General Rules Issues

[Foxiekins]

Funny, for my games the players roll, calculate, and tell me what DCV they would have hit, then if the gm uses a few manuvers he can keep the players guessing as to what the real DCV is.

Okay, in your case it's:

Player decides which Maneuver to take, and adjusts his OCV.

Add 11 to OCV.

Roll Dice.

Add Dice.

Subtract Dice Total from OCV + 11.

Announce Difference as DCV hit...

My method still doesn't require subtraction or a reference table...

[SteveZilla]

Im not certain the Automation stuff should not be scrapped and restarted, build automations using differnign ideas after all if I drop My computer I guarantee ill con stun it.

Seeing as how most computers don't have a CON stat, that's not exactly the right comparison IMO. ;)

But presuming it did have a CON stat, does it have more than a 1 or 2 PD?

Computers are IMO sometimes built (in game terms) as a Fragile Focus.

[Markdoc]

You already paid for their ability to avoid stun by buying automaton powers, is the increased defense cost really necessary?

Oh, my God yes. Absolutely. I've played in a supers game where the GM (one of the best GMs, I played with, incidentally) forgot this rule. The result was one one of the most one-sided spankings, I've ever seen administered to a supers team. The problem is that by not tripling the cost of defences, there was no red flag for the GM that that he had set defences way too high and until the robot legion marched right over the top of his players. If he had consciously decided "the robots all have 45 rPD/ED" it would have been because he had consciously decided to throw an opponent at us that most of the team could barely touch - and the scenario would have been set up to reflect that. As it was, he thought "only 15 PD" - without thinking that that was 15 DC of damage. Most of the team was entirely helpless and only my character - the team brick - could harm them at all (and that was by haymakering).

As a player.... Well, we used to run this thing called "personalized warfare" where the GMs would post character design rules and the players - up to 14 at a time - would design rules-legal characters, no matter how cheesy, and then they would slug it out to the last man/woman/thing standing.

One time I played an automaton. Eventually they took me down, but not before I had killed half the players on the board. If I had been smart enough to buy regeneration, I would have killed the lot, including that damn pixie with the 8d6 RKA :D

Do not, I repeat, do not, underestimate how nasty automatons can be.

cheers, Mark

[Diamond_J]

The current options - if you use them - are pretty lethal. There is also advice on how to do this in Dark Champions.

I have that book...I should read it again it's been awhile.

[Diamond_J]

GURPS suffers from this. The problem is that if you are buying a large number of skills based off a particular stat, it becomes cheaper to buy the stat up than to buy the skills individually.

at a minus 2 to the attribute I don't think it would be unbalanced, and have just recently instituted this rule in my games.

consider that this rule only applies to things everybody should be able to do such as conversation, climbing, oratory and so forth. Three game points gets you a plus 2 to this role in effect, so it's not cheaper to raise your attribute. The familiarity can stand for things like science skills since you can't attempt what you know nothing about, however in todays day and age everybody should would have a general 8- in basic science, perhaps KN: Science 8-.

[CTaylor]

Do not, I repeat, do not, underestimate how nasty automatons can be.

There's a difference between underestimating how powerful automaton powers can be and believing that the price for the powers is equivalent to their power. I've been playing and running Hero since 1982, I have a pretty good idea how the game works.

[SteveZilla]

The familiarity can stand for things like science skills since you can't attempt what you know nothing about, however in today’s day and age everybody should would have a general 8- in basic science, perhaps KN: Science 8-.

I would disagree that everybody in today's day and age would have that. Not so much because of any lacking of intellect, but because of upbringing. An upbringing with either a lack of access to the knowledge or (IMO more predominately), an upbringing that devalues science because of cultural and/or religious beliefs.

Some of the lack of basic scientific knowledge and lack of logic and reasoning skills in the world is simply astounding to me.

[Klaus Mogensen]

Some of the lack of basic scientific knowledge and lack of logic and reasoning skills in the world is simply astounding to me.
I have met highly educated people who didn't know the difference between a planet and a star. And a lot who consider scientific theories like relativity and evolution beliefs with no more foundation than the religion of their choice - even though relatively and evolution are based on and confirmed by massive amounts of evidence. (I don't have to take anybody's word for the speed of light being 300,000 km/s - I have measured it myself).

- Klaus

[BobGreenwade]

...after all if I drop My computer I guarantee ill con stun it.

Seeing as how most computers don't have a CON stat, that's not exactly the right comparison IMO.Not to mention that there's no such thing as "con stun."

[CTaylor]

I'd point out that the speed of light isn't relevant to relativity: relativity is a theory that at present we can't exactly establish but evidence seems to support. Then again, in the past, the theory that ants came from dust seemed to be supported by evidence as well...

[Klaus Mogensen]

I'd point out that the speed of light isn't relevant to relativity: relativity is a theory that at present we can't exactly establish but evidence seems to support.
We're getting off topic, but I can't let that go unchallenged.

The Special Theory of Relativity was derived mainly from the fact that the speed of light was found to be independent of how fast and in what direction the Earth traveled through space. So the speed of light is very relevant to relativity.

The theory is also one of the best established in physics - it was derived mathematically from a few assumptions based on a solid body of observations, and it made a number of predictions that seemed fantastic at the time (dilation of time and space, the non-universality of simultaneity, the similar nature of time and space), but which all have later been observed repeatedly.

Special Relativity isn't very difficult mathematically - it can be derived in a few pages using nothing but high-school matethatics. The General Theory is quite another matter - very few people in the world can handle the mathematics in that. But that, too has been vindicated over and over again.

- Klaus

[CTaylor]

So the speed of light is very relevant to relativity.

Not precisely: just because light can be demonstrated to apparently go that fast doesn't mean that time is distorted at those speeds. At present we aren't able to really prove them, all we can do is note that the theory appears to be supported by observable phenomenon.

Science is past the point where we can really demonstrate things to be true, we've advanced past our experimental capacity and are mostly in the realm of theory. That doesn't make it wrong, it just makes it difficult to demonstrate to certainty.

[ajackson]

Not precisely: just because light can be demonstrated to apparently go that fast doesn't mean that time is distorted at those speeds.
Actually, we have clocks that can measure time dilation. You either need an incredibly accurate clock, or a not so accurate clock (such as timing the half-life of subatomic particles) that can be accelerated to a high fraction of the speed of light. We have done both sorts of test.

Incidentally, the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s. Exactly -- the meter is currently defined based on the speed of light and the second.

Not sure how this related to 'general rules issues', however.

[CTaylor]

It's not, I just find the topic interesting: the difference between observed phenomena and proof of a theory.

[SteveZilla]

Not precisely: just because light can be demonstrated to apparently go that fast doesn't mean that time is distorted at those speeds. At present we aren't able to really prove them, all we can do is note that the theory appears to be supported by observable phenomenon.

Science is past the point where we can really demonstrate things to be true, we've advanced past our experimental capacity and are mostly in the realm of theory. That doesn't make it wrong, it just makes it difficult to demonstrate to certainty.

Actually, it has been proven in several ways that both speed and gravity affect the passage of time. Unstable particles created in atom smashers break down after a period of time (usually a very short period). Specific particles break down in specific, identifiable ways and at a specific period of time since their creation. These particles last longer when moving at near the speed of light. The only conclusion is that time has slowed for them.

In 1971 scientists conducted an experiment where they took 4 atomic clocks on around-the-world jet flights (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/177/4044/166). When compared to a ground-based atomic clock, the results proved time dialation from velocity in the marcoscopic world.

[rreay]

It's not a big issue but what the heck.

Consider changing the name of the Stunned condition. Some people use the term CON Stunned. My guess is it's because they are unconsciously trying to distinguish it from the STUN characteristic. There is always a bit of discussion when anyone ever uses CON Stunned on the boards.

Over in the 5th edition discussion ghost-angel brought of the idea of the term Staggered.

[Cargus10]

We use Con-Stunned all the time, I don't see why some people get so worked up over it.

[Tonio]

We use Con-Stunned all the time, I don't see why some people get so worked up over it.

The usual argument is that since there is no other way to get Stunned, there's no reason to qualify "Stunned" in any way.

Me, I'd rather not favor theory against practice... if people ARE confused or for whatever reason find a need to qualify the term (which is evident from the proliferation of the term "CON Stunned"), regardless of whether theory says they should or shouldn't have a reason to, I'd rather change the term to one that doesn't cause confusion or a desire to qualify it. "Staggered" definitely sounds like a good candidate.

[CTaylor]

We just use the official names, stunned means the obvious, knocked out means the obvious. The only confusing part is the stat named STUN but it's not that rough a concept.

[Chris Goodwin]

There's only one thing the word "stunned" refers to in HERO System.

The phrase "CON stunned" is used by a minority of players. Not enough IMO to justify changing it.

[Netzilla]

There's only one thing the word "stunned" refers to in HERO System.

The phrase "CON stunned" is used by a minority of players. Not enough IMO to justify changing it.

I suspect that weather or not it's a minority depends entirely upon your perspective (as does weather or not it's a significant minority). I've noticed that more folks in my neck of the woods seem to use the term CON Stunned than not including 4 different game groups going back 20 years as well as local cons. It also got used fairly regularly on the old Champions mailing list and I don't recall anyone ever making a big deal out of it. Your experience is obviously different.

Of course, there is also the question, "why would changing the term 'Stunned' to 'Dazed' or 'Staggered' be a bad thing?"

[CTaylor]

I suppose it wouldn't be, but then not changing it wouldn't be a bad thing either.

[AnotherSkip]

it's an issue?

I :confused:, couldn't even figgure what the guy was talking about.

[James Gillen]

There's only one thing the word "stunned" refers to in HERO System.

The phrase "CON stunned" is used by a minority of players. Not enough IMO to justify changing it.

I prefer "Bonked."

jg

[Foxiekins]

For what it's worth, I've tried GMing Hero System... Every time I tell a player their character is Stunned, they immediately ask how much STUN to mark off...

Again and again and again...

[CTaylor]

Sounds like you're having a communication problem with your players and explaining the rules.

[SteveZilla]

For what it's worth, I've tried GMing Hero System... Every time I tell a player their character is Stunned, they immediately ask how much STUN to mark off...

Again and again and again...

Try wording it differently. Perhaps if you ask them: "What happens when you take more STUN damage than your CON stat?"

And once they've learned that rule and can reply correctly, you add: "And what is the name of that condition?"

Don't say "state" instead of "condition" because some smart-alec will likely say something like "Nevada", or "De Nile!" ;)

I.e., teach them the rule that governs that particular condition first, then the name associated with it second. It worked for my group a long, long time ago. :)

[Starlight]

I prefer "Bonked."

You wouldn't, or at least you shouldn't, if you were playing in the UK. Bonked has a colloquial meaning over on this side of the Atlantic that isn't particularly usable in polite company. :hush:

The groups I've gamed with normally use 'con-stunned' to refer to taking more stun than CON. This is probably due to using 'stunned' to refer to characters who are between 0 and -9 STUN. It's a long standing habit that is most unlikely to change. Below -10 STUN characters are considered 'unconscious'. I like ghost-angel's idea of using 'staggered'. It's more evocative than con-stunned. I also like our use of 'stunned' for the 0 to -9 STUN condition. It doesn't feel right to me to use 'unconscious' for a condition in which a character is aware, no matter how vaguely, of the situation and activities around them. I would agree that what we use is not the standard terminology but we understand what's meant so; no harm, no foul.

[SteveZilla]

How about using Dazed instead of Stunned? I can see that as being synonymous to Stunned, and AFAIK doesn't have any colloquial meanings that aren't polite. :)

Or we could make it Phased and *really* confuse people. The Desolid character in a Star Trek setting: "I Phased though the wall on my Phase but then I got Phased by his Phaser." :D

[Klaus Mogensen]

It worked for my group a long, long time ago. :)
Oh, but that was in a galaxy far, far away! ;)

[CTaylor]

Dazed would work, if people really are having that much of a struggle with their native language.

[Hugh Neilson]

You wouldn't, or at least you shouldn't, if you were playing in the UK. Bonked has a colloquial meaning over on this side of the Atlantic that isn't particularly usable in polite company. :hush:

Well, if you're dropped to 0 DCV and your non-persistent powers shut off, you are typically Bonked.

[BobGreenwade]

I'm fine with changing the name of Stunned to Dazed. It will alleviate the confusion with people who can't tell the difference between STUN and Stunned, as well as the annoyance when people say "CON Stunned."

Though I'm of a mind to incorporate a rule in my games that anyone who uses the phrase "CON Stunned" should be out for two phases instead of just one.

[Hugh Neilson]

I'm fine with changing the name of Stunned to Dazed. It will alleviate the confusion with people who can't tell the difference between STUN and Stunned, as well as the annoyance when people say "CON Stunned."

It will end up being" CON Dazed". Worse, it will be a mixture of Stun, Dazed, CON-stunned and CON Dazed (likely Dazed Stunned and STUN Dazed as well) as experienced and new gamers mix their terms.

Though I'm of a mind to incorporate a rule in my games that anyone who uses the phrase "CON Stunned" should be out for two phases instead of just one.

This seems a much more elegant solution, actually.

[James Gillen]

I'm fine with changing the name of Stunned to Dazed. It will alleviate the confusion with people who can't tell the difference between STUN and Stunned, as well as the annoyance when people say "CON Stunned."

Though I'm of a mind to incorporate a rule in my games that anyone who uses the phrase "CON Stunned" should be out for two phases instead of just one.

It's no worse than referring to the "ATM Machine."

JG

[CTaylor]

It's no worse than referring to the "ATM Machine."

Or VIN number, or PIN number.

[AnotherSkip]

Or VIN number, or PIN number.

Hmm ill have to see if some Coworkers use Vin number.


honestly though I dont care it is annoyingly nitpicky to care about Con Stunned vs stunned vs stun loss.

bites his thumb at the nit pickers.

[CTaylor]

Usually it's advertisers that use "VIN number."

[BobGreenwade]

It's no worse than referring to the "ATM Machine."

Or VIN number, or PIN number.Or "one-year anniversary."

None of which are phrases I use, nor care to hear used by people claiming to know what they're talking about.

[Tonio]

Dazed would work, if people really are having that much of a struggle with their native language.

Snide remarks and veiled insults notwithstanding, HEROesque is not many people's native language. If you're implying that "Stunned" is an English word, and most HERO gamers' native tongue is English, and therefore there shouldn't be any confusion, ask yourself why you don't drop to 0 DCV and have all your non-Persistent powers drop when you find out the guy you're supposed to be protecting is the Master Villain ("you mean HE'S Dr. Nephasto?!?! I'm stunned!"), or whenever you encounter a COM-20, "stunning" beauty. The condition you're in when you take more STUN damage than your CON score is not the proper, English definition of the word "stunned".

[BlackSword]

Though I'm of a mind to incorporate a rule in my games that anyone who uses the phrase "CON Stunned" should be out for two phases instead of just one.

This seems a much more elegant solution, actually.
Wow, what a solution, ensure that the game is played only one way, and if anyone dares to play it differently punish them. What a fun table to be at.

Its a term some gamers use to describe a character's state in the game world. Its a little more descriptive than just saying "stunned," and at least in my mind, using it reminds new players to check how much stun they took against their CON.

[Hugh Neilson]

Wow, what a solution, ensure that the game is played only one way, and if anyone dares to play it differently punish them. What a fun table to be at.

Using the same terminology across the board is not the same as mandating that "the game is played only one way". To me, the most significant issue of this terminology is the confusion caused to other gamers.

If you and I are playing Hero, and I ask you your character's AC, what will your response be? I'm guessing one of confusion. But, I tell you, "My group refers to AC, not to DCV. It's easier for us to remember." That may be the case - maybe my group had trouble making the terminology switch moving from d20, and refers to DCV as AC. Maybe that works great at my table.

Maybe I want to refer to DEX as Agility, CON as Stamina, Bod as HTK, Ego as Will and PRE as Charisma. Any maybe that works great at my table as well.

But it doesn't work great talking to, or gaming with, Hero gamers from other tables, or posters on the Internet. I am using variant terminology that confuses people.

Just as Con Stunned leads some to ask "what's that and how does it differ from just being Stunned?". A number of other terms have been suggested above, but I suspect that, if a group of us started substituting Gobsmacked for Stunned in our posts, it would confuse people.

[Cargus10]

Seems to me this whole "stunned" vs. "CON stunned" vs. "dazed" vs. "what-the-hell-ever" is being unnecessarily pedantic. We all know what it means, get over it and move on. I doubt anyone is going to get their minds changed in any event.

As for talking to people unfamiliar with HERO - well, that ain't happening on this board. And if it happens in your gamin group, they'll pick up the group terminology right fast.

Let's talk about something more important/interesting please!

[Chris Goodwin]

Seems to me this whole "stunned" vs. "CON stunned" vs. "dazed" vs. "what-the-hell-ever" is being unnecessarily pedantic. We all know what it means, get over it and move on. I doubt anyone is going to get their minds changed in any event.

As for talking to people unfamiliar with HERO - well, that ain't happening on this board. And if it happens in your gamin group, they'll pick up the group terminology right fast.

Let's talk about something more important/interesting please!

If you're in a community with a reasonably specialized vocabulary, and you choose not to use the vocabulary when dealing with other members of the community, you ought to expect some friction.

[CTaylor]

HEROesque is not many people's native language. If you're implying that "Stunned" is an English word

Using the word "stunned" to mean exactly what happens in Hero is not exactly obscure or unique to the game. It's standard usage, quite common. Not confusing at all.

Still, you can decide to use dazed if you want. It means the same thing, and if you're so challenged by using the word that you can't decide between the stat and the condition, feel free.

[Starlight]

I've been noticing over the last week or so a lot of posts in this forum that, although interesting in themselves, appear to have little or nothing to do with 6th edition rules. The current debate on con-stunned versus stunned versus dazed being just one example. Yes, having myself taken part in that debate, I'm as guilty as anyone.

At some point in the future Steve Long will be reading the posts in this forum. That's going to be a lot of reading. His task will be easier if we at least try to keep focused on the purpose of this forum and avoid getting sidetracked.

Be kind to Steve Long: Think before you post! :D

[Tonio]

Using the word "stunned" to mean exactly what happens in Hero is not exactly obscure or unique to the game. It's standard usage, quite common. Not confusing at all.

Not obscure, not unique to the game... but certainly not automatically evident. (Without having read the description of the Stunned status, would you have been able to divine what it meant, just from the word?)

Standard usage? Common? Perhaps, but cetainly not universal... a LOT of people use Con Stunned, or Boggled, or Dazed, or Staggered.

And saying it's not confusing is either closeminded or insulting to many. Which do you mean? Are you choosing to ignore the substantial number of people who have either expressed confusion or have seen others confused by it? Or are you implying their intelligence is so far below standard that they are confused by subjects that shouldn't be confusing?

Still, you can decide to use dazed if you want. It means the same thing, and if you're so challenged by using the word that you can't decide between the stat and the condition, feel free.

I don't appreciate the insults; I don't think I, or anybody, has said anything to warrant them.

There is an unmistakable connection between being Stunned and the CON stat. Taking STUN damage can have two detrimental results. One of them is related to your current STUN stat, the other related to the CON stat. I don't find it so far fetched that fact that the result of taking STUN that only takes into consideration the STUN score is not the one called "Stunned" results in confusion for some. I hardly think one has to be "challenged" to find that confusing. I don't think anybody's claiming it's hard to understand. I think the terminology could be less confusing.

[CTaylor]

Sorry if you feel insulted, I just don't have a lot of patience with people who can't work with the language they were born with. If you play D20 games do you have problems with armor class because you have a class that you play as a fighter? It's just unfathomable to me that people would have that much problem working out the meaning of a commonly used phrase in the game context.

I honestly suspect the problem is not nearly as common nor as compelling as it's being portrayed here - I think like a lot of internet discussions people exaggerate for effect.

And this isn't entirely off topic: Steve Long might decide that it's time to change the term to "dazed" or "bedazzled" or something so that nobody gets confused between the word 'Stunned" and "Stun" any longer.

[Hugh Neilson]

And this isn't entirely off topic: Steve Long might decide that it's time to change the term to "dazed" or "bedazzled" or something so that nobody gets confused between the word 'Stunned" and "Stun" any longer.

And then we'll have people confused due to continued use of Stunned as the old-timers who refuse to change their terms post and the new players, unfamiliar with the hisory, read this "stunned" term and can't find it in their Hero 6e books.

[James Gillen]

Be kind to Steve Long: Think before you post! :D

Indeed, that would be kindness to everybody. :D

JG

[Tonio]

Sorry if you feel insulted, I just don't have a lot of patience with people who can't work with the language they were born with. If you play D20 games do you have problems with armor class because you have a class that you play as a fighter? It's just unfathomable to me that people would have that much problem working out the meaning of a commonly used phrase in the game context.

I honestly suspect the problem is not nearly as common nor as compelling as it's being portrayed here - I think like a lot of internet discussions people exaggerate for effect.

And this isn't entirely off topic: Steve Long might decide that it's time to change the term to "dazed" or "bedazzled" or something so that nobody gets confused between the word 'Stunned" and "Stun" any longer.

Like I said... it's not that people can't work out the meaning. It's not that "Stunned" is a tough concept to understand. It's that most people don't ponder every word of every sentence... and when you're dealing with a STUN characteristic, a CON characteristic, STUN damage, and being Stunned, there are enough similar words in there to make many people have to stop and review and make sure they got it right.

Consider a different game where you'd have a LIFE stat, a SPIRIT stat, and you could take LIFE damage, and if you took enough LIFE damage to get you to 0 LIFE, you're Dead. If you take more LIFE damage than you have SPIRIT, you're Lifeless (a condition where you still have a pulse and such, but your spirit has temporarily retreated from your body and you can't act). Similar situation (actually, just about the same) as the HERO counterpart, different names. Would you say the "Lifeless" name is entirely clear, descriptive, and non-confusing?

[Hugh Neilson]

Consider a different game where you'd have a LIFE stat,
a SPIRIT stat, and you could take LIFE damage, and if you took enough LIFE damage to get you to 0 LIFE, you're Dead. If you take more LIFE damage than you have SPIRIT, you're Lifeless (a condition where you still have a pulse and such, but your spirit has temporarily retreated from your body and you can't act). Similar situation (actually, just about the same) as the HERO counterpart, different names. Would you say the "Lifeless" name is entirely clear, descriptive, and non-confusing?

After having read that description in the rules? Yes. The explanation is quite clear. I certainly don't feel the need to rename it "Spirit Lifeless".

[Tonio]

After having read that description in the rules? Yes. The explanation is quite clear. I certainly don't feel the need to rename it "Spirit Lifeless".

And "Lifeless" doesn't make you think "without life; dead"? You automatically think "spirit retreated temporarily, can't act" when you read or hear "Lifeless"? If so, excellent! But I'd think it's certainly not strange, odd, or indicative of lack of intelligence to be confused by it.

And I don't think people who say "CON Stunned" would like the term to be officially renamed to "CON Stunned". I'm pretty sure they'd prefer "Staggered", "Dazed", or something of the sort.

I'm frankly surprised at the resistance to changing a term to another properly descriptive term ("Staggered" is no less appropriate than "Stunned", I think), when the original one brings problems (not serious ones, but enough to create this discussion) to a substantial minority.

[BobGreenwade]

I've been noticing over the last week or so a lot of posts in this forum that, although interesting in themselves, appear to have little or nothing to do with 6th edition rules. The current debate on con-stunned versus stunned versus dazed being just one example. Yes, having myself taken part in that debate, I'm as guilty as anyone.The Stunned vs Dazed discussion is quite on topic, as Tonio points out:And I don't think people who say "CON Stunned" would like the term to be officially renamed to "CON Stunned". I'm pretty sure they'd prefer "Staggered", "Dazed", or something of the sort.

I'm frankly surprised at the resistance to changing a term to another properly descriptive term ("Staggered" is no less appropriate than "Stunned", I think), when the original one brings problems (not serious ones, but enough to create this discussion) to a substantial minority.This is quite so.

As for "old-timers" who refuse to change the term in their games... well, we can treat them with a little more courtesy than we currently do people who say "CON Stunned," since it's a former term. But any confusion caused by hanging on is their fault and their responsibility to deal with, not the book's and not those of people who prefer to keep up with the times.

[BlackSword]

Sorry if you feel insulted, I just don't have a lot of patience with people who can't work with the language they were born with.
Hero is not the language I was born with, and since the group I joined used Con Stunned as I learned Hero it is part of the terminology of my group. The usage seems common enough that no one this board has never been confused between Con Stun and Stunned. If I am at con-game and use the term Con Stunned and the GM seems confused by it, I can describe it easily enough. I will try to use the term the GM is most comfortable with. If the GM instead decides that I should be stunned for two phases instead one because I used the terminology I usually use, then I will walk and tell all my friends to avoid any game run by that GM.

If you play D20 games do you have problems with armor class because you have a class that you play as a fighter? It's just unfathomable to me that people would have that much problem working out the meaning of a commonly used phrase in the game context.

I honestly suspect the problem is not nearly as common nor as compelling as it's being portrayed here - I think like a lot of internet discussions people exaggerate for effect.
Just as unfathomable to me that people would be confused by people who use the term 'Con Stunned.' I agree with your second paragraph though, I don't see it as a problem and confusion on both sides is likely exaggerated for effect. The issue is what people are comfortable with, and a few veiled insults.



And this isn't entirely off topic: Steve Long might decide that it's time to change the term to "dazed" or "bedazzled" or something so that nobody gets confused between the word 'Stunned" and "Stun" any longer.[/QUOTE]

[BlackSword]

As for "old-timers" who refuse to change the term in their games... well, we can treat them with a little more courtesy than we currently do people who say "CON Stunned," since it's a former term. But any confusion caused by hanging on is their fault and their responsibility to deal with, not the book's and not those of people who prefer to keep up with the times.
Since its a common interest in general, and in particular a shared interest in the same game system, I would expect courtesy to be extended to everyone.

[PhilFleischmann]

Realistic vs. Cinematic

My claim is that the rules should, by default, be geared toward Realism - simplified greatly, obviously, for the sake of playability. Then, they can be modified, or simplified further, to make the game cinematic if desired.

And of course, the rules have to allow for the various elements of the fantastic to be incorporated (superpowers, magic, etc.), obviously, but these should still behave as realistically (again, simplified to the level of reasonable playability) as possible.

The reason for this is that "cinematic" is a moving target. There is no one "level" of cinematicness. The degree of realism changes wildly not only between genres, but even within the same genre. It also changes both between and within the various mediums of the source material. The game should not assume that one particular interpretation of cinematicness fits everyone's games.

So then why should realism be the default? Simple: because reality is the only baseline that we have.

I'm sure we could make a long list of cinematic stuff that we've seen in various sources, and we wouldn't all agree on what's too cinematic for the game we want to play and what isn't. And many of us want to play multiple games which also wouldn't agree on these cinematic things.

A few examples:

Alien species encountered all look like minor variations of humans, and they all speak English. This doesn't bother me so much, because I buy into the idea as part of the genre. I want to be able to understand the aliens and relate to them as characters. I don't want to have to spend the first half of every episode waiting for the aliens to learn English.

A dropped gun will fire by itself when it hits the floor, and will likely kill someone. If it falls down a flight of stairs, or is a machine gun, it will fire several times, killing lots of people. This makes me roll my eyes.

Superman flies around the world so fast that he reverses its rotation. Instead of everyone and everything flying off into space and doing massive damage, it causes time to reverse. Is this how cinematic we want to be?

It isn't even a linear scale of "unrealism". It's a many-dimensional scale. Even cartoons have a consistant internal logic of a sort.

I hope this is clear what I'm trying to say. Thoughts?

[SteveZilla]

It's no worse than referring to the "ATM Machine."

JG

Or the NIC Card*. :D


*For those not versed in Compu-speak, NIC = Network Interface Card.

[Hugh Neilson]

And "Lifeless" doesn't make you think "without life; dead"? You automatically think "spirit retreated temporarily, can't act" when you read or hear "Lifeless"? If so, excellent! But I'd think it's certainly not strange, odd, or indicative of lack of intelligence to be confused by it.

After reading your definition, I would have no difficulty applying your definition of "lifeless" in a game context. It's not hard to understand. It doesn't mean that I will forget the ordinary English meaning of the word, any more than I get confused when my computer says "Strike Any Key" and wonder whether this is the first, second or third strike, or when my computer will declare me out. The word can be used in different contexts. In the Hero Game context, Stunned means "Took more STUN than his CON - negative ramifications".

And I don't think people who say "CON Stunned" would like the term to be officially renamed to "CON Stunned". I'm pretty sure they'd prefer "Staggered", "Dazed", or something of the sort.

How confusing. A character carrying his maximum lift can only stagger a few steps with it, by the rules. Everyone will think that you're referring to a character lifting, not taking damage. Better rename them CON-staggered and Weight-Staggered to prevent confusion.

Dazed, from the American Heritage Dictionary:

1. To stun, as with a heavy blow or shock; stupefy.
2. To dazzle, as with strong light.

Oh dear, that won't do - they'll confuse it with being Flashed! We'll need to call them CON-Dazed and Sight-Dazed.

I'm frankly surprised at the resistance to changing a term to another properly descriptive term ("Staggered" is no less appropriate than "Stunned", I think), when the original one brings problems (not serious ones, but enough to create this discussion) to a substantial minority.

If I saw a problem and felt this would fix it, I'd be all for it, but other words have other contexts as well, so all you do is create another set of terminology to layer on the old terminology, which I doubt will reduce confusion.

The Stunned vs Dazed discussion is quite on topic, as Tonio points out:This is quite so.

As for "old-timers" who refuse to change the term in their games... well, we can treat them with a little more courtesy than we currently do people who say "CON Stunned," since it's a former term. But any confusion caused by hanging on is their fault and their responsibility to deal with, not the book's and not those of people who prefer to keep up with the times.

Agreed - but changing to a new term that confuses solves little, and will exacerbate confusion as old-timers refuse to move ahead. How many people here know there is no such thing as "CON-stunned", but vehemently defend their use of this term? Will the defenders who "have used STUN since 1983 and aren't gonna change now" be any less vehement?

[Klaus Mogensen]

Realistic vs. Cinematic
One thing I liked about the Fuzion Champion:TNM was the concept of dials: you could turn grittiness and complexity up and down by adding/subtracting a number of optional rules.

Realism isn't necessarily the same as added detail. In fact, detail can often detract from realism because it enforces a specifoc interpretation of what happens.

Superman flies around the world so fast that he reverses its rotation. Instead of everyone and everything flying off into space and doing massive damage, it causes time to reverse. Is this how cinematic we want to be?
Nitpick: If you're referring to the movie, he doesn't reverse the earth's rotation; he starts moving backwards in time and thus perceives the earth as rotating backwards.
It isn't even a linear scale of "unrealism". It's a many-dimensional scale. Even cartoons have a consistant internal logic of a sort.
Aye, there's the rub. Should a game strive for realism or for genre conventions as the basis? In a single-genre game, the latter is the obvious choice; things are a bit more complicated for a generic game.

I'm not sure that realism should be the baseline. In real life, people die very easily, and particularly in realistic futures, individual persons would be able to do very little that robots and computers can't do vastly better. In role-playing games, players like to play characters that make things happen and can survive when the going gets tough. This isn't realistic, but I think it is a better baseline for an rpg than 'realism'.

- Klaus

[Netzilla]

I'm not sure that realism should be the baseline. In real life, people die very easily, and particularly in realistic futures, individual persons would be able to do very little that robots and computers can't do vastly better. In role-playing games, players like to play characters that make things happen and can survive when the going gets tough. This isn't realistic, but I think it is a better baseline for an rpg than 'realism'.

On this I whole-heartedly agree. I get enough reality in my day-to-day life and turn to gaming as a form of escapism. Also, as evidenced by this and every other gaming board/mailing list I've ever read, not everyone agrees on what is "realistic". Partly, this is because reality is so very complex that there's no way for a game to truly model reality and still be playable (thus I feel modeling it is an impossible goal). Besides, most of the time, when I see gamers use the word "realistic" what they actually mean is "gritty" (which I'm not saying Phil F. is doing here).

Now, an argument can be made for where the "baseline" of the Hero System should be set. Should it work from the baseline of Marvel/DC style comic books (as it has in the past), should it work more from Pulp-style assumptions or should it work for more of a Hollywood Action Movie style? That's pretty debatable. However, it may be that Steve Long should base his assumptions around what genres have sold best for 5th Edition (Champions and Fantasy IIRC). Now, from that he can decide if he wants to reinforce Hero's strengths in those areas or he can try to determine what it is about the system that caused the other lines to not be as strong and then try to shore up those weaknesses. I'm not sure which is the better route to take, but I somewhat lean toward the latter. Basically, what systematic changes would it take to make Hero a more popular choice for Sci-Fi, Martial Arts, Horror, etc?

[Tonio]

Nitpick: If you're referring to the movie, he doesn't reverse the earth's rotation; he starts moving backwards in time and thus perceives the earth as rotating backwards.

Is THAT what happened?? Is this your conclusion, or did you read this somewhere official? Makes much more sense, of course, but I always assumed what had happened was the reversing of the Earth's rotation. Wasn't Lois (and weren't others) aware of the change, too? I sorta remember them confused, remembering what had happened and wondering how it had been undone. My memory usually sucks, though. =/

[AnotherSkip]

Actually there is a Directors cut of Superman that makes much more sense than that hacked up original release.

youtube has it IIRC.

http://forums.rpghost.com/showthread.php?t=57928

this thread for a "competitor" group has the relevant links and info.

Have fun

[CTaylor]

If you're referring to the movie, he doesn't reverse the earth's rotation; he starts moving backwards in time and thus perceives the earth as rotating backwards.

Correct, but it was handled poorly and a lot of people got really confused because of it. Overall the original Superman movie was pretty well done.

[PhilFleischmann]

Aye, there's the rub. Should a game strive for realism or for genre conventions as the basis? In a single-genre game, the latter is the obvious choice; things are a bit more complicated for a generic game.
That wouldn't produce a single-genre game, but a single *setting* game, i.e., one particular interpretation of a particular genre. That's the problem with genre conventions: they aren't always conventional. They change within a single genre. You can even find different levels of realism between different interpretations of the same exact characters/story. Superman, for example, does not maintain the same level of realism/cinematicness between different authors.

I'm not sure that realism should be the baseline. In real life, people die very easily, and particularly in realistic futures, individual persons would be able to do very little that robots and computers can't do vastly better.
There's a perfect example. It's your particular interpretation of "future world genre conventions," which is fine, but it isn't necessarily so for all future-setting games.

[AnotherSkip]

Not to mention that there's no such thing as "con stun."


Actually there should be because hero is that flexible, for example:

Inflict the Weakness of the Lesser Mind:
4d6 major transform inflicts weakness on target: character is stunned if he takes more Stun than he has Ego, character is stunned twice as long if the stun taken exceeds both Ego and Con. 20 Point Physical Limitation.

now you can "Ego Stun" a characer!

Therefore the difference is important. :)

[Klaus Mogensen]

Inflict the Weakness of the Lesser Mind:
4d6 major transform inflicts weakness on target: character is stunned if he takes more Stun than he has Ego, character is stunned twice as long if the stun taken exceeds both Ego and Con. 20 Point Physical Limitation.

now you can "Ego Stun" a characer!
It could actually be a nice optional rule that mental attacks stun targets when Stun taken exceeds target's EGO. In the source material, it is usually the strong-willed, not the physically strong, that best resist mental attacks.

- Klaus

[SteveZilla]

I like that idea. I might try it out in a game. My only concern is that it could make Mentalists, who are already usually quite effective, even more so.

[Chris Goodwin]

It could actually be a nice optional rule that mental attacks stun targets when Stun taken exceeds target's EGO. In the source material, it is usually the strong-willed, not the physically strong, that best resist mental attacks.

I like that idea. I might try it out in a game. My only concern is that it could make Mentalists, who are already usually quite effective, even more so.

How about an Advantage? EGO and CON have the same cost but CON tends to be higher; I'd say +1/2 would do it.

[CTaylor]

I'd say +1/4 at most, and for a primarily mentalist campaign, by default without buying the advantage.

[BobGreenwade]

I'd say +1/4 at most, and for a primarily mentalist campaign, by default without buying the advantage.I agree with the +1/4 level. I think "Checks EGO For Stunning" as a +1/4 Advantage would be a good Advantage for Mental Powers, specifically Ego Attack, Mental Illusions (with damage done by MI-generated attacks), and Attack Powers bought BOECV. Even if it doesn't go into the new 6th Ed rulebook, it could go into whatever is done for 6th Ed as a mental powers book.

[SteveZilla]

It's too bad something like it didn't make it into The Ultimate Mentalist (AFAIK).

[Chris Goodwin]

I agree with the +1/4 level. I think "Checks EGO For Stunning" as a +1/4 Advantage would be a good Advantage for Mental Powers, specifically Ego Attack, Mental Illusions (with damage done by MI-generated attacks), and Attack Powers bought BOECV. Even if it doesn't go into the new 6th Ed rulebook, it could go into whatever is done for 6th Ed as a mental powers book.

It also, by extension, leads to things like "Checks INT For Stunning" and "Checks ___ For Stunning." Which is, IMO, a good thing.

[SteveZilla]

It also, by extension, leads to things like "Checks INT For Stunning" and "Checks ___ For Stunning." Which is, IMO, a good thing.

Checks COM for Stunning? :ugly:

I think it should be restricted to Primary Characteristics to avoid things like Checks STUN for Stunning -- which leads to issues about current value or starting value. And Checks PD for Stunning -- is it their base PD, i.e., just the Stat? If so, I've seen many, many characters that would be stunned by just 8 points of effect.

[James Gillen]

Checks COM for Stunning? :ugly:

"MAN, I'm pretty!"

[Chris Goodwin]

Checks COM for Stunning? :ugly:

"MAN, I'm pretty!"

The Ultimate Mentalist suggests an Entangle resisted by COM. COM Stunning is not that far away.

[SteveZilla]

The Ultimate Mentalist suggests an Entangle resisted by COM. COM Stunning is not that far away.

Eh? :think: What would be the Special effects of a mental entangle such that those who are physically prettier can break out more easily?

[AnotherSkip]

I long considered a power that dealt with self value and, since com is partially based in how others see you (and for purposes of prettyness Pre can be very very ugly thus was disqulified) building all sorts of effects that deal with narcisstic issues would probably have to be based upon Com.

In addition although Ego is the realm of mental defense and self worth Com does sort of cross over on the link at least our society has and places mental value at least partially upon appearance.

besides there was a mental illusions battle versus Marvel Girl and the White queen (or whatever their names are this go around) wherein yes there was some attacks dealing with appearance and self image. however against the white Queen, attempting to stun through either Ego or Com would probably do less than a good solid punch.

Some may have to be in the realm of negative com (ie uglyness may help the character break out simply because after a certain point there is a level of "i dont care what society thinks", it can still hurt but it won't knock them for a loop.)

[BobGreenwade]

It also, by extension, leads to things like "Checks INT For Stunning" and "Checks ___ For Stunning." Which is, IMO, a good thing.Yes, absolutely!The Ultimate Mentalist suggests an Entangle resisted by COM. COM Stunning is not that far away.Eh? :think: What would be the Special effects of a mental entangle such that those who are physically prettier can break out more easily?One possibility would be a sort of "enrapturement" -- assuming a "sexually appropriate target" -- that is, if the character is female, a heterosexual or bisexual male, or homosexual or bisexual female -- the character dazzles the target with her beauty so provocatively and profoundly that the target can only stare, or stand and fantasize. A target with higher COM would be more accustomed to such attention, and be more able to break out of the stupor.

That may sound like a logical stretch to some, but it's the kind of effect I've been trying to figure out with a particular character concept for several years, only finding this very solution just a month and a half ago.

But back to the idea of Stunning based on other Primary Characteristics besides CON... yes, I do think at least a few words should be said on the topic, but not too much since most of the corresponding special effects would be relatively obscure.

[AnotherSkip]

Eh? :think: What would be the Special effects of a mental entangle such that those who are physically prettier can break out more easily?

Mirror of Narcissus: save vs Com at -6 or stand enraptured by your own perfected idealised self (people with a higher com allready think they are pretty darn perfect so it doesnt show much imporvement)

Aura of Aphrodite: Save vs Com at -8 or drop all weapons, tools and armor bare your chest and demand you fellows slay you because now you have seen perfection and can safely die. A save indicates that the character thinks he is worthy of her love and can now pursue her with wild abandon.

[Hugh Neilson]

Checks COM for Stunning? :ugly:

I think it should be restricted to Primary Characteristics to avoid things like Checks STUN for Stunning -- which leads to issues about current value or starting value. And Checks PD for Stunning -- is it their base PD, i.e., just the Stat? If so, I've seen many, many characters that would be stunned by just 8 points of effect.

SPD Stun...

EDIT: Why does this require us to allow other characteristics? We've had the "Mental Powers move at Ego instead of DEX" option for years, and there's no huge outcry for using other selections of stats for this purpose.

[AnotherSkip]

Speed Stunning, OWWWWWW!!!

Here is where I think Classes of minds discussion should be (Since Chris G. doesnt want it on his MP and senses and Pre thread).
Oddly enough the only place wherein I can think of Clases of minds existing for Pc's is in Keri Arthur's Guardians Romance novels about Riley Jenson.... Not a place I think of Steve L. as drawing inspiration from.

The Books also easily illustrate the problems with letting classes of minds run rampant (every Shapeshifting/supernatural race has it's own class of mind PLUS they can pretty much read humans fairly freely). Even the heroine seems to vent/take issue about the classes of minds problem. (how's that for sad?)

Personally I think that the only way for classes of minds to work is a house rule I implemented (Big shocker there) the Mentalists maximum roll to hit is = to a maximum of the "alien" targets highest social interaction roll, usually acting. Thus if the ECV vs ECV indicates the mentalist would have a 14- roll to hit the target and he had an alien class of mind with an 11- acting as his best social interaction roll then he would have to roll under 11- to affect the target.
To determine if the target is mentally not human it is the Inverse of the "alien" targets highest social interaction roll. Thus if the target had a 14-acting then a mentalist would on an 8- perception roll determine the target was of an alien mind. This argument is based upon if the character can fake social interactions well enough to pass for human then they make themselves a reasonable target for mental interaction. True aliens without any connection to humanity at all would be immune to mental powers just like before but they would be obvious to normals on any level of social interaction. The ones that can slide around without humanity knowing, well they have to open themselves up in order to do a good job so they lose some immunity as the price of hiding from everyone else.

[SteveZilla]

I think Classes of Minds (however it's done) shouldn't apply to all Mental Powers. For example, Ego Blast should be equally effective against any target that has a mind because IMO it doesn't care about the differences.

Like my Mamma always said, "Damage is as damage does."

I do kinda like the idea that the character should buy their extra resistance to Mental Powers via extra Mental Defense and maybe Skill Levels With ECV/Ego Rolls. But the question then arises, what about his attacks? How does he buy his attacks so that they are less effective against Alien (to him) classes of Minds?

To Superman, Martian Manhunter is the Alien. To J'onn J'onzz, Clark Kent is the Alien. The only way around this is to define one of them as the "Campaign Norm", and have those that aren't of the norm buy their extra Defenses and Mental Powers w/ Limitations like "Only Vs" or "Not Vs" as appropriate.

[ideasmith]

I think Classes of Minds (however it's done) shouldn't apply to all Mental Powers. For example, Ego Blast should be equally effective against any target that has a mind because IMO it doesn't care about the differences.

Like my Mamma always said, "Damage is as damage does."

I do kinda like the idea that the character should buy their extra resistance to Mental Powers via extra Mental Defense and maybe Skill Levels With ECV/Ego Rolls. But the question then arises, what about his attacks? How does he buy his attacks so that they are less effective against Alien (to him) classes of Minds?

To Superman, Martian Manhunter is the Alien. To J'onn J'onzz, Clark Kent is the Alien. The only way around this is to define one of them as the "Campaign Norm", and have those that aren't of the norm buy their extra Defenses and Mental Powers w/ Limitations like "Only Vs" or "Not Vs" as appropriate.

Superman and Martian Manhunter both have human class of minds. 'Alien' is reserved for really weird minds.

[SteveZilla]

Superman and Martian Manhunter both have human class of minds. 'Alien' is reserved for really weird minds.

How weird do you have to be to be weird? ;)

Would Odo from Star Trek: DS-9, be Really Weird enough? After all, he's not limited to just one form like the rest of us, and in his "natural" state isn't even mostly "solid" like we are.

[CTaylor]

I think alien means "formed of boron crystals and cannot communicate with us" alien. Something that truly is outside human experience and cannot learn our language, something truly different - like real aliens would likely be, should we encounter any.

[ideasmith]

How weird do you have to be to be weird? ;)

Per page 117 of 5ER, any character usable as a PC has the mind type 'human'.

Would Odo from Star Trek: DS-9, be Really Weird enough? After all, he's not limited to just one form like the rest of us, and in his "natural" state isn't even mostly "solid" like we are.

I'm not familiar with the character. The information you give about the characters body says little about what the character's mind might be like.

[SteveZilla]

Per page 117 of 5ER, any character usable as a PC has the mind type 'human'.



I'm not familiar with the character. The information you give about the characters body says little about what the character's mind might be like.

Odo on Wikiedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_%28Star_Trek%29).

Being a non-solid, life form, and thus not subject to the restrictions and physical rules that us "solids" learn about from a very early age would make his race one of extremely different mentality. Heck, the race spends most of it's time in one gigantic liquid-form ocean where individuality is all byt dissolved into the greater consciousness.

[Markdoc]

Odo on Wikiedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_%28Star_Trek%29).

Being a non-solid, life form, and thus not subject to the restrictions and physical rules that us "solids" learn about from a very early age would make his race one of extremely different mentality. Heck, the race spends most of it's time in one gigantic liquid-form ocean where individuality is all byt dissolved into the greater consciousness.

Yeah, but can he talk and interact at least reasonably well with humans? If yes, then he qualifies as "human class of mind". Strange, certainly, but still the same category.

cheers, Mark

[James Gillen]

Yeah, but can he talk and interact at least reasonably well with humans? If yes, then he qualifies as "human class of mind". Strange, certainly, but still the same category.

cheers, Mark

Which again is why I think the concept is bogus, at least in regard to most characters. In Trek, the only common race that classifies outside the main "class of mind" is the Ferengi, because of their unique brain structure. But that would mean other "Aliens" couldn't affect them either.

JG

[SteveZilla]

Which again is why I think the concept is bogus, at least in regard to most characters. In Trek, the only common race that classifies outside the main "class of mind" is the Ferengi, because of their unique brain structure. But that would mean other "Aliens" couldn't affect them either.

JG

Yeah, I mean Spock was able to Mind Meld -- sorta -- with the Horta (a Silicon-Based Lifeform). If the Horta didn't qualify as Alien, I don't know what would other than something extra-dimensional (meaning existing in *greater* number of dimensions than we do).

[Hugh Neilson]

Yeah, but can he talk and interact at least reasonably well with humans? If yes, then he qualifies as "human class of mind". Strange, certainly, but still the same category.

Which again is why I think the concept is bogus, at least in regard to most characters. In Trek, the only common race that classifies outside the main "class of mind" is the Ferengi, because of their unique brain structure. But that would mean other "Aliens" couldn't affect them either.

Yeah, I mean Spock was able to Mind Meld -- sorta -- with the Horta (a Silicon-Based Lifeform). If the Horta didn't qualify as Alien, I don't know what would other than something extra-dimensional (meaning existing in *greater* number of dimensions than we do).

I note from the above that "What is an Alien Mind" is very much a subjective matter. The Horta isn't, but Ferengi are? It seems like Ferengi are quite capable of interacting with other species, certainly far more so than Horta and far more similar than Odo's people. That seems to blow the theory that the "alien mind" is incapable, or at least much less capable, of interaction with human class minds.

If alien class minds are, indeed, so scarce, it begs the question why mental powers that affect them cost the same as mental powers that affect the much more common human class of minds.

If we accept, for the moment, that Horta, Odo's people and Ferengi are all alien, it makes no sense that they can affect one another with their default mental powers. Horta would be quite alien to Ferengi and vice versa. So why does one adder allow the human to affect all of them?

I find myself back at the view that the alien should pay for the advantages of his alien mind - resistance to mental powers to the point of immunity - not obtain such an advantage for free.

Using the Horta as our example. why would she be immune to mental powers for free, but be required to pay for her near-immunity to phaser fire? Just make her body "Silicon Class" and state that she's immune to physical attacks without the 10 point "Silicon Class" adder, or that do not affect silicon-based life forms instead of carbon-based life forms by default.

That

[AnotherSkip]

I note from the above that "What is an Alien Mind" is very much a subjective matter.

Star Trek is notoriously a bad example for deciding on Alien Classes of minds.

[BobGreenwade]

Clearly, assuming Classes of Minds rules are kept, more text is needed to:

1) Make it clear that definitions of "Class of Minds," and their ramifications for Mental powers, is campaign-dependent.

2) Better define what Classes of Minds fall into what definitions in the Hero Universe.

[Hugh Neilson]

Star Trek is notoriously a bad example for deciding on Alien Classes of minds.

Provide a better one. To me, unless they are near-universal across genres, they do not belong as a default core rule. Unless they are quite common across genres, they do not belong in the core rules at all.

In my view, these should be setting-specific rules, and presented in either setting books where they are used, with specifics of which classes of mind are used and who falls in them, or in some detail as an optional rule in an "Ultimate" type book.

[CTaylor]

Yeah, I mean Spock was able to Mind Meld -- sorta -- with the Horta (a Silicon-Based Lifeform). If the Horta didn't qualify as Alien

Or he had bought the adder to use telepathy with alien minds...

[Markdoc]

I note from the above that "What is an Alien Mind" is very much a subjective matter. The Horta isn't, but Ferengi are? It seems like Ferengi are quite capable of interacting with other species, certainly far more so than Horta and far more similar than Odo's people. That seems to blow the theory that the "alien mind" is incapable, or at least much less capable, of interaction with human class minds.

Or - my take: the Ferengi are very much a human class of mind. The structure of the brain might be different, but their minds are very clearly human-like in operation, even down to the point where their motivations are easily understandable by humans. Forget about brain structure, whether it's made out silicon, carbon or supercooled amazium. That's all special effects. The question to be answered is simply "Are their thought processes comprehensible to humans? If yes, Human class of minds" FRed makes this explicit when it notes that all PCs should be human class of mind

If alien class minds are, indeed, so scarce, it begs the question why mental powers that affect them cost the same as mental powers that affect the much more common human class of minds.

It doesn't - if you accept that human class of minds is the default. In that case all you are paying for is the adder - which becomes acceptable once you accept that other classes are very rare.

If we accept, for the moment, that Horta, Odo's people and Ferengi are all alien, it makes no sense that they can affect one another with their default mental powers. Horta would be quite alien to Ferengi and vice versa. So why does one adder allow the human to affect all of them?

Which, to me is a good example of why I don't accept such a premise.

I find myself back at the view that the alien should pay for the advantages of his alien mind - resistance to mental powers to the point of immunity - not obtain such an advantage for free.

Using the Horta as our example. why would she be immune to mental powers for free, but be required to pay for her near-immunity to phaser fire? Just make her body "Silicon Class" and state that she's immune to physical attacks without the 10 point "Silicon Class" adder, or that do not affect silicon-based life forms instead of carbon-based life forms by default.

Again, if you accept the premise that the Horta has a "human class of mind" - which the mind-meld example certainly supports - then being a Horta becomes a good special effects justification for buying mental defences, not a way to get them for free.

For me, this looks like people just confusing special effects with mechanics.

cheers, Mark

[James Gillen]

Again, if you accept the premise that the Horta has a "human class of mind" - which the mind-meld example certainly supports - then being a Horta becomes a good special effects justification for buying mental defences, not a way to get them for free.

For me, this looks like people just confusing special effects with mechanics.

cheers, Mark

Unfortunately the Class of Mind principle makes that necessary. I agree that it would be better handled as tons of Mental Defense or maybe DECV levels based on being harder to 'target'.

JG

[Hugh Neilson]

Again, if you accept the premise that the Horta has a "human class of mind" - which the mind-meld example certainly supports - then being a Horta becomes a good special effects justification for buying mental defences, not a way to get them for free.

For me, this looks like people just confusing special effects with mechanics.

Emphasis added. That is a perfect description of my view of the entire Classes of Mind issue. If the creature has a mind - human, android, Ferengi, Horta or Great Old One - it has a mind. The type of mind - human, animal, alien - is, or should be, a good special effects justification for buying mental defenses, not a way to get them for free.

This leaves only the issue of creatures which have no Ego score - automatons and computers, for example. There should be provision for mental powers which affect such entities - mental illusions which fool cameras rather than brains; mental control of computers rather than thought processes.

If it has an Ego score, it should be affected by standard mental powers. If it should be especially resistant, it buys mental defenses. If it does not have an ego score, a separate subset of mental powers should affect it. Again, especially resistant = buy mental defenses.

At present, we subdivide creatures with an Ego score and have no rules for those lacking one - how does one control a zombie with no handwaves?

[ideasmith]

At present, we subdivide creatures with an Ego score and have no rules for those lacking one - how does one control a zombie with no handwaves?

Instructions for that are in 4ER, page 117, "CLASSES OF MINDS", second paragraph, final sentence. You use INT in place of EGO. (And zombies would have the 'undead' class of mind. 5ER does say that its list of classes of minds is incomplete.)

[SteveZilla]

I do like the *idea* of a mind that is different from what one is used to, and this difference making it more difficult to achieve certain effects (Mind Control, Mental Illusions, and Telepathy primarily). But once you have familiarized yourself with a certain "type/class" of different mind, those minds should be no more difficult than any others you are equally familiar with. Also, different classes are rated in "points of divergence/difference" from them (by the GM) -- a lot like the Languages chart.

Perhaps a Mental Familiarity system, where for each character, the "base" is what *they* are, and they pay to be familiar with various other classes of mind.

For ex: A Vulcan can Mind-Meld with other Vulcans without difficulty. This would apply even to a Vulcan raised by some other race/culture, because I see the similarity being primarily biological/racial resulting in a certain physical brain structure. But because he has served with Humans for a long time, he has had the opportunity to purchase Human as a fully familiar class.

Later on, this Vulcan meets a very alien life form. Because of his significant skill/power, he is able to establish mental contact with it, but even then is only able to get very rudimentary levels of communication. Had he much more time in which to familiarize himself with this specific species' mind, he would have a reason to buy some familiarity with it. But because it is much more different than he is, it would take a greater purchase to bring it to the same level that he has for Humans.

[SteveZilla]

At present, we subdivide creatures with an Ego score and have no rules for those lacking one - how does one control a zombie with no handwaves?

Zombies are Automatons. Automatons have programs. It'd be a poor Necromancer that didn't create a Zombie with the "Receive Verbal Commands From Creator" program. ;)

[CTaylor]

Some creatures will have no mind to contact, read, control, or otherwise use mental powers on. There's no "block of salt" mental class.

[Markdoc]

This leaves only the issue of creatures which have no Ego score - automatons and computers, for example. There should be provision for mental powers which affect such entities - mental illusions which fool cameras rather than brains; mental control of computers rather than thought processes.

As far as I can work out, the whole class of minds thing came about as a result of the difficulty of creating characters who could "mind control" devices and automatons. Personally, I'd rather see class of minds go away and another attempt at rules for controlling devices.

cheers, Mark

[CTaylor]

I have used mind control on other stats to represent different powers (such as vs body to control machines), it works better than just classifying a mindless object as having an alternate mind type, in my opinion.

[James Gillen]

As far as I can work out, the whole class of minds thing came about as a result of the difficulty of creating characters who could "mind control" devices and automatons. Personally, I'd rather see class of minds go away and another attempt at rules for controlling devices.

cheers, Mark

I'd prefer either Telekinesis or a ranged type of Computer Programming to simulate these effects.

jg

[Markdoc]

I'd prefer either Telekinesis or a ranged type of Computer Programming to simulate these effects.

jg

Me, too: I hate the "machine class of minds" thing. The problem is that there is no really elegant way to do this. The best solution that I have come up with is an alternate versions of summon (or follower, depending on how long you need them to stay around) called "animate" which allows you to "summon" or create a creature by animating an object. I can't, after all, see the difference between "summoning" an undead creature like a ghost and animating a zombie except that one requires a corpse and one doesn't.

cheers, Mark

[James Gillen]

Me, too: I hate the "machine class of minds" thing. The problem is that there is no really elegant way to do this. The best solution that I have come up with is an alternate versions of summon (or follower, depending on how long you need them to stay around) called "animate" which allows you to "summon" or create a creature by animating an object. I can't, after all, see the difference between "summoning" an undead creature like a ghost and animating a zombie except that one requires a corpse and one doesn't.

cheers, Mark

In Aaron Allston's Champions, Mechanon has a similar power.

jg

[Hugh Neilson]

Zombies are Automatons. Automatons have programs. It'd be a poor Necromancer that didn't create a Zombie with the "Receive Verbal Commands From Creator" program. ;)

A powerful enough necromancer should be able to impose his will on zombies he didn't create himself, though. That needs mental powers that impact the automaton.

As far as I can work out, the whole class of minds thing came about as a result of the difficulty of creating characters who could "mind control" devices and automatons. Personally, I'd rather see class of minds go away and another attempt at rules for controlling devices.

Agreed on all counts.

[GamePhil]

I note from the above that "What is an Alien Mind" is very much a subjective matter. The Horta isn't, but Ferengi are? It seems like Ferengi are quite capable of interacting with other species, certainly far more so than Horta and far more similar than Odo's people. That seems to blow the theory that the "alien mind" is incapable, or at least much less capable, of interaction with human class minds.


It just means that Spock bought the Alien Class, and Troi didn't. Hardly surprising considering that Spock was allowed to be superhuman while they continued to clip Troi's powers throughout the series because it got in the way of the hack... er, storytelling.

Disclaimer: Not saying all of TNG was bad, but any episode that cripples a character in some way just so that someone can lie to her gets on my nerves.


If alien class minds are, indeed, so scarce, it begs the question why mental powers that affect them cost the same as mental powers that affect the much more common human class of minds.


There are all kinds of constructs that vary in usefulness from campagn to campaign, and they don't get a cost break, either. If one were introduced, then it would certainly apply to Mental Powers that you can only use one in ten games.


If we accept, for the moment, that Horta, Odo's people and Ferengi are all alien, it makes no sense that they can affect one another with their default mental powers. Horta would be quite alien to Ferengi and vice versa. So why does one adder allow the human to affect all of them?


In a game where the distinction was important and worth the points, it wouldn't.


I find myself back at the view that the alien should pay for the advantages of his alien mind - resistance to mental powers to the point of immunity - not obtain such an advantage for free.


I went down that route, and have had to draw the conclusion that it is better to have the Classes of Mind for certain things, but that it has to be discussed more. It's just overly complex trying to give every machine the set of Powers it would need, otherwise, for example. It does require that Alien Class be truly alien, moreso than Odo.

[Hugh Neilson]

I went down that route, and have had to draw the conclusion that it is better to have the Classes of Mind for certain things, but that it has to be discussed more. It's just overly complex trying to give every machine the set of Powers it would need, otherwise, for example. It does require that Alien Class be truly alien, moreso than Odo.

"it's too complex to buy their abilities" often means "It's too expensive to buy thir abilities". I dislike an ability which grants a significant advantage, but it's only for NPC's - not PC's no matter how well it may be justified.

Why is Our Hero's loyal winged steed Animal class of mind if it's a follower but Human class if it's another PC?

[GamePhil]

"it's too complex to buy their abilities" often means "It's too expensive to buy thir abilities".


No, I'm pretty sure I meant what I said, thanks very much. Otherwise I would have said too expensive.

I dislike an ability which grants a significant advantage, but it's only for NPC's - not PC's no matter how well it may be justified.

First of all, if it's giving a significant advantage, there's something wrong. There should either be people with the power to affect it, or it should be a thing that you wouldn't normally try to affect with mental powers anyway.

Second, aside from the difficulty of playing something well that has a different enough type of mind for me to allow it to be a separate Class, I see no reason why PCs should be disallowed from being one.


Why is Our Hero's loyal winged steed Animal class of mind if it's a follower but Human class if it's another PC?

I only allow Animal Class of Mind if the creature is non-sentient, a sentient winged steed counts as Human (or possibly both, which is worth a Disadvantage), which is in keeping with 5ER's clarification about robot PCs. I don't know of many people who want to play an animal. But if you want to stamp your feet and whiney to communicate, I'll allow it. I've had groups where it would be amusing.

[GamePhil]

As far as I can work out, the whole class of minds thing came about as a result of the difficulty of creating characters who could "mind control" devices and automatons. Personally, I'd rather see class of minds go away and another attempt at rules for controlling devices.


Whereas I would prefer them greatly expanded and clarified until Mind Control could, within certain limits, be used to control just about anything in existence, and would like those rules expanded to include Presence Attacks. Not that I want mental powers to be able to do anything, there are solid mechanical reasons to use Telekinesis for some kinds of control, for example. But there are times I'd like to be able to Mind Control a car or Presence Attack a lock (or, more likely, a zombie or a robot, currently covered by giving them a Disadvantage to allow automatons to be affected).

[AnotherSkip]

I went down that route, and have had to draw the conclusion that it is better to have the Classes of Mind for certain things, but that it has to be discussed more. It's just overly complex trying to give every machine the set of Powers it would need, otherwise, for example. It does require that Alien Class be truly alien, moreso than Odo.

Well I can simplify this really easy.
Alien Class of minds: Desolid, Affects mental Powers, 0 End(+1/2), Persistant(+1/2),(120 Active) affected by physical attacks & exists in real world (-2), Only to block mental powers because of Alien Class of Mind (-2), Always on (-1/2) RC=22
And that seems to me to be Exactly what "alien class of mind" is getting for "Free" which breaks the rule of "if it is worth something then it should cost points" (the inverse of "if it really isnt a disad then it is worth no points") and the second rule of "Don't build it cheaply just to be cheap".

:idjit: of teh paraphrasing.

Then any alien from an alien class of mind has to buy VERY expensive attack powers on it's mental power. And basically the mentalist has to buy "Affects Desolid" on their mental powers tying that right in to a semi useful construct anyways which is what it costs right now and you get 'double" bennies.

Part of the problem I have with some decisions is what I like to call the Shadowrun Decision. Which is basically the whole line of "It doesn't matter what the NPC pays, who cares how many points they have I can give them whatever they want to fit their concept... But I have to have strict accounting on the PLAYERS with every point tracked to the .01 because they are sneaky backstabbers who will rip apart my campaign faster then a rottweiler on Paris Hilton's bag dog."

[GamePhil]

Had to rearrange things a bit.

Well I can simplify this really easy.
Alien Class of minds: Desolid, Affects mental Powers, 0 End(+1/2), Persistant(+1/2),(120 Active) affected by physical attacks & exists in real world (-2), Only to block mental powers because of Alien Class of Mind (-2), Always on (-1/2) RC=22

Then any alien from an alien class of mind has to buy VERY expensive attack powers on it's mental power. And basically the mentalist has to buy "Affects Desolid" on their mental powers tying that right in to a semi useful construct anyways which is what it costs right now and you get 'double" bennies.


If that's your idea of simple, great. I'm happy with how things are now, thanks, but the rules are certainly in place if you want to do it that way, instead.


And that seems to me to be Exactly what "alien class of mind" is getting for "Free" which breaks the rule of "if it is worth something then it should cost points" (the inverse of "if it really isnt a disad then it is worth no points") and the second rule of "Don't build it cheaply just to be cheap".


And, sure, if it's really getting something for free, I'm all for exacting a cost. However, since it's just as unable to affect humans as humans are to affect it, and I exact further costs (Animals must be non-sentient, computers lack free will, aliens need to be really alien, not just people with odd protrubences on their heads), I don't see it as free.

I also make sure that in any game where I use or allow a class of mind that there is a reasonable possibility for that horribly expensive 10 points is spent for some mentalists to be able to affect them.
Ferengi have mental defense. The Kings of Edom are Alien.


Part of the problem I have with some decisions is what I like to call the Shadowrun Decision. Which is basically the whole line of "It doesn't matter what the NPC pays, who cares how many points they have I can give them whatever they want to fit their concept... But I have to have strict accounting on the PLAYERS with every point tracked to the .01 because they are sneaky backstabbers who will rip apart my campaign faster then a rottweiler on Paris Hilton's bag dog."

Why are you assuming that I limit these rules to NPC's? I'm perfectly happy to use them for PCs if they want, but I haven't had any problems thus far once I explain the drawbacks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Well I can simplify this really easy.
Alien Class of minds: Desolid, Affects mental Powers, 0 End(+1/2), Persistant(+1/2),(120 Active) affected by physical attacks & exists in real world (-2), Only to block mental powers because of Alien Class of Mind (-2), Always on (-1/2) RC=22
And that seems to me to be Exactly what "alien class of mind" is getting for "Free" which breaks the rule of "if it is worth something then it should cost points" (the inverse of "if it really isnt a disad then it is worth no points") and the second rule of "Don't build it cheaply just to be cheap".

Exactly - the alien gets abilities he hasn't paid for.

Then any alien from an alien class of mind has to buy VERY expensive attack powers on it's mental power. And basically the mentalist has to buy "Affects Desolid" on their mental powers tying that right in to a semi useful construct anyways which is what it costs right now and you get 'double" bennies.

So a +1/4 advantage on the Mentalist's power to affect alien minds, and a +2 advantage on the alien's mental attack powers.

And these costs imply we accept the handwaved "desolid as invulnerable" construct. If we don't, the alien buys significant mental defense, mental damage reduction, mental DCV, etc. which costs considerably more.

Part of the problem I have with some decisions is what I like to call the Shadowrun Decision. Which is basically the whole line of "It doesn't matter what the NPC pays, who cares how many points they have I can give them whatever they want to fit their concept... But I have to have strict accounting on the PLAYERS with every point tracked to the .01 because they are sneaky backstabbers who will rip apart my campaign faster then a rottweiler on Paris Hilton's bag dog."

Yeah, because a GM building unbalanced characters (by accident or by design) can't hurt the game, right? :thumbdown

[Hugh Neilson]

If that's your idea of simple, great. I'm happy with how things are now, thanks, but the rules are certainly in place if you want to do it that way, instead.

"Simple" is just handwaving the whole issue, which is basically what Classes of Mind does. "You can have it for free just because." By the same logic, why shouldn't a creature that's a sentient gaseous cloud be allowed to be invulnerable to physical attacks that don't pay for an added since he is of the Gaseous "class of body"? That would eliminate all the complexities of buying Desolidification that's Always On and putting advantages on its attack powers, which is just as big a pain as buying mental immunity for an alien or an animal.

It does highlight the need for a much less cumbersome construct for complete immunity to a special effect or class of powers, but that's a much broader issue than mental powers alone. And immunity to mental powers is a benefit, so the Hero system philosophy that more power/versatility/benefits means paying more points is breached by this orphan mechanic of classes of mind.

And, sure, if it's really getting something for free, I'm all for exacting a cost. However, since it's just as unable to affect humans as humans are to affect it, and I exact further costs (Animals must be non-sentient, computers lack free will, aliens need to be really alien, not just people with odd protrubences on their heads), I don't see it as free.

What other abilities can I buy simply by having the right disadvantages? Can my CloudCreature trade off his inability to exert strength for natural Desolid and Affects Desolid on all his attack powers? Even if the benefits and the drawbacks are balanced, this still allows the alien (or the CloudCreature) to avoid the usual "maximum disadvantages" restriction. I'm assuming you don't also allow the character disadvantage points for these restrictions.

Why are you assuming that I limit these rules to NPC's? I'm perfectly happy to use them for PCs if they want, but I haven't had any problems thus far once I explain the drawbacks.

Providing a listing of drawbacks that precludes PC's from using the ability is, in my view, no different from restricting it to NPC's. Funny thing...those bizarre aliens and nonsentient animals always behave exactly as desired for the GM's game.

The GM could simply give the creature enough points to achieve the desired effect. However, that means the GM actually looks at the point cost. For someone like you, who's played the game for a long time and is proficient with the rules, there likely are no significant balance issues. But for new players and GM's, the lack of point costing eliminates one of Hero's most prominent balancing tools, imperfect though it may be. A key requirement of 6e should be making the game accessible - DoJ is a business, and new sales are the business' life blood. 6e needs to be made accessible. Losing the Classes of Mind rule not only makes the game accessible for new players, but also more internally consistent by not giving away free mechanical advantages because of special effects and background.

[GamePhil]

Classes of Mind, to me, are not a cheap way of making creatures immune to Mental Powers. In addition to simply feeling that they give a benefit to the game system, they also don't, in fact, make such creatures immune. It's a 10 point Adder to overcome this. You can buy the Power to directly affect them. They aren't immune, any more than humans are immune to their Powers, and if one has to buy Powers to cover this circumstance, both must.

Now, personally, I'd argue that the Classes of Minds should be a Limitation on Mental Powers rather than an Adder, but that's a completely different issue. Transforms even work against everything, barring a Limitation, so I see no reason that the CoM can't work similarly, but that's an entirely different issue. The problem I have with doing it this way? I think that CoM's add to the game by broadening what the mechanic of Mental Powers can work against, without allowing to work against just everything. Thus, you can use Mental Powers to operate against computers, or sentient life forms, or with some broadening of the concept a car or a magic wand without adding new rules to the game. I consider that to be a good.

What I would do with the concept is change what the Classes are somewhat. Everything that thinks like a human, or even that could be recognized as sentient in some way, would probably fall under a Sentient Class Of Mind (or whatever, Chris had a good explanation for this part). Computers would be Machine, Animals would be Non-Sentient, a car would be an Object (and the Mental Powers would need a different Characteristic, possibly DEX), a magic wand would also be an Object (and the Power would possibly go against some function of Active Points, or if Foci are altered might even go against a Characteristic or its Defense). Those would not overlap, and you'd need the Adder.

On the other hand, what is now an Alien Class of Mind would most likely be a Limitation on the Power or a Power for the Alien, depending. I can't affect creatures with different brain structures: I take a Limitation. I can't be affected by mere mortal Powers because I am a King of Edom: I take a Power. And so on and like that.

[CTaylor]

Exactly - the alien gets abilities he hasn't paid for.

No more than everyone else gets abilities they haven't paid for when he tries to use his mental powers on them. It's reciprocal.

[AnotherSkip]

Free is Free.

Put Alien Class of minds on a Brick, Heck IronClad , What is he gonna do? Whip out his Mental Stunning attack?

In most games IC is an NPC so the "not on Pc's rule doesn't apply".


Are you really going to build a mentalist Alien that has mental powers that can affect other targets for just ten points on his mental attack?
Make him really imposible to deal with and throw some desolid there for 40 points (and why bother making is affects mental?)

Desolid is there for a reason use it.
AC is handwaving.

[ideasmith]

Desolid is there for a reason use it.
AC is handwaving.

Desolid provides no protection against mental attacks (5ER page 147). Try 75% mental Damage Reduction.

[SteveZilla]

By using different levels of Mental Damage Reduction (Mental rDamage Reduction?), one can simulate varying degrees of "alienness"... After all, I'd think that a Ferengi is not as alien as a Horta to us Humans.

[AnotherSkip]

Desolid provides no protection against mental attacks (5ER page 147). Try 75% mental Damage Reduction.

Wow, I must have been running off of a BBB version of Desolid or something.
however I have been charging a +20 adder for the advantage. Good Catch Ideasmith.

[AnotherSkip]

How about this
Alien Class of Minds SHOULD have a cost associated with it otherwise it is pretty simple to build a mental transform that could inflict this as either a cheep immunity to the evil mentalists or a way to render them totally unable to affect normals. Probably Cosmetic would realistically work, though play balance issues would suggest major. Personally I have a disagreement with Steve over transforms in that changing the description should be cosmetic, content should be minor and value should be Major, Ooh I'll post that where it belongs.

[CTaylor]

An alien mind would make that PC incapable of interacting with other PCs. Alien mind means alien not just extraterrestrial. It's for really weird, extremely non-human creatures, not just a guy with funny bumps on his forehead.

[AnotherSkip]

Still as long as it is for 0 points it is easier to do than add powers or disads, therefor from a transformation perective adding a 30 point disad "cannot intereact with pc's" is harder to do than give them an alien class of minds....

in addition there can be cases wherein MP just has barriers that are impossible to cross that Don't seem to be power level related. simply put they are yes/no which is what Class of Minds really does. If both characters have mental powers and they cannot read each other then either the campaign defenses are set waaaay wrong or there is class of minds issues going on.

[CTaylor]

I would define transforming someone into having an alien mind as a major transform (mental), wouldn't you? If that strikes you as cheap somehow...

[AnotherSkip]

2d6 BOECV Major Mental transform, a few hits from that in a 60 point MP and Menton can kiss his arse by by! it would take more hits to inflict disads repersenting + body needed to generate effect) to make his mental powers useless thus comparitively speaking it is important to charge points for Alien class of mind "advantage"

[James Gillen]

2d6 BOECV Major Mental transform, a few hits from that in a 60 point MP and Menton can kiss his arse by by!

You haven't SEEN Menton's Mental Defense, have you?

jg

[AnotherSkip]

You haven't SEEN Menton's Mental Defense, have you?

jg

That isn't the defense it is being targeted against, it still goes against POW D :D

[Hugh Neilson]

You haven't SEEN Menton's Mental Defense, have you?

Why target Menton? I can change my non-mentalist teammates who lack mental defense before we confront Menton. Now they are immune to his mental powers.

If my teammate is already affected by Menton, presumably I can also Transform them then - his mental powers should stop working once they are Alien class. Now, Menton could spend xp to affect Alien class, but then I can spend xp to make my Transform variable so I can change my target to any class of mind.

[SteveZilla]

Why target Menton? I can change my non-mentalist teammates who lack mental defense before we confront Menton. Now they are immune to his mental powers.

If my teammate is already affected by Menton, presumably I can also Transform them then - his mental powers should stop working once they are Alien class. Now, Menton could spend xp to affect Alien class, but then I can spend xp to make my Transform variable so I can change my target to any class of mind.

It's like playing Three Card Monty with your teammate's brains... :nonp:

Edit: ... And Menton is the sucker trying to guess where the "Human Class" card is.

[James Gillen]

Why target Menton? I can change my non-mentalist teammates who lack mental defense before we confront Menton. Now they are immune to his mental powers.

If my teammate is already affected by Menton, presumably I can also Transform them then - his mental powers should stop working once they are Alien class. Now, Menton could spend xp to affect Alien class, but then I can spend xp to make my Transform variable so I can change my target to any class of mind.

Thanks for giving me ANOTHER reason to hate that rule. :D

JG

[AnotherSkip]

You are welcome.

which brings us back to the point of People do consider it advantageous, but if it is free why then it can be abused much much more easily than if it costed ponts especially a LOT of points.

[Hugh Neilson]

You are welcome.

which brings us back to the point of People do consider it advantageous, but if it is free why then it can be abused much much more easily than if it costed points especially a LOT of points.

Exactly. Also exact is your avatar's portrayal of the difficulty in enabling some posters to comprehend this.

[Chris Goodwin]

Exactly. Also exact is your avatar's portrayal of the difficulty in enabling some posters to comprehend this.

I feel rather the same going the other way.

It's a tool for the toolkit. It's optional, in much the same sense that Multipowers and Elemental Controls are optional. Why do you want to take it away from everyone? I get the impression that, if I use it in my games it somehow causes you pain. If my impression is wrong, I would be happy to hear what makes it wrong.

[James Gillen]

Exactly. Also exact is your avatar's portrayal of the difficulty in enabling some posters to comprehend this.

:yes:

[Hugh Neilson]

I feel rather the same going the other way.

It's a tool for the toolkit. It's optional, in much the same sense that Multipowers and Elemental Controls are optional. Why do you want to take it away from everyone? I get the impression that, if I use it in my games it somehow causes you pain. If my impression is wrong, I would be happy to hear what makes it wrong.

It's optional only in the sense that all core rules are optional. I believe it is more appopriately removed from the default rules. It is also contrary to the Hero system, as I view it, in that it provides a benefit to some characters, at no cost, based solely on their background.

It doesn't hurt me if you play d20 or Runequest either. But I don't want Hero to emulate those game systems, or otherwise provide arbitrary benefits based on background. I'd much rather see a rule that sets a point cost for being of a non-standard class of mind, just like there is a point cost for being immune to attacks that do not Affect Desolid.

[AnotherSkip]

I feel rather the same going the other way.

It's a tool for the toolkit. It's optional, in much the same sense that Multipowers and Elemental Controls are optional. Why do you want to take it away from everyone? I get the impression that, if I use it in my games it somehow causes you pain. If my impression is wrong, I would be happy to hear what makes it wrong.

its more along the lines of
"See the abuses inherent in the system!!!!"

In addition, it conflicts with the major balancing factor of transforms which is a good way to get around a lot of limitations inherent in the system. If the character points did not matter THEN transform would not have this additional difficulty.
I like transforms and change environment and all the other really really flexible stuff in the system.

[Hugh Neilson]

In addition, it conflicts with the major balancing factor of transforms which is a good way to get around a lot of limitations inherent in the system. If the character points did not matter THEN transform would not have this additional difficulty.
I like transforms and change environment and all the other really really flexible stuff in the system.

That Transform is an abuse I hadn't previously considered, but simply Transforming a target to make them a different class of mind ("I will transform my teammates to androids making them immune to Menton's telepathic powers") seems like an easy system abuse.

[Chris Goodwin]

It's optional only in the sense that all core rules are optional. I believe it is more appopriately removed from the default rules. It is also contrary to the Hero system, as I view it, in that it provides a benefit to some characters, at no cost, based solely on their background.

Multipower and Elemental Control are as optional, to the extent that there are some campaigns and even genres for which they're not appropriate. Yet they're right there in the core rulebook, IMO where they belong.

I'm happy with them, implemented as is, with a note that they are optional, and maybe some notes on different ways to run with them.

I also disagree that they provide a net benefit for free, but we've already been over that, and I doubt we're going to convince each other.

[CTaylor]

simply Transforming a target to make them a different class of mind ("I will transform my teammates to androids making them immune to Menton's telepathic powers") seems like an easy system abuse.
Reply With Quote

Since you can't transform yourself they'd be incomprehensible to you. But hey, if you want to spend 150 points on an ability to protect them from mental powers, don't let me stop you.

[wulfe_hawke]

I will keep this post to my opinion only as it would end up several pages otherwise responding to everyone elses thoughts on the issue. I would increase the # of dice rolled to either 4d6 or 5d6. This does increase the range from 3 to 18 to 4 to 24/5 to 30 respectively. I would increase the to hit roll (not counting modifiers to either 14+OCV-DCV or 18+OCV-DCV to account for the difference in averages. for