Plot device or by the rules

[Snarf]

I used to stat out most stuff without figuring out point costs, because it wasn't worth the effort most of the time, but then I got Hero Designer. Now I tend to stat out most stuff and Hero Designer does the hard work of figuring out the point values and such.

[Dust Raven]

I know almost nothing substantive about Amber. Do you find that the system penalizes people who are not articulate? If not, how does it avoid doing so if the system is largely based on "descriptions" and "story-telling"? This isn't even intended as a back-handed criticism, I am truly curious. If it odes not, I wouldn't condemn it, though it would seem to me then that it is clearly for a specific subset of RPGers.

It doesn't penalize at all, at least not the way I run it or have seen it run. There's really no reason someone should be penalized because they can't describe what their character is doing. Intent, purpose and tactics are what get rewarded. It makes no difference to me whether a player says "I attempt to feint at his hands, then avoid his parry and strike his thights...when he winces I'll entangle is blade and disarm him" or "I to disarm him." At least as far as acomplishing actions go. I prefer something descriptive and colorful and exciting, but if a player can't manage it I don't worry about it.

[Dust Raven]

Minor pet peeve: overblown nuke stats. Going by the metarules behind damage progression, a 1 Megaton nuke should be a 15d6 RKA ( with some form of AoE, obviously ). They should *not* be treated as plot devices, except in low level ( 350 point ) campaigns.

In any campaign that has players expected to deal with nukes as if they were common weapons, I'd want stats. If all you want is something that destroys everything in a given area, stats don't matter (though what you call it might).

[Madstone]

Madstone:

You should try springing one of these traps on your PCs. After they finish whining, bitching, and moaning, show them the post where the others players responded maturely and see if they are shamed into compliance. Of course, you then have to follow said trap with some really cool drama in order to make it worthwhile.

Hmmm, shame my players into cooperation. Good idea. No, wait-it won't work.

My players are shameless.

[zornwil]

It doesn't penalize at all, at least not the way I run it or have seen it run. There's really no reason someone should be penalized because they can't describe what their character is doing. Intent, purpose and tactics are what get rewarded. It makes no difference to me whether a player says "I attempt to feint at his hands, then avoid his parry and strike his thights...when he winces I'll entangle is blade and disarm him" or "I to disarm him." At least as far as acomplishing actions go. I prefer something descriptive and colorful and exciting, but if a player can't manage it I don't worry about it.

Huh. From these posts, I'm not entirely sure what to make of it but I do think I get the gist. I'll have to check Amber out sometime and see exactly what you guys mean. I've certainly heard good things.

[Dust Raven]

Huh. From these posts, I'm not entirely sure what to make of it but I do think I get the gist. I'll have to check Amber out sometime and see exactly what you guys mean. I've certainly heard good things.

It's not for everybody, but I've yet to meet a HERO player that's tried it and didn't at least not hate it (most I know like or love Amber).

If you are lucky enough to find Amber Diceless pick it up. Even if you never play it, there is wonderful advice on role-playing in general that can apply to any system and genre. Also, if you can, check out Roger Zelazny's The Chronicles of Amber (a large compililation of all 10 books) which is the series the rpg is bassed on. The rpg seems to make more sense if you've read at least one of these books.

[lemming]

It's not for everybody, but I've yet to meet a HERO player that's tried it and didn't at least not hate it (most I know like or love Amber).

I looked at it, but the group that was playing Amber just annoyed the hell out of me.

[Metaphysician]

In any campaign that has players expected to deal with nukes as if they were common weapons, I'd want stats. If all you want is something that destroys everything in a given area, stats don't matter (though what you call it might).

Yeah, but the only way you can tell if nukes will simply destroy everything, including the characters, is if they have stats to measure against the characters.

[GamePhil]

I tend to write up everything by the rules, including plot devices, for one simple reason: I can never be sure that the write up won't be useful for something else later. I have on many occasions written up something that might seem like it should be hand waived only to have it give me ideas to use later.

On the other hand, if building the thing would only get in the way, I am certainly willing to cut to the action.

[Dust Raven]

Yeah, but the only way you can tell if nukes will simply destroy everything, including the characters, is if they have stats to measure against the characters.

Or, I can just say it does. I'm the GM.

[Metaphysician]

Or, I can just say it does. I'm the GM.

Yes, but then you enter the realm of "Yes, I know you had a 30 defense, 20 Body character survive a nuke in the past; your 35 defense, 50% damage reduction, 25 Body character still dies, because I'm the DM and I say so."

I *HATE* arbitrariness. The DM has no excuse for arbitrarily ignoring the rules when he has an unlimited point budget to play with.

IOW, if you want to absolutely, positively kill the players, then use some of those unlimited points to build an 35d6 RKA doomsday bomb, rather than exaggerate the effects of a real-world weapon.

[Hyper-Man]

Yes, but then you enter the realm of "Yes, I know you had a 30 defense, 20 Body character survive a nuke in the past; your 35 defense, 50% damage reduction, 25 Body character still dies, because I'm the DM and I say so."

I *HATE* arbitrariness. The DM has no excuse for arbitrarily ignoring the rules when he has an unlimited point budget to play with.

IOW, if you want to absolutely, positively kill the players, then use some of those unlimited points to build an 35d6 RKA doomsday bomb, rather than exaggerate the effects of a real-world weapon.

First, different nukes can have different yeilds.
Second, how many dice a GM is rolling should not be known to the players, the GM should be the only person with a god's eye view of things.

Either the players trust a GM to create an interesting situation for them to interact with in a fun way or they just don't trust the GM. If the later is the case maybe there are other issues that need to be addressed.

The Rules (of ANY RPG) are a FRAMEWORK that the GM chooses to use, not the other way around.

[ghost-angel]

First, different nukes can have different yeilds.
Second, how many dice a GM is rolling should not be known to the players, the GM should be the only person with a god's eye view of things.

Either the players trust a GM to create an interesting situation for them to interact with in a fun way or they just don't trust the GM. If the later is the case maybe there are other issues that need to be addressed.

The Rules (of ANY RPG) are a FRAMEWORK that the GM chooses to use, not the other way around.

FYI, and way off topic, the largest nuclear bomb reported was the soviet Tsar Bomba at 100MegaTons, the smallest was the US Davey Crockett at .1 Kilotons. Soviet Suitcase Bombs are reported to be in the .1-.2 Kiloton range but I haven't found any actual specifications on them.

Quite a range.

and I agree, the rule are a Framework for the GM who is in charge of telling a story. And if he can't figure out how to do something he needs to do with in "the rules" then he should be under no obligation to build it first as that will only result in slowing the game down.

[Dust Raven]

Yes, but then you enter the realm of "Yes, I know you had a 30 defense, 20 Body character survive a nuke in the past; your 35 defense, 50% damage reduction, 25 Body character still dies, because I'm the DM and I say so."

I *HATE* arbitrariness. The DM has no excuse for arbitrarily ignoring the rules when he has an unlimited point budget to play with.

IOW, if you want to absolutely, positively kill the players, then use some of those unlimited points to build an 35d6 RKA doomsday bomb, rather than exaggerate the effects of a real-world weapon.

And when I enter that realm, I get really descriptive about events and circumstances. If I drop a 'nuke' on the players and want them to live, I provide a circumstance for them to live. If the last time they survied, it's not because of their own defenses. It's because they found cover at the last second (like a bomb shelter) or were on very edge of the blast or managed to teleport out of the area just as it was going off. Survival in this case has absolutely nothing to do with their defenses.

[austenandrews]

The only time I've statted out The Bomb was in my short-run 50's space opera game, in which space rockets fired atomic torpedoes at each other. And that's only because they were a staple of combat. Otherwise it's entirely irrelevant exactly how much damage nukes do, because if I set one off in my game, those caught in the blast will either die instantly or take whatever lesser amount of damage I deem is dramatically suitable.

-AA