EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

[Hawksmoor]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

IMO several types of characters are often overlooked by players because the points simply are not there, for example, Robots and Androids. Because of the popularity of Sci-Fi novels and of course Lt. Commander Data from ST:TNG most players see these characters as better, stronger, faster, smarter, and more durable than any human.

 

Fine in a Heroic game to simply place their stats at just above human maxima. But in a superheroic game we start to think 30+STR, 23-26 DEX, 28+CON etc. Add in the skill and perk sets from having a computer for a brain and the requisite life support it is hard to find the points to move much if anything beyond the core concept of Superandroid.

 

Yet, comics are filled with artificial lifeforms that have abilities far above their superspecial origins. The Vision, Red Tornado, the original Human Torch, Ultron, Nimrod, and Amazo. Each of these examples is, like Mechanon, a character over and above his more than flesh origin and has powersets equal to those possessed by classic human heroes. It is just that they are *more than human*.

 

It is these characters, and others like the Mentalist/Energy Projector (MP and EC a must for these to work properly), that frameworks exist. They reduce the cost of the character build allowing them to be built on artificially low base points that are repeated mentioned as the "early years of a Hero career."

 

Hawksmoor

[GestaltBennie]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

If you don't like ECs, ban them outright. Your GMing life will be much happier. Mine is. :-)

[Vondy]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

...imperial power and magesterial authority of the game master, and all that.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

IMO several types of characters are often overlooked by players because the points simply are not there, for example, Robots and Androids. Because of the popularity of Sci-Fi novels and of course Lt. Commander Data from ST:TNG most players see these characters as better, stronger, faster, smarter, and more durable than any human.

 

Fine in a Heroic game to simply place their stats at just above human maxima. But in a superheroic game we start to think 30+STR, 23-26 DEX, 28+CON etc. Add in the skill and perk sets from having a computer for a brain and the requisite life support it is hard to find the points to move much if anything beyond the core concept of Superandroid.

 

Yet, comics are filled with artificial lifeforms that have abilities far above their superspecial origins. The Vision, Red Tornado, the original Human Torch, Ultron, Nimrod, and Amazo. Each of these examples is, like Mechanon, a character over and above his more than flesh origin and has powersets equal to those possessed by classic human heroes. It is just that they are *more than human*.

 

It is these characters, and others like the Mentalist/Energy Projector (MP and EC a must for these to work properly), that frameworks exist. They reduce the cost of the character build allowing them to be built on artificially low base points that are repeated mentioned as the "early years of a Hero career."

 

Hawksmoor

 

 

A neat argument, and in a heroic game an android would be 'better' than 'mere humans' so it would need more points (and I'd rather see it built on more points than with an EC that disguises them).

 

In a superheroic game though, I can see no justification for giving a fill-up to the android: just build a standard brick, add 10 INT and describe it as a metallic humanoid: you have your android. There is no reason an android concept should be better than a 'standard' super brick.

 

As for mental powers, well I do agree that it is hard to build an effective mentalist with a wide range of powers on the same budget as a straightforward brick, but why should you be able to? The mentalist, in practice, will usually trounce the brick, unless they start the match standing next to each other and the brick has a DEX advantage. I happen to think the 'well rounded' mentalist is a very powerful concept and I am wary of simply handing one over to a player. Tell me the villain's plan. Now beat up your team mates for me. They make far better NPCs, and then I don't really care about point totals.

 

You see, I believe that there is some unfortunate hyperbole on the back of 5ER which has left a lot of fallout we have to deal with. It says:

 

"...the HERO system, provides you with unfettered flexibility, allowing you to exercise your own creativity without hinderance. Build any character...you can think of!"

 

Tosh. I can think of characters that can re-arrange the universe on a molecular level to make everything theirs. I can even build it (Transform? A really huge base?). Doesn't mean I should be allowed to, not if I want to play the character in a game with others.

 

The book itself gives us the impression that not only can we build anything, but that we should. I disagree.

 

The only real important decisions are 'does it work in the game I'm playing' and 'is everyone happy'. If these questions can fairly be answered 'Yes!' then, frankly I wouldn't care if one player was 100 points and another was 1000, rather than them both being 100, but with the latter having all his powers in .zip files!

[Sean Waters]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

If you don't like ECs' date=' ban them outright. Your GMing life will be much happier. Mine is. :-)[/quote']

 

...imperial power and magesterial authority of the game master' date=' and all that.[/quote']

 

Ah the sweet voice of reason!

 

Actaully I'm hoping someone can convince me that they are a good idea. I've changed my view on a number of HERO issues as a result of these little discussions. In practice they are rarely a problem, but then, in practice, characters that are going to be a problem don't get in to the match, so that's not a good test for whether ECs are a good thing or not.

[Fox1]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

The only real important decisions are 'does it work in the game I'm playing' and 'is everyone happy'. If these questions can fairly be answered 'Yes!' then' date=' frankly I wouldn't care if one player was 100 points and another was 1000, rather than them both being 100, but with the latter having all his powers in .zip files![/quote']

 

As someone who typically runs games with 600 point differences between some PCs, I must put forth my agreement with this. Anyone seeking to actually balance their game based upon the points alone is wasting their time, no matter how they handle ECs.

[tesuji]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

As for mental powers, well I do agree that it is hard to build an effective mentalist with a wide range of powers on the same budget as a straightforward brick, but why should you be able to? The mentalist, in practice, will usually trounce the brick, unless they start the match standing next to each other and the brick has a DEX advantage. I happen to think the 'well rounded' mentalist is a very powerful concept and I am wary of simply handing one over to a player.

 

 

Well, IMO a well rounded brikc is also a very powerful character yet he CAN be built without an EC framework at all.

 

This gets back to my point early.

 

Characters whose super-traits are mostly characteristic based... whose superpower is superstrength as opposed to super-claws... can be built efficiently without frameworks since their core superpower is actually several powers (str provides an offense, a defense in terms of stun/rec/PD, and a movement power) most of which are "free" or "figured" while an EB for the same price of offense is only one attack power.

 

The EC and Multipowers make building a blaster comparable with building a brick, in that for the same total cp you can end up with comparable effectiveness. heck, even with Ecs and Mps for the blasters, it was always easier for me to make my bricks the scientists or billionaire playboys 'cause they still tended to be cheaper for powers and have more pts to spare on side stuff than the blasters.

 

mentalists were tough for low pt games but i did not see them as more effective pound for pound than the bricks, but this will vary.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

Well, IMO a well rounded brikc is also a very powerful character yet he CAN be built without an EC framework at all.

 

This gets back to my point early.

 

Characters whose super-traits are mostly characteristic based... whose superpower is superstrength as opposed to super-claws... can be built efficiently without frameworks since their core superpower is actually several powers (str provides an offense, a defense in terms of stun/rec/PD, and a movement power) most of which are "free" or "figured" while an EB for the same price of offense is only one attack power.

 

The EC and Multipowers make building a blaster comparable with building a brick, in that for the same total cp you can end up with comparable effectiveness. heck, even with Ecs and Mps for the blasters, it was always easier for me to make my bricks the scientists or billionaire playboys 'cause they still tended to be cheaper for powers and have more pts to spare on side stuff than the blasters.

 

mentalists were tough for low pt games but i did not see them as more effective pound for pound than the bricks, but this will vary.

 

Fair comment, and i've seen it argued that STR is, in effect, an EC anyway, with all the goodies you get. It does seem that the EC is a way to 'balance' strength. Of course that is a problem if you build a brick with an EC: double the fun! That was a large part of my suggestions that ECs should always have an attack power slot: it makes it slightly less attractive to bricks who already have a major offensive power.

 

Low point game mentalists are pretty ineffective, but that is the nature of HERO. There is a 'break point'. Generally, to be really useful in combat, you need to be able to overcome EGO+10 or EGO+20. Assuming an 'average' EGO of 15 that means 25 to 35 points of effect, which means 8 to 10 dice have some chance of being effective in combat. Mind you that's only about 30 percent of the time, due to breakout rolls. 10 more points of effect and you are really having an impact as breakout rolls are at -2, so 35 to 45 points, or 10 to 13 dice. Oddly, EGO rarely increases substantially for most players and they will either have Mental Defence or not.

 

Generally above 10 dice VERY DANGEROUS, below 10 dice substantially less so, and that rule holds pretty true over quite a large range of power levels (varies from campaign to campaign, of course. If every NPC has mental defence in spades, it throws the figures off). Normal attack powers scale much more effectively than mental ones, which are all or nothing. At some point they almost always become 'all'...

[zornwil]

Re: EC AN (Ad Nauseam)

 

Ack! You're all being far too reasonable (I did read it all, Ehreval).

 

I KNOW there is no Nirvanic Perfection to be had, I'm just tinkering.

 

I probably wrote a bit too much: the thrust of it boils down to this:

 

NEW RULE: EVERY EC MUST HAVE AN ATTACK POWER FOR AT LEAST ONE SLOT.

 

Thoughts?

I still think it's too arbitrary. I prefer to see ECs as SFX-restricted and while I don't go down the drain-one-drain-all path because that really leads specifically on a de facto rewrite of Adjustment Power definitions (an Energy Blast Drain as such is not SFX-based, why then does this occur on this interaction with EC other than a possibly-false presumption as to the nature of the EB? from an SFX perspective, naturally it should drain all if it makes sense, but the nature of the Drain and the EC both drive this, not one arbitrarily over the other), I would still say that a better bar is to indicate that an EC must have the equivalent of an achilles' heel on the order of how NNDs work, that there must be a reasonably common countering method, whether to suppress the whole EC or simply (more commonly) counter its effects in battles, as, for example, let's say that Iceman's EC is affected by fire.