Jump to content

Schmucks?


nexus

Recommended Posts

Guest WhammeWhamme

Re: Schmucks?

 

One of the problems with the HERO system, a problem that is glaringly obvious with large VPPs, is that it leads people to believe that anything that can be done with a certain number of points is possible for any character with access to that number of points.

 

It's no more unfairly "holding Tak back" to limit what he can do with his spells than it is to limit what a player can add on to his PC over time because of that PC's concept.

 

The mechanical system in HERO exists to emulate effects -- ideas first, mechanical application second. The last thing to happen when creating anything using the HERO system is the actual mechanical construction. The setting should exist, and the character should be developed, before a single point is spent. That includes Takofanes. The limitations of magic and the supernatural were already set, and Takofanes has to opperate within those limits the same way every other character does. The limits of Takofane's magic should have been established before his VPP was ever written up.

 

Please explain to me how to write up the abilities of a powerful spellcaster, and still satisfy the desire some people have to all the bounds of a character's capabilities firmly established mechanically.

 

-1/4: Cannot do anything brokenly abusive without taking lots of extra time and using spell components of equivalent magnitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 621
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest WhammeWhamme

Re: Schmucks?

 

I think most DMs consider that a -0 Disad' date=' mandatory for basically all VPPs.[/quote']

 

If they had put that on the official CU writeups, THEN we're talking. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

One of the problems with the HERO system, a problem that is glaringly obvious with large VPPs, is that it leads people to believe that anything that can be done with a certain number of points is possible for any character with access to that number of points.

 

It's no more unfairly "holding Tak back" to limit what he can do with his spells than it is to limit what a player can add on to his PC over time because of that PC's concept.

 

The mechanical system in HERO exists to emulate effects -- ideas first, mechanical application second. The last thing to happen when creating anything using the HERO system is the actual mechanical construction. The setting should exist, and the character should be developed, before a single point is spent. That includes Takofanes. The limitations of magic and the supernatural were already set, and Takofanes has to opperate within those limits the same way every other character does. The limits of Takofane's magic should have been established before his VPP was ever written up.

 

Please explain to me how to write up the abilities of a powerful spellcaster, and still satisfy the desire some people express to have all the bounds of a character's capabilities firmly established mechanically.

 

I don't disagree with anything you've just typed; however, at the core it still comes down to "It's a plot device". Tak's victories and defeats, along with those of other villains at that level, have nothing to do with mechanics; they are plot devices. An Allies book may be fun, but adding high powered heroes to the setting does nothing except trade one GM supplied plot device ("He is held back by the laws of magic and the will of cosmic entities") for a DoJ supplied plot device ("There are Mighty Heroes who could stand against him, as long as we stack the deck in their favor.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

I don't disagree with anything you've just typed; however, at the core it still comes down to "It's a plot device". Tak's victories and defeats, along with those of other villains at that level, have nothing to do with mechanics; they are plot devices. An Allies book may be fun, but adding high powered heroes to the setting does nothing except trade one GM supplied plot device ("He is held back by the laws of magic and the will of cosmic entities") for a DoJ supplied plot device ("There are Mighty Heroes who could stand against him, as long as we stack the deck in their favor.")

 

You're applying the term "plot device" too broadly. The "rules" of the setting for a story and/or an RPG aren't typically considered plot devices. A specific and out-of-character "rule" for the setting rule might be considered a plot device. A specific character or object might be considered a plot device.

 

But, for example, if magic is repeatedly shown to have certain limits and quirks, and the otherwise extremely powerful major antogonist of the sixth book of the series is defeated by those same limits and quirks, then that's not a plot device. If the story in the seventh book relied on the major antogonist being able to break all those limits and quirks, then that could be considered a plot device.

 

 

And I'm still confused as to why you think an AntiTak wouldn't cancel out Tak. Anything rediculous you can come up with for Tak's VPP can be instantly countered by something equally rediculous for AntiTak's VPP -- and vice versa, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

You're applying the term "plot device" too broadly. The "rules" of the setting for a story and/or an RPG aren't typically considered plot devices. A specific and out-of-character "rule" for the setting rule might be considered a plot device. A specific character or object might be considered a plot device.

 

But, for example, if magic is repeatedly shown to have certain limits and quirks, and the otherwise extremely powerful major antogonist of the sixth book of the series is defeated by those same limits and quirks, then that's not a plot device. If the story in the seventh book relied on the major antogonist being able to break all those limits and quirks, then that could be considered a plot device.

 

 

And I'm still confused as to why you think an AntiTak wouldn't cancel out Tak. Anything rediculous you can come up with for Tak's VPP can be instantly countered by something equally rediculous for AntiTak's VPP -- and vice versa, as well.

 

1) I do not agree that Magic has been shown to have limits and quirks in the CU that would prevent Tak from pulling world ending tricks and stunts. Just scaling up modestly (in point terms) from published spells can create nightmares. Try it yourself. The argument that "It can't be done because it hasn't been done" doesn't wash; the physics of CU magic have been left deliberately open in order to give GMs freedom in creating their worlds. Tak does not pull those tricks for reasons of "dramatic sense". More heroes are not going to make a bit of difference, except possiby trading one plot device for another.

 

2) "Bad Tak" only has to attack, and he's not attacking "Good Tak". He can attack anywhere he chooses, and mechanically hiding from all forms of detection is cheap and reliable. "Good Tak" has to know when the attack will take place, where, and what form it will be. Even if he manages to figure all of that out, he has to counter before the attack wipes out humanity, and still be in a position to block the next strike. Mechanically, he is in a very weak position. He's not going to make it without the GM's help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest WhammeWhamme

Re: Schmucks?

 

You're applying the term "plot device" too broadly. The "rules" of the setting for a story and/or an RPG aren't typically considered plot devices. A specific and out-of-character "rule" for the setting rule might be considered a plot device. A specific character or object might be considered a plot device.

 

But, for example, if magic is repeatedly shown to have certain limits and quirks, and the otherwise extremely powerful major antogonist of the sixth book of the series is defeated by those same limits and quirks, then that's not a plot device. If the story in the seventh book relied on the major antogonist being able to break all those limits and quirks, then that could be considered a plot device.

[/Quote]

 

Is there a particular series you're referring to there? (curious)

 

And I'm still confused as to why you think an AntiTak wouldn't cancel out Tak. Anything rediculous you can come up with for Tak's VPP can be instantly countered by something equally rediculous for AntiTak's VPP -- and vice versa, as well.

 

Because the whole of humanity could die in the phase it takes for the AntiTak to work out what Tak just did.

 

Sure, if he knew that's what he was going to do, he could stop it... but then Tak might do something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

 

1) I do not agree that Magic has been shown to have limits and quirks in the CU that would prevent Tak from pulling world ending tricks and stunts. Just scaling up modestly (in point terms) from published spells can create nightmares. Try it yourself. The argument that "It can't be done because it hasn't been done" doesn't wash; the physics of CU magic have been left deliberately open in order to give GMs freedom in creating their worlds. Tak does not pull those tricks for reasons of "dramatic sense". More heroes are not going to make a bit of difference, except possiby trading one plot device for another.

 

I wasn't speaking strictly of the CU, but rather against the broad usage of the term "plot device".

 

2) "Bad Tak" only has to attack, and he's not attacking "Good Tak". He can attack anywhere he chooses, and mechanically hiding from all forms of detection is cheap and reliable. "Good Tak" has to know when the attack will take place, where, and what form it will be. Even if he manages to figure all of that out, he has to counter before the attack wipes out humanity, and still be in a position to block the next strike. Mechanically, he is in a very weak position. He's not going to make it without the GM's help.

 

AntiTak just casts a "Sense Attempts to Hide from Me" spell, then.

 

Or better yet, casts a "Restore everything Tak just destroyed" spell after he realizes what's going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

Is there a particular series you're referring to there? (curious)

 

No, not really.

 

Because the whole of humanity could die in the phase it takes for the AntiTak to work out what Tak just did.

 

Sure, if he knew that's what he was going to do, he could stop it... but then Tak might do something else.

 

So AntiTak just casts the opposite Giant Mega Rediculous Spell and restores everything that Tak just destroyed. **yawn** Gee, maybe it's already happened dozens of times, and the nature of the spells keeps anyone from realizing what's going on, except those two silly liches. :stupid:

 

Goofy, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

I wasn't speaking strictly of the CU' date=' but rather against the broad usage of the term "plot device".[/quote']

 

In the specific context of this discussion (Tak and other huge VPP NPCs in the CU), my use of the term is correct.

 

 

AntiTak just casts a "Sense Attempts to Hide from Me" spell, then.

 

Or better yet, casts a "Restore everything Tak just destroyed" spell after he realizes what's going on.

 

The first doesn't work, as Bad Tak has cast Darkness to the Mystic Group, with Invisible Power Effects. Restore Everything Tak Just Destroyed may be possible, but then Tak just gets the fun of blowing it all up again.

 

Play both sides out. Good Tak won't manage to save humanity the CU. I do like the idea of him constantly yanking them back from deat though. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

So AntiTak just casts the opposite Giant Mega Rediculous Spell and restores everything that Tak just destroyed. **yawn** Gee, maybe it's already happened dozens of times, and the nature of the spells keeps anyone from realizing what's going on, except those two silly liches. :stupid:

 

Goofy, isn't it?

 

Yes. Good thing it's just a plot device. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Champsguy

Re: Schmucks?

 

]

The first doesn't work, as Bad Tak has cast Darkness to the Mystic Group, with Invisible Power Effects.

 

Except Good Tak uses a Dispel vs Darkness first. So what.

 

I don't care anymore. Bang your head against a rock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

I find it funny that Takofanes was more powerful in a primative world (significantly) than in a Supers world. Were the mages of that time equal to 200pt VPP at minimum.

 

Not all of them. As it stands, technically, TA mages have to buiy spells individually ( albeit at 1/3 cost ).

 

OTOH, there's plenty of room for "epic" heroes to oppose him: archmages, demigods, and heroic adventurers that are Just Plain That Damn Good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

Btw, Oddhat, the term for what you are doing to yourself is "reducto ad absurdum." Yes, technically, everything from the smallest bit of setting material to the rules mechanics, is GM/Author Fiat. Thats also a totally meaningless statement, for the exact same reason.

 

Now, when most reasonable people use the term "GMs Fiat," they are talking about situations when the *only* reason something happens or doesn't happen is because the GM says so, *absent any reasonably in game explanation*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

Btw, Oddhat, the term for what you are doing to yourself is "reducto ad absurdum." Yes, technically, everything from the smallest bit of setting material to the rules mechanics, is GM/Author Fiat. Thats also a totally meaningless statement, for the exact same reason.

 

Now, when most reasonable people use the term "GMs Fiat," they are talking about situations when the *only* reason something happens or doesn't happen is because the GM says so, *absent any reasonably in game explanation*.

 

Meta, the only reasonable explanation for why Tak has not destroyed the world is that the GM/Author doesn't want him too, because it wouldn't make for a good story. There is nothing built into the CU setting to stop it. Oddly enough, this is just what you started out complaining about. :D

 

The main difference in our POV is that I'm happy to see GMs pick their own plot devices to counter silly, overpowered villains in this setting, while you have a very specific plot device in mind and want to see it made official.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

Except Good Tak uses a Dispel vs Darkness first. So what.

 

I don't care anymore. Bang your head against a rock.

 

Such anger over a game! Well that's not healthy. ;)

 

Yes, huge VPP villains are absurd. Luckilly, as they are only plot devices, you can do as you like with them. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

In the specific context of this discussion (Tak and other huge VPP NPCs in the CU), my use of the term is correct.

 

Not really.

 

Part of the problem is that you're confusing "mechanically possible" with "possible in the setting and for the character in question". Just because you can make up an unbeatable power out of someone's VPP doesn't mean that the character in question can pull the effect off.

 

I love the HERO system, but the mechanics seem to overshadow everything else terribly sometimes.

 

Again, I ask, how would you construct Takofanes so as to retain his current flexibility, while mechanically restricting him sufficiently that no, ahem, "plot devices" are needed to keep him in check?

 

The first doesn't work, as Bad Tak has cast Darkness to the Mystic Group, with Invisible Power Effects. Restore Everything Tak Just Destroyed may be possible, but then Tak just gets the fun of blowing it all up again.

 

Play both sides out. Good Tak won't manage to save humanity the CU. I do like the idea of him constantly yanking them back from deat though. ;)

 

AntiTak could, of course, preclude all this by casting a giant, megascale "Destroy Liches" spell -- with Personal Immunity if he's a lich as well. Or by carting around a "Dispell Big Bad Death Spells" with "triggered" on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

Not really.

 

Part of the problem is that you're confusing "mechanically possible" with "possible in the setting and for the character in question". Just because you can make up an unbeatable power out of someone's VPP doesn't mean that the character in question can pull the effect off. ..

 

And whether or not he can pull it off is determined by internal story logic and the plot. Thus, "plot device". Part of the problem is that you are asserting that your personal interpretation of the character and setting is official, and confusing arguments over the mechanically possible with arguments over story telling choices. ;)

 

I love the HERO system, but the mechanics seem to overshadow everything else terribly sometimes..

 

The mechanics are the Hero System. Application and adjustment of those mechanics is setting dependant. The CU setting is independent of the Hero System: You could play in the CU using another mechanical system, should you choose to do so.

 

 

Again, I ask, how would you construct Takofanes so as to retain his current flexibility, while mechanically restricting him sufficiently that no, ahem, "plot devices" are needed to keep him in check?

 

I wouldn't. I'd use "common and dramatic sense" to determine what he could and could not do, according to the needs of the story. Plot devices, dig? ;)

 

AntiTak could, of course, preclude all this by casting a giant, megascale "Destroy Liches" spell -- with Personal Immunity if he's a lich as well. Or by carting around a "Dispell Big Bad Death Spells" with "triggered" on it.

 

Which might kill BadTak, if his defenses are down and he hasn't taken precautions, but does not stop him from destroying all human life on Earth first, unless GoodTak manages to cast it before BadTak takes his action; as the GM/Author, you are free to play it that way. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Schmucks?

 

You're still using too broad a definition for "plot device" -- so broad it basically includes everything the author puts in the story.

 

You're using an artificially narrow definition for plot device, especially as it applies in a role playing game.

 

Arguing semantics is not changing anyone's minds, but then not much in this thread had a chance of that anyway. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...