for example, more directly states what that framework does. Advantaged and Limited Abilities both make more sense than Advantaged or Limited Powers.

On the whole, I'd prefer a shorter, pithier word, but none seem to fit, and there's a workaround for that issue. 'Ab' is a great short form, and within the game context would be clear and handy.

As a bonus, you can have Able Lists, to list who on your roster is able to fill a needed role, because of their Abilities.

Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?
..
Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

There are clear advantages to kicking 'Armor' off the list of current names; it's misleading and obfuscatory.

For the same reason, the suggested 'Defense, Passive/Active' is not great. For one, there's already Physical/Energy Defense (nonresistant). If you're going to reuse the word as proposed, there appears to be a major overhaul of Resistance needed to go with it. (Not saying there isn't.)

Also, Defense is both a category word, and the name of all abilities within that category? It introduces more opportunities for confusion.

'Fortification' (long), 'Aegis' (yuck), 'Fortitude' (meh), all not great. 'Buffer' has potential, but.. seems weak and generic. Still, a Physical Buffer or Energy Buffer.. not impressive. 'Toughness'.. also not fond of. I am fond of 'Proof'; it's short, simple, works well in compound terms: 'Energy Proof', 'Killing Proof', 'Normal Proof'... and maybe needs a better sales pitch.

I'm also not fond of the 'Passive/Active' part. Latent, Innate, or simply Persistent for Passive are all better, in that they don't assume something about the ability that is not required. Unless that's another planned overhaul.

.. but also kind of flavorless.
Which we'd also want to avoid.

Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?
Yes, up to where you say:

—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
This doesn't add anything, IMO. There are already useful drowning rules, and rules for suffocating based on the drowning rules and consistent with them; it's artificial to add a new layer of complication by putting in a power that specifically does this. Would it mean that you can't suffocate someone unless you've bought the power? Is NND such a bad way to simulate a combat-effective suffocation effect, where needed? Suffocation by drowning rules takes a long, long time for most characters -- as it should -- so adding a long, slow power to specifically do this that makes combat more cumbersome to run isn't an advantage, to my mind, when there's already 'suffocation' attacks as NNDs, which don't do this.

—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
At best, this deserves a footnote in Transformation about how to build Transformation -> STUNNED, no? I hate to put everything into the Transformation bucket, but this is one of those places it fits, to my mind.

—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
Sure.. why isn't this Dispel Stun?

—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
Long overdue. The ability to redirect HTH attacks at adjacent attackers is needed, and there are times when 'Block' isn't really what the defender is doing. Alternately, why bother to distinguish HTH from Ranged for Deflection, at all? Simply clarify some rules about interactions of attacks with Deflection.

—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
I'm uncomfortable about game balance for this, and believe giving a set of examples of how to build strong force fields with damage reduction, or a limitation like 'Breaking Point' on force fields would work just as well. (E.G. a 40/40 FF, if damage gets past it in some ratio/level/period of time it has a chance of failing/freezing up/knocking out the user.)

—an Invulnerability powerI'm uncomfortable about game balance for this, and believe giving examples of how to build strong Proof abilities with damage reduction limited to certain special effects would work just as well.

Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?
What an interesting thought exercise. It should definitely be done, included as an Appendix, and never referred to again. As an Appendix, it could help people trying to wrestle with first principles of the game mechanics get a handle on what the designers were thinking, without becoming an impediment to clear understanding, since from such a framework, one could come up with countless equally valid variations..

So sure, do it. But still do the real thing, too.

And thank you for providing this forum for contribution.

[Enforcer84]

Really? Rename everything so Spy guy doesn't feel like Batman?
I can't believe this is an issue.

[Killer Shrike]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

Yes. Names are important. They convey information both in connotation and denotation -- what people think they mean as well as what they technically mean. Whether you intend them to or not the way something is named effects how it is received and even how it is thought about.

Power is a word that conveys a meaning that doesn't match what "Powers" actually are in the HERO System; it only covers a narrow subset of possible things doable with them.

The "Power" rules can be used to design all sorts of abilities, items, even things such as traps, natural hazards, and other externalized effects. Basically the "Power" rules are a metalanguage with which to describe "Game Effects". In fact, Effects would be an accurate, even ideal, name, but unfortunately it collides with "Special Effects" and could be confusing but we already use the idea of a base effect.

Phenomenon is a broad label that could encompass all the things doable with the "Powers" rules -- any occurrence that is (theoretically) observable is a phenomenon. "The universe is a phenomenon, as is every particle of matter within it; that which is non-phenomenal does not exist because it is noumenon." That pretty much covers a six-shooter, a sword, a spell, a super-power, or a super nova. Some folks might find Phenomenon difficult to spell, but it covers the concept.

So, my personal preference for a more generic and broad label would be, in order: Effects, Game Effects (vs Special Effects), Phenomena, Abilities.


The various actual base powers with SFX specific / comic-booky names should all be genericized IMO as well.


I plan to respond to the other items but its pushing 2am and I've still got work to do for tomorrow so it will have to wait :(

[Acid_Crash]

I don't know why Force Field and Force Wall are two seperate powers to begin with. To me, a Force Field IS a Force Wall, only one is more visible than the other.

Intangibility is a great name.
Keep Armor, rename it Body Armor or Innate Armor... but then again, why not just a power called Physical Defense and have a FX for it called Armor or body armor.

I'd say that there are already enough attack type powers, it's already kind of confusing when you have HtH attacks, melee, then ranged, KillingHtH melee and ranged, and Energy Blast. You already have HtH damage from your Strength, and I've always been confused if this Power HtH damage adds to your Strength HtH damage or supplants.

I'm more in favor of having a power like Normal Damage, then define it as Melee, Ranged, or Energy Blast, and have examples... and something similar for Killing Damage, Melee, Ranged, or Energy Blast. But not have each being its own power.

Heck, just have a power that is called Damage Bonus or Damage... for every 5 pts it does 1d6 Normal damage, or for every 15 points it does 1d6 Killing damage. At it's base this is fairly easy, and when purchased the person defines it as they want, either Normal or Killing. For an additional 10 pts the person can switch the attack between either Normal or Killing damage, or some kind of Power pption like that.

If you label it Normal or Killing it does physical, if you label it Energy, it does energy damage, and add in Mental damage for a mental attack, and it does mental damage.

No real reason to have so many different damage powers. This would be for those powers that are obviously used to directly inflict damage upon someone else in some way.

I am in favor of powers that cause different effects, like knockdown, stun, knockout, sickness, scared, etc... but you'd have to just create what those effects do in the game...

Being sick causes you to suffer a +2 penalty to your dice checks... knockout power could have you make an opposed check vs. the power, if you fail you get knocked out... scared could be an opposed Ego roll vs. the power, if you fail you are penalized something and can only make half actions... all these are viable options that don't have to be entirely based on doing damage to cause these effects.

As the system stands now, the way I understand it, if you want a power that causes a person to be 'stunned' then you have to have a power that does enough stun damage in a single turn to be effective... instead have a power effect called Stunning = causes the person to lose his next action, can only move at half speed, loses half CV, or whatever it is, and it doesn't have to do any damage at all. This power can be resisted by the targets Body or Con characteristic, modified by the number of points put into the power. Let's say it costs 10 pts per +1 penalty to the Stunning check, with a range of 2m per 10 pts... all hypotheticals of course... so if somebody spent 30 pts, that's a +3 penalty to his Con check, make an attack roll to hit. If it, target makes Con check, and if he fails, he's STUNNED. I don't know if the current rules have something as simple as this, but it should.

[Xotl]

Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)


In the very important interest of making the system more intuitive to new players, I'm in favour of these three. I've taught a lot of players over the years, and these changes would really have helped. None of these changes raise compatibility issues either.

Intangibility, in addition to what you mentioned, has the benefit of being an actual word. Mental Attack is much more easily understood.

Energy Blast is the most important one: it covers all sorts of attacks that have nothing to do with Energy in SFX terms, and most importantly doesn't even necessarily apply to ED. As such it tends to sound silly at best and be outright confusing at worst; try telling the new guy about his non-Energy Energy Blast vs. PD. I don't care what you call it, but help the game gain new players and go with any name that removes "Energy" from the title.

These changes hurt nothing and help things out, which is the best criteria I can think of.

[Andrew Byers]

There are a few effects that IMO, Hero doesn't do very well currently. The ones that come to mind include possession, astral projection, and the ability to stop time. Sure, we've all found ways to simulate these, but the solutions are inelegant. And Hero should be, if anything, elegant. They are all effects that I would really like to see 6th edition handle a bit better than is currently the case.

[nexus]

New Powers I'd like to see

possession
Astral Projection (maybe with a more generic name)
"Wish" Using EDM never sat well with me.

Time Stop (The Speed Zone) is sort of kludgy but it works well enough for me that I could take or leave seeing it as a separate power.

[yamamura]

New Powers I'd like to see

possession
Astral Projection (maybe with a more generic name)



also and this is a biggie, We need a possesion power, a your body disapears and is in the other person, probably with a -1/2 lim for personality switch

Ditto on both of these.

[Balok]

It seems to me that a place to look for new powers would be at the ways people bend Transform until it screams for mercy...

[steamteck]

keep most of the names as they are. Powers is a better description than abilities to me. Mental attack is fine. ranged attack is just fine. Defense, passive and defense ,active sounds like GURPS and sounds unexciting and bland..
A possession power might be useful. Everything else I can already do just fine unless you mean absolute invulnerability which I don't want in HERO. .

[Andrew Cermak]

We're already simulating this with No Range on FW.


And it's very clunky. You shouldn't have to define the area on an innate defense. You shouldn't need Indirect attacks to attack out of an innate defense. And an innate defense shouldn't "go down" when you take damage.

[DrFaust]

It seems to me that a place to look for new powers would be at the ways people bend Transform until it screams for mercy...

Like a proper unlocking spell.

[Hugh Neilson]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

However, despite my not liking it, and despite having discussed this issue with a lot of people over the years, I’ve yet to come up with anything better.

I suggest eliminating Talents in favour of making these more example Powers. If we did this, the term "Talents" becomes free for use in the broader context and could replace "Powers" as a more genre-neutral option.

- "Powers" are talents used as superpowers.
- "SuperSkills" are talents used to simulate high skill levels
- "Psionics" are talents used as mental abilities
- "Spells" are talents used as magic spells


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

Mixed bag. I don't like "defense, passive" or "defense, active". I see no difference between "Desolid" and "intangible". Most of the rest I agree with. I see no reason to retain Armor or Force Field at all. They're just defenses with damage resistance, and costs END for FF. they would be better as example powers showing how Characteristics can become powers.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Steve, that should be the benchmark for all new rules of any stripe - if it's hard to do now, consider an ability to make it easier. I'd like to see automaton powers shifted into the mainstream, even with Stop Signs to clarify they may be unbalancing. I hate the concept of powers only NPC's can use.


Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets

I like both of these.


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)

I dislike these. Present sample powers that do this. A power that Stuns without damage would logically be cheaper than one that can KO, and a low AP ability to STUN would be devestating. One character buys it so targets have no DCV for his teammates. NND, STUN Suppress, Stun Drain and Ego Attack work fine for KOing targets without knockback or injury. Yes, it's expensive to KO someone in one shot. It should be.


—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks

Absolutely. I favour making Missile Deflect and this HTH approach adders purchased to the Block mechanic.


—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power

The first makes sense to me. It also creates a scalable Invulnerability power. However, I think an Invulnerability power (perhaps based on 100% Damage Reduction one step up from 75%) would be useful.

I concur with your comments on adding new powers generallly.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

No because it is counterintuitive, exactly as you note.

[Killer Shrike]

Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.

Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.


Tackling these two together. I think the powers should definitely be coalesced into a small collection of base effects from which all existing base effects can be expressed; though four doesnt quite cover it. If I were to collapse the base powers down, it would mirror the current Power Categories very closely, with minor variations. From the hip:

Mitigate: the negation of hostile effects. Every point of Mitigation costs 1 point and is bought specifically against either an Inflict or a Modify (see below).

Mitigate is Constant, costs END, is visible and is not persistent by default. To make a Mitigate effect 0 END and / or Persistent is handled by applying the applicable advantages. If both are taken, the effect is assumed to be not visible as well as a freebie (like it currently is on Armor).

The idea of Resistant vs Non-Resistant damage is gotten rid of. Attacks are now bought to do BODY or not do BODY specifically (see Inflict below), and mitigation is bought to protect vs BODY / STUN or not.

FF and Armor are both coverable in obvious ways with this. Force Wall is handled as a Create (see below).

Damage Reduction is done away with entirely as a base effect. While it is a great ability, its inherently not balanced in a scaled game like the HERO System; in low powered games its not worth its points, in high powered games it becomes a staple of many characters due to a combination of its fixed cost and its huge effect on high dice of effect. It also, in my frequent experience, slows the game down to administer; most noticeably 25% and 75% versions. It is still described in a sidebar and noted as permissible as a GM's Option for backwards compatibility and those who prefer to continue using it.

Inflict: the causing of damage (meaning non-fading / must be healed) to characteristics. Any characteristic. The base effect is not ranged and does not add STR or anything else. It costs 5 points x the cost of the targeted characteristic per 1d6 of damage inflicted. Effects can be stacked, and can be stacked in disproportional ratios. Half dies cost 1/2 points, and +1 effect costs 1/3 points.

Thus (based upon the current costs of characteristics for example purposes) 1d6 of Inflict vs DEX costs 15 points, while 1d6 of Inflict vs STR costs 5 points, and 1d6 of Inflict vs STUN and BODY costs 15 points, and 2d6 of Inflict vs BODY + 1d6 of Inflict vs STUN can be bought and stacked into a single attack for 25 points and so on.

Range is an Adder -- it costs 2 points per d6. Add (some Characteristic) is also an Adder; it costs 3 point per d6. Many of the current attack effecting Advantages are also Adders with a flat cost; roughly speaking each +1/4 of current Advantage is converted into a +1 point per d6 Adder. (Switching from Advantages to Adders wherever possible both makes the math easier and the game scale better, IMO.)

Killing vs Normal Damage is gotten rid of as a base concept; since a power is designed to inflict vs BODY or not specifically and in what increment it becomes a largely meaningless distinction.

Modify: the causing of temporary alterations (including nullification) of other effects. The current set of Adjustment effects and Dispel all fall into this base power.

Like Inflict, Modify is bought vs a specific characteristic or base effect. Each 1d6 of Modify costs 3 points x the base cost of a targeted characteristic or x1 for an effect and is Instant in effect. The duration of its effect is moved up the time chart as an Adder costing +1 point per step up the time chart starting at Phase for +1, Turn for +2, and so on. Modify vs various things can be bought together and stacked if desired. Modify can be bought in half dies at 1/2 cost and +1 effect for 1/3 cost.

Modify is not Ranged. Range is an Adder -- it costs 2 points per d6.

Modify normally does not cost END; however costing END is a -1 Subtracter on each d6.

Modify is normally incremental in effect; however if it requires an all or nothing effect (roll must match or exceed total points of target), its a -2 Subtracter on each d6.

Modify, like all effects, always costs a minimum of 1 point per d6.

Mixing extended time and END costing, an effect is essentially Constant up to the duration of the effect or until the character can no longer pay END, whichever is less.

Thus an effect similar to a Dispel costs 3 points per d6 of ranged END costing effect and is Instant in nature. It can be bought to have an effect greater than Instant, in which case it begins to act more like Suppress with a time limit.

An Aid like ability vs an effect would cost 5 points per d6 to last 1 TURN, not costing END and not Ranged.

Etc etc.

Move Simple mechanic, 1 point per 1 unit of measurement -- whatever that might end up being. Assumed turn mode, END cost, no contact with surface. No Turn mode = +1 point per unit, No END cost = +2 point per unit, Contact w/ surface = -1 point per unit, gliding behavior -1 point per unit, swinging behavior -1 point per unit...dammit, gotta go. Duty calls...more later

[Chris Goodwin]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

However, despite my not liking it, and despite having discussed this issue with a lot of people over the years, I’ve yet to come up with anything better.

My two cents: How about the word superpower to represent the things a superhero buys? Small-s. So you have superpowers, spells, psychic abilities, equipment, etc., all built with Powers.

[eternal_sage]

we need a "sleep" power, because it has a lot of HEROic and SuperHEROic uses (Joker has sleep gas, bards have sleep spells, ninjas have sleep dust, etc). possession might be cool, but i think its easily managed by a combo of other powers. same with most of the other "new" powers.

if you wanna change names, no skin off my back. i'll use them the same way, and still not care what they are called :)

oh, and i like Killer Shrike's concepts of reducing powers into a smaller set of catagories (although more than 4)

[Edsel]

I printed off all of Steve's original posts in all of the 6th Edition threads and spent hours reading them last night and thinking. It is amazing how little I came up with to respond with though. However the opinions in this post are based only on what Steve has posted in message #1 of this thread, I haven't been influenced by what others have posted subsequently since I haven't read them yet. I will try to keep my comments brief since there is a hellava lot to read in these discussions.


Q: Should we change the term “Power”?
I suppose you could call them "Gifts" if you wan a more generic term.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Current Name —> Possible Change
Energy Blast —> Blast
Force Wall —> Barrier
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
I like the changes above. I think the other changes make it sound too bland.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)
This is the only one I feel strongly enough to comment on. I want Automation Powers available to all characters. This would make a lot of sense for Cyborgs and such. In our games we allow this already. In Hero Designer we just buy them as Custom Powers since the rules won't normally allow it.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?
No. I like the current feel of the multiple power set-up.

[lazarus]

The only power consolidation I'm a fan of is EB/RKA/HKA/HA into one power: Attack. This would have options for making it ranged and/or killing. All other modifiers on those powers are the same, and they seem balanced that way.

One possibility I'd like to suggest is to incorporate a sort of mini-USPD into the characters book. Like, a chapter either before or after the Powers mechanics are described listing the various "iconic" or common powers someone would want to do, and how to build them (a sort of tutorial, if you will, while also having pre-built and pre-pointed powers list).

I'm not sure where this would go: ideally, though, I would like to see everything folded under the "Powers" framework. I know we have the option of buying Characteristics as Powers, but it sort of feels klunky to me to have it referred to in two different spots.

Laz - make the hard easy, and the impossible possible!

[BobGreenwade]

I have some of my own specific thoughts on this topic, but for now I'll just answer questions posted.


Q: Should we change the term “Power”?I would say no. The term "Power" has a long enough history to it that I think it can survive.

If you do change it, I'd suggest "Ability."
Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.I'm almost completely with you here. I'd go with changing Desolidification to Intangibility, but the rest can stay as is.
Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability powerOf the new Powers from DH, I'm unsure about Probability Alteration, but I'd add the others. In fact, I feel fairly strongly about the Automaton Powers part -- there are alraedy published characters using this rule.

For the rest, I also was surprised that Succor wasn't a distinct Power in 5th Ed; it should have been, and should be for 6th. It has plenty of differences to make it distinct from Aid. Suffocation seems like it'd be a good candidate for a separate Power. The Stunning and Knock Out effects should probably be buildable from Energy Blast, Mind Control, or some other Power. HTH Deflection could just become a factor in Missile Deflection (call it just Deflection). Personal Defense could just be built off Force Wall, and Invulnerability off Damage Reduction.
Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.I agree with you. An appendix showing how something like this could be done might be beneficial (as long as it wasn't more than a few pages long), but this sort of wholesale change really wouldn't be.

[Andrew Cermak]

Like a proper unlocking spell.

Sounds like a possible application of the Activate power.

[Andrew Byers]

As another general comment, I would really like to see the applications for Transform and Extra-Dimensional Movement as work-arounds for difficult effects be sharply limited in the 6th edition (we need a good acronym for that -- SHE for Sixth Hero Edition?). Those two are kind of the default responses that many folks have for difficult to construct powers. It would be a vast improvement if the judicious addition of a couple new powers could cut down on wha I consider to be over-use of Transform and EDM.

[John Desmarais]

The problem I have with most of the suggestions I've ever heard for new powers is that they are usually things that can be accomplished with existing ones.



Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
Already have one. Energy Blast, NND, defense Life Support


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damageNot difficult to do with existing powers, but kinds wordy: Energy Blast, NND, Standard Effect, enough dice to cover the highest expected CON in the game, limitation: damage only equal to target's CON+1?

Or, Mind Control.


—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)Mind Control, one command, SLEEP


—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacksIsn't this what blocking does?


—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall doesThis could be done with a modifier applied to Force Wall.


—an Invulnerability powerMaybe, but it would need some strict controls.

[Chris Goodwin]

The problem I have with most of the suggestions I've ever heard for new powers is that they are usually things that can be accomplished with existing ones.

(Suffocation)

Already have one. Energy Blast, NND, defense Life Support


That doesn't do what suffocation does in the rules. That does STUN damage to targets who don't have Life Support.

Suffocation prevents you from taking a Recovery, causes you to spend END, causes you to use STUN when you run out of END, and causes you to start taking BODY when you run out of STUN.

I think what Steve is going for: there are environmental conditions that don't necessarily have game effects associated with them, but should.

[buzz]

Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.
I think that there more than a few powers that could be condensed (like most of the attack powers), but I'll grant you that boiling everything down to four is a bit extreme.

At the very least, I think that KAs could be simply made into Advantages, and that Armor/FF/Damage Reduction/Resistance could be all rolled into a single power.

Nonetheless, I'd vote for some reduction.

[ghost-angel]

I'm for all the name changes - Any name change that removes connotations of SFX from the Power itself I'm for.

I've run into too many people who think Energy Blast means "Vs Energy Defense" - even 20yr veteran players doing that (Why? HOW?). Attack, Ranged is perfect, tells you exactly what it is and does.

Same with all the other changes - they go more towards actually telling you what the Power DOES in a simple, concise and clear manner.

Though personally, I'm for smashing Armor and Force Field into one Power - calling it Resistant Defense and stating it's a 0END/Persistent Power and if you want a "force field" make it Visible, and it can Cost END at the discretion of the builder.

[Hugh Neilson]

That doesn't do what suffocation does in the rules. That does STUN damage to targets who don't have Life Support.

Suffocation prevents you from taking a Recovery, causes you to spend END, causes you to use STUN when you run out of END, and causes you to start taking BODY when you run out of STUN.

I think what Steve is going for: there are environmental conditions that don't necessarily have game effects associated with them, but should.

This is it exactly, to me. Sleep spell? NND or mental attack. Out of Stun? You're asleep. That's much closer to a Sleep spell than an NND can get to a "cut off air supply" ability

"You can't breathe; lose 21 STUN; recover them normally" doesn't seem remotely similar to the actual game effects of being unable to breathe. We should be able to simulate that fairly easily.

[Chris Goodwin]

Oh, something I just thought of.

I'd like to see all Powers be, effectively, Constant Powers. In other words, when you activate your Force Field, you have Force Field up as long as the Power is active. I'd like to see the same for, e.g. Energy Blast. When you activate your Energy Blast, you can throw Energy Blasts as long as your Power is active. It would have all of the problems of Constant Powers, though; you pay END every Phase it is active, plus END for every time you throw it. You can buy down either or both of those. If you go Stunned or Unconscious, your Energy Blast Power deactivates unless you've bought it Persistent.

While I'm on the subject of END Cost, I'd like to see a little more detail: make all Powers have END Cost to activate, END Cost to maintain, and END Cost to make use of; our hypothetical Energy Blast might cost 5 END to activate, 5 END per Phase to maintain, and 5 END for every time you throw Energy Blast. Perhaps activation and maintenance costs could be rolled together.

Oh, and, I'd like to see all Powers cost Endurance by default, and you buy them down from there. For consistency's sake, if nothing else. Alternately, make none of them cost Endurance by default, and allow Costs END as a Limitation.

[MorpheousXO]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

We could, but yeah, I can't honestly think of anything that's not already used (like ability).


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?
Lemme go through your list and see what I think.


Armor —> Defense, Passive
I like it, though it is a bit bland, but I think being bland would actually help people get the idea that you put your special effect on it. Then you don't worry about the general sfx of the name tainting the thought process.

Desolidification —> Intangibility
I don't see any need to change this, I don't think 'comic book' when you say desolidification.

Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Most definitely go with this one!

Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Like Armor, I like the blandness of Normal Attack, and it makes it mesh with Killing Attack... speaking of which, killing attack could be renamed lethal attack, but definitely not necessary.

Entangle —> Restrain
At first I don't think it needs a change, but then I think "entangle makes you think they're wrapped up" but this can also represent a mental stopping power, so I do actually think the change is warranted.

Force Field —> Defense, Active
Yes, let's do this one!

Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
I like Barrier... though you COULD call it Defense, Barrier.

HA —> Normal Attack, HTH
Oh yeah, like this change!


Honestly, though — I’m not sure making these changes gains us much of anything. They’re definitely more generic and less superhero-y, but also kind of flavorless. I’m not sure it’s worth upsetting the apple cart. The only one I’m strongly sold on so far is Ego Attack —> Mental Attack.
I think it gains more ease of understanding if you genericise the names when it comes to sfx. Long timers don't have a problem, but it definitely is an issue at first. This should also be done with martial arts (legsweep I'm looking at you!) but this technically isn't the right place.



Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?
Oh yes, consider away!


Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Err... that sounds interesting, and it definitely would fill a gap... I suppose... dang it, need to get DH!

Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Oh yes, PLEASE!! I would like this much much more than using transform, and it's a bit more intuitive too, to my mind.

Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Sounds good.

Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)
Sounds neat.

—making Succor a distinct Power
Probably should, pretty much already is.

—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
Would be nice and not as clunky as the current way.

—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
I don't think this is as needed as you'd just buy an attack as "only to determine if stunned", maybe throw that lim in there for the sake of it being official.

—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
Well, this would have to be very regulated in my mind, no matter how much I want to be able to do this since it could easily be abused. In fact, it might end up just being another limited power somehow, or just Mental Attack.

—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
Or a combat maneuver that does for Ranged attacks what block does for HTH attacks! Actually, a power would allow HTH to reflect... hmm... BOTH!!! Maybe... umm... ok, on the fence, I definitely think though that HTH reflection needs to be implemented somehow, and that hth and ranged blocking needs to be unified.

—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
Hmm... nah, just make a limitation/adder/advantage combination for Force Wall that does the same thing, or even an adder for Force Field/Defense, Active.

—an Invulnerability power
NO. Only way I'd say is if it were very very limited in it's usage, and got very expensive to make it not as limited.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?
Heck no! :doi:

[MorpheousXO]

Disambiguation is best. Saying what you mean is best. 'Power' is neither.

You can now have an ambiguously X-powered Power; many Powers can be skillful use of minimal power, or of an opponent's power, or are merely absences of anything at all.

We have a word, 'Power', that is both ambiguous and used to mean things it, in common parlance, doesn't.

The sense you seem to be looking for is 'Ability'. And, by coincidence, it's my favorite candidate. Less awkward than 'Capacity', 'Means', 'Aptitude', 'Attribute', 'Characteristic', 'Potential', 'Prowess', or 'Faculty', it's Able to do the job.

A Variable Ability Pool, for example, more directly states what that framework does. Advantaged and Limited Abilities both make more sense than Advantaged or Limited Powers.

On the whole, I'd prefer a shorter, pithier word, but none seem to fit, and there's a workaround for that issue. 'Ab' is a great short form, and within the game context would be clear and handy.

As a bonus, you can have Able Lists, to list who on your roster is able to fill a needed role, because of their Abilities.

There are clear advantages to kicking 'Armor' off the list of current names; it's misleading and obfuscatory.

For the same reason, the suggested 'Defense, Passive/Active' is not great. For one, there's already Physical/Energy Defense (nonresistant). If you're going to reuse the word as proposed, there appears to be a major overhaul of Resistance needed to go with it. (Not saying there isn't.)

Also, Defense is both a category word, and the name of all abilities within that category? It introduces more opportunities for confusion.

'Fortification' (long), 'Aegis' (yuck), 'Fortitude' (meh), all not great. 'Buffer' has potential, but.. seems weak and generic. Still, a Physical Buffer or Energy Buffer.. not impressive. 'Toughness'.. also not fond of. I am fond of 'Proof'; it's short, simple, works well in compound terms: 'Energy Proof', 'Killing Proof', 'Normal Proof'... and maybe needs a better sales pitch.

I'm also not fond of the 'Passive/Active' part. Latent, Innate, or simply Persistent for Passive are all better, in that they don't assume something about the ability that is not required. Unless that's another planned overhaul.

Which we'd also want to avoid.

For some reason I was thinking Ability was already used somewhere in the system. Yes, ability is DEFINITELY a good word to replace Power with.

On the front of Energy/Physical Defense, you could call them Soak, which some gamers might be familiar with from other games, and being somewhat appropriate in that you are Soaking up the damage.

[MorpheousXO]

I see no reason to retain Armor or Force Field at all. They're just defenses with damage resistance, and costs END for FF. they would be better as example powers showing how Characteristics can become powers.

Hmm... yes, i like this, just get rid of them and have Energy Defense and Physical defense that you modify with advantages and adders, or other powers (Damage Resistance, which could be renamed Defense Resistance to denote it makes your Defenses resistant!).

[Paragon]

I'd like to make a general design philosophy suggestion. I'll give what I consider a couple examples of it that occur in 5e, but it has more implications than that, and I think is sound even if you don't agree with my specific examples.

Don't let system consistency interfere with purchase value.

What I mean by this is that Hero has been plagued a bit from the start with a tendency for things to sometimes cost too much (or too little) just because the most logical way to link the pieces together says it should. To some extent this is unavoidable, but I think it does some serious harm when its too well inculcated in the rules.

Examples:

1. Damage Shield. The 5e damage shield is as it is, far as I can tell, because it seemed logical that it needed to be a continuous power, and that it should pay something for its property of attacking potentially multiple times. However, the effect of this is a construct that ends up almost always being too expensive for anyone buying it for primarily conceptual reasons, and is of dubious value even for characters wrapped around it. The pieces put together in a way that just doesn't represent the final value over all.

2. Shapeshift. The 5e attempt to make Shapeshift compatible with other sensory powers wasn't fundamentally unsound; but because most of the others are much broader in application, and because sensory powers are built primarily off adders, a serious shapeshift ends up being prohibitively expensive for what is, in the end, usually a hyped-up disguise power. Another case where consistency with process didn't really look at whether the result seemed commensurate with the cost.

3. Energy-type specific defenses. This is complicated because of the frequency of occurence issues, but its still a problem. Basically, an attempt to not make generic limitations too generous made it such that buying things like a Force Field that only protects against radiation is prohibitively expensive. Frankly, in most campaigns, getting a -2 Limitation on such a construct wouldn't exactly make it overattractive; the 5e standard of -1/2 makes it almost an idiot's game.

I suspect the only way to address this is to suggest that most modifiers and other power philosophy constructs are contextual; and as such, some constructs aren't going to use the most obvious values to derive them. But I think it'd serve the system better.

[rjcurrie]

First off, I don't like "Ability" as a replacement for "Power". I've always liked "Ability" to be a generic way to refer to a Skill, Talent, Perk, or Power. Perhaps "Effect" would be a possible term. You would then build a Spell or Superpower from one or more effects.

[ajackson]

Current Name —> Possible Change

In many cases, there's no obvious advantage to changing it; the proposed variant isn't really less comic-booky than the replacement. A few specific notes:
Armor —> Defense, Passive
[/quote]
Or Toughness, or just discard the power and use PD/ED/damage resistance.


Ego Attack —> Mental Attack

Ego Attack has always been an ugly name.


Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Go with Blast.


Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
I like Barrier. As for Force Field, the problem is less the comic-book nature of the name than the fact that the name implies a special effect.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.
In general I agree. However, there's something to be said for having two basic attack powers: Damage and Inflict. Damage causes damage (e.g. blast, mental blast, etc), Inflict applies a non-damage condition that weakens someone temporarily (Flash, Drain, Transform, Mental Illusions, Entangle, etc). Those powers can still be kept, but unifying them so they have a single underlying mechanic would clean things up. I'm inclined to use the same sort of targets as for mind control, but that's a secondary issue.

On another topic: a lot of power writeups really need to be simplified. Most powers should not require a paragraph of text. The big offenders here tend to be 1/4 advantages and limitations.

[James Gillen]

My two cents: How about the word superpower to represent the things a superhero buys? Small-s. So you have superpowers, spells, psychic abilities, equipment, etc., all built with Powers.

You mean... like we're doing now? ;)

jg

[James Gillen]

Don't let system consistency interfere with purchase value.

What I mean by this is that Hero has been plagued a bit from the start with a tendency for things to sometimes cost too much (or too little) just because the most logical way to link the pieces together says it should. To some extent this is unavoidable, but I think it does some serious harm when its too well inculcated in the rules.

Examples:

1. Damage Shield. The 5e damage shield is as it is, far as I can tell, because it seemed logical that it needed to be a continuous power, and that it should pay something for its property of attacking potentially multiple times. However, the effect of this is a construct that ends up almost always being too expensive for anyone buying it for primarily conceptual reasons, and is of dubious value even for characters wrapped around it. The pieces put together in a way that just doesn't represent the final value over all.

2. Shapeshift. The 5e attempt to make Shapeshift compatible with other sensory powers wasn't fundamentally unsound; but because most of the others are much broader in application, and because sensory powers are built primarily off adders, a serious shapeshift ends up being prohibitively expensive for what is, in the end, usually a hyped-up disguise power. Another case where consistency with process didn't really look at whether the result seemed commensurate with the cost.

:yes:

[Enforcer84]

I liked the powers Steve Came up with in his Digital Hero articles and would love to see them folded into the 'official' game.


Also, reading the above, I actually like Shapeshift as it is...I hated it at first, but now I've come to like it.



again, I don't know what that says about me. :)

[JmOz]

Adjustment Powers in general should at the base level effect one power based on F/X, 2 powers can remain a +1/2. 4 powers a +1. all +2. A limitation should be included as an option if you can only effect a limited effect (So Fire powers is +/- 0, A fire blast might be -1/2 and would be effective vs any fire blast style power built with RKA or EB, or something weird).

A note that some leeway should be given regarding the F/X of characteristics, while it would make sense that the leach could not steel Defender's Str from his armor, many F/X for characteristics could be considered. To use a marvel example, Draining Hulk, Thor, or the Thing, should be ok, draining Iron Man's armor, should not be ok.

Maybe just say that characteristics should normaly be considered a single effect. Yes this makes Drain slightly more powerful, but I don't think that much so, and it makes "more sense" at least to me

Could someone repost this rambling, illogical, error filled, post, into something more coherent...I would appreciate it

[Hugh Neilson]

Adjustment Powers in general should at the base level effect one power based on F/X, 2 powers can remain a +1/2. 4 powers a +1. all +2. A limitation should be included as an option if you can only effect a limited effect (So Fire powers is +/- 0, A fire blast might be -1/2 and would be effective vs any fire blast style power built with RKA or EB, or something weird). [\quote]

That reminds me. I would like to see "affects multiple abilities" segregated from "abilities affected can be varied". The cost of draining, say, STR and CON (or fire-based EB's and force fields) specifically should be less than the cost of Draining any two characteristics changed at the character's discretion (or fire powers).

[QUOTE=JmOz;1545157]A note that some leeway should be given regarding the F/X of characteristics, while it would make sense that the leach could not steel Defender's Str from his armor, many F/X for characteristics could be considered. To use a marvel example, Draining Hulk, Thor, or the Thing, should be ok, draining Iron Man's armor, should not be ok.

Yes and no. I agree with minor benefits for SFX. Is significant power defense a minor benefit? I'd rather see guidance that, if Iron Man thinks his STR should not be drained, he should buy power defense. If Leech's drains won't work on focused powers (or, more likely, if he needs flesh to flesh contact), he should get a limitation.

[Paragon]

Also, reading the above, I actually like Shapeshift as it is...I hated it at first, but now I've come to like it.





Do you like the way its structured, or how much it costs? I don't have anything intrinsically against the way its structured; its that the final costs seem, well, bluntly, ridiculous for what it does for you that I have an issue with. If it was built in a similar fashion, but where it used 5s and 3s where it uses 10s and 5s perhaps, I'd have far less to complain about.

Its the fact that all the sensory powers are built to a common metric, which means the only variable is base cost that creates the problem there. Adding a sense group to what your Shapeshift effects is simply not the same in value as doing so with your Images (and I'm not sure its the same with your Flash, your Darkness or your Invisibility either, though its muddier comparing those three). If they were constructed with the same pattern, but with adders of different value based on the base value of the effect (as they would be if they were Advantages instead) that creates the issue there.

But that's rather my point; sometimes I think its too easy to make things tidy at the expense of making them work right.

[arkibet]

I registered just so I could write this. I'd prefer Energy Blast to remain named Energy Blast. It was easy for me to understand that it's anything from an ice beam to a hot flame to a laser. It has character. I think it's the coolest name for what it is.

[Netzilla]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

I can't think of anything better to call it. Any of the alternatives I can think of carry just as many connotations as the term “Power”.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

I do think some should be renamed. However, I think the ones that should be renamed are those that strongly imply a certain special effect. Energy Blast, Armor & Force Field come to mind as the one's I've seen misinterpreted the most (EB & FF must be made of energy, Armor must be worn, etc). So, I think the list of what needs to be renamed is probably shorter than the list you have.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?
Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)

Haven't read the HEROglyphs in question, but I think Heroic Action Points would model this well.


Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)

Couldn't this be a variation on Summon?


Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)

Ick. What special effects justifies this without being better tasked to an existing power:
* Flip a switch = TK
* Control a computer = Mind Control vs Computers or Computer Programming with Indirect


Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Some of these can be appropriate for certain character concepts. I've personally used Does Not Bleed for a character who could willfully close his arteries. Of course, it also required 0DCV concentration and cost END to use. I think at least some Automaton Powers should be moved to the general Powers list with appropriate Stop Sign markers.


—making Succor a distinct Power

Works fine as is, IMO.


—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets

I guess this means that it forces a character into the status of “Drowning” as opposed to using a Continuous NND/Drain construct. I could potentially see this. Seems like this could potentially be modifier on Entangle, Change Environment or Summon/Transform, but I'm not sure how complex that might get.


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage

Seems easy enough with a limited EB: EB, Only to confer Stunned status (-2).


—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)

Eh, this gets into the realm of Absolutes and I'm not sure I like it. I'd only be in favor of this if there were a relatively common way of resisting it (such as requiring a CON or EGO roll, but then we're creating a “Saving Throw” mechanic). I can see the need, but I'm not sure I'll like the results.


—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks

Isn't that Block? I know, you can't Reflect with a block. I suppose a power that allows you to re-direct a HtH attack could be useful. I think that if you do this, you just create a power called Deflection and have to pick a single type of attack that it effects (HtH, Ranged or Mental). Adding additional categories is a +1 Advantage.


—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does

What's wrong with Force Wall, Self Only (-1/2).


—an Invulnerability power

100% Damage Reduction? Only if there is a reasonably common way of bypassing it (such as Desolid requiring you to name a common special effect that works). However, if you did this, I'd like to see “levels” applied to this Invulnerability that could be bypassed by an attack with the appropriate Advantage. For example, Level 1 Invulnerability to Fire can be defeated by a Fire-based EB that has the Irresistible Advantage at L1 or more.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

I can see a definite advantage to doing this and am somewhat in favor of it. My only concern is that newbies will see how the power is actually constructed and freak, thinking that's what they have to do to purchase this power. If you go this route, I think it should be handled like Talents and Super Skills are, where the write-up is at least partially hidden by a good description (perhaps even moving the mechanics into a different “Meta-Powers” section).

[ajackson]

Steve’s Thoughts: As early as the 4th Edition design process it was suggested that the number of Powers be boiled down to four — Attack, Defend, Move, Sense — and that all the different Power effects be created from them with Power Modifiers. I don’t think the idea had any more merit then than it does now, and have no intention of implementing it (unless, as usual, someone were to come up with an utterly brilliant argument in its favor). I think this would make the HERO System even harder to learn and create far more problems than it might solve.
I think it might help for certain classes of problem. For example, 1" teleport is generally useful out of proportion to its cost, as a cheap way to escape from grapples and entangles and pass through walls. This doesn't mean reducing all powers down to anything like that short a list, though. Some more generic powers which might be useful:

Damage: there's no real need for separate powers of Blast, Hand Attack, Mental Blast, etc; they're really all one power. Keeping Killing separate, as it has a different mechanic, is reasonable.
Defend: I agree that I don't see the point here. However, merging the various ways of buying PD/ED/rPD/rED would be a good thing.
Inflict: attack power that causes a negative condition, rather than damage. Incorporates Drain, Flash, Mental Illusions, Mind Control, Transform. Entangle probably needs to be separate, though it can be merged with a Create Object power.
Move: treat all the special forms of movement as adders, rather than a separate power. Something like: Clinging (+5p). Flight (+20p). Gliding (+10p). Leaping (+5p). Swimming (+5p). Teleport (+20p). Tunneling (+X p). Water Walking (+5p); each one just lets you move at your normal speed in that particular movement mode. This eliminates structures such as Flight (only along surfaces).
Sense: well, this pretty well already exists, though turning Telepathy and Mind Scan into senses has some appeal.

[SSgt Baloo]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Steve’s Thoughts: The use of “Power” as a term for a game element is confusing, since it’s not the same thing as a power, and because Powers can be used to create abilities that people don’t think of as “powers.” It’s a relic of the HERO System’s roots in the Comic Book Superhero genre.

However, despite my not liking it, and despite having discussed this issue with a lot of people over the years, I’ve yet to come up with anything better.

The only candidate suggested thus far that has any appeal would be "Ability". Having said that, I'd kind of like to have it renamed "George" ("George" or "real George" used to be a slang term meaning "Wonderful".) [/obscure reference]


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH


My suggestions?
Armor —> Fold it in with pd/ed and Damage resistance.
Ego Attack —> See below.
Energy Blast —> this is a ranged form of HA and should be treated accordingly
Entangle —> Restrain (Maybe now we can use a mental paralysis based on this?)
Force Field —> (Defenses that cost END and have no range)
Force Wall —> Barrier. Perhaps it should be based on Restrain?
HA —> Attack (adding STR to damage is an advantage, adding range is an advantage, mental attack is an advantage, killing attack is an advantage.)
Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)

Sounds like a way to get rid of Luck dice in favor of something less nebulous. OTOH, I would like to suggest putting a few notes next to whatever passes for "luck" in 6E to suggest a few ways of simulating luck besides the power that currently bears the name.


Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)

Is something like this really necessary? I know Transform is overutilized, but isn't this one of the things it's supposed to do? Or is what you are discribing fundamentally different than conjuring something up from something else (or something from nothing)?


Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)

Again, I'm not sure what the power you're proposing is supposed to do differently from using TK to control objects at a distance?


Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

It's about time! I did this anyway.


Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

I don't understand. Can you give some f'rinstances of "Activate" in game usage?


—making Succor a distinct Power

It used to be, didn't it? If you're describing what I think you are, I'm in favor of it.


—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets

Doesn't NND or EB, NO BODY do something like this? Couldn't it just be suggested that a power based on suffocation SFX results in suffocation if maintained after the victim loses consciousness?


—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)

As others have mentioned, there's a lot of different ways to do this. My preferred method would be an appropriately limited NND or Mind Control.


—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks

It's been suggested that perhaps missile deflection could become an extension of the Block maneuver. I'd like to see that.


—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does

Force Wall, personal effect only (limitation?). A reasonable way to approximate a limited form of invulnerability.


—an Invulnerability power[quote]

Or just allow a 100% level of Damage Reduction with all the appropriate warnings, bells and whistles.

[quote]Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Not necessarily, but someone else suggested that such be included in the design notes for those who want to experiment with their own crunchy flavors of Hero.


...we need a good acronym for that -- SHE for Sixth Hero Edition?

[obscure reference]
How about Ayesha?
[/obscure reference]

[Lucius]

Hi folx!


:)Hi, Mr. Long!

Sorry, couldn't resist it any longer....



Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)


For some - Does not Bleed, No Hit Locations - this is a "no brainer."

For others - Takes No Stun - the balance considerations give one pause, but I still am in favor of making them officially available - with a great big stopsign.





Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?



Within limits.

For example, we've never had seperate powers for Energy and Physical damage - it's always been a kind of "toggle," damage dealing powers do one or the other and you choose which when you buy the power, but we've never had both Energy Blast and Physical Blast as seperate powers. So maybe the difference between Ranged and Hand to Hand should be a "toggle" as well?

Then again, maybe what we need to do is completely revamp the rules for adding damage. Maybe make the default for the damaging power "Ranged" with a limitation for "No Range" and then adding STR is an Advantage? Possibly a variable Advantage depending on how much one can add....hm....

In any case, Normal Attacks and Killing Attacks need to be balanced against each other. Not long ago, a brand new person (I forget who) who had just bought the game and found the website, on one of his first posts brought up the obvious imbalance and asked if he was missing something because it didn't look right to him....totally unaware of how many times the issue has been hashed out over the decades.

I see three ways this can be done:

Make Killing an Advantage. An obvious solution and often raised, although I actually have not endorsed it for over a year. But if we go that route, I think it should be two Advantages: One to cover the improved dice mechanic, and one to cover the limited Attack Vs Limited Defense aspect.

Make Killing an Addervantage. Just as Resistant Defenses is an Addervantage - it adds to "Base Cost" before Advantages, like an Adder, but the cost is a percentage of how much of the power you have bought, like a +1/2 Advantage. Then again maybe what we really want to do is get rid of the one Addervantage in the game - and other orphan mechanics?

Make Normal a Limitation. This has the advantage (if you'll pardon the expression) of being already in the system, in the form of the "mandatory limitation" for Hand to Hand Normal Attack. It also seems to cause less disruption than the alternatives. It's just a matter of extending it to whatever you are going to call Ranged Normal Attack. However, I propose two changes: 1. I think the limitation should perhaps be larger. 2. I think there should be two limitations: One to impose the more limited dice rolling mechanic, and one to apply against all applicable (non-resistant) defenses.

Oh, and another possibility is to just eliminate one class of damage or the other. Not something I'd seriously propose, but for the sake of mentioning all possible options....


And a more general suggestion: Besides the Addervantage I mention, I think the system should be scoured for "orphan mechanics." If they are useful, perhaps they can be expanded to other aspects of the system; if not, perhaps they can be eliminated in the interest of streamlining and simplifying the system.


Lucius Alexander

And a leaner, meaner palindromedary

[Enforcer84]

Do you like the way its structured, or how much it costs? I don't have anything intrinsically against the way its structured; its that the final costs seem, well, bluntly, ridiculous for what it does for you that I have an issue with. If it was built in a similar fashion, but where it used 5s and 3s where it uses 10s and 5s perhaps, I'd have far less to complain about.

Its the fact that all the sensory powers are built to a common metric, which means the only variable is base cost that creates the problem there. Adding a sense group to what your Shapeshift effects is simply not the same in value as doing so with your Images (and I'm not sure its the same with your Flash, your Darkness or your Invisibility either, though its muddier comparing those three). If they were constructed with the same pattern, but with adders of different value based on the base value of the effect (as they would be if they were Advantages instead) that creates the issue there.

But that's rather my point; sometimes I think its too easy to make things tidy at the expense of making them work right.
No, I don't mind it's cost. If it were cheaper it'd be harder to fit into Elemental Controls. :)

[GamePhil]

Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?


This one's near and dear to me, so I'll start with it. And my answer is: Eh, probably not. It runs into the same problem as with adventures: only a small percentage of the gaming populace would buy it, this time, the tinkerers, which is probably an even smaller chunk of the pie than the GMs. That's not a good thing for a main rule book.

In addition, people already complain about Regeneration and Instant Change, and so long as Hero maintains the "show your work" policy, it would get many times worse if you had to do something similar to create an Energy Blast.

Personally, I would love to see a set of rules like this, and have the game based on them. One more level of abstraction, behind the scenes, would do my tinkerer's heart good. But I absolutely think that a separate pamphlet or a five page section in the appendix would be a better way to present it, if it's ever done, than re-writing the game system around it.

[GamePhil]

I'd like to make a general design philosophy suggestion. I'll give what I consider a couple examples of it that occur in 5e, but it has more implications than that, and I think is sound even if you don't agree with my specific examples.

Don't let system consistency interfere with purchase value.


Well, I sort of agree, and I wouldn't mind seeing a "This Is More/Less Useful Than The Points Indicate" Modifier, but I don't entirely agree with the conclusion. If you're getting an undesirable result by consistently applying the rules, then the rules need to be examined, not just thrown to the side. More options are frequently the result, and are seldom bad things.

For example, I'm completely on board with Damage Shield having to be Continuous, but a lot of the rest I have issue with. My simplest answer: It is not more useful than another Continuous Power, so it should not need a larger Advantage, it's simply a form of Continuous (much as Radius and Line are forms of Area Of Effect). Then, you can further examine Continuous to see if still more forms of it might be made available. Or, you could say that Damage Shield is still a +1/2, but that it can take No Range and Self Only, and if it doesn't you can place the Damage Shield around something else.

[GamePhil]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?


I think the main problem there is that most everything else you could call it has similar problems. The best I've seen is "Effect" earlier, but with Special Effect being so core to the game it might be confusing, too.



Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?


Maybe. Being flavorless is not necessarily bad, since the players provide the flavor.



Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?


Probably, though what the Powers are to be is the challenge.



Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.


I would prefer to see Activate folded into a broader power, if possible. It just feels too narrow in effect to me to be a really useful Power, that is, one with enough applicability to see often on character sheets.

I kind of like just using Mind Control against Body, though.

Your other HG articles I need to look at.



—making Succor a distinct Power


Unconcerned.



—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets


Too narrow. Perhaps an Environmental Effect Power, or an expansion of Change Environment.



—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)


We can do both of those now with a Standard Effect Stun Only EB, with Only To Stun for the first and All Or Nothing and Recovers Full Stun When Brought To Consciousness on the second, not sure we need another way.



—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks


I'd prefer a reworking of Missile Deflection to a separate Power.



—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does


All for it. It helps bring characters and vehicles and automatons together.



—an Invulnerability power


Like with a lot of things, I prefer to just use Absolute Effect. I do think those rules should be in the 6th Ed books, though.

[Paragon]

No, I don't mind it's cost. If it were cheaper it'd be harder to fit into Elemental Controls. :)

I have to point out that using the criteria that nothing costs too much because of frameworks seems, well, a little arcane.

[Paragon]

Well, I sort of agree, and I wouldn't mind seeing a "This Is More/Less Useful Than The Points Indicate" Modifier, but I don't entirely agree with the conclusion. If you're getting an undesirable result by consistently applying the rules, then the rules need to be examined, not just thrown to the side. More options are frequently the result, and are seldom bad things.



In theory I agree, but I've seen enough build systems now over the years that I've concluded this isn't entirely addressable on a systemic level; you can fiddle with costs until hell freezes over, and some things will still come out wrong.




For example, I'm completely on board with Damage Shield having to be Continuous, but a lot of the rest I have issue with. My simplest answer: It is not more useful than another Continuous Power, so it should not need a larger Advantage, it's simply a form of Continuous (much as Radius and Line are forms of Area Of Effect). Then, you can further examine Continuous to see if




Well, personally, I think its overpriced even at Continuous, but that's neither here nor there.




still more forms of it might be made available. Or, you could say that Damage Shield is still a +1/2, but that it can take No Range and Self Only, and if it doesn't you can place the Damage Shield around something else.

Which is tantamount to what I'm talking about though, since that decision is fundamentally subjective in regard to applicability. I'll also note it makes the construction more complicated without really any purpose.

[Chris Goodwin]

I would prefer to see Activate folded into a broader power, if possible. It just feels too narrow in effect to me to be a really useful Power, that is, one with enough applicability to see often on character sheets.

I had come up with a Power of my own called "Toggle". It could flip something between two states. Locking and unlocking a door was the main function, but it could turn a car on or off, or put someone to sleep (though it would probably need a roll against a Characteristic for the latter, though. Activate seems pretty similar to what I was going for.

[Vondy]

Do you like the way its structured, or how much it costs? I don't have anything intrinsically against the way its structured; its that the final costs seem, well, bluntly, ridiculous for what it does for you that I have an issue with. If it was built in a similar fashion, but where it used 5s and 3s where it uses 10s and 5s perhaps, I'd have far less to complain about.


I agree. I don't mind the structure - it makes a weird kind of sense - but the costing seems... a tad high.

[jtelson]

I had come up with a Power of my own called "Toggle". It could flip something between two states. Locking and unlocking a door was the main function, but it could turn a car on or off, or put someone to sleep (though it would probably need a roll against a Characteristic for the latter, though. Activate seems pretty similar to what I was going for.

We've pretty much always used Cosmetic transform for this effect. How did you scale it? or was it an absolute? (I toggle off the Villians AI, the Nuclear Reactor, The Nuclear Bomb?)

[Chris Goodwin]

We've pretty much always used Cosmetic transform for this effect. How did you scale it? or was it an absolute? (I toggle off the Villians AI, the Nuclear Reactor, The Nuclear Bomb?)

Well, I never actually got it designed.... I'm not sure how it would work. Probably would have to scale in some way, maybe be defended against by Power Defense.

[GamePhil]

Which is tantamount to what I'm talking about though, since that decision is fundamentally subjective in regard to applicability. I'll also note it makes the construction more complicated without really any purpose.

I'm confused: how is it fundamentally subjective? Being able to apply Limitations to the Damage Shield is completely consistent with the rest of the game. It further means that Damage Shield is no longer an Advantage that gives a Power Limitations, and it means that Damage Shield without Limitations can be applied to your Entangle or your Force Wall without making exceptions to the rules, and allows you to use your Heat Vision to heat up a gun to force the target to drop it. How is that "without really any purpose"?

[Opal]

It further means that Damage Shield is no longer an Advantage that gives a Power Limitations, and it means that Damage Shield without Limitations ... allows you to use your Heat Vision to heat up a gun to force the target to drop it. A concrete example like that really drives the point home. Lots of advantges have implicit limitations - like an explosion might damage someone you don't want to damage or whatever - and, even if they didn't, the objection is still 'merely' philosophical. While you could probably just destroy a focus with your heat vision, anyway, putting a damage shield on it seem like a pretty cool (npi) thing that it should be possible to do in a straightforward, intuitive way.

[casualplayer]

Just stop dragging your feet and make TK effectively Ranged STR, price it accordingly, eliminate the implied sorta-Indirect and then you don't need to create a new power called Activate.

Additive should be a new advantage/adder that allows damage stacking a la STR + HTH or STR + HKA.

[ajackson]

Just stop dragging your feet and make TK effectively Ranged STR, price it accordingly, eliminate the implied sorta-Indirect and then you don't need to create a new power called Activate.
Activate is basically ranged skill use, actually.

[GamePhil]

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)


I think I'd prefer expansion or discussion of Luck to a separate Power like this. I don't know that it's appropriate for all games to have re-rolls, and keeping it as options of Luck might work better.



Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)


I'd like to see some more options for Summoning, but I suppose that inanimate objects might be to complicated to not need a separate Power. That is, writing it up as a type of Summon would require Loyalty and a full "character" build, and might not be expensive enough to be appropriately priced.



Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)


Could this one be done as part of reworking Dispel? I don't know what it might be called, since Activate/Deactivate doesn't really have a ring to it, but it's basically Dispel in reverse.



Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)


All for that one, I'd like all Powers that exist in the game to be for all characters. I'd even go so far as to want to include the Cargo from Vehicles, though it would have to be re-worked to make sense in any other context. A new Cargo-like Power that covered bags of holding, a hidden space in a cyborg's artificial arm, and the inside portion of a vehicle, I'd be happy.

[GamePhil]

I had come up with a Power of my own called "Toggle".

Good name, I was just wondering what such a thing would be called.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?
No. It would needlessly cross-up long-time players of the game, and (as you note) there doesn't seem to be a great alternative. I'd suggest minimizing confusion between Powers and powers by meticulously always referring to comic book superhero-style abilities as "superpowers." If the little-p "powers" was rarely or never used (as abilities built with Powers would be called superpowers, or spells, or equipment, etc.), then over time, the confusion might abate somewhat.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?
I go back and forth on this. From a game design standpoint, they should probably be changed, because they're genre-flavored. But changing them does make them rather flavorless, and does upset the apple cart to a degree. I'd say the best compromise would be not to change them just because they "should" be changed in some theoretical sense, and only change the ones that seem to demonstrably confuse people because they imply a specific special effect.

With that in mind, I guess I'd recommend changing Armor, Ego Attack, Energy Blast, Force Field, and Force Wall. If Energy Blast is renamed Blast, I'd leave Hand-To-Hand Attack alone. If Energy Blast is renamed Normal Attack: Ranged, then I'd go ahead and rename Hand-To-Hand Attack to Normal Attack: Hand-To-Hand (to maintain symmetry).


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?
I'd like to see all the ones you suggest from your Heroglyphs columns. For the Probability Alteration Power, I think it would be cool if Probability Alteration also had a way of simulating the kind of generalized good or bad fortune currently simulated by Luck and Unluck. This would allow using Probability Alteration to build standard Luck, thereby making Luck a Talent. :) Also, if you add an Object Creation Power, it might be worth looking at whether or not Force Wall should be folded into it. (Probably not, since FW's walls behave differently from OC's, but it's probably worth kicking the idea around.)


Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power
Succor a separate Power: Yes

Suffocate: Yes (wonky to build a literal suffocation effect currently, perhaps also tie this in with an official way to silence a target that doesn't treat "voice" as a kind of Sense)

Instant Stunned & Instant Knockout: Perhaps two aspects or two levels of the same Power? I dunno on this one. Potentially very useful, but as you've noted elsewhere, there aren't a lot of all-or-nothing effects in the system.

Invulnerability: No strong feeling either way. I'm not sure I'd make it separate Power... it might fit as an optional kind of Damage Reduction or even Life Support. I'd flag it as optional, with a bright red flashing GM warning all over it, and a note pointing out that what what seems to be invulnerability to something in fiction, often turns out to just be a lot of resistance to that thing. Alternately, I think the Absolute Effect Rule from Fantasy HERO also works fine for this.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?
YES!!! :eg:





Okay, no. ;)

[Paragon]

I agree. I don't mind the structure - it makes a weird kind of sense - but the costing seems... a tad high.

Shapeshift tends to be the standout one of the set because its applicability is limited; in the end, its entirely a disguise power, albiet one with brio in some cases. Its harder to assess the rest because they have various degree of combat implications, and in some cases the base costs are high enough the cost of the adders gets lost in the "noise" of that base cost.

It probably would have been a non-issue if the additional senses and such all had been built as Advantages, but that might have caused different problems.

[Paragon]

I'm confused: how is it fundamentally subjective?



Because when Flaws are applicable almost always is.

[GamePhil]

perhaps also tie this in with an official way to silence a target that doesn't treat "voice" as a kind of Sense)


I don't get that one: Voice as a kind of sense makes perfect sense (ugh) to me, just in the same way as broadcasting radio signals is part of HRRH. Why should it be treated otherwise? Making it explicitly Broadcast on Hearing works fine for me.

[GamePhil]

Because when Flaws are applicable almost always is.

Only if you're going to chuck out the Limitation system entirely, and probably Advantages, as they are also subjective, and maybe even Powers. Possibly the whole system.

Presenting the Damage Shield as it is but allowing it to take the Limitations it would have for virtually any other power is consistent with the rules as they stand and provides benefit in building a number of Powers seen in literature. I'm pretty satisfied with it.

[Paragon]

Only if you're going to chuck out the Limitation system entirely, and probably Advantages, as they are also subjective, and maybe even Powers. Possibly the whole system.



I'm not trying to chuck it, but its not self-evident that any given one is legitimate, which is my point.

[nexus]

Has anyone brought up changing the default basis of Adjustment Powers to Special Effects instead of specific Powers? Powers in Hero System can represent so much that, for example, Dispel vs Energy Blast is hard too justify since it can be used against a Thrown Rock, a Plasma Cannon and an magically summoned lightening bolt depending on how they are defined mechanically.

[steamteck]

Has anyone brought up changing the default basis of Adjustment Powers to Special Effects instead of specific Powers? Powers in Hero System can represent so much that, for example, Dispel vs Energy Blast is hard too justify since it can be used against a Thrown Rock, a Plasma Cannon and an magically summoned lightening bolt depending on how they are defined mechanically.


I really really like that better.

[SSgt Baloo]

It further means that Damage Shield is no longer an Advantage that gives a Power Limitations, and it means that Damage Shield without Limitations can be applied to your Entangle or your Force Wall without making exceptions to the rules, and allows you to use your Heat Vision to heat up a gun to force the target to drop it. How is that "without really any purpose"?

Oh, yeah! I've always wondered how to implement something like that in a supers game. And it just occurred to me that using a ranged attack to perform a disarm might not be unreasonable either. But it isn't as cool. :cool:


I don't get that one: Voice as a kind of sense makes perfect sense (ugh) to me, just in the same way as broadcasting radio signals is part of HRRH. Why should it be treated otherwise? Making it explicitly Broadcast on Hearing works fine for me.

Okay, someone has finally sliced through the gordian knot my brain tied itself into trying to wrap around "talking is a sense?!?":confused::eek::thumbup:

Thank You. I'd rep you but it seems I've overdone the rep thing of late.

[Paragon]

I really really like that better.

There's nothing really stopping you from having both; that's what M&M does in its equivelent.

[Derek Hiemforth]

I don't get that one: Voice as a kind of sense makes perfect sense (ugh) to me, just in the same way as broadcasting radio signals is part of HRRH. Why should it be treated otherwise? Making it explicitly Broadcast on Hearing works fine for me.That's okay too. I was just saying that voice isn't technically a sense in the real world, so it makes silence effects seem odd to build. Building them as Darkness or Flash vs. Hearing is kind of counterintuitive as first glance.

But defining voice as "Broadcast Hearing" makes perfect sense. Especially if the "Everyman Senses" are listed, and that list includes Broadcast Hearing and notes that it's "voice." :)

[steamteck]

There's nothing really stopping you from having both; that's what M&M does in its equivelent.


Good point that needs to be remembered a bit more in these discussions

[Toadmaster]

I'd say leave powers and the various power names alone unless they make the power more obvious in meaning (desolid vs intangable being a good example). HERO already has a bit of an image problem, and defense, resistant, passive 1 each really doesn't do anything to help that image.

Darkness and Flash are also rather misleading, they imply their effects against vision but actually can be used against other senses.


I'm sure there are a few powers that could be added, I'd say if it is a fairly common power effect, and the current way to make it involves a laundry list of advantages, lims or just plain feels awkward, it should probably be a seperate power. The fact it can be made under the existing rules should not be a reason to exclude it as a new power, if it is not easy or obvious how to make it it should at least be given consideration.

I don't think absolute powers should be included but I do think it is worth showing how to build powers that provide the absolute effect desired. For example invulnerability to fire could be built using, armor and damage reduction only vs fire, the amount required would be based on campaign limits to DC. Always hits could be built using area effect.

It was posted up thread a ways but I strongly agree with including pre-built powers. While many experienced players want to design every aspect of their character many players, particularly new players coming from other games are put off by this. Having fire environmental powers, ice powers etc already made up so they can just pick them would go a long way towards making the game "friendlier" to someone just walking in from a game that hands you everything in a pick and choose format. I realize this is what the USPD & related books did, but they may never get to them if the core book turns them off. Of course this goes completely against the idea of a smaller book which I really think should be a goal.

I'd also like to see change environment or some other power be used to create environmental conditions that can harm people. It should be possible to create an area filled with 100% nitrogen to suffocate people (using the suffocate rules), or freeze people by making it 40 below (using the cold environment rules). Not quite sure how you would figure the costs though, since these are essentially attacks but it seems odd that change environment can't be used to radically change the environment and attack powers have to be tweaked as a clunky fit.

[Lucius]

All for that one, I'd like all Powers that exist in the game to be for all characters. I'd even go so far as to want to include the Cargo from Vehicles, though it would have to be re-worked to make sense in any other context. A new Cargo-like Power that covered bags of holding, a hidden space in a cyborg's artificial arm, and the inside portion of a vehicle, I'd be happy.

Excellent! Perhaps that can replace the lift/carry function from STR, and STR can be divided into "cargo" (perhaps renamed?) and "Hand to Hand Normal Attack."

Lucius Alexander

Calculating cargo for a palindromedary

[Netzilla]

Has anyone brought up changing the default basis of Adjustment Powers to Special Effects instead of specific Powers? Powers in Hero System can represent so much that, for example, Dispel vs Energy Blast is hard too justify since it can be used against a Thrown Rock, a Plasma Cannon and an magically summoned lightening bolt depending on how they are defined mechanically.

I'm very much behind this idea. I require this in my campaigns anyway. I do the same thing with Power Defense.

[GamePhil]

Has anyone brought up changing the default basis of Adjustment Powers to Special Effects instead of specific Powers? Powers in Hero System can represent so much that, for example, Dispel vs Energy Blast is hard too justify since it can be used against a Thrown Rock, a Plasma Cannon and an magically summoned lightening bolt depending on how they are defined mechanically.

Well, you can do this with a Limitation on the Dispel: Vs. EBs but only Special Effect X. Changing it to go against Special Effects might go against what Steve is talking about with Missile Deflection: that Powers interact with Powers, not Special Effects, barring Advantages and Limitations.

Still, I don't see any way that it would be difficult to implement. To get the above Power, you'd take Dispel vs. Special Effect X with the Limitation, Only Against EB, so it's a wash.

[GamePhil]

New Powers thoughts:

It's not that I think they'll be adopted, but I have to say something.

Spaces: A Power to allow the character to have some form of internal space, whether within the character (for example, a Vehicle) or a focus (a bag). This can be used to replace Cargo from TUV, and if some form of mass/volume elimination were used could also be used for Bags of Holding and the TARDIS, along with Cloak's (of Cloak & Dagger from Marvel) cloak.

Reduce Time: A Power or an Advantage to do things faster on the Time Chart. This could cover Rapid Attack, Instant Change, rapidly reloading a bow, create a Powered form of the Full Move Martial Arts element, and so on. It could also be an alternative form of Regeneration by applying it to Recovery of Body.

[Kdansky]

New Powers thoughts:

It's not that I think they'll be adopted, but I have to say something.

Spaces: A Power to allow the character to have some form of internal space, whether within the character (for example, a Vehicle) or a focus (a bag). This can be used to replace Cargo from TUV, and if some form of mass/volume elimination were used could also be used for Bags of Holding and the TARDIS, along with Cloak's (of Cloak & Dagger from Marvel) cloak.

Reduce Time: A Power or an Advantage to do things faster on the Time Chart. This could cover Rapid Attack, Instant Change, rapidly reloading a bow, create a Powered form of the Full Move Martial Arts element, and so on. It could also be an alternative form of Regeneration by applying it to Recovery of Body.
Great ideas! I was trying to write up something similar to BoH, and ended up with EDM. Works, but clunky!

[Teflon Billy]

With regards to absolutes, as this has been discussed before (I'd post a link to the thread, but the search function isn't working for me at the moment)

What we came up with on the issue of Invulnerability was that there were two major classes of Invulnerability: Absolute Invulnerability and what we termed Threshold Invulnerability.

Absolute Invulnerability: This is what has been discussed before: 100% Resistant Damage Reduction, or Desolid w/effects Solid World, etc...

The key to this one, is that to prevent it from being a game ruining power, it had to be effects based. You would be Immune to all damage from a SFX, for example. Someone Immune to Fire would suffer absolutely no harm from powers that were Fire based (Drain, Suppress, KA, etc...) but would suffer damage from Ice attacks or even fire like attacks not defined as exactly fire (Hellfire for example, as Johnny Storm has found out on many occasions when he has encountered it.)

Overall, Absolute Immunity might be a better name, the power grants absolute invulnerability from a narrow effect.

The other version of Invulnerability that we discussed was:

Threshold Invulnerability: This power would be an open ended defensive power. The character would purchase levels (price to be determined) and these levels would cancel 1 for 1 a DC of attack.

Mr. Bulletproof could have 5 levels of TI (Only verse Kinetic Projectiles), which would cancel the first 5 DCs of incoming bullet attacks. Anything left over and above those 5 DCs would then have to contend with his PD/ED as normal. Allowing him, for example, to totally ignore that .38 revolver though he would need to take notice of that 60mm Mortar.

Mechanically:

Attack: 4 DC RKA (.44 Magnum)

Defense: 3 DC TI, 1 PD 0 rPD

Result: 1 DC of RKA gets through the TI to effect the player, since they don't have any rPD the full 1 DC of RKA effects them and stun is rolled on 1 DC of attack.

It'd would also work well for Cosmic campaigns where "mundane" weapons just wouldn't effect the character. Let them have 20 DCs of TI (Only verse non-Cosmic attacks) and you can have the Silver Surfer totally ignore artillery rounds.

There could even be an counter-power that cancels TI 1 for 1 as AP cancels Hardened.

It basically comes down to TI would simplify character write-ups, keep PD/ED at reasonable levels for other modes of attack by negating the need to compensate for Stun multipliers for KAs, and duplicate the proper effect that the player is trying to capture.

By having an open ended defense power, it's not trully an "absolute" all the attacker has to do is get a "bigger gun" to defeat the defense. It's benefit over the other defensive powers, is that it is absolute, no matter how many Piercing, AP, Stun multiplier levels the attacker has if the DC of the attack is not greater than the level of TI then the defender suffers no effect (Stun, knockback, etc...)

TB

[steamteck]

Thats a good idea for Threshold Invulnerability. it would eliminate the 'bullet bouncing" problems so common.

sorry I'm out of Rep.

[nexus]

With regards to absolutes, as this has been discussed before (I'd post a link to the thread, but the search function isn't working for me at the moment)

*Invulnerability options snipped*

TB

Those are pretty cool. I wouldn't mind seeing them officially implemented.

[Supreme Serpent]

Mental Powers/BOECV. Why default to line of sight range and no range mod other than 'it's always been done that way'?

[ideasmith]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?


I suggest 'Power Basis'. As in:

To create a power, you typically start with a Power Basis and apply Power Modifiers. Sometimes, you don't need any Power Modifiers and the Power Basis stands alone. Other times, you need more than Power Basis to create a Power. While there are modifiers designed specifically to combine Power Basises (Linked, Power Frameworks), you can combine Power Basises without them. You can take several Power Basises, apply Power Modifiers seperately to each Power Basis, place the results next to each other on the character sheet, and specify that they are all part of the same power.



Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?


How About Negative Skill Levels and Naked Advantage?

[SylvanSnake]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

No, it is sort of a defining characteristic of the game system, I see no real advantage to changing this.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Armor (don't change)
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity (Desolidification is quite an unwieldy term, and Intangibility or Phasing are both more commonly used for this type of power, so change it)
Ego Attack (don't change, it is a simple enough term and fits the context of the game)
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (for this, I think "Ranged attack, Physical" or "Ranged Attack, Energy" would work or perhaps even more definition like "Ranged Attack, Fire")
Entangle (don't change)
Force Field (don't change, Force Field is a staple term for almost every genre, whether it's a fantasy wizard spell or super hero power or sci-fi gadget creating it)
Force Wall (Force Wall works just fine, I see no reason to change it)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH (honestly can't say I'm a fan of either of these options, but I can't really think of anything better)


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

I always like the idea of more powers, that means more options. Activate could be made into a more universal power like Electrokinesis, allowing a player to have control over electronic devices. Impose limits on it based on points spent on the power, but it could be quite useful.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

Definitely not. The game would become much more complicated than necessary.

[SAVeira]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

Do not care one way or the other on this issue. However, if you do change it, the new name must be good.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Again, do not care one way or the other on this issue. Just as long as the new names make sense and sound good.


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

I believe that Instant Change and Regeneration both need to be add back to the game. The current method of Instant Change and Regeneration really seem to lack elgants. I could live with Instant Change as Talent, called Quick Change or Regeneration based of the REC Charactistic with an Advantage tacked to lower the Time Chart.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

No. This would not be productive. Create much more work for the GM and players. Also could inflate the size of a character sheet dramatic.

[ajackson]

A power I would like to see would be a generic 'give someone a disadvantage' power. My thoughts on this:



Inflict: 5p/die
Gives someone a disadvantage or other negative condition, which is specified when you buy the power. Roll inflict dice, subtract power defense, and compare the remainder to Bod.

Bod +0: effect is Slightly Impairing. A 5 point disadvantage would qualify; when considering frequency, anything that the person with the power could easily bring with him should be considered 'very common'. This may also be a power with a point value not exceeding 2 per die (other formulations are possible), where having that power (uncontrolled) does not result in more than minor impairment, nor will the impairment likely last longer than the duration of the Inflict power. Note that useful powers may actually reduce the level of impairment; being blinded is normally fully impairing, but if you are granted sufficiently acute exotic senses it might be reduced to greatly impairing, or even slightly impairing.
Bod +10: effect is Greatly Impairing, equivalent to a 15 point disadvantage, or 15 points in penalty levels. May grant powers as above.
Bod +20: effect is Fully Impairing; includes effects such as Blindness, loss of powers, etc. May grant powers as above.
Bod +30: effect is totally incapacitating.

In all cases, the effect fades by 5 points per phase. Fade rate may be bought up at +1/4 per step on the time chart. For +1/4, a single power can trigger multiple different effect levels (e.g. at +20, the victim is blinded; when he drops down to +15, rather than fully recovering, he's still got major visual impairment). May be made variable in a small category for +1/4, in a large category for +1. For a -1/2 limitation, the power fades immediately.

This actually covers a number of powers, including:

Drain: Inflict (Power Loss; varies).
Flash: Inflict (Blindness; +20).
Usable Against Others powers (Varies)
Transform: Inflict (Varies).
A number of powers that currently cannot easily be implemented, such as making people slip and fall (Inflict: Prone Position; +10).

[dsatow]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

No, the reasons to change it do not outweigh the benefits.


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

I agree, I'd only change Ego Attack to Mental Attack. Of course, you could change all the ECV powers to have Mental as the prefix. So you would also change Mind Link to Mental Link and Mind Control to Mental Control (or Mental Domination...BWHAHAHAA!<GM in me coming out>).


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

I can live with Activate as a simple power.

I'd like luck and unluck better defined or really better related to combat. Its either wildly too powerful or too wimpy depending on the GM.

Succor can be a independant power but please limit its maximum to prevent abuse.

A power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage.
You can already do this by dispelling or surpressing stun.

A power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
People already do this mind control though at low levels its not very effective.

A HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
Sounds like block.

A personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
I know a lot of people who would like this or who do it privately in thier campaigns. It should cost as much as FW with personal immunity IMHO.

An Invulnerability power
Why? FF, DR, Armor not enough?

Bring Back Regen. It simplified things rather than healing with advantages and disadvantages.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

I agree. No further argument here.

[Alibear]

Absolute Invulnerability: This is what has been discussed before: 100% Resistant Damage Reduction, or Desolid w/effects Solid World, etc...

The key to this one, is that to prevent it from being a game ruining power, it had to be effects based. You would be Immune to all damage from a SFX, for example. Someone Immune to Fire would suffer absolutely no harm from powers that were Fire based (Drain, Suppress, KA, etc...) but would suffer damage from Ice attacks or even fire like attacks not defined as exactly fire (Hellfire for example, as Johnny Storm has found out on many occasions when he has encountered it.)

Overall, Absolute Immunity might be a better name, the power grants absolute invulnerability from a narrow effect.




This I like very much until I worry about stuffing it into a Big MP and have multiple immunities.

Player: Immunity to mundane weapons?
GM: Melee only?
Player: Immunity to melee weapons then?
GM: Yeah.
Player: Immunity to cold?
GM: Check.
Player: Lightning rod?
GM: Aha.
Player: Born of fire?
GM: I suppose.
Player: Catfall (Takes no damage from falls?)
GM: Okay.
Player: Immunity to arrows?
GM: Eh?
Player: Throw them all in a big spell MP?
GM: Over my dead body!!!

[Teflon Billy]

This I like very much until I worry about stuffing it into a Big MP and have multiple immunities.

Player: Immunity to mundane weapons?
GM: Melee only?
Player: Immunity to melee weapons then?
GM: Yeah.
Player: Immunity to cold?
GM: Check.
Player: Lightning rod?
GM: Aha.
Player: Born of fire?
GM: I suppose.
Player: Catfall (Takes no damage from falls?)
GM: Okay.
Player: Immunity to arrows?
GM: Eh?
Player: Throw them all in a big spell MP?
GM: Over my dead body!!!That's why I prefer "Threshold Invulnerability" more.

The key impetus for the power was to get past the Stun lotto of KAs without the players needing super high PD/EDs to just protect them from Stun.

TB

[Paragon]

That's why I prefer "Threshold Invulnerability" more.

The key impetus for the power was to get past the Stun lotto of KAs without the players needing super high PD/EDs to just protect them from Stun.

TB

Of course if that's all its going to do, the easy thing is simply to change killing attacks so the stun lotto goes away.

[BobGreenwade]

This I like very much until I worry about stuffing it into a Big MP and have multiple immunities.

Player: Immunity to mundane weapons?
GM: Melee only?
Player: Immunity to melee weapons then?
GM: Yeah.
Player: Immunity to cold?
GM: Check.
Player: Lightning rod?
GM: Aha.
Player: Born of fire?
GM: I suppose.
Player: Catfall (Takes no damage from falls?)
GM: Okay.
Player: Immunity to arrows?
GM: Eh?
Player: Throw them all in a big spell MP?
GM: Over my dead body!!!Not that I think your point is invalid (it's not), but it does bear pointing out that the PC in this case would only be immune to one of these things at a time.

[Teflon Billy]

Of course if that's all its going to do, the easy thing is simply to change killing attacks so the stun lotto goes away.Well, it goes a bit beyond that in it ignores piercing, penetrating, AP, and xStun.

TB

[Paragon]

Well, it goes a bit beyond that in it ignores piercing, penetrating, AP, and xStun.

TB

Assuming, of course, you assume some of those _shouldn't_ effect this.

[Teflon Billy]

Assuming, of course, you assume some of those _shouldn't_ effect this.The whole point of the defense was that it was absolute.

It nullifies one DC of attack. That is its power.

Maybe making that the new hardened and making AP be it's antithesis may be something to consider. It'd get rid of the problem of 1 level of AP being too good (halving a characters defense for only 1/4 whether the enemy has 2 PD or 200 PD.)

And just let piercing and penetrating just not get through. Let those only matter against normal and resistant defenses.

TB

[James Gillen]

For example, I'm completely on board with Damage Shield having to be Continuous, but a lot of the rest I have issue with. My simplest answer: It is not more useful than another Continuous Power, so it should not need a larger Advantage, it's simply a form of Continuous (much as Radius and Line are forms of Area Of Effect). Then, you can further examine Continuous to see if still more forms of it might be made available. Or, you could say that Damage Shield is still a +1/2, but that it can take No Range and Self Only, and if it doesn't you can place the Damage Shield around something else.

That's pretty much my opinion. If it's +1 because it's Continuous, it shouldn't have to cost that much more besides.

JG

[James Gillen]

New Powers thoughts:

It's not that I think they'll be adopted, but I have to say something.

Spaces: A Power to allow the character to have some form of internal space, whether within the character (for example, a Vehicle) or a focus (a bag). This can be used to replace Cargo from TUV, and if some form of mass/volume elimination were used could also be used for Bags of Holding and the TARDIS, along with Cloak's (of Cloak & Dagger from Marvel) cloak.

"Pockets! I have pockets!" :D

[Alibear]

Of course if that's all its going to do, the easy thing is simply to change killing attacks so the stun lotto goes away.

Easier just to buy bulletproof properly so the stun lotto isn't a concern.

I do like it the idea of SFX immunity though.

Costs range is coupled with how often the attacks occur.

[Paragon]

The whole point of the defense was that it was absolute.



The question is _why_ is it absolute at that DC but not higher? What's it representing? If its comic book invulnerability, there's certainly some of those that potential affect most of them. If its not, then what?

[Paragon]

That's pretty much my opinion. If it's +1 because it's Continuous, it shouldn't have to cost that much more besides.

JG

I'm just not convinced its even as valuable for the routine user as standard continuous. It might be that useful to a grapple specialist, but I'm not sure pricing for the absolute optimal build using it is any better here than in other places.

[Paragon]

Easier just to buy bulletproof properly so the stun lotto isn't a concern.



I'd say that would largely require reworking the whole damage system, and since I've never seen a consistent argument as to why the Stun lotto is a virtue anyway...

[Teflon Billy]

The question is _why_ is it absolute at that DC but not higher? What's it representing? If its comic book invulnerability, there's certainly some of those that potential affect most of them. If its not, then what?I don't care about SFX, just the mechanics.

It's up to the player and the GM to define *why* the Character isn't harmed by 5 DC attacks or lower, not the game designer.

TB

[Paragon]

I don't care about SFX, just the mechanics.

It's up to the player and the GM to define *why* the Character isn't harmed by 5 DC attacks or lower, not the game designer.

TB

While I don't think SFX should be built into mechanics, when I see a mechanic that doesn't represent anything I can think of, I question the purpose in its existence (a bitch I have with Penetrating generally, for example).

[Opal]

I've never seen a consistent argument as to why the Stun lotto is a virtue It's a Feature in simulating dramatic realism for characters in some genres. You can have the soldier riddled with machine gun bullets and dead on his feet, but still able to throw a grenade into the pill box, because he's not stunned and still has a few Stun left. You can have the victim of a crime shot and left for dead because he was instantly KOd by a non-mortal wound, only to ID the shooter later.

It's only a Bug when it comes to modelling 'invulnerable' superheros - but it's a big, hairy, ugly bug.

[ajackson]

It's only a Bug when it comes to modelling 'invulnerable' superheros - but it's a big, hairy, ugly bug.
Actually, it's a bug whenever the target doesn't take Bod from a hit. If the Stun Lotto applied to penetrating damage, rather than base damage, it certainly wouldn't cause any problems (and would probably make KAs a bit underpowered).

[Paragon]

It's a Feature in simulating dramatic realism for characters in some genres. You can have the soldier riddled with machine gun bullets and dead on his feet, but still able to throw a grenade into the pill box, because he's not stunned and still has a few Stun left. You can have the victim of a crime shot and left for dead because he was instantly KOd by a non-mortal wound, only to ID the shooter later.

It's only a Bug when it comes to modelling 'invulnerable' superheros - but it's a big, hairy, ugly bug.

In addition to my comment elsewhere on this, I'd also say even in those genres its too random to be even dramatically realistic. The fact it encourages use of killing attacks for exactly the wrong reasons is, I think, evidence for this on the face of it.

[Opal]

Actually, that's just an aspect of it; the real problem with it is that it makes combat overly random, especially for a system otherwise set up to limit the degree of randomness. It's stick out far less if this wasn't a system that uses 3d6 for most resolution, and uses increasingly large numbers of dice (which increasingly flatten curves) for everything else.
OK, I can see how that's inconsistent, being the most random mechanic in the system. But, it does provide some of the coveted 'dramatic realism' - if it were as consistent as an EB, it'd rather consistently KO you before killing you, even in the absence of resistant defense. One of the cool things about Hero has always been (And, I remember reading this in a review of the 1st Ed of Champions! before I went out and got it), that it tracks STN and BOD sepparately. You can be dying but still concious, or unconscious and unharmed. Many systems handle the latter (if, often, with a kludge of some sort), but the former is pretty unusual, and the STN lotto, much as I dislike it when playing Campions!, highlights it nicely.


In addition to my comment elsewhere on this, I'd also say even in those genres its too random to be even dramatically realistic. Thus all the optional rules for heroic level games to make mooks go down a bit faster, and PCs a little more leary of low-die KA handguns?


The fact it encourages use of killing attacks for exactly the wrong reasons is, I think, evidence for this on the face of it.I assume you're refering to using KAs to KO or STN very high-resistant defense characters? Yes, that's indisuptable.


Actually, it's a bug whenever the target doesn't take Bod from a hit. If the Stun Lotto applied to penetrating damage, rather than base damage, it certainly wouldn't cause any problems (and would probably make KAs a bit underpowered). That is, in fact, exactly the variant I use when I run Champions!, and yes, it does leave plain vanilla KAs a bit underpowered in super-powered confrontations. With judicious use of Find Weakness &/or AP &/or Penetrating, though, it's still entirely possible to make a super that gets his points worth from his KA. When I want to model ordinary armor, though, it becomes a bit more complex - I've made a few attempts to get a 'limitted power' limitation for armor that achieved the right effect. The simplest was 'Flawed'-1/2, which just made any attack count as if it were penetrating. What I'd really need, to be realistic (less the dramatic) would be a way for a defense to convert Killing to Normal damage, up to a threshold, past which it provides little or no defense....

[Paragon]

OK, I can see how that's inconsistent, being the most random mechanic in the system. But, it does provide some of the coveted 'dramatic realism' - if it were as consistent as an EB, it'd rather consistently KO you before killing you, even in the absence of resistant defense. One of



I don't think a degree of randomness of stun output is the problem--its the extremity of the current degree. I've never had a problem when using hit location, which also varies it, for example, because it still piles up toward 3x reasonably heavily. But a small linear die roll is really just too much.



I assume you're refering to using KAs to KO or STN very high-resistant defense characters? Yes, that's indisuptable.



Or honestly, any target where its either put them down fast or its unacceptable. Even in the case of moderate to light defense opponents, most of the time a single hit or two won't put them down. The _expected_ hit from a killing attack won't either (in fact it does a bit worse) but once you're hoping to get lucky, the chance of doing so is so much greater with KAs it isn't even comparable.

Frankly, for superhero games I don't see any virtue to it at all I'm the person who pretty much invented the flat x3 option), and for heroic scale games, there are better options than a single D6.

[Netzilla]

OK, I can see how that's inconsistent, being the most random mechanic in the system. But, it does provide some of the coveted 'dramatic realism' - if it were as consistent as an EB, it'd rather consistently KO you before killing you, even in the absence of resistant defense. One of the cool things about Hero has always been (And, I remember reading this in a review of the 1st Ed of Champions! before I went out and got it), that it tracks STN and BOD sepparately. You can be dying but still concious, or unconscious and unharmed. Many systems handle the latter (if, often, with a kludge of some sort), but the former is pretty unusual, and the STN lotto, much as I dislike it when playing Campions!, highlights it nicely.

I don't think anyone who's arguing against the Stun Lotto is arguing for merging Body and Stun, so I'm not sure what argument you're attempting to counter here.


Thus all the optional rules for heroic level games to make mooks go down a bit faster, and PCs a little more leary of low-die KA handguns?

Actually, most of the house rules I've seen proposed for heroic level games regarding mooks & killing attacks relates to how to kill mooks faster. I've seen far too many threads over in Fantasy, Dark Champs and Star Hero that complain about killing attacks KOing mooks long before they're close to death. Part of this relates to the average DEF given to those mooks, but even in games where the average mook DEF was only about 2 or 3 my group had to adopt the Mere Mortal Physical Limitation (takes x2 BOD from attacks that penetrate defenses) because we didn't like having to walk around capping mooks in the head after the fight was over.


I assume you're refering to using KAs to KO or STN very high-resistant defense characters? Yes, that's indisuptable.

Even against low DEF targets, that target is more likely to be KOed by a killing attack than killed by it. Take a 1 1/2d6 sword vs an normal human (8 BOD, 16 Stun & 2 PD). They'll take an average of 4.5 Body and 11.97 stun from each hit if they're unarmored. Give that human 1 DEF armor and suddenly they're taking 3.5 Body and 8.97 Stun per hit. Two hits and they're unconscious and not bleeding to death or even Impaired or Disabled.

Also, not all of the objections to the Stun Lotto relate to game balance. Here's a quick summary of my arguments for dropping it for some form of unified damage mechanic (UDM):


A UDM will make it easier to balance the attacks against each other as they'll all be on the same method of resolution.
One rule takes up less space in the rule book, making it that much shorter.
One rule is easier for new players to learn than two.
One rule would simplify the Hit Location chart by removing one of the columns.
Reduce the number of rolls for Killing Attack damage from two to one.
The existing Stun Multiplier might, arguably, reflect the wide variance of reactions to lethal attacks in real life, but real life is not "Dramatic Reality", which is one of the stated design goals of 6th edition.
The existing Stun Multiplier can all too easily ruin the dramatic tention of a big scene. In the final confrontation with the big bad guy, the first shot of with a 2d6 sword has a rougly 0.5% chance of doing 12 body and 60 stun (max damage). The supposedly equally powerful 6d6 club attack has only a 0.002% chance of doing 12/36 damage. That's not only a massive difference of scale, but the killing attack is several orders of magnitude more likely to get that result.

[Opal]

Actually, it's a bug whenever the target doesn't take Bod from a hit. If the Stun Lotto applied to penetrating damage, rather than base damage, it certainly wouldn't cause any problems (and would probably make KAs a bit underpowered).A bit underpowered for KO'ing people, certainly, if resistant defense isn't limitted - but they'd still be the best choice for inflicting BOD - they do more BOD, on average, per Apt spent on them, and they bypass normal defense.

That would seem to improve them a great deal. They'd still be the attack of choice in game were resistant defense is banned or kept very low - but I'd expect such a campaign wants to focus on killing in combat, anyway.

[ajackson]

A bit underpowered for KO'ing people, certainly, if resistant defense isn't limitted - but they'd still be the best choice for inflicting BOD - they do more BOD, on average, per Apt spent on them, and they bypass normal defense.
The problem one runs into is that characters can relatively easily have enough damage resistance to be totally impervious to Bod from attacks up to the active point limit. If resistant defense were capped (say, active point limit/4 or /5) killing attack would bleed body through, making Wolverine clones at least a viable archetype, if not terribly effective.

[Paragon]

A bit underpowered for KO'ing people, certainly, if resistant defense isn't limitted - but they'd still be the best choice for inflicting BOD - they do more BOD, on average, per Apt spent on them, and they bypass normal defense.

That would seem to improve them a great deal. They'd still be the attack of choice in game were resistant defense is banned or kept very low - but I'd expect such a campaign wants to focus on killing in combat, anyway.

The problem there is that the attack has then stopped resembling even a ghost of reality, as most armors transfer at least _some_ effect through; only rigid armors well above the penetrating power of a given weapon completely avoid this.

[ajackson]

The problem there is that the attack has then stopped resembling even a ghost of reality, as most armors transfer at least _some_ effect through; only rigid armors well above the penetrating power of a given weapon completely avoid this.
Given the scaling of armor in the hero system (+2 Def = x2 weight), 'well above the penetrating power of a weapon' is about +2 Def. 20 rPD will prevent artillery shells from doing body damage; it's hardly plausible that a 9mm pistol will cause stun.

Going to the genre evidence, killing attacks have a very high chance of causing Body damage (much higher than in Hero; Wolverine can cause Body damage to almost anyone), but in the event they fail to penetrate, they generally seem to be almost totally ineffective. There are a few exceptions -- Luke Cage seems to take stun from bullets, for example -- but mostly, hits that don't cause body don't cause stun either.

[Opal]

The problem there is that the attack has then stopped resembling even a ghost of reality, as most armors transfer at least _some_ effect through; only rigid armors well above the penetrating power of a given weapon completely avoid this.

As it stands, though, even impossibly strong armors far above the penetrating power of a given weapon can't stop half it's STN.

A 2d RKA can do 60 STN, and does it orders of magnitude more often than a 6d6 EB will do it's maximum of 36. A 40 PDr target - twice the defense of a tank, IIRC, and better than tripple the max BOD of the attack - will let 20 of that STN through. That seems like it off in the other direction.

[Lucius]

I'd say that would largely require reworking the whole damage system, and since I've never seen a consistent argument as to why the Stun lotto is a virtue anyway...


It's a Feature in simulating dramatic realism for characters in some genres. You can have the soldier riddled with machine gun bullets and dead on his feet, but still able to throw a grenade into the pill box, because he's not stunned and still has a few Stun left. You can have the victim of a crime shot and left for dead because he was instantly KOd by a non-mortal wound, only to ID the shooter later.



In addition to my comment elsewhere on this, I'd also say even in those genres its too random to be even dramatically realistic. The fact it encourages use of killing attacks for exactly the wrong reasons is, I think, evidence for this on the face of it.


The testimony of people with far more experience with real violence than I ever hope to have, indicates that Hero’s way of handling Killing Attacks IS pretty realistic.



The existing Stun Multiplier might, arguably, reflect the wide variance of reactions to lethal attacks in real life, but real life is not "Dramatic Reality", which is one of the stated design goals of 6th edition.

You can always rule that they’re just plain not allowed in your games – the first edition of DC Heroes made even knives and guns “nonlethal” attacks. I’m sure such a game would work very well.



The existing Stun Multiplier can all too easily ruin the dramatic tention of a big scene. In the final confrontation with the big bad guy, the first shot of with a 2d6 sword has a rougly 0.5% chance of doing 12 body and 60 stun (max damage). The supposedly equally powerful 6d6 club attack has only a 0.002% chance of doing 12/36 damage. That's not only a massive difference of scale, but the killing attack is several orders of magnitude more likely to get that result.
[/LIST]

One problem I see here is “Supposedly equally powerful.” We all know that it’s NOT by any stretch of the imagination actually equal. In fact, the club does have a Limitation already to reflect that, but it should probably be bigger than – ½

The solution to that problem is to price the two attacks accordingly – and the best solution I see to do that is to take the “Normal” Limitation that’s already part of Hand to Hand Normal Attack and extend it to Ranged Normal Attack (whatever we end up calling it) as well. My vote would be to make it two – ½ Limitations: One for Normal damage dice, one to be blocked by nonresistant defense. This also helps silence the clamor about the cost of STR when it becomes obvious that the 1d6 damage every 5 pts of STR grants is not really worth 5 pts by itself.

An advantage of splitting up those two aspects – whether it’s two Advantages to make Killing or two Limitations to make Normal – is that you can for example permit Killing Attacks that have only the Attack Vs Limited (Resistant) Defense aspect, but NOT the advantageous die roll aspect. Then you can have guns and knives that are at least more dangerous than the equivalent Normal attacks, but still do not threaten “bulletproof” heroes nor spoil those dramatic moments when you do not want a villain “one shotted.”


Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary agrees that normal is a limitation….

[ajackson]

The testimony of people with far more experience with real violence than I ever hope to have, indicates that Hero’s way of handling Killing Attacks IS pretty realistic.
It's pretty realistic for attacks that actually penetrate armor. Realistically, non-penetrating damage is not particularly random.

[GamePhil]

Originally Posted by Hugh Neilson
Chris, may I take it, then, that you wholeheartedly support all of Steve's work to date, including:

- 5e damage shields
- 5e regeneration
- 5e Instant Change
- Flying Dodge
- 1 pip penetrating KA does 1 BOD every time (absent hardened defenses)


I'm absconding with this from the Characteristics thread, since I'm not responding to the original argument but to the examples used, which is a General Powers discussion.

In point of fact, while I disagree with the specifics in every case, I wholehardedly agree with the direction Steve has taken those first three, and under certain circumstances even find his Flying Dodge ruling moderately acceptable.

Damage Shield is a Power that I think can get some broader use if it gets broken down into its constituent parts. I think adding Continuous is consistent with this goal, but it needs to go farther, or possibly in another direction.

If Regeneration did not need to break the normal Healing rules to be built, I'd be completely behind it. I'd prefer another method, personally, but Healing is certainly a logical basis for it, especially if it can be broadened so that Regeneration doesn't have to be an exception.

Instant Change never needed to have its own Power. It's not uncommon, but folding it into something else is perfectly acceptable to me. I don't agree with him that Transform is the Power to do it, but, again, it's a logical basis for it.

In the sense that any Martial Art Maneuver is balanced at all, I have little difficulty with his interpretation of Flying Dodge. Using my earlier analogy of Manuvers as part of an invisible Multipower that everyone has, all you do is buy Trigger on your Movement, and put that Naked Modifier in the Multipower with GMs permission. So, if that Movement is within a certain range, the Maneuver is reasonable in comparison to other Maneuvers. Speedsters need not apply for the "reasonable" statement, however, and are one reason I'd like to see Martial Arts as they are done away with and replaced by something where we can fiddle with the nuts and bolts. But, like Passing Strike, within certain limits I just have no problem with it, and would require characters outside those limits to buy it differently.

Didn't even know about the 1 Pip thing, and honestly don't much care. I would have prefered a 1d6 KA, Penetrating, Can Only Do 1 Body, but that goes against that "simplicity" thing so many people enjoy, and doesn't really add anything but consistency. I like consistency, but I'm told time and again I take it too far :cry:

Hey, I said I wouldn't argue decoupling anymore, not that I wouldn't respond to Hugh in general.

[BobGreenwade]

The testimony of people with far more experience with real violence than I ever hope to have, indicates that Hero’s way of handling Killing Attacks IS pretty realistic.Based on that, we should probably keep the current method as default. But for a less random approach with more "dramatic realism" (of the kind we usually see in movies, TV, comics, etc.), we could really use an optional alternative.

[Netzilla]

Okay, there's been a lot of talk about the Stun Lotto, weather or not it's a problem, at what level it's a problem and how to solve it. Unfortunately, we don't have much of an analysis of the alternatives as compared to the current system. One of the fundamental questions that should be considered is not weather the current system is “good enough” but rather weather or not it can be made better. Without doing a comparative analysis, we have no way of determining what method is truly better. Unfortunately, a good deal of game design is largely subjective, including the idea of what constitutes “better”, but I feel we need to do something. So here I am, presenting such a comparative analysis. I warn you now that there's a bunch of boring statistics following and this is going to be a long post (6 pages if printed).

First, so that we can make our comparisons, we'll need a target for our attacks to hit. I'm restricting myself to the Heroic Scale for 2 reasons. One is simply that the math is easier and the charts are smaller. :) Second is to counter the idea that the Stun Lotto is only a problem in Superheroic campaigns. I've both personally seen and read enough “gamer testimonials” on these very boards to have formed the opinion that the Stun Lotto is just as much a problem at the Heroic scale. Regardless, here are my proposed targets:

Mook: 8 CON, 8 BOD, 16 Stun, 2 PD human wearing 2 DEF armor
Average Foe: 13 CON, 13 BOD, 26 Stun, 3 PD, 3 DEF armor
Elite Foe: 15 CON, 15 BOD, 30 Stun, 6 PD, 8 DEF armor

Against these targets will be applied various 6 DC attacks:

6 DC Normal Attack (6d6) as our base line.
6 DC Killing Attack under the current system: 2d6 + Stun Lotto.
6 DC Killing Attack under the current system using Hit Locations: 2d6 + Hit Locs.
6 DC Killing Attack under Steve Long's proposed system: 2d6 w/ 1d3+1 Stun Multiplier.
6 DC Normal Attack with the Killing AVLD (+½) advantage. This means that only resistant defenses apply; comes to 4d6.
6 DC Normal Attack with the Killing (+¼) advantage. This version has the attack treating Normal and Resistant defense they same way Killing Attacks treat them now (rDEF vs Body; rDEF + nDEF vs Stun) and increases the Body Pips by 1 per die (1-3 range rather than 0-2). This comes to 5d6.


6 DC Normal Attack (6d6)
Minimum Body = 0 with a 0.002% chance to roll this.
Mode Body = 6 with a 25% chance to roll this.
Max Body = 12 with a 0.002% chance to roll this.
Median Body = 6.
Minimum Stun = 6 (0.002%)
Mode Stun = 21 (9%)
Max Stun = 36 (0.002%)
Median Stun = 21

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Body = 14%
Odds to do ½ Body = 14%
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0%
Odds for 0 Stun = 0%
Odds for Stunning = 98%
Odds for KO = 64%


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Body = 64%
Odds to do ½ Body = 0%
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0%
Odds for 0 Stun = 0.002%
Odds for Stunning = 64%
Odds for KO = 0.5%


vs Elite

Odds for 0 Body = 100%
Odds to do ½ Body = 0%
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0%
Odds for 0 Stun = 6%
Odds for Stunning = 2%
Odds for KO = 0%


Thus we get a base line for how Normal Attacks work.

6 DC Current KA (2d6 w/ Stun Lotto)
Minimum Body = 2 (3%)
Mode Body = 7 (17%)
Max Body = 12 (3%)
Median Body = 7
Minimum Stun = 2 (0.9%)
Mode Stun = 8 (6.5%)
Max Stun = 60 (0.5%)
Average Stun = 18.667
Chance to do 36+ Stun = 12% (compare to 0.002% chance of doing 36 stun with normal attack)

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Body = 3% (vs 14% for a normal attack)
Odds to do ½ Body = 72% (vs 14% for a normal attack)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 8% (not possible with a normal attack)
Odds for 0 Stun = 6% (vs 0% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 55% (vs 98% for a normal attack) (vs 72% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 42% (vs 64% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance for a kill)


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Body = 8% (vs 64% for a normal attack)
Odds to do ½ Body = 17% (vs 0% for a normal attack)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (not possible with a normal attack)
Odds for 0 Stun = 16% (vs 0.002% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 42% (vs 64% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 18% (vs 0.5% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance for a kill)


vs Elite:

Odds for 0 Body = 72% (vs 100% for a normal attack)
Odds to do ½ Body = 0% (vs 0% for a normal attack)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (not possible with a normal attack)
Odds for 0 Stun = 48% (vs 6% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 22% (vs 2% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 6% (vs 0% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance for a kill)


In almost every case, the odds of Stunning an opponent exceed the odds of doing ½ Body. Similarly, the odds of KOing a foe always exceed the odds of getting a kill and frequently exceed the odds of doing ½ Body. This suggests that Killing Attacks with the Stun Lotto are better at subduing a foe than they are at impairing or killing him. Stunning and KO odds also frequently exceed the odds of doing the same with a Normal Attack, generally by one or more orders of magnitude. This makes them more efficient at subduing a foe than the equivalent Normal Attack.

6 DC KA (2d6) using Hit Locations
Minimum Stun = 2 (0.2%)
Mode Stun = 24 (9%)
Max Stun = 60 (0.1%)
Average Stun = 20
Chance to do 36+ Stun = 9% (vs 0.002% chance of doing 36 stun with normal attack)

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Stun = 2% (vs 0% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 72% (vs 96% for a normal attack) (vs 72% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 48% (vs 55% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance to kill)


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Stun = 6% (vs 0.002% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 48% (vs 64% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 15% (vs 0.5% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance to kill)


vs Elite:

Odds for 0 Stun = 33% (vs 6% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 18% (vs 2% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 3% (vs 0% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance to kill)


The results are less pronounced than with the Stun Lotto, but the general trend seems to hold. Stunning is more likely than impairing (½ Body) and a KO is more likely than a Kill (and often more likely than a impair). However, only vs the Elite is the Hit Location method likely to be more efficient for subdual than an equivalent Normal Attack, though it should be noted that the Average Foe is still more likely to be KOed by the Hit Location roll than with a Normal Attack; it's just Stunning where Normal Attacks remain more efficient.

Steve Long's 6 DC KA (2d6 w/ 1d3+1 Stun Lotto)
Minimum Stun = 4 (0.5%)
Mode Stun = 24 (5%)
Max Stun = 48 (0.5%)
Average Stun = 10.5
Chance to do 36+ Stun = 10% (compare to 0.002% chance of doing 36 stun with normal attack)

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Stun = 0.5% (vs 0% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 39% (vs 96% for a normal attack) (vs 72% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 26% (vs 55% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance to kill)


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Stun = 2% (vs 0.002% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 26% (vs 64% for a normal attack) (vs 17% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 8% (vs 0.5% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance to kill)


vs Elite:

Odds for 0 Stun = 14% (vs 6% for a normal attack)
Odds for Stunning = 10% (vs 2% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance for ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 1% (vs 0% for a normal attack) (vs 0% chance to kill)


Again, we get Killing Attacks proving to be better at Stunning and KOing than they are at impairing or killing. The performance vs Normal Attacks at subdual are similar to the relationship of KA with Hit Locations vs Normal Attacks. To be honest, I expected this part of the analysis to prove this was worse than the current Stun Lotto system. However it seems that moving the average Stun Multiplier from 2.66 to 3 and increasing the frequency of a max roll was more than counter-balanced by the removal of the x5 option. However this system also greatly reduces the odds of zeroing out your Stun & Body vs the Stun Lotto system. Seems to perform fairly close to the use of Hit Locations without the need to roll 3d6 and do a lookup.

6 DC Normal Attack w/ Killing Attack (+1/2; only Resistant DEF applies): 4d6
Minimum Body = 0 with a 0.08% chance to roll this.
Mode Body = 4 with a 35% chance to roll this.
Max Body = 8 with a 0.08% chance to roll this.
Median Body = 4
Minimum Stun = 4 (0.08%)
Mode Stun = 14 (11%)
Max Stun = 24 (0.08%)
Median Stun = 14

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Body = 9% (vs 14% for normal attack) (vs 3% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 9% (vs 14% for NA) (vs 72% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (vs 0% for NA) (vs 8% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 0% (vs 0% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 84% (vs 98% NA) (vs 9% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 16% (vs 64% NA) (vs 0% to kill)


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Body = 32% (vs 64% NA) (vs 8% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 17% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 0% (vs 0.002% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 24% (vs 64% NA) (vs 0% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 0% (vs 0.5% NA) (vs 0% to kill)


vs Elite

Odds for 0 Body = 100% (vs 100% NA) (vs 72% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 5% (vs 6% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 0.08% (vs 2% NA) (vs 0% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% to kill)


This looks to perform the worst of all options. Not only is this method almost completely ineffectual at killing an impairing (can't even 1-shot a mook with this version) your Stun/KO ratio is even more out of balance vs impairing/killing than the current Stun Lotto is. Basically, by reducing the range of Body damage so drastically, it makes it far to easy to make yourself virtually immune to that Body damage.

6 DC Normal Attack, Killing (+1/4; resistant/normal DEF treated as under current system, +1 BODY pip per die): 5d6
Minimum Body = 5 with a 0.01% chance to roll this.
Mode Body = 10 with a 32% chance to roll this.
Max Body = 15 with a 0.01% chance to roll this.
Median Body = 10
Minimum Stun = 5 (0.01%)
Mode Stun = 17, 18 (10% each)
Max Stun = 30 (0.01%)
Median Stun = 17.5

vs Mook:

Odds for 0 Body = 0% (vs 14% NA) (vs 3% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 99% (vs 14% NA) (vs 72% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 2% (vs 0% NA) (vs 8% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 0% (vs 0% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 90% (vs 98% NA) (vs 99% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 31% (vs 64% NA) (vs 2% kill)


vs Average Foe:

Odds for 0 Body = 0% (vs 64% NA) (vs 8% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 66% (vs 0% NA) (vs 17% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 0.08% (vs 0.002% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 31% (vs 64% NA) (vs 66% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 0% (vs 0.5% NA) (vs 0% kill)


vs Elite

Odds for 0 Body = 12% (vs 100% NA) (vs 72% current KA)
Odds to do ½ Body = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for Bleeding to Death = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% current KA)
Odds for 0 Stun = 22% (vs 6% NA)
Odds for Stunning = 0.1% (vs 2% NA) (vs 0% ½ Body)
Odds for KO = 0% (vs 0% NA) (vs 0% kill)


In general, this method is more likely to impair and kill than they current Killing Attack systems or Steve Long's proposal due to the increased range of Body damage (5-15 vs 2-12) and the shallower curve (5d6 vs 2d6). Also, the odds of impairing and killing seem to fall closer to the odds of Stunning and KOing a foe. There is a difference but it's not nearly as pronounced as with the other systems. It seems to favor impairing over Stunning and KOing over killing in most cases. There is quite possibly a better system for handling Killing Attacks (after all, I only compared a handful of the many different systems that have been proposed thus far).

Now, if anyone wants to know where I got my numbers from, I'm attaching an Open Office Spreadsheet that contains all of the tables I generated for the various die rolls. These were all generated using a Java application that I wrote. If anyone wants to take a look at my code, drop me a PM and I'll email it to you.

[Paragon]

Given the scaling of armor in the hero system (+2 Def = x2 weight), 'well above the penetrating power of a weapon' is about +2 Def. 20 rPD will prevent artillery shells from doing body damage; it's hardly plausible that a 9mm pistol will cause stun.



Yes, but if you multiply afterwards, it won't even cause stun to someone in a kevlar and riot gear suit.

[Paragon]

It's pretty realistic for attacks that actually penetrate armor. Realistically, non-penetrating damage is not particularly random.

I won't disagree here. The effect of penetrating lethal attacks is pretty wide in its swing, but that doesn't say anything about randomness of interaction with armor. As I said, my complaint is that currently the only way any bleed through effect is handled in the system is because stun values exceed Body values; if you eliminate that from Killing damage (by only doing post-penetration multipliers) you get too many wierd artifacts in the system, worse honestly than the current rules at least in heroic scale games.

[Paragon]

The testimony of people with far more experience with real violence than I ever hope to have, indicates that Hero’s way of handling Killing Attacks IS pretty realistic.



Bluntly, nonsense. I doubt anyone has ever told you that guns knock out someone one time in six _even when unable to penetrate their armor_. And that's exactly what the current killing attack rules can easily do at heroic scale game.

Now , if someone want to roll a die after penetration (say a D3 equivlent where 1 was half value, 2 was full value and 3 was double value) while using a flat value for multiple before hand so you still get something to represent blunt transmission, I think there could be an argument for that. But as it is, the stun multiple does what it does regardless of the amount of resistant defense and that's neither realistic _nor_ good for the run of the game.

[Opal]

Yes, but if you multiply afterwards, it won't even cause stun to someone in a kevlar and riot gear suit.I actually use the 'STNx aplied to BOD after defenses' in my Champions! campaign, so I have encountered this problem, yes.

It depends on how you build the kevlar. If it's DR on 1/2 your PD up to the normal 'max' of 8, (so it might be 1-4 depending on who's wearing it), they'll take a little BOD, and thus a little STN, half the time, and can still be seriously injured. Similarly, if it's a low amount of armor, like 3 or 4, it would let some BOD through half the time vs a 1 1/2d handgun. And, yes, it'd 'ping' some of the time, too.

What I do is build any amor that I want to be that realistic with a Limitted power limitation that causes any attack to act as if it were Penetrating against it. I call it 'Flawed' and peg it at -1/2. At first, I just did this with any armor that took 'real armor,' but it's really too much for a -1/4.

Thus, if I give some commandos 6 PDr body armor, even a 1d+1 handgun will bruise them through it to the tune of 1 or 2 BOD and 1 to 10 STN. With flawed armor, you do get the 'leaking' effect that no attack is stopped completely.


Still, while KA's 'pinging' off of comparatively low resistant defense may not be realistic, and might call for a little customization to model realistic armor, it does put the KA in a more balanced place.

If you look at how much specialized defense it takes to completly stop a Flash, Ego Attack, AVLD, or Drain, it's around half the Apts of the attack - often a little more. Normal Attacks, OTOH, take slightly more Apts than the Apts of the attack to stop completely, every time (but, they rarely ever do maximum damage, anyway). A KA that aplies STNx after defesnses is completely stopped by a little more than half it's Apts in resistant defenses. 18 Apts of Armor (12 PDr), will stop a 2d KAp (30 Apts). That's the same as the Apts of Power or Ego Defense it takes to stop a Drain or Ego Attack.

The regular KA mechanic requires 66 Apts of defesnse to stop 30 Apts of KA.


Another good variation of the idea is to aply a fixed x2 STN multiplier when an attack failes to penetrate, and the usual STNx to the penetrating BOD only when it gets through. This puts the KA about even with the EB as far as Apts of defense to stop it completely goes.

[Paragon]

It depends on how you build the kevlar. If it's DR on 1/2 your PD up to the normal 'max' of 8, (so it might be 1-4 depending on who's wearing it), they'll take a little BOD, and thus a little STN, half the time, and can still be seriously injured. Similarly, if it's a low amount of armor, like 3 or 4, it would let some BOD through half the time vs a 1 1/2d handgun.

[/'quote]

The problem is that it then lets too _much_ Body through too often. A D6+1 handgun does 4 Body one time in six, which is excessive for a modern kevlar vest (assuming hit locations or activation are in use so the abstraction value of full body damage isn't an issue).

[quote]



Another good variation of the idea is to aply a fixed x2 STN multiplier when an attack failes to penetrate, and the usual STNx to the penetrating BOD only when it gets through. This puts the KA about even with the EB as far as Apts of defense to stop it completely goes.

What I suggested in another post was to use the x3 multiple (this assuming you don't want killing attacks to routinely penetrate _less_ stun than normal) and then roll a secondary multiplier afterwards (1-2 x1/2, 3-4 x1, 5-6 x2 would work, but other patterns could be used to adjust to suit). That shouldn't be any higher overhead than the current rules, honestly.

[SSgt Baloo]

Darkness and Flash are also rather misleading, they imply their effects against vision but actually can be used against other senses.

Sensory Interference? Coming from an EW (Electronic Warfare) background, I'd be inclined to call Darkness "Sense Spoofing" and Flash "Sense Jamming" and roll it in with imagessomehow. I'm aware that the suggested terms may not be universally understood to mean what I think they mean (;)) and will take no offense if they are rejected.


I'm sure there are a few powers that could be added, I'd say if it is a fairly common power effect, and the current way to make it involves a laundry list of advantages, lims or just plain feels awkward, it should probably be a seperate power. The fact it can be made under the existing rules should not be a reason to exclude it as a new power, if it is not easy or obvious how to make it it should at least be given consideration.

Sounds logical and reasonable (not always the same thing). Repped. (Or it would be, but I have to spread it around s'more.) Can somebody get this guy for me?


It was posted up thread a ways but I strongly agree with including pre-built powers. While many experienced players want to design every aspect of their character many players, particularly new players coming from other games are put off by this. Having fire environmental powers, ice powers etc already made up so they can just pick them would go a long way towards making the game "friendlier" to someone just walking in from a game that hands you everything in a pick and choose format. I realize this is what the USPD & related books did, but they may never get to them if the core book turns them off. Of course this goes completely against the idea of a smaller book which I really think should be a goal.

QFT. If I could rep you twice, I would. (See above.)


Spaces: A Power to allow the character to have some form of internal space, whether within the character (for example, a Vehicle) or a focus (a bag). This can be used to replace Cargo from TUV, and if some form of mass/volume elimination were used could also be used for Bags of Holding and the TARDIS, along with Cloak's (of Cloak & Dagger from Marvel) cloak.

Reduce Time: A Power or an Advantage to do things faster on the Time Chart. This could cover Rapid Attack, Instant Change, rapidly reloading a bow, create a Powered form of the Full Move Martial Arts element, and so on. It could also be an alternative form of Regeneration by applying it to Recovery of Body.

"He's a Genius!" (Can somebody rep this guy, too? It seems I'm all repped out.)


Threshold Invulnerability: This power would be an open ended defensive power. The character would purchase levels (price to be determined) and these levels would cancel 1 for 1 a DC of attack.

Mr. Bulletproof could have 5 levels of TI (Only verse Kinetic Projectiles), which would cancel the first 5 DCs of incoming bullet attacks. Anything left over and above those 5 DCs would then have to contend with his PD/ED as normal. Allowing him, for example, to totally ignore that .38 revolver though he would need to take notice of that 60mm Mortar.

I like! And repped! (I guess I only need to spread it around s'more.) I've been thinking of something similar that requires less math (and probably provides less defense). It would make (however many) points of defense an Impenetrable defense. If the body damage of an attack does not exceed an Impenetrable defense, it has no effect. If the attack's body damage exceeds the points of Impenetrable defense, then all defenses apply normally (awkwardly worded, I know -- ask me questions if you don't understand.) I imagine Impenetrable as an Advantage which may be applied to defenses. That way you could build a character for whom "Nothing less than a bursting shell can penetrate his skin!"

Having given this a bit of thought, I like "Impenetrable" as a possible default for superheroic defenses (without ruling out its judicious application in other genres as necessary).


"Pockets! I have pockets!" :D

[Obscure Reference]
"I've got a hole in me pocket!"
[/Obscure Reference] :dyn


It's only a Bug when it comes to modelling 'invulnerable' superheros - but it's a big, hairy, ugly bug.

Quick Henry! The Flit! (Repped.)

Addressing the Stun Lotto, I wonder if Killing Damage might be better served with a mechanic that does 1 point of penetrating damage against mundane (or "normal", however that's defined) attacks for every "6" rolled?

[Opal]

The problem is that it then lets too _much_ Body through too often. A D6+1 handgun does 4 Body one time in six, which is excessive for a modern kevlar vest (assuming hit locations or activation are in use so the abstraction value of full body damage isn't an issue).That's why I use a limitation like 'Flawed', above. I'm not perfectly happy with 'Flawed.' One problem is "what if the attack is /already/ penetrating?" Another is that it still doesn't model real armor that realistically. When an attack does penetrate, even 'flawed' armor still provides a lot of protection, while, realistically, when armor fails, it really doesn't provide much protection at all. I've often considered doing more complex (or simpler) things to model realistic armor a little better.

I've toyed with the idea of modelling armor as converting a KA below it's DEF to normal damage (aplied against the wearer's normal defense), and doing little or nothing vs a KA that exceeds it. That would be quite realistic, I think.

[Opal]

I've been thinking of something similar that requires less math (and probably provides less defense). It would make (however many) points of defense an Impenetrable defense. If the body damage of an attack does not exceed an Impenetrable defense, it has no effect. If the attack's body damage exceeds the points of Impenetrable defense, then all defenses apply normally (awkwardly worded, I know -- ask me questions if you don't understand.) I imagine Impenetrable as an Advantage which may be applied to defenses. That way you could build a character for whom "Nothing less than a bursting shell can penetrate his skin!"This is exactly how FW works. The 5 Apts/2 PD or ED price point for FW seems about right, too. I did come up with a power, 'Rigid Armor,' to be to FW as Amor is to FF. It was years ago, to go with the Incomplete Rules as a way of building vehicles and the like in a way more unified with other forms of character creation. It was... baroque...



[Obscure Reference]
"I've got a hole in me pocket!"
[/Obscure Reference] :dyn
Yellow Submarine is obscure?




Quick Henry! The Flit!Now that's obscure, to me, anyway.



Addressing the Stun Lotto, I wonder if Killing Damage might be better served with a mechanic that does 1 point of penetrating damage against mundane (or "normal", however that's defined) attacks for every "6" rolled?
I've tried something like that, though as a limitation ('Flawed,' above) on defenses, rather than a characteristic of KAs. I'm not completely happy with it, but it seems to help.

[dsatow]

Just a side note on KA and the Stun Lottery

One of the problems I hear in arguments on the Stun Lottery is that people use two very different genres for the problem. A superhero level game and heroic game.

"In my fantasy game, it takes only two hits before the NPC is unconcious and he's not dying."

The problem here is you shouldn't be using the stun lottery (1d6-1). Rather you should be using hit locations, instant death, and bleeding. If you do a 5 body KA hit, if it hit an 8 body NPC in the head or vitals, he'd be dead on a failed con roll. If not he'd take from about 10 body bleading to death. If you include the optional bleeding rules, he'd expire even faster.

If you want hard and fast killing attacks in heroic level games to kill your characters faster, use all the optional damage effects. Include Crits, Hit locations, Hesitation (Con-rolls), instant kills, Bleeding, 2xStun for hit people who are non-combat, Pre Attacks* and Knockdown. Just try it for three battles using killing attacks in you Heroic game and you can see just how deadly Hero can be.

Note *: In many martial combats and fire fights, the attacker will scream like a madman when attacking. This is basically a Pre Attack while doing a very violent action.

[ajackson]

If you're using hit locations, the stun lotto isn't a problem with KAs -- or at least, it's not unique to KAs, since hit location lotto applies to both normal and killing attacks. With hit location, a x5 killing stun location (average 5.8 stun per DC) is also a x2 normal stun location (average 7 stun per DC), a x4 killing stun location (average 4.67 per DC) is also a x1.5 normal stun location (average 5.25 per DC).

Of course, hit location lotto has its problems too; you tend to have to give really tough critters extra stun-only PD/ED on the head, stomach, and vitals.

[Pteryx]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

How about "Tool" or something derived from it, to go with the "toolkit" idea?


Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: Arguably some of the Powers still have names that are a bit too “comic book-y,” that suggest certain special effects, or that use strained language. Here are some examples that occur to me:

Current Name —> Possible Change
Armor —> Defense, Passive
Desolidification —> Intangibiliity
Ego Attack —> Mental Attack
Energy Blast —> Normal Attack, Ranged (or possibly “Blast”)
Entangle —> Restrain
Force Field —> Defense, Active
Force Wall —> Wall (or maybe Barrier)
HA —> Normal Attack, HTH

And perhaps all the continuing-effect Mental Powers should have more “generic” names, too, but I think that can slide given that they are, in fact, Mental/Psionic 99% of the time. ;)

Given that Armor and Force Field do exactly the same thing, just with the latter being Constant by default and the former Persistent (and there are Advantages and Limitations for that kind of distinction when it's seen in practically every other power), I would not shed a tear if they were collapsed into a single power named Special Defense. You can very easily build Armor with Force Field and Force Field with Armor, so why are they seperate?

Desolidification -> Intangibility sounds great to me. Easier to say.

I approve of Ego Attack -> Mental Attack, too. Or maybe Mental Blast...

I think "Blast" or "Normal Blast" is the better name. Making HA "Strike" or "Normal Strike" to go with it would be nice too. Then maybe "Killer Blast" and "Killer Strike" to round out the quartet. What they do would be clear enough IMO, without sounding dull or having heavy special effect connotations.

Entangle -> Restrain sounds good.

I agree with renaming Darkness to "Sensory Block".


Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Steve’s Thoughts: There’s certainly no shortage of candidates for new Powers that have been suggested over the years. In my HEROglyphs columns I described the following:

Probability Alteration (DH #4, allows character to alter probabilities affecting him or others)
Object Creation DH #7, allows creation of simple objects)
Activate (DH #14, allows character to activate devices/machines at range)
Automaton Powers (DH #44, Automaton Powers for all character types)

Of these, I think the one that definitely deserves serious consideration is Activate. The contortions I had to go through to build abilities to activate devices in the USPD tell me that we need some standard, easy-to-use rule for that effect.

Dunno enough about Probability Alteration to know if that'd be a worthwhile addition.

I would love to see Object Creation as its own power rather than a Transform. And why stick to simple objects? Make levels of it to allow degrees of complexity, like Transform has levels to allow degrees of change! Heck, doing that would even let me easily express some of Crys's limitations...

No objections to Activate here. TK requires information the character may not have, after all, and Mind Control vs. Machine minds is of little help when the computer is off.

I echo the sentiment that many of the Automaton Powers should be available anyway, and others could get very, very abusive very, very easily.


Beyond those, other suggestions I have heard include:

—making Succor a distinct Power
—a power that allows characters to suffocate targets
—a power that allows characters to inflict a Stunned effect on a target without actually doing any STUN or BODY damage
—a power that instantly Knocks Out a target without any physical effects like Knockback or injury (for, e.g., sleep spells)
—a HTH Deflection that does for HTH attacks what Missile Deflection does for Ranged attacks
—a personal Defense Power that provides protection like a Force Wall does
—an Invulnerability power

Succor basically is a distinct power anyway to me. Make it official; give it a seperate writeup.

A suffocate power seems oddly specific. Not sure it'd make a broadly useful tool.

An "Only to inflict Stun effect" Limitation might well cover the stun power sufficiently.

I think a knockout ability would be an excellent addition to the game. The fact that each of us has a seperate pet means of producing this effect should tell you that we need a mechanic for it. (Suppress STUN with Transform's All Or Nothing Limitation and some kind of duration mechanic wrapped around it, BTW. :D )

Turning Missile Deflection & Reflection into a broader Deflection & Reflection ability that you specify melee, ranged, or mental on, and physical or energy in the case of melee and ranged, sounds good to me.

I've never been a big fan of Force Wall in the first place; I have a hard time envisioning what could possibly work quite like that. But that's me.

Not sure what to say on Invulnerability that hasn't already been said better.


Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

I'd say no. -- Pteryx

[Opal]

With hit location, a x5 killing stun location (average 5.8 stun per DC) is also a x2 normal stun location (average 7 stun per DC), a x4 killing stun location (average 4.67 per DC) is also a x1.5 normal stun location (average 5.25 per DC).Against characters with no defense, that's true. But, the hit location multipliers for normal attacks (and KA BOD) are aplied after defesnses, while the STNx for KAs from hit locations is still aplied before. So the hit location lotto is kinda the same for both, but KAs still benefit from it more.

[ajackson]

Against characters with no defense, that's true. But, the hit location multipliers for normal attacks (and KA BOD) are aplied after defesnses.
Oh, did that finally get changed in 5e? I haven't played FH in a while, and under 4e it was still applied before defenses.

[Opal]

Aparently. I've never used hit locations much, and I honestly don't remember it well, but that's how it was explained to me recently, by several different people, so I'm assumed it was true... :rolleyes: You know what they say about assuming.

I could see it either all working before or all working another, but N STN, N BOD, & K BOD working one way and K STN another is wierd.

[casualplayer]

Can I dare to suggest that we don't need both Darkness and Flash? Both are a PER Suppress essentially, one with a fade rate and one continuous. The powers themselves shouldn't determine how the target is hampered; the rules for being unable to make a successful PER Roll should determine the effects.

[JmOz]

Can I dare to suggest that we don't need both Darkness and Flash? Both are a PER Suppress essentially, one with a fade rate and one continuous. The powers themselves shouldn't determine how the target is hampered; the rules for being unable to make a successful PER Roll should determine the effects.

Not sure if I said it, but I think darkness should be removed in favor of CE...

[casualplayer]

Not sure if I said it, but I think darkness should be removed in favor of CE...

Seem to recall that you did. I'm a little hinky on where CE is going though; almost seems to be an adjustment power used on the environment rather than a specific target.

[i3ullseye]

Ok, this is the one topic I think that intrigues me most. To be honest, this discussion covers all powers and their attendant modifiers collectively.

Maybe instead of Powers we call them Abilities... but it would be confused with Attributes easily. Many words like effects, Causes, etc... can logically be applied. BUt I think this is a losing battle. Nothing speaks to what they are as well as just plain ole Powers I think.

But what about paring them down to 4 mega powers?

I think this is overly ambitious. But I think the power categories already in use... Defenses, Movement, Attack, etc.... might be just right. I love the Sidebar structure of the past books, and think giving examples of how certain things can (and should) be built is great. Nothing says in the attack section of the book you don't explore Blinding, Ego/mental, Range or Hand to Hand attacks. And you probably should in the full rules. But this also allows for wiriting smaller rules sources, like a new Sidekick that would be about a third of the size.

But to add to this, we really shouold see the basic mechanic of each category spelled out (and they are pretty well now), but ALSO get back to the clearly defined structure of how to build and price out modifiers. Sure, explain that a certain Area effect is worth +1/2, but now explain a bit more HOW it was determined to be worth that. Again, we can see larger groups listed, with explainaitions and examples, but the core rules themselves become smaller and more portable.

It goes without saying the same approach should probably be applied to adders.

I really don't think the system is too far from this now. But what is missing is that basic underlying math that explains why the basic powers cost exactly what they do now in a detailed way that can be applied to future creations. This is especially true for the power modifiers and adders. And hey, if the real answer is just "judgement call" thats fair too!

This approach then allows ANY modifier or maybe even adder to apply to ANY basic power to tailor what is needed.

Now, for a bit more dramatic approach, I think perhaps the attributes can tie into these powers a bit more to round characters out a bit more. What do I mean? Remember old school Martial Arts? It multiplied your strngth damage, but it's cost was based on your strength also. I DON'T think this is the right approach. But applying your basic applicable attribute to some powers as a basic starting bonus when you buy it might not be out of line.

Example include simplified the calculated abilities into powers themselves. No more PD/ED, instead your strength and/or con give you a basic bonus number of points on a defense ability... which can then be increased or modified as a whole if you want to be a brick for example. So the net result is still getting 1 extra point for every 5 strength maybe, but it is now in a clearly defined defense power that everyone might have for free. But if your tank with 50 Str, and +10 to your [new named defense power here] ability, wants it to be resistant, he applied a modifier to the total he has to get this result.

[nexus]

.

Maybe instead of Powers we call them Abilities... but it would be confused with Attributes easily. Many words like effects, Causes, etc... can logically be applied. BUt I think this is a losing battle. Nothing speaks to what they are as well as just plain ole Powers I think.


How about System Effects? That is allot like Special Effect but that could be played as an advantage in write ups.

Power Example:

Genre: Fantasy Magic Spells
Name: Stinking Cloud
Special Effect: A thick acrid black cloud of nauseating oily smoke appears in the target area when this spell is cast blinding/sickening all with in.
System Effects: CE, Darkness/Flash,NND, etc. with modifiers.

[SSgt Baloo]

How about System Effects? That is allot like Special Effect but that could be played as an advantage in write ups.

Power Example:

Genre: Fantasy Magic Spells
Name: Stinking Cloud
Special Effect: A thick acrid black cloud of nauseating oily smoke appears in the target area when this spell is cast blinding/sickening all with in.
System Effects: CE, Darkness/Flash,NND, etc. with modifiers.

How about "Mechanical effects" since "powers" are actually a game mechanic? Perhaps we could call it Smoke and Mirrors? (But that might result in everyone just shortening it to S&M?) :eg:

[SSgt Baloo]

Yellow Submarine is obscure?

To a younger crowd maybe, but the line itself is at least slightly cryptic (or am I thinking generic?)



Now that's obscure, to me, anyway.

Theodore Geisel used to do print ads for an insecticide called "Flit". "Quick henry, the Flit! (http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll/dsads/index.shtml)" was the tagline.

Here's a link to a typical ad: Link (http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll/dsads/flit/flitbigyear.shtml)

[Opal]

To a younger crowd maybe, but the line itself is at least slightly cryptic (or am I thinking generic?)If you've played D&D and seen the movie, that line probably sticks in your head because of the fairly desireable magic item, the 'Portable Hole.'

[SSgt Baloo]

If you've played D&D and seen the movie, that line probably sticks in your head because of the fairly desireable magic item, the 'Portable Hole.'

My first introduction to the "portable hole" came from a Warner Brotherd cartoon where an inventor's new invention fell into the wrong hands.

[James Gillen]

How about System Effects?

Or just "Effects"?

jg

[Paragon]

Just a side note on KA and the Stun Lottery

One of the problems I hear in arguments on the Stun Lottery is that people use two very different genres for the problem. A superhero level game and heroic game.

"In my fantasy game, it takes only two hits before the NPC is unconcious and he's not dying."

The problem here is you shouldn't be using the stun lottery (1d6-1). Rather you should be using hit locations, instant death, and bleeding. If you do a 5

The problem is that just because someone is running a fantasy game, that doesn't mean they want the overhead present in those rules; there's a reason those are optional rules.

[Paragon]

If you're using hit locations, the stun lotto isn't a problem with KAs -- or at least, it's not unique to KAs, since hit location lotto applies to both normal and killing attacks. With hit location, a x5 killing stun



Well, its _less_ of a problem, as the variance doesn't tend to be as high; however you still can get some fairly severe swings, somewhat more often than with normal.

[Paragon]

Aparently. I've never used hit locations much, and I honestly don't remember it well, but that's how it was explained to me recently, by several different people, so I'm assumed it was true... :rolleyes: You know what they say about assuming.

I could see it either all working before or all working another, but N STN, N BOD, & K BOD working one way and K STN another is wierd.

The problem is that since KA are, by themselves, just naked body damage, if you did that you'd frequently get no stun or any effect through at all, which is not the same with normal damage which, effectively, gets a x3.5 stun multiple just in how its rolled. While I'm the first to argue that normal dice should be more efficient at delivering stun, that's rather too extreme.

[PhilFleischmann]

This is a sort of "meta" idea. It's a bit confusing the way the power threads are arranged. Simply having them in alphabetical order groups isn't that helpful. It might have been easier and simpler and more useful to arrange them in categories:

Movement Power Issues
Defensive Power Issues
Sense Power Issues
Mental Power Issues
Adjustment Power Issues
Sense-Affecting Power Issues
Body-Affecting Power Issues
Attack Power Issues (other than the ones in another category)
Other Power Issues

This would keep the similar issues together. There may be an issue relating to both Aid and Transfer, but because their on opposite ends of the alphabet, they have to be posted multiple times.

[casualplayer]

This is a sort of "meta" idea. It's a bit confusing the way the power threads are arranged. Simply having them in alphabetical order groups isn't that helpful. It might have been easier and simpler and more useful to arrange them in categories:

Movement Power Issues
Defensive Power Issues
Sense Power Issues
Mental Power Issues
Adjustment Power Issues
Sense-Affecting Power Issues
Body-Affecting Power Issues
Attack Power Issues (other than the ones in another category)
Other Power Issues

This would keep the similar issues together. There may be an issue relating to both Aid and Transfer, but because their on opposite ends of the alphabet, they have to be posted multiple times.

Survey sez :thumbup:

[Comic]

I always thought 'Telekinetic' should be an advantage and 'Fine Work' an adder each available for any inherently ranged power.

So EB, Physical, Indirect, Telekinetic would be equivalent to the current power 'Telekinesis'.

EB, Energy, Telekinetic, Fine Work would be a type of energy that could be used at range to perform precision work - for electrical effects, activate small electronic devices; for fire effects, do woodburning/branding/cooking/welding; for biological effects, tattoo or surgery; for cold, ice sculpting, etc.

Though there'd have to be a variety of examples to give GM's the general idea of what can/can't be done, and maybe several levels of the advantage depending how useful it is, it seems doable, and to reduce the overall number of Powers by one while increasing the number of possible power builds virtually limitlessly.

[James Gillen]

Another "meta" idea: Since Drain and Adjustment Powers usually apply to either one stat or one special effect, why does Power Defense apply to all of them? Like, if there's a Power in The Ultimate Brick that allows a Brick to drain STR by tearing his foe's ligaments, why would Power Defense apply to that and (say) Adjustment attacks based on radiation? And if it applies to both, what's the special effect?

Just throwing that out there...

JG

[CTaylor]

Because to do otherwise would be absurdly cost prohibitive, and defenses are always cheaper than attacks.

[James Gillen]

Because to do otherwise would be absurdly cost prohibitive, and defenses are always cheaper than attacks.

Obviously, but it still makes me wonder.

J

[nexus]

How about "Mechanical effects" since "powers" are actually a game mechanic? Perhaps we could call it Smoke and Mirrors? (But that might result in everyone just shortening it to S&M?) :eg:

Mechanical Effects was actually my first thought but I didn't feel it rolled off the tongue smoothly enough but that's just personal taste. Either would work for me.


Or just "Effects"?

jg

I wanted to distinguish them from Special Effect which are another important concept in Hero System.

[James Gillen]

Mechanical Effects was actually my first thought but I didn't feel it rolled off the tongue smoothly enough but that's just personal taste. Either would work for me.

I wanted to distinguish them from Special Effect which are another important concept in Hero System.

Which is why I don't think there's another term that encompasses as much territory but still has the pizzazz of "Powers."

JG

[Starlight]

nexus wrote:
Mechanical Effects was actually my first thought but I didn't feel it rolled off the tongue smoothly enough but that's just personal taste. Either would work for me. How about just 'Mechanics'? With an optional sub-heading, 'Some assembly needed'.

[Vondy]

Or just "Effects"?

jg

Or, Abstractions.

[CTaylor]

I see no particular benefit and some confusion for older players in changing the word "powers" to some other word. Powers covers the topic rather well.

[Paragon]

Another "meta" idea: Since Drain and Adjustment Powers usually apply to either one stat or one special effect, why does Power Defense apply to all of them? Like, if there's a Power in The Ultimate Brick that allows a Brick to drain STR by tearing his foe's ligaments, why would Power Defense apply to that and (say) Adjustment attacks based on radiation? And if it applies to both, what's the special effect?

Just throwing that out there...

JG

I've been bothered for a long time by the broadness of Power Defense; the rationale for it on a character almost always ends up hitting cases where it seems like it shouldn't apply. It probably should be almost always Limited, but as long as the base case doesn't do that, the lazy thing to do is always going to be just to put it down as-is.

[ajackson]

I've been bothered for a long time by the broadness of Power Defense; the rationale for it on a character almost always ends up hitting cases where it seems like it shouldn't apply. It probably should be almost always Limited, but as long as the base case doesn't do that, the lazy thing to do is always going to be just to put it down as-is.
The reason for power defense being generic is gamist -- it would make power attacks unbalancingly strong if there wasn't a generic and simple defense you could buy against power attacks. It's kind of like Affects Desolid: I can think of very few excuses for an attack that hits any sort of desolid target, but it's included in the game because otherwise desolid is too potent.

[Paragon]

The reason for power defense being generic is gamist -- it would make power attacks unbalancingly strong if there wasn't a generic and simple defense you could buy against power attacks. It's kind of like Affects Desolid: I can think of very few excuses for an attack that hits any sort of desolid target, but it's included in the game because otherwise desolid is too potent.

Once you decide the wind should blow from that direction, though, I think it should be essentially a standard attribute rather than one only _some_ characters buy.

[ajackson]

Once you decide the wind should blow from that direction, though, I think it should be essentially a standard attribute rather than one only _some_ characters buy.
I agree. I think all characters should have Power defense, and the game system should be balanced on the assumption that characters will typically have Power defense roughly equal to the DC level (i.e. in a 60 active point game, characters will average about 12 Power defense). This would also kill off various abuses like Continuous power attacks.

I don't think NND should actually exist either (it should be a limited AVLD, probably vs Power defense); there should be a way to make a character generically tough without being actually immune.

[CTaylor]

Q: Should we change the term “Power”?

I could live with the word "mechanic" instead of power to help people think of the building process a little more easily but I don't think its really that important.

Q: Should we consider renaming some of the Powers?

If you want to, but the "comic booky" names help people relate to what they do a little better, I think. Dry names might make them too abstract. Especially dry, military-style names like you offer.

Q: Should we consider adding some new Powers?

Sure, if they are good and fit the game, I've suggested a couple ideas. The best way to consider a new power is "will this be used in people's games with any frequency and is it better than a huge, long, complex build and explanation?"

Q: Should we collapse the Powers down to a very small number and “create” the other effects with Advantages and Limitations?

For some I'd be in favor. For example, HTA and Energy blast could become "normal attack" while RKA and HKA could become "killing attack." I'd be very sparing with this, because as you've noted elsewhere: if it takes longer to explain the different builds than to just have a new power, go with the power.

[dstarfire]

One thing that seriously ought to be fixed in sixth ed is to make adjustment powers be based on special effect, rather than the Power used in the power being adjusted.

Basing them on special effect just makes more sense, and would make them easier to use. I've yet to see a power designed to affect, say, any energy blast. I almost always see them with either 'any x powers based on y sfx' advantage, or the 'limited special effect' limitation.

[ajackson]

I've yet to see a power designed to affect, say, any energy blast. I almost always see them with either 'any x powers based on y sfx' advantage, or the 'limited special effect' limitation.
I've seen plenty of drains designed to target one attribute. Targeting a single power (rather than attribute) is usually a poor decision if you don't have a VPP -- too few people have any specified power.

[James Gillen]

Or, Abstractions.

What about "Concepts"?

JG

[Rockhoof]

For some reason I was thinking Ability was already used somewhere in the system. Yes, ability is DEFINITELY a good word to replace Power with.

On the front of Energy/Physical Defense, you could call them Soak, which some gamers might be familiar with from other games, and being somewhat appropriate in that you are Soaking up the damage.

FTR: I'm down w/ Ability replacing Power.

I'd also like to see standard attacks and defenses defined down to two powers, with advantages like Ranged, Lethal, Hardened, AoE and Penetrating. I'd personally like to see combat defined on a 5pts gives you 1d6 attack, 5pts gives you 2-3 defense system; add, limit, advantage and salt to taste. This way, defenses are static and expensive, attacks give you your variability and are cheaper because of it. As long as 3.5 pts of defense is more expensive than 1D6 of Attack, damage will happen. it's just a matter of how fast you want combats to be.

FWIW, I prefer Filter to Soak. Defenses filter incoming damage, making it more manageable.

[ideasmith]

On the planned new term for 'thingee that you apply Power Modifiers to when creating a power':

I think that the term should begin with the word 'Power', by analogy with Power Limitation, Power Advantage, Power Framework, and Power Modifier.

I also think that the second part of the term should imply, but not require, that further changes (i.e. Power Modifiers) will be applied.

[Enforcer84]

Once you decide the wind should blow from that direction, though, I think it should be essentially a standard attribute rather than one only _some_ characters buy.
Why? It's a exotic defense for exotic attacks.



I agree. I think all characters should have Power defense, and the game system should be balanced on the assumption that characters will typically have Power defense roughly equal to the DC level (i.e. in a 60 active point game, characters will average about 12 Power defense). This would also kill off various abuses like Continuous power attacks.

I don't think NND should actually exist either (it should be a limited AVLD, probably vs Power defense); there should be a way to make a character generically tough without being actually immune.

Why is Continuous Power Attacks abusive?

[ajackson]

Why is Continuous Power Attacks abusive?
It's not so much that continuous power attacks are abusive, as that the advantage cost required to make continuous special defense attacks not abusive makes continuous normal attacks totally worthless.

Compare these two powers:
Power 1: Drain, 1d6, area effect (+1), increased area x16(+1), continuous(+1); 40 active points. This isn't amazing, but it will be modestly useful against a lot of characters.
Power 2: Energy Blast, 2d6, same advantages; 40 active points. This power will be totally useless against just about any target you might be interested in; even agents won't care.

This is a bit of a general problem: normal attacks with advantages often wind up being extremely marginal.

[Hugh Neilson]

I'd like to see some effort go in to reconciling how various defenses work. Presently:

- if I want to shift between PD and ED, it's free (+0)

- If I want to shift from PD/ED to an exotic defense (Flash, Power, Mental), it costs +1 1/2

- If I want to shift from one exotic defense to another, it costs +3/4

- There is no standard for shifting down from an exotic defense to PD/ED

- If I want to shift from PD/ED to resistant only, it costs +3/4 [killing attacks are a special case where only the BOD shifts to resistant only]

I would like to see some logic applied here. If it costs nothing to switch between PD and ED, and the same amount to shift PD or ED to any exotic defense, logically it should cost nothing to shift between exotic defenses. If it costs +1 1/2 to shift to an exotic defense from PD/ED, it should limit similarly to shift back down.

Also, I would like to see the rules officially provide that all exotic defenses are automatically resistant or, alternatively, that there is no such thing as resistant exotic defenses. Result in either case: any power defended against by an exotic defense counts the entire exotic defense. No "KA AVLD - Ha Ha you didn't make your Smell Flash Defense Resistant".

[dstarfire]

FTR: I'm down w/ Ability replacing Power.
As long as 3.5 pts of defense is more expensive than 1D6 of Attack, damage will happen. it's just a matter of how fast you want combats to be.

FWIW, I prefer Filter to Soak. Defenses filter incoming damage, making it more manageable.

Actually, one of the Hero system core principles is that the defense against a given power is always cheaper than the power itself. There are much better ways to prevent 'mr invincible' type characters (def caps; what players do, villains can do too; etc.)

[PhilFleischmann]

Actually, one of the Hero system core principles is that the defense against a given power is always cheaper than the power itself. There are much better ways to prevent 'mr invincible' type characters (def caps; what players do, villains can do too; etc.)
Except that there are "no sacred cows" in regard to 6th. It does sometimes seem to me that defenses are too cheap. This causes players to want to spend a lot more on attack powers, and advantages like Armor Piercing and NND, because they know that it won't be too difficult for an opponent to buy up his defenses high enough. If defenses cost more, characters have to make a choice as to what they want to be defended against, and how.

And as a general principle of real life, damaging and destroying things (and people) is, and always has been, easier than protecting things (and people) from damage and destruction.

[Shoutybloke]

Edit: Gah- wrong thread

[CTaylor]

Hm I don't build characters based on what the enemy will have, I build them based on what my character's concept is and the powers he'll have.

[Opal]

And as a general principle of real life, damaging and destroying things (and people) is, and always has been, easier than protecting things (and people) from damage and destruction.It seems to me that Hero can't help but model that, even as it stands. Take a reasonable defense, like armor. If it's easily snatched away or only protects you for one phase, it's prettymuch worthless for it's intend purpose: protecting you. So you might have a 1/2 limitation, maybe even a -1, while still getting some use out of it. You also typically cover two defenses with it.

Now look at an attack, like, oh, a LAW rocket. It's a perfectly useful weapons even though it can be snatched away from you and has only one shot. That's a -3 limitation. You could add more, and still be able to use it to punch through the poor guy wearing the armor, above.

So, no, it doesn't hurt that an attack has a higher active cost than the defense needed to offer reasonable protection against it. To be effective, an attack only needs to work once and overcome one defense. To be effectively defended, you need multiple defenses, and you need to to be available most of the time.

[steamteck]

Hm I don't build characters based on what the enemy will have, I build them based on what my character's concept is and the powers he'll have.


Same here, as do my players. I 'vefortunately never run into this sort of non concept design except for a few players who didn't last very long because of other reasons. You obviously want your character to be competitive but concept should be king.

[Steve Long]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Steve's Thoughts: I can see some of the inspiration for this in many modern-day comics characters. However, I think any Power along these lines is something to be approached with caution; it could easily become unbalancing. Allowing Regeneration of BODY, which is relatively rarely lost and which has severe consequences if lost, is one thing. Allowing Regeneration of STUN, which is regularly lost without severe consequences and quickly regained, is another matter. Still, you can create a power sort of like this now using various Adjustment Powers and Power Modifiers, so it might be helpful to have a more straightforward way of doing it.

[Chris Goodwin]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

This would give us a way to consider REC of BODY, STUN, and END as a form of "everyman Regeneration". I'm all for it (Regen for any Characteristic).

[GamePhil]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?


I'm not sure I see a reason not to, depending on what you decide to use for Regeneration. If it continues to be a form of Healing, you can largely do that already. If you use (as one example) the idea of "moving REC up the time chart", it would also easily apply to STUN (that method specifically should be at extra cost for moving from Turn to Phases, though), and you could also apply such an ability to "Recovering from Drain X" to counter long-term Drain advantage levels.

I agree that, especially with Stun, it could cause balance issues to be able to get it back significantly faster than REC allows, but it seems on the face of it a reasonable Power as long as there are warnings and GM oversite.

[Netzilla]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Steve's Thoughts: I can see some of the inspiration for this in many modern-day comics characters. However, I think any Power along these lines is something to be approached with caution; it could easily become unbalancing. Allowing Regeneration of BODY, which is relatively rarely lost and which has severe consequences if lost, is one thing. Allowing Regeneration of STUN, which is regularly lost without severe consequences and quickly regained, is another matter. Still, you can create a power sort of like this now using various Adjustment Powers and Power Modifiers, so it might be helpful to have a more straightforward way of doing it.

Color me confused, but can't you already do this with Recovery and Healing? If you're looking for the effect of someone recovering faster from a KO than normal, then extra Recovery, Only when Unconscious (-1) or a triggered Healing would seem to be the way to go.

[Paragon]

I've seen plenty of drains designed to target one attribute. Targeting a single power (rather than attribute) is usually a poor decision if you don't have a VPP -- too few people have any specified power.

There are actually several powers that are common enough that as a Multipower slot a drain targeted on them is useful: Force Field, Energy Blast, Flight--the problem is its hard to rationalize what a drain that does that against all SFX of those power, but nothing else represents: what's the drain that will hit LightMan's APEB but not his autofire RKA about?

I personally think you should have both options, and just accept that some uses won't come up often, but that's me.

[GamePhil]

I personally think you should have both options, and just accept that some uses won't come up often, but that's me.

It's probably the addition of "or a single Special Effect, one Power at a time" to the original Adjustment Power description.

[Paragon]

Why? It's a exotic defense for exotic attacks.



Because the poster I was responding to had already concluded it should be on the majority of characters. At that point, in practice, its not an exotic defense, and shouldn't be purchased like one. Once you're going to have it there for entirely game balance reasons (and that's his defense of general Power Defense) there's no reason for it to only be on some characters.

Once you decide it shouldn't be on everyone, arguing for the general form no longer makes much sense, as the general form doesn't actually make much sense from a non-metagame point of view; it protects against too many, too varied things.

[Paragon]

It's probably the addition of "or a single Special Effect, one Power at a time" to the original Adjustment Power description.

Yeah.

[BobGreenwade]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?I wouldn't create a whole separate Power for this. Like Chris, I'm in favor of allowing Regeneration for any Characteristic, whether you bring it back as a separate Power or keep it as a subset of Healing. For that matter, allow anything to Regenerate -- Flash damage, Transform damage, etc. Leave BODY as the "default" Regeneration, just for clarity, but allow anything else as an option (with Power Modifiers or Multipliers if you feel it's needed).

[CTaylor]

I think stun recovers swiftly enough as is without needing regeneration to cover it. Regen exists because Body recovers so slowly, which makes recovering it so much faster (even once a day is almost ten times more swiftly) a power. Related: I would like to see rules for applying it to Long Term Endurance put in the optional rules at least.

[James Gillen]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Steve's Thoughts: I can see some of the inspiration for this in many modern-day comics characters. However, I think any Power along these lines is something to be approached with caution; it could easily become unbalancing. Allowing Regeneration of BODY, which is relatively rarely lost and which has severe consequences if lost, is one thing. Allowing Regeneration of STUN, which is regularly lost without severe consequences and quickly regained, is another matter. Still, you can create a power sort of like this now using various Adjustment Powers and Power Modifiers, so it might be helpful to have a more straightforward way of doing it.

I agree with your logic on these points... generally this is one of the things that I think is not needed, except possibly as a modifier/Aid-type boost to REC itself. How to make it a more "straightforward" effect, I'm not sure, except for the already suggested idea of making Regeneration apply to more than one stat, as with other Healing powers. But in that case you can just apply the build you already have (where Regen is just a Healing effect bought Self Only).

JG

[Opal]

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Steve's Thoughts: you can create a power sort of like this now using various Adjustment Powers and Power Modifiers, so it might be helpful to have a more straightforward way of doing it.I'd think that allowing Regeneration to work on stats other than BOD could be reasonable, perhaps as some sort of adder. Recovering drained stats with Regeneration, for instance, doesn't seem out of line, especially if the Drain has a bought up fade rate and an F/X that seems apropriate ("I slice your achiles tendon as a Drain: Running, vs Rpd, comes back at 5/Month!" "But, I regenerate BOD every turn, the wound should be gone in moments?!")

STN or END, though, already have a mechanic for fast recovery: REC, which you get back every turn, or when you take a recovery. For that matter, we already have a mechanic for recovering BOD, and it's also REC. Maybe we could just have Regeneration be a power that allows you to recover body more frequently than once a month, and have a similar thing for recovering END or STN - taking it from per turn or per recovery action to per phase or per segment. Frankly, though, I think taking any form of recovery - STN, END or BOD - to a level faster than once per Recovery action (Post-12 or taking a recovery), could seriously alter the dynamics of combat.


Here's a thought: Damage Reduction with the 'Gradual' Limitation. You take full damage when hit, but 'get back' that which would have been reduced by the DR over the stated time frame. I suppose, much more simply, you could just take defense or damage reduction that "doesn't prevent stunning." That'd about sum up the effect of recovering STN super-fast.

[PhilFleischmann]

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?
I was under the impression that this was already allowed. Since Regeneration is built by starting with Healing: BODY, and then adding some Advantages and Limitations that make it into Regeneration, you just start with Healing: STUN instead. Granted, few people would bother buying it since they already have REC to easily get back STUN (as well as END). But you could make Regeneration for any characteristic or power that you want. Start with Healing: X, and then add on the appropriate Advantages and Limitations and you've got Regeneration: X. That X could be DEX, or Running, or EB, or anything you like. And of course, you could add an additional Advantage, "Any One (or however many) Power(s)/Characteristic(s) of a Given SFX" to be able to regenrate practically anything that's been Drained/Suppressed/Dispelled/Tranferred.

Is it not so?

[Hugh Neilson]

I wouldn't create a whole separate Power for this. Like Chris, I'm in favor of allowing Regeneration for any Characteristic, whether you bring it back as a separate Power or keep it as a subset of Healing. For that matter, allow anything to Regenerate -- Flash damage, Transform damage, etc. Leave BODY as the "default" Regeneration, just for clarity, but allow anything else as an option (with Power Modifiers or Multipliers if you feel it's needed).


I was under the impression that this was already allowed. Since Regeneration is built by starting with Healing: BODY, and then adding some Advantages and Limitations that make it into Regeneration, you just start with Healing: STUN instead. Granted, few people would bother buying it since they already have REC to easily get back STUN (as well as END). But you could make Regeneration for any characteristic or power that you want. Start with Healing: X, and then add on the appropriate Advantages and Limitations and you've got Regeneration: X. That X could be DEX, or Running, or EB, or anything you like. And of course, you could add an additional Advantage, "Any One (or however many) Power(s)/Characteristic(s) of a Given SFX" to be able to regenrate practically anything that's been Drained/Suppressed/Dispelled/Tranferred.

Is it not so?

More to the point, why should it not be so? You can Heal Stun or END. Why can't you regenerate it? Why could a character not Regenerate all stats below starting level (+2 advantage)? He heals quickly, from everything.

Now, the concern I see is that this character can't be kept down - at -50 STUN, he still regenerates. But that's an issue for the GM to consider for balance in his campaign. The game system would properly allow for the possibility.

ADDENDUM: Would it be worth having the ability to buy up (or buy down) the "10 base" at which your recoveries start slowing down?

[PhilFleischmann]

Now, the concern I see is that this character can't be kept down - at -50 STUN, he still regenerates. But that's an issue for the GM to consider for balance in his campaign. The game system would properly allow for the possibility.
I don't see anything wrong with that. After all, he's paying a premium for only part of what his REC would already do for less. 7.2727 points per 2 STUN regenerated per turn, as opposed to 4 points for 2 REC, which would also give you END back.

[Hugh Neilson]

I don't see anything wrong with that. After all, he's paying a premium for only part of what his REC would already do for less. 7.2727 points per 2 STUN regenerated per turn, as opposed to 4 points for 2 REC, which would also give you END back.

I don't see a costing problem. I do see a potential campaign problem if this one character can never be kept down for any length of time, but that's for each GM to assess.

[Paragon]

I don't see a costing problem. I do see a potential campaign problem if this one character can never be kept down for any length of time, but that's for each GM to assess.

I think this also can create some problems (that already exist with a few extent powers like Damage Reduction) where the defense caps just don't mean what they mean on some characters, too; if everyone is operating under the same defense caps, but one is regenerating Stun, in practice, he's not taking the same stun as his buddy with the same defenses does.

But that gets into my whole thing with the inadequacy of active point, CV and defense caps when it comes to really assessing balanced power level for a campaign.

[casualplayer]

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Steve's Thoughts: I can see some of the inspiration for this in many modern-day comics characters. However, I think any Power along these lines is something to be approached with caution; it could easily become unbalancing. Allowing Regeneration of BODY, which is relatively rarely lost and which has severe consequences if lost, is one thing. Allowing Regeneration of STUN, which is regularly lost without severe consequences and quickly regained, is another matter. Still, you can create a power sort of like this now using various Adjustment Powers and Power Modifiers, so it might be helpful to have a more straightforward way of doing it.

[Bold mine}
While this was true "Back in the Day," it is very much not the case in HERO anymore and it would be a mistake to make decisions based on this premise. If BODY damage was as rarely inflicted contemporaneously as it once was then it would be possible for a character to be viable without Resistant Defenses. The prevalence, and sheer existance, of Combat Luck proves otherwise. You can count the number of characters without rDEF on the fingers of one foot and points, being a scarce resource, don't get spent on things without merit.

[GamePhil]

[Bold mine}
While this was true "Back in the Day," it is very much not the case in HERO anymore and it would be a mistake to make decisions based on this premise.

He said, "relatively", and what he was saying that relative to was Stun. Are you saying that in the present characters take Body even close to as often as they take Stun? That's certainly not been my experience. Especially in Champions games, characters are frequently knocked to GMs option without ever taking Body.

And Combat Luck is a reaction to Killing Attacks, which have always been in the game, and are always taken by certain types of players and GMs, so I'm unclear how this is a side effect of the game as it stands now as opposed to the game as it's always been.

[Paragon]

[Bold mine}
While this was true "Back in the Day," it is very much not the case in HERO anymore and it would be a mistake to make decisions based on this premise. If BODY damage was as rarely inflicted contemporaneously as it once was then it would be possible for a character to be viable without Resistant Defenses. The prevalence, and sheer existance, of Combat Luck proves otherwise. You can count the number of characters without rDEF on the fingers of one foot and points, being a scarce resource, don't get spent on things without merit.

I think that's a chicken-and-egg problem; the reason Body is rarely lost is because Resistant Defense is so universal, and outside of specialized settings and local game culture, really always has been. Take a look at official products over the years and you rarely see characters without at least some resistant defense; when you get to Champions characters, it becomes close to nonexistent.

[casualplayer]

I can recall a time when characters not only often didn't have rDEF but they also often didn't have the ability to inflict Killing damage. Killing damage was the signature power of bloodthirsty lunatics and rDEF, especially at high amounts, was the signature power of bricks. That isn't the case anymore. Some consider it a feature, some consider it a flaw but not considering it at all would be a mistake. HERO has gotten more Iron Age over the years and that involves bloody battles and BODY damage.

[Paragon]

I can recall a time when characters not only often didn't have rDEF but they also often didn't have the ability to inflict Killing damage. Killing damage was the signature power of bloodthirsty lunatics and rDEF, especially at high amounts, was the signature power of bricks. That isn't the case anymore. Some consider it a feature, some consider it a flaw but not considering it at all would be a mistake. HERO has gotten more Iron Age over the years and that involves bloody battles and BODY damage.

I don't know when you're thinking of, since I don't recall that even back in the earliest days of the game (the lack of rDEF part). I just grabbed a copy of Villainy Unbound (published in '88) and out of 38 villains, exactly six had no resistant defense (four mentalists and two martial artists), and about another 3-4 had minimal amounts (in the 3-5 range). All the rest had at least 8 or more points of Resistant Defense, and at least half had in excess of 15 points (enough to pretty much eliminate any expected Body from most attacks).

Fact was, no matter what you or your super opponents were doing, ordinary cops and ordinary crooks used guns, and that meant unless you wanted a nasty surprise now and again in your history, you needed at least minimal amounts, because the inability to use PD against the Stun was unacceptable even if you weren't that concerned about the random Body.

If your experiences were different, I have to bluntly suggest they were well out of the mainstream here.

[ajackson]

Back before 4th edition, Damage Resistance worked differently (a flat 15 points to get half your defense resistant, 30 points for fully resistant), which on a character likely to be in the 250-300 point range was high enough that not everyone took it. Force Field was available (and resistant) all the way back to the start, but I don't think the Armor power (which gave 3 resistant defense for 5 points) appeared until something like Champions 3.

[Chris Goodwin]

Back before 4th edition, Damage Resistance worked differently (a flat 15 points to get half your defense resistant, 30 points for fully resistant), which on a character likely to be in the 250-300 point range was high enough that not everyone took it. Force Field was available (and resistant) all the way back to the start, but I don't think the Armor power (which gave 3 resistant defense for 5 points) appeared until something like Champions 3.

It was in my third edition Champions book, and AFAIK it appeared prior to that.

I don't recall any Powers that appeared from one edition of Champions to the next; the new ones appeared in the "almanacs" (II and III).

[casualplayer]

I don't know when you're thinking of, since I don't recall that even back in the earliest days of the game (the lack of rDEF part). I just grabbed a copy of Villainy Unbound (published in '88) and out of 38 villains, exactly six had no resistant defense (four mentalists and two martial artists), and about another 3-4 had minimal amounts (in the 3-5 range). All the rest had at least 8 or more points of Resistant Defense, and at least half had in excess of 15 points (enough to pretty much eliminate any expected Body from most attacks).

Fact was, no matter what you or your super opponents were doing, ordinary cops and ordinary crooks used guns, and that meant unless you wanted a nasty surprise now and again in your history, you needed at least minimal amounts, because the inability to use PD against the Stun was unacceptable even if you weren't that concerned about the random Body.

If your experiences were different, I have to bluntly suggest they were well out of the mainstream here.

You use an example by Scott Bennie!? That hack! ;) My copy's around here somewhere

You actually reinforce my point. 6 out of 38 characters in one suppliment. If you can find 6 without rDEF out of all of 5th's character creations I'll eat that copy of Villainy Unbound.

It's a vicious circle, and you have to get off somewhere. Unthreatened by bullets leads to bigger bullets which leads to bigger, more convoluted defenses which leads to mini-nukes which leads to pleas for Absolute Invulnerability. 6th Ed would be a lovely time to reboot and warn people of the dangers of escalation.

[CTaylor]

In Champions II the following powers showed up:

Energy Absorption (Absorption)
Gadget Pool (proto power pool)
Light Illusions (images)
Presence Defense
Reflection (really need something like this back in the rules)

In Champions III the following powers showed up:
Detect
Duplication
Damage Reduction
Healing
Knockback Resistance
Mental Paralysis
Multiform
Neutralization (all or nothing suppress)
Piercing (reduce defenses by points - great power I understand came back in a supplement recently)
Power Destruction (long-term drains)
Shape Shift
Transformation Attack

In my copy of the gray Champions book from 1981, Damage Resistance is in the rules. It had a chart that looks like this:

Cost...............Half Defense vs
5 pts..............HKA
10 pts............HKA and physical ranged KA
10 pts............Energy KAs of any kind
20 pts............all killing attacks

You bought it twice for full resistance to killing attacks

For the life of me I can't work out why the distinctions were built that way. I never used the power.

Armor is in that edition as well, 3 total defense per 5 pts.

[BobGreenwade]

Armor was in First/Second Edition. I don't actually have a copy, but I remember it because one of my first characters had Armor.

[James Gillen]

I can recall a time when characters not only often didn't have rDEF but they also often didn't have the ability to inflict Killing damage. Killing damage was the signature power of bloodthirsty lunatics and rDEF, especially at high amounts, was the signature power of bricks. That isn't the case anymore. Some consider it a feature, some consider it a flaw but not considering it at all would be a mistake. HERO has gotten more Iron Age over the years and that involves bloody battles and BODY damage.

I currently have an Energy Projector with Code vs. Killing who nevertheless has a laser Killing Attack to cut barriers. Sometimes 60 STR attacks won't go through 10 DEF as well as 2d6 K AP. ;)

JG

[dugfromthearth]

I would prefer that powers be stripped of side effects and alternate uses. For instance eb's being spreadable and entangle being used to create walls. A base power should have one effect. The other effects should be advantages.

[nexus]

It mght have been brought up before but a specific and codified power for object creation could be a useful addition. It doesn’t need to be a separate power; an expansion of Transform or maybe Summon would work.

[James Gillen]

It night have been brought up before, but a specific and codified power for object creation could be a useful addition. It doesn’t need to be a separate power; an expansion of Transform or maybe Summon would work.

It was one of the first things Steve brought up. ;)

jg

[nexus]

It was one of the first things Steve brought up. ;)

jg

Well, damn. I missed it. That is what It might have.

[Hugh Neilson]

Back before 4th edition, Damage Resistance worked differently (a flat 15 points to get half your defense resistant, 30 points for fully resistant), which on a character likely to be in the 250-300 point range was high enough that not everyone took it. Force Field was available (and resistant) all the way back to the start, but I don't think the Armor power (which gave 3 resistant defense for 5 points) appeared until something like Champions 3.


Armor was in First/Second Edition. I don't actually have a copy, but I remember it because one of my first characters had Armor.

It was around from 1st. IIRC, you purchased 3 points of rDEF for 5 points. Over the editions, Damage Resistance became scalable and Armor was repriced to cost the same as Defense + Damage Resistance. Hence my belief that Armor is no longer needed - it's just an example of a characteristic and a power combined and purchased as a power.

[BobGreenwade]

It was around from 1st. IIRC, you purchased 3 points of rDEF for 5 points. Over the editions, Damage Resistance became scalable and Armor was repriced to cost the same as Defense + Damage Resistance. Hence my belief that Armor is no longer needed - it's just an example of a characteristic and a power combined and purchased as a power.If Armor is redefined as PD and ED with the Resistant Advantage (+1/2), then removing it might be acceptable; however, the "grandfathering" text might turn out to be nearly as long as the description for the Power. Also, on the character sheet, it's a lot easier to put "Armor (6 PD/6 ED)" than "+6 PD, Resistant (+1/2); plus +6 ED, Resistant (+1/2)" on the character sheets. I personally wouldn't complain (much) about having to do it that way, but it would take up a fair bit of extra space in Enemies books.

[CTaylor]

Armor is persistent also, it's not exactly a straight cost equivalence to force field, but it is to damage resistance plus defenses.

[James Gillen]

If Armor is redefined as PD and ED with the Resistant Advantage (+1/2), then removing it might be acceptable; however, the "grandfathering" text might turn out to be nearly as long as the description for the Power.

Much like Regen. :D

JG

[BobGreenwade]

Much like Regen. :DGood example. :thumbup:

[Markdoc]

Here's another question, prompted by something that someone asked me recently:

Q: Should we allow Regeneration (whether as it currently exists, or in a revised form) to apply to STUN (and possibly other Characteristics), or create a new power to allow rapid recovery of lost STUN?

Actually this one is far easier to do within the rules than the current version of regeneration. It's simply Healing (self only), either triggered, or Continuous, uncontrollable, 0 END. The latter gives you a character who, unless the power is turned off, will recover a good chunk of STUN, when ever he takes damage. It's not too abusive, since the healing cap puts an absolute level on how much they can recover. You can use Aid to STUN, with the fade rate pushed out one interval as a substitute for that, but in either case, the advantages make it a rather expensive power.

So it's useful (we've had two characters with versions of this power) - especially combined with Damage Reduction :eg: but not overwhelming. I'd be wary of making it any cheaper, though.

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

An adjustment power issue. We need rules for how adjustment power limits integrate. The Rules Board indicates that a character with 1d6 Absorb - Physical and 1d6 Absorb - Energy, both increasing STR, allows a maximum +6 to STR. In my opinion, this should be a maximum of +12, with 6 coming from physical and 6 from energy. A third approach would have a single cap of 12 without the bookkeeping to track sources.

A similar question often arises with fade rates - do I lose points (or regain points) at each recovery increment for every positive (negative) adjustment power at 5 points per increment, at 5 points for each power which has been applied, or at 5 points for each time I was struck with any adjustment power?

For example, my STR has been drained by two opponents, one of whom hit me twice and the other three times. I'm down 50 STR. PS 12 rolls along. Do I:

- recover 5 STR
- recover 10 STR (5 for each of the two powers used on me)
- recover 25 STR (5 for each time I was hit)

Do I need to track each power, or each hit, separately for this purpose, increasing bookkeeping markedly?

I think 6e needs to clearly define the default, and discuss advantages or limitations to deviate from that default. An example of a character with Aid, Absorb and Transfer would illustrate the concept nicely.

I also think 6e needs to avoid what seems to be the trend to marginalize adjustment powers by making them less and less effective with these rulings. Transfer not working as a Drain when the transfer is maxed out (no thanks, I'll buy a linked drain and aid instead) and limits to positive adjustments not stacking are a couple of examples in this regard.

[CTaylor]

Both Regeneration and Instant Change are examples of "variants that take more time and trouble to explain than just building them as powers" and which are somewhat questionable according to the rules. I mean, you could take almost all of the talents away and just make them side bar examples but they're in the talent section to help building a character be easier.

On the other hand some powers (gliding, for example) are so redundant and small that they may as well be an example of flight built a certain way - and you could have gliding stop being cheap flight and have real limitations on it like 1/2 DCV full time and no noncombat movement.

[Netzilla]

Both Regeneration and Instant Change are examples of "variants that take more time and trouble to explain than just building them as powers" and which are somewhat questionable according to the rules. I mean, you could take almost all of the talents away and just make them side bar examples but they're in the talent section to help building a character be easier.

On the other hand some powers (gliding, for example) are so redundant and small that they may as well be an example of flight built a certain way - and you could have gliding stop being cheap flight and have real limitations on it like 1/2 DCV full time and no noncombat movement.

This pretty well sums up my feelings on what should or should not get it's own entry in the Powers and Talents sections. If you can write it up with another power using only one or two modifiers (such as Gliding vs Flight) then it should be a side-bar example. If the build is more complex than that, but it's still a commonly used power (Swinging vs Flight) then it should get its own entry that "hides" the modifiers in order to facilitate quicker character building.

I know that there can be Active Point issues with regards to frameworks & campaign limits that come up when "hiding" modifiers, but how often have we ever seen an abusive use of Swinging? I never have, but then perhaps my experience is atypical.

[nexus]

Both Regeneration and Instant Change are examples of "variants that take more time and trouble to explain than just building them as powers" and which are somewhat questionable according to the rules. I mean, you could take almost all of the talents away and just make them side bar examples but they're in the talent section to help building a character be easier.


Exactly. It's more cumbersome to build them than to just have them listed as discrete powers and it doesn't require bending the rules. Both effects are generic enough to be widely applicable tools.

[Paragon]

Back before 4th edition, Damage Resistance worked differently (a flat 15 points to get half your defense resistant, 30 points for fully resistant), which on a character likely to be in the 250-300 point range was high enough that not everyone took it. Force Field was available (and resistant) all the way back to the start, but I don't think the Armor power (which gave 3 resistant defense for 5 points) appeared until something like Champions 3.

As others have said, it goes back to the start of the game system; the price changed slightly at one point, but its been there all along.

[Paragon]

You actually reinforce my point. 6 out of 38 characters in one suppliment. If you can find 6 without rDEF out of all of 5th's character creations I'll eat that copy of Villainy Unbound.



That's simple evolution, though; what quickly became obvious over time was that it only needed an occasional problem for this to become non-viable. Does the villain never get shot at by a cop? The hero by a thug? Given in the latter case it takes exactly one unlucky roll for a character to be dead (a light submachine gun wielded by a thug that happens to rolls low is more than sufficient, as I saw early in my career as a gamesmaster) and even the occasional moderately lucky one is problematic (a single shotgun blast could trivially take out a character without resistant defense just because his PD had no impact on the stun value).

It wouldn't have mattered if killing attacks increased in frequency at all; unless a GM just deliberately avoided them, it only needed one or two in a character's career to make it appear an incredibly bad idea.

Now really high levels of rDEF weren't particularly necessary, but you still saw plenty of it outside or bricks for a very simple conceptual reason; many characters primarily justified most of their PD and ED in general off force fields, and force fields are resistant defense as a default.

[Klaus Mogensen]

This thread seems to be the place to suggest new Powers. If it isn't, I apologize.

Anyway, some years ago I wanted to create a character (in 4th ed.) with a psychometry (object reading) power. I and my GM decided that it would be too clunky to create it as a Sense, so we came up with this, which I think could be a useful Power:


PSYCHOMETRY
A character with this Mental Power can detect the psychic imprints left on
objects or places by individuals who have been associated with them in the past. The character must normally be in contact with the object/place for at least a minute (though very strong imprints may be immediately detected, or even 'burn' the character).

For 15 Character Points, the character gets a base 11- roll. This roll can
be increased by +1 for every 3 points. The roll is made with modifiers as
listed below. If the roll is made by 1 or 2, the character will get a general
idea about the individuals and passions which have governed the use of the
object/place in the past. If the roll is made by 3 or more, the character
gains a clearer view, enough to recognize individualss involved and even Mind
Scan for them.

Modifiers:
Character has attempted Psychometry on object/place before: -3 per attempt
Contact less than 1 minute: -2 per step up the Time Table
Contact more than 1 minute: +1 per step down the Time Table
Strong passions assciated with object/place: +1 - +2
Extreme passions assciated with object/place: +3 - +5
Passions only involved briefly (e.g. a single murder): -1 - -2
Passions involved for more than a week: +1 per step down the Time Table
Individual involved has Mental Defense: -1 per 5 Mental Defense
Time since last use less than 1 day: +1 per 2 steps up the Time Table
Time since last use more than 1 day: -1 per step down the Time Table

Note: If more than one individual has been involved with the object/place,
the total modifier may be different for different individuals. Only one roll is
made, the information gained about individuals depend on their individual modifiers.

Psychometry Cost: 15 Character Points for 11- roll, +1 to roll per 3 extra Character Points.

________________
Klaus Æ. Mogensen

[PhilFleischmann]

Another General Powers Issue, that I've brought up before on the 5th Edition Discussion Board: The Visibility of Powers Rules

I believe 6th would be improved by changing these rules to focus more on the "bottom line" - the actual utility and game effects of powers' visibility, rather than on specific sense groups that a power must be visible to.

For my full thoughts on the subject, you could search for a thread I started with the title Game Mechanics of Visibility (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49402). The basic idea is that a normally visible power should allow for the following bits of information to be easily gleaned from sensory experience:

1. That a power is being used and what its effect is.
2. The SFX of the power.
3. If it's an attack power, it should be fairly obvious the direction it came from. And under ideal circumstances, it should be fairly obvious, down to the individual person who fired the power.
4. The "size" or "level" of the power, in a general way, e.g., a 12d6 EB should "look" more powerful than a 6d6 EB.
5. Gradually or eventually, one should be able to notice the effects of the power on the user (END cost, Side Effects, etc.). It should eventually be noticable that someone continuously using a power is getting tired, or not, as the case may be.
6. The extent of the target of the power - individual person or area.
7. The damage done, or change affected, if any.

Rather than buying Invisible Power Effects by individual Sense groups, IPE should be purchased based on the above pieces of information being concealed or harder to detect.

Note also that some of these pieces of information don't really apply to non-attack powers. This is fine. It means that it will cost less to make a non-Attack power invisible than it would for an Attack Power. This is as it should be, because the invisibility of a non-attack power is not nearly as useful as the invisibility of an Attack Power.

(Read my original post at the link above, it explains the idea more clearly.)

[Chris Goodwin]

Another General Powers Issue, that I've brought up before on the 5th Edition Discussion Board: The Visibility of Powers Rules

It would be nice to reconcile this with Obviousness of Foci as well.

In fact, we should probably limit the Focus Limitation to Accessible or Inaccessible, and do Obviousness (formerly Visibility) of the Power with a separate Modifier.

In fact in fact, Accessibility could be separated out of Focus completely, and made part of Restrainable; Obvious and Restrainable are separate Limitations, and could apply whether or not the Power is part of a Focus. We just have to know what the default condition regarding Obviousness of Powers is. Focus itself could be only a -1/4 Limitation.

[Opal]

Restrainable is what a -1/2?

So if focus is -1/4, and visible is -1/4, then an OAF is still -1, an IIF is still -1/4, and an OIF is still -1/2. But an IAF is -3/4?

Also, it still seems to me that there's a big difference between a focus that can be 'restrained' in combat, and one that can be /taken away/ in combat.

Maybe:

Restrainable: -1/4
Visible: -1/4

Focus, can be taken away out of combat: -1/4
Focus, can be taken away in combat: -1/2

This would leave the values for existing foci the same, and add three new categories (all at -3/4). The restrainable, visible, must-be-removed-out-of-combat focus (like a blaster attached to the right arm of your powered armor); the visible, can be taken away in combat focus (like the magic amulet that can be snatched away, but which you don't have to touch or manipulate to use, so being entangled doesn't prevent you from invoking it); and the restrainable, can be taken away in combat, but not 'visible' focus (sorry, can't think of an example).

[ajackson]

In fact in fact, Accessibility could be separated out of Focus completely, and made part of Restrainable
Doesn't work. An OAF is not just restrainable, it can be taken away with a Grab maneuver.

[Chris Goodwin]

Doesn't work. An OAF is not just restrainable, it can be taken away with a Grab maneuver.

Hence the additional -1/4 I mentioned for it being a Focus.

[Chris Goodwin]

This would leave the values for existing foci the same, and add three new categories (all at -3/4). The restrainable, visible, must-be-removed-out-of-combat focus (like a blaster attached to the right arm of your powered armor); the visible, can be taken away in combat focus (like the magic amulet that can be snatched away, but which you don't have to touch or manipulate to use, so being entangled doesn't prevent you from invoking it); and the restrainable, can be taken away in combat, but not 'visible' focus (sorry, can't think of an example).

Maybe something like a wizard's staff; he's using to control his undead minions or whatever, but there aren't obvious visual effects going from him to them.

[AnotherSkip]

Simple thought: K.I.S.S.

If we slashed everything down to four powers/concepts (or as close as feasable, and moreso than now) with advantages/adders then it would eliminate many of the listed problems above: no need for new powers, or renaming (by default everything would be renamed, kinda) and it would allow alot of the SFX differences to appear. In addition new characters would grab one of each of the four powers and be ready to rumble, this would solve a new player needing to read six different powers to get to the decision of what kind of attack, he simply grabs (for example) Damage Classes then with a few simplifying questions gets the right feel for the character, a much narrower decision tree than the current laundry list of powers, since most characters need one of these four if not all four for real builds. 10 questions should do it much like the advantages/limitations section. it also might make Sidekick easier to build since alot of the excess would be left out.

perhaps the "simplify to four" would be most useful for movement powers with Movement being the base power and advantages/disadvantages being applied to the abilities, which is really what we have anyways. Gliding is really a limited form of flight (Gliding, -1), swimming, (flight, only in water -1) etc with perhaps Clinging being weird. 2 points per rate with modifers would also help with active capping and comparing Swimming and Flight.

Eliminating Growth & Density Increase as powers would also be helpful since they are merely ltd Str + Built in advantages/Disads, build how you want to the SFX not to some obscure designers concept that may not even make sense for the character. I did some very interesting things when I built a 250 point character, 8 DC Max, 40 point EC With Growth, Shrinking, Density Increase and Desolid all in the mix.

As a caviat some things should remain, after all needing to go through DC's to get Summon might not be a good idea. so perhaps a special powers section would remain.

this would also help eliminate some power builds (Drain EB should then become drain fire Damage Classes for a water based character ) eliminating a drain EB not affecting a RKA even though the sfx are the same. And Perhaps one could build

In the current system Drain and Transfer could be monopowered say Drain, Transfers (removes points from target and gives to user,+1/2). Within a 4 point Power system it would be DC (Damage Class), Drain (removes Con, +1), Transfer (Adds Body,+1).
And Perhaps absorbption could be Aid with a limitation, which just might limit Some duplication of writing. Of course in a simple to four Some things would get more complex but the duplication and comparisons could be reduced in the end, increasing benefit. I for one have a hard time tracking many of the hidden restrictions, Advanatages and balance needs that are unlisted. By Listing them, in the Power description Line, you have one place to look to see whether or not something is availible. Can I Spread My Attack? See Your description line.

in the defenses Desolid could become Absolute Defense with a note about it being the power for absolute defenses, after all if you are a ghost you are "invulnerable" to the normal world, except for same SFX (Ghost on Ghost which could even be Brick on Brick) thus Bricks wouldn't need 60 points in defenses and 14d6 attacks, they could be Bricks with the Invulnerable Brick SFX for Absolute Defense with 8d6 attacks slugging it out and the fight would be over faster brick on brick than EB vs Brick, you could even half cost the Absolute Defense and then allow half of the damage dice to AND from affecting real World and Character. This would make characters be more effective in their niche against the same niche (which is the best place to deal with comparisons) than anywhere else. this would keep guns where they are at in dealing with the real world BUT make them ineffective against Superheroes (except for those who had the Weaponeer and/or Martial Artist SFX which does reinforce those character concepts yet another benne). Enabling Bricks to bounce bullets and howitzer rounds off of their chest while taking a beating from Grond, and delivering some too. Desolid Could be divided into 20 points inability to take or deal physical damage in real world and same for energy after all Desolid has a 20 point adder for mental Desolid, this concept then brings Desloid in line with Damage reduction. Which just might build a Personal Force Wall with an idea or two.....and this path might reduce the spirialing out of control situation of CP inflation, less defense could mean less need for offense and since 8d6 costs less than 14d6 but relative to defenses and they had the same effect then the characters could be reduced in cost. benefit of making every point gained in play more worthwhile. and we would not need 1000+ costing DC heroes.



If the character wanted a 100% real world ability to attack then pointing out the Point Defense would be the way to go. this might be a real benefit if we eliminate PD& ED As figured characteristics/defenses, even to the point of there is no base defense against suffering damage (I.E. no PD & ED Period, unless bought.)

This would also eliminate special rules about the armor power becoming Visible when it has focus bought on it rather than getting the disad benefit for taking Visible. everything would take the base power move from SFX to final concept and make for tighter more internally consistant characters, well, theoretically.

Find Weakness would be unlikely to be feasable at this point with the absolute defense idea, though that may change. perhaps as an eliminating defense or halving Absolute defense power rather than halving effect. though that might make it too easy to be overpowered.

in addition with the KISS idea taking Summon, Vehicles, bases, Followers, duplication and Multiform and rolling into an "Association" (Allies?)power would make a great deal of sense. Associate, Summon(call forth instantly in one action,+?) vs Associate, Follower (Hangers on, +?) vs Associate (vehicle, +?) would enable some comparisons that just are not seen, in addition it would immediately unify these similar but disparate abilities under one section for ease of concept reference.

In the Senses category isn't this what we have allready done? sense has very few powers outside of enhanced senses (find weakness? perhaps a few others) if all the 4 could be that small while keeping flavor and granularity it might just reduce the page count SIGNIFICANTLY and thus the time to write as well.

Most of this is bizarre and probably waaaay off in la la land but then I Was Writing up a users suggestion guide to V&V that involved showing how every power listed in the book could be developed in the four ways (attack, Defense, Move, & Sense) just as a fun thing to do. And maybe Hero isn’t that far behind V&V :)

[Chris Goodwin]

Simple thought: K.I.S.S.

If we slashed everything down to four powers/concepts (or as close as feasable, and moreso than now) with advantages/adders then it would eliminate many of the listed problems above

Which Steve has said is not going to happen.

[Markdoc]

Simple thought: K.I.S.S.

If we slashed everything down to four powers/concepts (or as close as feasable, and moreso than now) with advantages/adders then it would eliminate many of the listed problems above:

Indeed it would: no players, no problems.

I want to play Hero system. Possibly a new, slightly improved Hero system, but definitely Hero system. I've got approximately 0.000% interest (give or take 0%) in playing a different game with vastly less granularity and flexibility than Hero system. There are already attempts to simplify the approach (FUDGE, Fuzion). And they're free, if I wanted them. I've tried both and know that I don't want them. Given their negligible player base, I'd say most people feel the same.

cheers, Mark

[GamePhil]

Simple thought: K.I.S.S.
If we slashed everything down to four powers/concepts

I have to go through and see if I've said this already, as I'll have to delete this post if so, but I'm all for it as long as it is optional and used to build up to the current system. I believe that the full game would only benefit from having the atoms that built it available, but hidden in the back somewhere. If the game is the atoms, it's probably unplayable without extensive explanation, at which point you may as well build the game as it is now (or something very similar).

I am, myself, the kind of loonie that would use the atoms extensively, so I'm not just saying this because it wouldn't be in my way if done in that manner, but because I'd like it to be. But it wouldn't be easy.

[Netzilla]

I have to go through and see if I've said this already, as I'll have to delete this post if so, but I'm all for it as long as it is optional and used to build up to the current system. I believe that the full game would only benefit from having the atoms that built it available, but hidden in the back somewhere. If the game is the atoms, it's probably unplayable without extensive explanation, at which point you may as well build the game as it is now (or something very similar).

I am, myself, the kind of loonie that would use the atoms extensively, so I'm not just saying this because it wouldn't be in my way if done in that manner, but because I'd like it to be. But it wouldn't be easy.

I'm pretty much of the same mind and I think I've said so elsewhere. Go ahead and boil the system down to a hand-full of "meta-powers". These then go somewhere in the back of the book in some sort of "how the system was built" section. In the the actual Powers section that 90+% of character builds will use, build our current Powers list (or something close to it) from those "meta-powers" but hide the mechanics so as not to scare off newbies. This would allow for more consistent pricing of Powers and those of us who want to build our own will have the section in the back to work from, but we don't lose the utility of "pre-built" Powers.

[Teflon Billy]

Simple thought: K.I.S.S.

If we slashed everything down to four powers/concepts (or as close as feasable, and moreso than now) with advantages/adders then it would eliminate many of the listed problems above: And eliminate me as a player of the system.

Abstracting everything down to more and more fundemental things just makes it harder and harder for people to learn/play the game.

You have to do more work, writing, conceptualizing, developing, and just flat out constructing what you want to do before you can even do it that it becomes a chore and not fun.

The system already has too much of the abstraction ad absurdity as can be seen with forcing/shoe-horning Regeneration under Healing.

TB

[Mini-Nukette]

Power names:

Armor → Resistant Defense*
Ego Attack → Mental Ranged Attack
Energy Blast → Normal Ranged Attack**
Force Field → Resistant Defense* and Protects Items*
Hand-to-Hand Attack → Normal Hand-to-Hand Attack
Killing Attack - Ranged → Killing Ranged Attack
Killing Attack - Hand-to-Hand → Killing Hand-to-Hand Attack

*See Power Issues A-E

**A Ranged Attack Power can be chosen to be either Energy or Kinetic in nature, applying ED or PD against it respectively (as per Energy Blast, where you can choose it to be vs. ED or PD.) I think a Ranged Killing Attack should also have this distinction.

[GamePhil]

This one came up recently in my wild musings, to which Chris Goodwin posted some interesting thoughts:


In fact, maybe Class of Body could be a useful concept to add.

Classes of Body: Living, Undead, Spirit, Animate Machine, Inanimate Machine, Inanimate Object.

Living: Encompasses humans, animals, aliens. Possesses all stats.

Undead: Animated dead things. Skeletons, zombies, liches, etc. Possesses all stats except CON, END, REC, and STUN. Must buy END Reserve if it has Powers that use END. Does not suffer from STUN effects. Edit: Must buy Does Not Take STUN.

Spirit: Ghosts, other spirits built using (or not) the Spirits rules, or the Incomplete rules. Possesses DEX, INT, EGO, PRE, SPD. Could potentially possess "spirit" versions of the physical stats, in the event "spirit plane" combat is handled with an analogue of physical world combat.

Animate Machine: Robots, androids; any machine that could potentially be treated as a player character. Computers and AIs could be considered animate machines. Objects with a mind of some kind and a power source. Possesses minimum of DEX, INT, SPD, plus BODY, either PD and ED or rDEF. Potentially could possess STR, CON, EGO, PRE, END, REC, STUN. Edit: Must buy Does Not Take STUN if it does not suffer from STUN effects.

Inanimate Machine: Vehicles, firearms. Mindless objects with moving parts and/or power sources. Possesses minimum of BODY, PD and ED or rDEF. Could possess STR.

Inanimate Object: Doors, rocks, buildings. Corpses, unless you want to create a "Formerly Living" Class. Mindless objects with few or no moving parts and/or no power sources. BODY and PD/ED or rDEF. Could conceivably possess a STR score (a table might), but doesn't have DEX, CON, INT, EGO, PRE, SPD, REC, END, or STUN.

Such a system would allow for Mind Control (or, perhaps, just Control) to work against a much wider variety of targets. What it would mean is that you could Control a car to do what it does, or control a Focus to activate or deactivate. I suppose you could also use Telepathy to talk to rocks, though I'm not sure how much they'd say. What you probably couldn't do is get objects to do anything they can't normally do: you're not going to animate a statue to attack someone this way.

[Chris Goodwin]

This one came up recently in my wild musings, to which Chris Goodwin posted some interesting thoughts:



Such a system would allow for Mind Control (or, perhaps, just Control) to work against a much wider variety of targets. What it would mean is that you could Control a car to do what it does, or control a Focus to activate or deactivate. I suppose you could also use Telepathy to talk to rocks, though I'm not sure how much they'd say. What you probably couldn't do is get objects to do anything they can't normally do: you're not going to animate a statue to attack someone this way.

Sure. You could potentially take an Inanimate Object and apply a hypothetical Animate Object Power to turn it, however temporarily, into an Animated Object.

I'm thinking less like Undead needs to be its own category and more a subset of Animated Object, though in some genres (primarily Fantasy) it could have its own rules.

[PhilFleischmann]

**A Ranged Attack Power can be chosen to be either Energy or Kinetic in nature, applying ED or PD against it respectively (as per Energy Blast, where you can choose it to be vs. ED or PD.) I think a Ranged Killing Attack should also have this distinction.
(I trust you know that RKA already has that distinction.)

I find your use of the word "kinetic" interesting. If we're considering changing the names of powers, we should probably also consider changing the names of what we've been calling "Physical" and "Energy". Both of those words can really apply to either type attack. A fist, bullet, club, or thrown rock all do damage via kinetic *energy* a type of *energy*, even though we call them "Physical" attacks. Fire and electricity are *physical* phenomena that do damage, even though we call them "Energy" attacks. It might be clearer to new players to use words that are more precise in terms of the actual physics. "Kinetic" would be one good candidate for a more precise word to replace "Physical".

Remember: No sacred cows. Keep your mind open. :thumbup::angel::hex: