Jump to content

Doc Democracy

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    5,442
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Doc Democracy

  1. It is your game, so your decision, but I would say that those villains either have a high PRE by definition or no PRE or you modify the PRE attack by rPD. So a villain with a mega high rPD cares not about the bullets and so is not frightened by the damage and reduces the effect by the rPD score (which should make them effectively immune). It remains a game mechanic which not only encourages action from an opponent after an opposed roll but also potentially reduces DCV. I think it is a core mechanic worth considering, even if it needs tweaked to better describe the game effect. After all, your description is shooting to miss to drive an opponent into a place they will be easier to hit, if the opponent does not care about being shot, the actual manouevre should not affect them anyway. Doc
  2. I think that Lord Liaden's braided slings are a great idea, the ability to identify family, tribe and status from the sling someone carries is a bit of depth and colour to a fantasy race. I was looking to see if I could address the idea of hitting from behind. I presume that you are meaning a weapon that might strike from behind while facing your opponent rather than one that might be used for attacking from behind as well as attacking from the front? What if your slingstones were made of a specially sharp shell which contained one or two fire ants. The slingshot, if it hit, would not only do concussive damage but release these little fire ants to scuttle inside armour and/or clothing and begin to bite...or even an flammable liquid that ignites when exposed to air. It is all a bit unrealistic but we are talking fantasy here and I think it adds a little bit more to the fire aspect of your race. Doc
  3. Not hard coded into the rules and not actually in solid guidance in the rulebooks. Caps are something that evolved in us talking about our campaigns and how to get them within boundaries to make it easier for GMs to write villains they could be sure would not be one-shotted. Doc
  4. What is missing from the OP is the genre being played. I can understand a GM who wants a particular style of game and does not want guns to be freaky good (to emphasise other aspects of the game) to put things in place that enforce the goals of the game. If that is the reason behind GM rules then it is poor play to seek to undermine them. I am not suggesting this is the purpose of the OP, just that we need to be careful to have the information to hand before judging where unreasonability might be. It is easy to get conflict and grumpiness between players and GM early on in a game that can poison the whole game. The GM gets grumpy that players are looking to do things he had not wanted in his game while players are getting grumpy that the GM is forcing them to compromise their character vision (possibly because he had not completely communicated the scope of the game, possibly because the player had not completely listened/read/cared about the scope of the game). Which is why it is best when everyone engages positively as Gnome(BODY) said and the corollary of that, the GM approaching the player using "I am not sure your character quite fits the game, can we see how we can get what you want" rather than "this does not meet my rules, character rejected". Doc
  5. There is a tension here between narrative and sim. The narrative NEEDS heroes to get where they are going and does not really care (except in a few cases) how they get there, the journey is mostly not where the story is. The simulation is concerned about HOW the heroes get there (fast running, swimming, teleporting, flying etc). The question might often be, do you want your game to be the one where one of the heroes catches a taxi because that is going to be their fastest way to travel (because he was a batman rip-off that did not have enough spare points for the Bat-mobile)?? I do remember one perfect moment where lack of movement caused a great in-game point. It was Golden Age, Nissei was a second generation female martial artists, Radnor the Magnificent a norwegian stage magician. The player of Radnor was dissatisfied with his character - it was a lot of small effect VPPs and magical items and no real combat oomph. The player of Nissei was content to swap. It was a great moment as the second player immediately projected a stage magician persona on Radnor that really brought him to life. One of Radnor's complications was old-fashioned values (and this was already the Golden Age). It was almost the first call to arms for the group and they were travelling from a variety of places and Nissei and Radnor were in the same place. Radnor stepped on his magic carpet and took off, Nissei indicated she had no way to get there beyond running (at +2" running). Radnor simply said "Worry not young lady, I do not think this madness is appropriate for you to endanger yourself, I shall return for you when it is safe!" It was funny at the time, slightly frustrating for the martial artist's player, especially as it was his old character that he thought was useless that was leaving him in the lurch, it was the magician player perfectly playing the complication (it complicated the situation) and the party found another way for Nissei to get there. It does highlight that appropriate as the powersets were, they did not help the flow of the story and there will not (IMO) be enough Nissei/Radnor moments to justify the interruption to the narrative as everyone suddenly stops to figure out if everyone can get there. The question is, is multipower the answer or should we be looking at something else? Or is this something that every group needs to sort out every time they sit down to a game or begin a new campaign? Doc
  6. Yeah, even the other skill levels are probably simply either buying up the skill, or buying up the relevant characteristic (and limiting that if necessary)... Doc
  7. Reading this thread consolidates why I do not like them. They have never felt as if they are integrated with the rest of the system. I think that now OCV and DCV are purchasable elements, the need for skill levels (especially combat skill levels) is almost nil. They work and feel like an add-on to the system and a source of complexity that I do not think are needed. I had not appreciated it so much until I saw Sean's multipower but I now think that I will be eliminating them from my games and instead will be using limited CV. Doc
  8. You know. I have been playing this since 1981 and I can never remember having quite enough points to buy everything that I wanted for any character...maybe I am just greedy...
  9. Told ya! Once you really sit down and set out what you want, you begin to get a better idea of the mechanics that would deliver it. Personally I think that you might want to think about a layered corruption, a series of levels of corruption. Each layer delivers something - either a complication "Avoids bright lights" etc and/or provides benefits "+2 PER in low light". The transform runs using the dependency complication where the dependency is light. Without the light you begin to accumulate damage (in this case going towards the transform rather than actual BODY). You might define particular kinds of light as providing regeneration against the transform (firelight may be enough to ward off effects but only delivers 1 BODY/hour, whereas full sunlight provides 1 BODY/minute). I would also allow the light to get rid of corruption that has not yet delivered change but that changes might require specific rituals/magic etc to overturn, so once you have the "Avoid bright lights" you dont get rid of it by sunbathing, but only by bathing in a pool of radiance within the temple of Pholtus (or something like that). It does mean you have another stat to look after. You might give each player a bunch of tokens each (one for each BODY they have) and then, when it gets dark, begin taking them back. When someone is out of tokens, give them the tokens back with a bit of paper that indicates what effect they have to put on their character sheet. You might also want each player to have a psych complication of "never speak of the corruption of your body". Doc
  10. In play, I have ignored the realistic influences on Danger Sense and only applied things that might be more supra- (if not super-) natural. That means it occupies a space that perception etc does not. I tend not to allow it do more than give a vague sense of danger and the rough direction (with the corresponding information of which way it is safest to run). Doc
  11. Yup. I had forgotten stunning when I was typing this. I do look at the idea of stunning and I do like it being a factor. The CON for this particular straw man is 25. The point of this is that it gives me a baseline where I can talk to my players about what their combat effectiveness or lack of comes to. I make it clear that they are not likely to face a straw man in combat, their opponents will be a mixture of stuff around these values (as will the characters). Doc
  12. When I am working on a campaign (as I currently am) I give the kind of average, everyday level of things. I then have a straw man based on those numbers that I can compare characters to. So if the straw man has a 12D6 attack, CV8, DEF 20 (10 of that resistant), MCV 4, SPD 5, STUN 45 then I can work out how much damage, toe to toe the character might take and dish out. If the straw man fought the straw man I would see an average of 42 STUN and 12 BODY being fired at 20 DEF five times a round, that is 22 STUN through defences 62.5% of the time, five times a round or 13.75 STUN * 5 = 69 STUN a turn. These are short combats if folk just stand and whale at each other. It is a rough and ready reckoner but useful in that it shows what the baseline combat is and changes to the attacks/defences and SPD all contribute. I can also see where that leaves the combatants with regard to END (my straw men dont have such a consideration). I can quickly spot someone dishing out/taking far more than the campaign average and someone dishing out/taking far less than the campaign average and see whether that fits with the rest of the character. My preference is for attacks to be far superior to defences at baseline with characters able to ramp up defence and/or CV with corresponding compromises in offence or END use or something to begin to get a more dynamic combat. I have found that if defences dominate then it gets very boring. I want my characters to be worried about a big hit that takes them out and to work to deliver a big hit to take out an opponent. Obviously there will be the odd character that does have bigger defences (just to mix things up) and they tend to anchor combats for each side. Doc
  13. I think that one at a time is what people often say but not what lots of MPs demonstrate.... Like this. And I think this easy adjustment with variable slots are the unique element of the MP, but this is actually a limited form of VPP.
  14. Well, you can see that Call of Cthulhu has a sanity statistic and the characters accumulate random insanities as time goes on until the character is lost. With HERO, you can build a mechanic for almost anything you want to run but you need to be prepared to really sit down and think about what you mean by Corrupted by Dark Powers. What would the game effect be? Will there be intermediate effects or will a character simply accumulate some kind of corruption until it is lost to the player? Will the corruption be due to player action? Due to exposure? Due to exploiting powers best left alone? Can corruption, once acquired, be lost? If you can answer those questions, you will be MUCH closer to knowing how to do this in HERO. Doc
  15. I think the whole value of the multipower in the toolbox might be more aptly aimed at Duke. You are saying that you are building to concept rather than for value, so any multipower you use must be because it is hitting a concept value rather than a point value, no? So when do you reach for a multipower? Doc
  16. You know, when I started this I had two questions, one about efficiency and one about what role the MP plays in the toolbox. There has been a pretty thorough discussion of effectiveness and even a meta-discussion on the desirability of effectiveness. I think that it is safe to say that MPs provide value and that many characters will take them to broaden out their power base. What I have not seen is any real discussion of what a MP is actually for in terms of the toolbox. If you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Are we in possession of a hammer? Does every requirement to broaden a character mean we immediately reach for a MP? Is this broadening out the reason we would keep it, or is it only the cheapest tool to do that? Does it provide something that we would not be able to do otherwise??
  17. I have said it before but OMG Duke, when you start to type, you REALLY start to type! 🙂 Am gonna have to read this at least twice to draw out what needs drawing out!!!
  18. I am beginning to seriously consider having a single 10D6 blast power (and a second 8D6 blast power if I want primary and secondary attacks) and then a bunch of naked advantages that I can apply to one or the other blast power. The blast power might be in an MP along with flight and defence. I need to check if I might have a slew of naked advantages in the multipower...would that break my only one type of power per multipower idea? Probably, need to think harder about it. Doc
  19. Just build it with INT and EGO. Don’t think you need to do much more in game terms to be sentient...
  20. Personally, I liked the first edition Fantasy Hero encumbrance rules. They were pretty vicious and so there was a real combat penalty to wearing armour, you are good early on in the combat but you will get tired. I thought it made the lightly armoured combatant a decent, effective decision. You needed to stay out of range long enough to get that tank a bit tired, get him taking recoveries so you can begin slowly bleed him to death. As far as combat luck goes, there should be that idea that you cannot rely on luck forever, and sometimes it will let you down at the first time of asking. I quite like the idea of having luck dice for that armour. You roll the dice and every six provides you with 1DEF, possibly with a cap on how much you can get from any one roll You also reduce the pool when it saves you from damage. I think I would have things that restored the pool during fights, some karma style righting wrongs or something, or when an opponents combat luck saves them damage it restores your pool. But during an extended fight you are going to end up riding that luck. Unless you are playing a cinematic fantasy game, I would not use combat luck RAW. Doc
  21. I wasn’t asking about how it was used. A tool can be misapplied but that does not mean it is doing the job it was intended for. Now, I am not sure that anyone really sat down and thought about multipowers in the way they would if HERO was being designed from scratch. I can see the multipower designed to help replicate heroes like UltraBoy from Legion of Superheroes. Indeed, fixed slots used to be called ultra slots. That was not a gun with multiple special effects but a range of powers that might be used one at a time. That quickly goes out the window when it hits the enemy (the players). I am wondering if it should be limited such that it can only take one of any class of power, so one attack power, one body affecting power, one defence power etc. This retains the the ability to switch between diverse powers, one or two at a time. It begs the question of how you do the archer type, and whether that type is indeed too cheap for its utility. Shrike has already pointed out several ways to achieve a similar end that is not too much more expensive... Doc
  22. Another spin-off from the 6th edition is best thread. There seems to be a lot of talk about the value/effectiveness of multipowers. We got rid of elemental controls because the were simply a way to get free points. Shrike said that most people that want an MP actually want a VPP. Others are concerned that people throw things into an MP because it would be stupid not to. I guess that it throws up two questions. (1) As far as the toolkit goes, what is the multipower supposed to provide in game effect terms? (2) is it too cost effective? Doc
  23. This was never my favourite way of doing it. My version is where the possessor has duplication. The actual PC is one of the duplicates who has a transform power which is used to create the other duplicate. When there are two duplicates, they can be combined, to produce a point limited version of the possessed person. As such, possessing a more powerful person does not give full access to all their powers.
×
×
  • Create New...