Jump to content

Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)


Thia Halmades

Recommended Posts

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Okay. Today Thia is going to build a Giant Robot. There are things I still don't get - for example, what's light? What's heavy? There's no guage to the mass system that tells me which qualifies as what. Battletech tells me that Assault is 90-100 Tons, and Light is 20-35. In a straight fight there's no contest - it's just a matter of when the Light Mech is going to get tagged and go down. But we'll put that aside for the moment.

 

I'd say 1000-2000 is medium, as when I was playing regularly that's where most of ours came in.

 

You could tie it to Size Class: 3 is light, 4 is medium, 5 is heavy.

 

16 PRE, 6 points

 

Note that for being Size Class 4, your mecha has a base PRE of 40.

 

I'm not going to check your numbers; book is at home and I'll assume they're right.

 

Reviewing the weapons/armor/movement construction rules I think I've finally got my brain around what is a simple, but wholly alien concept. That all of these figures are used to move steps in value - not to change the cost. In other words, if you want a 6d6 weapon with a total of +2 Limitations, you end up with a 6d61/2 weapon, that has limitations on it. You could also put on an AOE: Explosion Advantage (-2) which would adjust it back to 6d6. I think I understand this now. With that in mind.

 

You can do it either way, and the math works out the same. I usually preferred starting with my weapon damage and figuring the final mass, but whatever works for you.

 

If you have Burnout & Charges' date=' you get tagged with a -2 Advantage. LAME. What is I have enough Charges that it's an Advantage? Would the penalty still apply? My Autopistol would be more effective if this were the case. I would almost HR that, since to build the weapon as a projectile, you sort of have too. The rule says "Make it an energy weapon on your fusion drive, that's more logical." L-A-M-E. But I left it on there, because it's the rules.[/quote']

 

I think the rules also say that using Burnout with Charges means you only lose one Charge. I'd say that if the weapon itself burns out, then leave off that Advantage.

 

I could be wrong, though.

 

I was proud of the AAS. Under the construction for it' date=' I hit anything within two hexsides in front of me... then it continues in a straight line? That wasn't quite what I wanted, but meh.[/quote']

 

You bought it with Area Effect Cone, right? It should make a triangle of hexes. When I get home I'll look in my book and see if I can clarify that.

 

I left the mech at 990 because I wanted movement cheaper - it was the only way to afford the thing clocking at 20 hexes in a turn. Which I thought was absurdly fast; I hope I'm right, it's supposed to be. I have to put in the calculation for MPH/KPH in the Spreadsheet. Must do that. It seems that unless you get into the stupid large range (see notes in the build) you're going to hover around the 5d6 - 7d6 camp. Anything bigger gets into 1000 base MU, or more. The numbers get kind of crazy.

 

20 hexes per turn comes in at 96kph (these are 16 meter hexes). Roughly, 60 mph. That's combat movement, right?

 

Oh, wait. If you bought 20 hexes of movement, that's 20 hexes per Phase. SPD 4 makes it 80 hexes per Turn. 384kph or 240 miles per hour. That is ridiculously fast. (And I think that one of the sample mecha I posted came in at the same movement.)

 

Interesting side note: you COULD build 10 Small Lasers all at 64 MU and fire them in grossly oversized volleys at their targets. That'd be hilarious. Until you were still rolling dice ten minutes later. Then, not so much. Good old Battletech.

 

Also your gangfire penalties would kill you on all 10 of them. I'll have to go back in the book; I don't remember whether it's -2 cumulative penalty per weapon fired, so the first one is full OCV, the second one is -2, the third one is -4, etc., or -2 per weapon total after the first, so you'd be looking at a net -18 OCV (!) per attack if you fire all 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Ah, that may change things slightly, as I was unaware that the final damage was also the final MASS. I missed that. I'll make my adjustments - I built the knuckle blade with leftover points, so the math here IS wrong. Good to know.

 

3/4/5 is actually a big help, thanks Chris!

 

I don't believe in a Mecha game that you would limit the ability of a machine to reload in combat - that's retarded. So I actively ignored that rule and created:

 

House Rule 1: A weapon with charges, that can be reloaded, may reload as a standard action per HERO rules.

 

It just doesn't make sense otherwise. Battletech Mechs carry spare ammo all the time, they just don't pay a round to reload, it just "happens" so long as there's an ammo cache on board. Have an AAS makes sense, giving it 8 charges makes sense - letting it RELOAD makes sense. I'd almost put an additional custom lim on it, Reload: Extra Time (+1), you reload the first four shells on your turn, the next four shells on the following turn.

 

You could also go the easy route and make it clip-fed, but it lacks drama.

 

It SHOULD make a triangle of hexes, but their hex side ruling says it would only reach out two additional hex sides, which makes it almost a no-range weapon, which isn't what I wanted. I can see where being able to stretch across the battlefield is kind of silly, but if the thing has no range at all, that's annoying. I have to check the 5ER ruling on AOE: Cone and double check that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Ah, that may change things slightly, as I was unaware that the final damage was also the final MASS. I missed that. I'll make my adjustments - I built the knuckle blade with leftover points, so the math here IS wrong. Good to know.

 

No, your math was right. Because it's all just line adjustments on a chart, you could start with, say, a 4d6 weapon (base 2 mass units) and apply -3 in Advantages to make it 16 mass units. Or, you could start with a base 16 mass unit weapon, and apply -3 in Advantages to make it do 4d6 damage.

 

That's how the math works the same either way.

 

3/4/5 is actually a big help' date=' thanks Chris![/quote']

 

You're welcome! :)

 

Edit: Or you could go 2/3/4 if you wanted them to be closer to Battletech sized.

 

I don't believe in a Mecha game that you would limit the ability of a machine to reload in combat - that's retarded. So I actively ignored that rule and created:

 

House Rule 1: A weapon with charges, that can be reloaded, may reload as a standard action per HERO rules.

 

It just doesn't make sense otherwise. Battletech Mechs carry spare ammo all the time, they just don't pay a round to reload, it just "happens" so long as there's an ammo cache on board. Have an AAS makes sense, giving it 8 charges makes sense - letting it RELOAD makes sense. I'd almost put an additional custom lim on it, Reload: Extra Time (+1), you reload the first four shells on your turn, the next four shells on the following turn.

 

You could also go the easy route and make it clip-fed, but it lacks drama.

 

I noticed you'd done that and didn't have a quibble. I actually went with clips in my web page; there I assumed that clips would be handled the same way as in Hero, and each 2x clips is a -1 Advantage. Maybe an additional flat -1 if they reload automatically without taking an action.

 

It seems to me that in a game we played once we allowed reloads; I still have some of the notes from it, and I'll check and see how we did it.

 

It SHOULD make a triangle of hexes' date=' but their hex side ruling says it would only reach out two additional hex sides, which makes it almost a no-range weapon, which isn't what I wanted. I can see where being able to stretch across the battlefield is kind of silly, but if the thing has no range at all, that's annoying. I have to check the 5ER ruling on AOE: Cone and double check that.[/quote']

 

Hmmm, okay. Maybe a candidate for fixing in my web page. For a 2 line Advantage, you should get something more than that.

 

Oh -- I think I recall. I think it makes a cone 3 hexes on a side. I was misunderstanding you; is that what you were saying? One would think that an AOE Cone would be a little bigger, wouldn't one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Chris: For a -2 Advantage, that's precisely what you'd think. I don't have a problem if the "cone" is limited, but the ruling was (I think) divide your Dice in Damage by 3; remove ALL decimal points. That's the hex-sides of outwards movement the weapon deals.

 

So, for my 6d6 AP Shotgun, it only covers the first four hexes in front of me - that's a total of "2 hex sides" if I understood it correctly, and that's... WEAK. It's possible I built the shotgun wrong, but having seen what Shottys do in skeet, I know they have more range than that. Maybe as an on/off option, but... there's something wrong with those shotgun rules that needs fixed.

 

Okay, clarification: I can EITHER:

 

- Do it by Mass, spend the mass once, then adjust, or

- Do it as a Die Set and then determine mass when it's over? I'm confused.

- OR should I start with a mass the Mecha can afford (like a 250 MU 6d6) apply Adv/Lims to it until it's "right" and then take that final number and assign it the same mass value as its damage? That doesn't make sense to me (although I yield the reasoning) because then all your weapons feel very "me too." If I want a Mass 16 pistol with more disads than you can shake a stick at and have it deal 7d6 ONCE before it could burn-out, but still weigh 16 MU, that makes sense to me. I don't equate Advs/Lims with the mass of a thing.

 

That's why I started the shotgun off at 6d6 (250) and then modified it from there. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Chris: For a -2 Advantage, that's precisely what you'd think. I don't have a problem if the "cone" is limited, but the ruling was (I think) divide your Dice in Damage by 3; remove ALL decimal points. That's the hex-sides of outwards movement the weapon deals.

 

So, for my 6d6 AP Shotgun, it only covers the first four hexes in front of me - that's a total of "2 hex sides" if I understood it correctly, and that's... WEAK. It's possible I built the shotgun wrong, but having seen what Shottys do in skeet, I know they have more range than that. Maybe as an on/off option, but... there's something wrong with those shotgun rules that needs fixed.

 

Hmmm. Yes, I do recall that now. Yeah, that doesn't give you a very big cone.

 

Maybe to house rule it: one hex per die of damage, drop fractions.

 

 

Okay, clarification: I can EITHER:

 

- Do it by Mass, spend the mass once, then adjust, or

- Do it as a Die Set and then determine mass when it's over? I'm confused.

- OR should I start with a mass the Mecha can afford (like a 250 MU 6d6) apply Adv/Lims to it until it's "right" and then take that final number and assign it the same mass value as its damage? That doesn't make sense to me (although I yield the reasoning) because then all your weapons feel very "me too." If I want a Mass 16 pistol with more disads than you can shake a stick at and have it deal 7d6 ONCE before it could burn-out, but still weigh 16 MU, that makes sense to me. I don't equate Advs/Lims with the mass of a thing.

 

That's why I started the shotgun off at 6d6 (250) and then modified it from there. Thoughts?

 

Oh dear. I've confused you.

 

You can either keep the dice constant and apply the modifications to the mass (keeping in mind that Advantages increase the mass and Limitations decrease it) or keep the mass constant and apply the modifications to the dice (keeping in mind that Advantages decrease the damage and increase the mass).

 

Is that clearer or am I confusing you more?

 

This part here:

 

Reviewing the weapons/armor/movement construction rules I think I've finally got my brain around what is a simple' date=' but wholly alien concept. That all of these figures are used to move steps in value - not to change the cost. In other words, if you want a 6d6 weapon with a total of +2 Limitations, you end up with a 6d61/2 weapon, that has limitations on it. You could also put on an AOE: Explosion Advantage (-2) which would adjust it back to 6d6. I think I understand this now. With that in mind.[/quote']

 

Is right.

 

I think I've been playing with it so long that I've just kind of internalized all of the math.

 

I apologize for confusing you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Hrm, we're not communicating on this and it's a board posting/too many terms issue. I'll ask the question this way:

 

Yes or No: If I purchase a weapon at 250 Mass, and then adjust the damage up so it would be 500 Mass, do I have to use the new mass, or can I simply adjust the damage and keep the original Mass (250) despite the limitations which increased the damage?

 

My mind is saying "Yes, you can do that" because that's how you'd create large, bulky weapons with minimal damage but tremendous advantages, or lighter weapons which deal more damage because of their limitations.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Hrm, we're not communicating on this and it's a board posting/too many terms issue. I'll ask the question this way:

 

Yes or No: If I purchase a weapon at 250 Mass, and then adjust the damage up so it would be 500 Mass, do I have to use the new mass, or can I simply adjust the damage and keep the original Mass (250) despite the limitations which increased the damage?

 

My mind is saying "Yes, you can do that" because that's how you'd create large, bulky weapons with minimal damage but tremendous advantages, or lighter weapons which deal more damage because of their limitations.

 

If you're asking what I think you're asking, the answer is yes.

 

Example: You want to build a 6d6+1 weapon. You want to put a net total of -1 in Advantages on it. You end up with a weapon that does 6d6+1 damage and is 500 Mass Units. You can, at the time of purchase, instead say "I want it to be a 6d6 weapon instead, with a net -1 in Advantages, for 250 Mass Units."

 

Does that example match with what you're asking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Actually, yes and no. Your answer to my question is actually "No, it doesn't work that way." Said another way:

 

I begin with a 16 Mass weapon. When its done with all Adv/Lims, it's a net of +1 in Lims. It is now a 32 Mass weapon, regardless of what it was supposed to start off as. When you move on the chart, you aren't just moving damage, you are ALSO moving mass, always. The entire line moves, not just the damage mod.

 

My concept was to start with a mass - like a 16 Mass 5d6 Auto Pistol (don't have muh book forgive me if I'm off on this) and then stack a couple of advantages on it: Autofire x5 (-1) and Charges 60 (-1). Then some limitations: Carried (+1), Burnout 8- (+1), No Knockback (+1). In the original rules, there's also the BS modifier: Burnout & Charges: (-2) giving me a net of -1.

 

Which would make my weapon a 4 1/2d6 Mass 8 - NOT a 4 1/2d6 Mass 16, correct?

 

Follow up question: What're your thoughts on the whole Burnout & Charges thing? I'm glad I saw the rule so it didn't bite me later - do you consider it garbage? It's inconsistent with the spirit of the rules in general; it makes sense, especially if you're using a PPC or something to slap Burnout on it, and it makes sense (it's required) to have Charges on just about everything.

 

And, follow up, per your site we can pretty much include any armor or movement or power rule we can think of - but we use Construction Points instead of Character Points and keep the costs for "systems" the same, correct? How do you figure Mass Units on Hardware that isn't listed in the book, or did you just try to cover everything?

 

And: if I only want a Size 5 mech to carry around an 8d6 Gauss Rifle, can I slap a STR Minima Limitation on it? I don't think you covered that. it wouldn't have to be on every mech, but it would make sense that on a Size Class 5 with a Carried Weapon that STR Minima figured into it.

 

Nother question: We're in a full blown RPG campaign. You and I are both PCs and we're also both GMs (to keep things fair). During one of the fights, my Negotiator Disarms one of the enemy RIGs - forcing it to drop its superior, Autofire 10x no Burnout Autopistol. I pick that puppy up.

 

How do we resolve that? Dramatically, and say that despite I haven't paid the Mass for it, because it's carried I can pick it up and use it - and keep it? How would the rules reasonably resolve this? In another example, something similar happens - we steal a Size Class Five Rocket Launcher, which happens to be Carried - it's a two-handed weapon, so the robot can't engage in hand-to-hand while using it.

 

Hey, new limitation: Two Handed Weapon, Robot may not use HtH manuevers while wielding it (-1). Good? Bad? Add it to your site? Moving on.

 

So my Negotiator with its 125 MU Lifters is now lugging this Tiger Cannon away. Because it's an SC 5 weapon, it probably has STR Minima (+1) its 2-Handed (+1) has limited charges (+1) is carried (+1) and is Explosive (-2) for a total of +2, and it deals 9d6. Could I fire it in combat?

 

Food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Actually, yes and no. Your answer to my question is actually "No, it doesn't work that way." Said another way:

 

I begin with a 16 Mass weapon. When its done with all Adv/Lims, it's a net of +1 in Lims. It is now a 32 Mass weapon, regardless of what it was supposed to start off as. When you move on the chart, you aren't just moving damage, you are ALSO moving mass, always. The entire line moves, not just the damage mod.

 

My concept was to start with a mass - like a 16 Mass 5d6 Auto Pistol (don't have muh book forgive me if I'm off on this) and then stack a couple of advantages on it: Autofire x5 (-1) and Charges 60 (-1). Then some limitations: Carried (+1), Burnout 8- (+1), No Knockback (+1). In the original rules, there's also the BS modifier: Burnout & Charges: (-2) giving me a net of -1.

 

Which would make my weapon a 4 1/2d6 Mass 8 - NOT a 4 1/2d6 Mass 16, correct?

 

Ahhh, I see where the confusion lies. Just the (Edit:) mass [1] moves on the chart, not both. Your sample weapon would be 4 1/2d6 mass 16. Or 5d6 mass 32.

 

[1] Edit: One and only one of the items, either damage or mass, but not both moves. Additional example: vanilla Hero System. 10d6 Energy Blast, 50 Active Points. Apply a +1/2 Advantage and you have 10d6, Armor Piercing (+1/2), 75 Active Points. Similarly in RW: a 4d6 weapon is 2 mass units. A 4d6 weapon with net -1 in Advantages is 4 Mass Units. A 4d6 weapon with net -2 in Advantages is 8 Mass Units. And so on.

 

Follow up question: What're your thoughts on the whole Burnout & Charges thing? I'm glad I saw the rule so it didn't bite me later - do you consider it garbage? It's inconsistent with the spirit of the rules in general; it makes sense, especially if you're using a PPC or something to slap Burnout on it, and it makes sense (it's required) to have Charges on just about everything.

 

Yeah, that is kind of asinine. I'm not sure why it would be done that way.

 

And, follow up, per your site we can pretty much include any armor or movement or power rule we can think of - but we use Construction Points instead of Character Points and keep the costs for "systems" the same, correct? How do you figure Mass Units on Hardware that isn't listed in the book, or did you just try to cover everything?

 

I tried to cover everything, at least I intended to. If I left anything off, it's an oversight, or else it's already covered (for instance, I left off Killing Attacks because robot weapons are built as Killing Attacks by default). Some of the stuff (probably things like Extradimensional Movement and Invisibility) probably should be Hardware, but at the time I couldn't be arsed to come up with mass values for it. And if I recall the Powers section was the last one I did, and I got pretty tired of looking at it by the time I got to the end.

 

And: if I only want a Size 5 mech to carry around an 8d6 Gauss Rifle, can I slap a STR Minima Limitation on it? I don't think you covered that. it wouldn't have to be on every mech, but it would make sense that on a Size Class 5 with a Carried Weapon that STR Minima figured into it.

 

Hmmm. I'm not sure how STR Minima would interact with mecha weapons. But there's no reason not to try to figure it out.

 

Nother question: We're in a full blown RPG campaign. You and I are both PCs and we're also both GMs (to keep things fair). During one of the fights' date=' my [i']Negotiator[/i] Disarms one of the enemy RIGs - forcing it to drop its superior, Autofire 10x no Burnout Autopistol. I pick that puppy up.

 

How do we resolve that? Dramatically, and say that despite I haven't paid the Mass for it, because it's carried I can pick it up and use it - and keep it? How would the rules reasonably resolve this? In another example, something similar happens - we steal a Size Class Five Rocket Launcher, which happens to be Carried - it's a two-handed weapon, so the robot can't engage in hand-to-hand while using it.

 

Yes, you can pick it up and use it because it's Carried (that's part of the Carried Limitation, IIRC). If your mecha has the lift capacity to carry it, then you can use it. Keeping it is another story; I'd say use the standard Hero System guideline that if you haven't paid points for it, eventually you'll lose it -- it'll get disarmed, or broken, or you'll have long term compatibility issues with your mecha, or Top Men will want to take it apart and look at it, or....

 

Hey' date=' new limitation: Two Handed Weapon, Robot may not use HtH manuevers while wielding it (-1). Good? Bad? Add it to your site? Moving on.[/quote']

 

I'd call it good. I'd say it fits under Limited Power (or whatever RW calls it).

 

So my Negotiator with its 125 MU Lifters is now lugging this Tiger Cannon away. Because it's an SC 5 weapon, it probably has STR Minima (+1) its 2-Handed (+1) has limited charges (+1) is carried (+1) and is Explosive (-2) for a total of +2, and it deals 9d6. Could I fire it in combat?

 

Sure, if you had enough lift capacity to carry it, and barring however STR Minima works with mecha weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

To follow up my own posting: the idea of STR Minima gives me an idea. Call it Lifter Class. The idea is that Lifter Class matches lift capacity to mecha size, so that, say, lifters with 2000 mass units lift capacity would be considered Lifter Class 4. So any mecha with LC 4 lifters could use a weapon scaled for LC 4 mecha. So, make Lifter Class a +1 Limitation, say that if your lifters are off by one LC from the base you're at a -2 OCV, two LCs at -4, etc. This also lets you, for instance, let superheroes with enough STR fire mecha weapons at a penalty; even though they've got the STR, unless they've got Growth their hands aren't the right size.

 

This also raises the question of what happens if your lifters can lift more than your Chassis and Powerplant's capacity. I think it's stated in the book, but in that instance you can't move. You should still be able to use the weapon, though. (Think of a small bot with a huge mecha arm on the side, or a mega hulk with a bunch of 125mu lifters.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

AHA! Then my design IS valid. Well, I feel a bit better now.

 

Okay, so we're in a campaign. You and I are both RIG operators, and we've been on seven missions in the span of the last real-world year; the GM has awarded us 3 xp per session, and we played 26 games, giving us a net of 78 XP. We both want to upgrade our RIGs.

 

How would you do it? I was thinking CP = CP in a one for one match up; but you'll almost immediately get into weight class issues unless you improve the Mass of your vehicle (at the modern 1:5 ratio; 1 CP = 5 MU). Coming from a d20 background I'm always more than willing to let players get away with a shiny new weapon, etc., although I accept the HERO canon that all things must be paid for.

 

But we can both have 300 Construction Points to start with and have grossly different RIGs. If I find the shiny new Autopistol to replace my current Autopistol, would the GM say "no, you can't have it" or - if it's a case of Mass Differential, do the cool thing and charge the balance; my Autopistol is 64 MU; this one is 125 MU; at 1 cp: 5 MU ratio, that'd be 12 XP from my pocket to cover it.

 

Ah, but my Negotiator has a 1000 MU generator - not a 2000 (although I considered that briefly). So would the whole thing be null and void, despite having plenty of reasonable examples of this happening in the genre? (Hey, nice gun! KABOOM!)

 

Hrm, fatal flaw: during writing this post I reviewed my copy of RW, which specifies a chart showing the CP/MU ratio based on size; at the smallest its 1:1, then 2.5:1, and my current mass makes it 40:1. I don't think a PC can afford that; but that also isn't fair. The question is would it remain balanced if we flipped it? Or reduced it to a 1:1 for all purposes? More thinking is required.

 

This also raises the question of what happens if your lifters can lift more than your Chassis and Powerplant's capacity. I think it's stated in the book' date=' but in that instance you can't move. You should still be able to use the weapon, though. (Think of a small bot with a huge mecha arm on the side, or a mega hulk with a bunch of 125mu lifters.)[/quote']

 

This covers what I'm asking above I think - you'd be kind of stuck there, with your thumb up your (beep). Here's another question - you've already got a system in place I think - you said on your site that a .25 MU lifter is 20 STR, and we double from there. Well, medium class/size 4 mechs are going to usually have 125 MU/2000 Capacity lifters - which, per your adjustment, is a 65 STR.

 

So right now I'm looking at two things that strike me as "off" - the Size Class chart, which is woefully outdated, and the mechanics of the lifting system (although I see what you mean, I'll get to where I'm going here in a second).

 

I think your idea - that we can assign a Lifter Class limitation to a weapon, is ideal. But if you read the chart, anything with a mass of 250-1999 is Size Class 4. SAY WHAT?! That doesn't even begin to make sense; they went about it backwards; instead of doubling the Mass and equating it to hexes, they double the hex size groupings and slapped a Mass on it. I propose changing the sizing system so it better reflects a wider range of Mecha; this will be more in keeping with the current iteration of the rules, and allow us to have more flexibility among sized weapons. So I propose a size chart more like this:

 

0-64, Size Cat 1

65-125, Size Cat 2

126-250, Size Cat 3

251-500, Size Cat 4

501-1000, Size Cat 5

1001-2000, Size Cat 6

2001-4000, Size Cat 7

 

etc...

 

This gives a better range and feel for the sizes of mechs, and allows for more variance. I think your idea is great - but with a 250-1999 range, all of which are "size class 4" the limitation is going to come up often. However (however) you're the expert, and I'm coming in from the outside; you may have thought of this already and dismissed it.

 

I considered using the TUV chart, but its wholly incompatible with the system; the size chart for RW does need to be independent. Which is a shame, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

AHA! Then my design IS valid. Well, I feel a bit better now.

 

Okay, so we're in a campaign. You and I are both RIG operators, and we've been on seven missions in the span of the last real-world year; the GM has awarded us 3 xp per session, and we played 26 games, giving us a net of 78 XP. We both want to upgrade our RIGs.

 

How would you do it? I was thinking CP = CP in a one for one match up; but you'll almost immediately get into weight class issues unless you improve the Mass of your vehicle (at the modern 1:5 ratio; 1 CP = 5 MU). Coming from a d20 background I'm always more than willing to let players get away with a shiny new weapon, etc., although I accept the HERO canon that all things must be paid for.

 

But we can both have 300 Construction Points to start with and have grossly different RIGs. If I find the shiny new Autopistol to replace my current Autopistol, would the GM say "no, you can't have it" or - if it's a case of Mass Differential, do the cool thing and charge the balance; my Autopistol is 64 MU; this one is 125 MU; at 1 cp: 5 MU ratio, that'd be 12 XP from my pocket to cover it.

 

If you picked up the autopistol in combat, it would be treated as any focus you'd acquired in Hero. If you pay the points for it you can keep it; if not, at some point it'll disappear. It would be a case of paying the balance; if yours is 64 and the new one is 125, you need to pay enough points to buy at least 61 more MU (or otherwise switch your load around, dropping a few points from your Spares Pool or whatnot).

 

In a straight RW game, you'd put your points in at 1 XP per 1 Construction Point. In fact, I think that by vanilla Hero rules, you upgrade vehicles at a straight 1 per 1, not 1 for 5. (That would make sense; that's how you do it for Duplication and Multiform, IIRC.)

 

Once you've put Construction Points in, then you can use those to buy up your mass at whatever the rate is for your current size, up to whatever your Chassis and Power Plant can support. (Weirdness that I never noticed before: this could theoretically push you up a Size Class.)

 

Ah' date=' but my Negotiator has a 1000 MU generator - not a 2000 (although I considered that briefly). So would the whole thing be null and void, despite having plenty of reasonable examples of this happening in the genre? (Hey, nice gun! KABOOM!)[/quote']

 

If it's got the Chassis and Powerplant and Lifter capacity, it can carry it. If not, then you're SOL. ;) (IOW, you've got a mech massing in at 1800 MU. Chassis and Powerplant Capacity is at least 2000. If you've got at least 125 MU of lifter capacity, then yes, you can use a 125 MU Carried weapon if you find it, steal it, disarm it, etc. If you pay enough points to bring your total MU to 1925 or more, you can keep it.)

 

Ummm: if it's not clear from the rules, you have to have enough C&PP capacity for the mech's entire mass.

 

Hrm' date=' fatal flaw: during writing this post I reviewed my copy of RW, which specifies a chart showing the CP/MU ratio based on size; at the smallest its 1:1, then 2.5:1, and my current mass makes it 40:1. I don't think a PC can afford that; but that also isn't fair. The question is would it remain balanced if we flipped it? Or reduced it to a 1:1 for all purposes? More thinking is required.[/quote']

 

IMO, it works fine as is. But it's the other way around: smallest is 1 CP for 1 MU, going up to 1 CP for 2.5 MU, and on up to your current level at 1 CP for 40 MU. That makes it easy to afford new stuff.

 

This covers what I'm asking above I think - you'd be kind of stuck there' date=' with your thumb up your (beep). Here's another question - you've already got a system in place I think - you said on your site that a .25 MU lifter is 20 STR, and we double from there. Well, medium class/size 4 mechs are going to usually have 125 MU/2000 Capacity lifters - which, per your adjustment, is a 65 STR.[/quote']

 

Right. I just pulled the STR values from lifter capacity; if I did it right, lifters massing .25 MU can lift 4 MU, which is 400kg, ergo 20 STR. I meant the STR to match the lifter's capacity.

 

So right now I'm looking at two things that strike me as "off" - the Size Class chart, which is woefully outdated, and the mechanics of the lifting system (although I see what you mean, I'll get to where I'm going here in a second).

 

I think your idea - that we can assign a Lifter Class limitation to a weapon, is ideal. But if you read the chart, anything with a mass of 250-1999 is Size Class 4. SAY WHAT?! That doesn't even begin to make sense; they went about it backwards; instead of doubling the Mass and equating it to hexes, they double the hex size groupings and slapped a Mass on it.

 

Yeah, there's a good reason for that. Think of levels of Growth: one character with one level of Growth is going to be bigger, but not significantly so, than a character with none, but a character with three levels is going to be eight times mass and double the height, ergo, double the hex size. Making double mass equal +1 Size Class runs the Ground Scale all out of whack.

 

Trust me, Size Class and Ground Scale work well together as written.

 

(Looking closer, it does appear that the Size Class cutoffs should match the Chassis and Powerplant Capacities, so that if you add 1 MU to a 1999 MU mecha, it doesn't suddenly jump one Size Class.)

 

I propose changing the sizing system so it better reflects a wider range of Mecha; this will be more in keeping with the current iteration of the rules, and allow us to have more flexibility among sized weapons. So I propose a size chart more like this:

 

0-64, Size Cat 1

65-125, Size Cat 2

126-250, Size Cat 3

251-500, Size Cat 4

501-1000, Size Cat 5

1001-2000, Size Cat 6

2001-4000, Size Cat 7

 

etc...

 

This gives a better range and feel for the sizes of mechs, and allows for more variance. I think your idea is great - but with a 250-1999 range, all of which are "size class 4" the limitation is going to come up often. However (however) you're the expert, and I'm coming in from the outside; you may have thought of this already and dismissed it.

 

Yep. You could potentially be looking at two mechs that are, say, 8 and 11 meters in height, and putting them at two different ground scales. Which is not a problem if you want to say something like "Size 1 = Ground Scale 2, Size 2-3 = Ground Scale 3, Size 4-5 = Ground Scale 4, etc., but then you're completely losing the point of using Size Classes and Ground Scales.

 

I considered using the TUV chart' date=' but its wholly incompatible with the system; the size chart for RW does need to be independent. Which is a shame, really.[/quote']

 

Man, I won't tell you how many times I've tried to come up with something workable combining the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

I'll look at the chart again; the reason I edited the chart for RW is because of the massive gap - if my 990 MU Mech is a medium, than we're talking about a 249 MU mech being small (Size 3) and a 1990 MU mech... ALSO being medium, and therein lies the fatal flaw. What was your final opinion of the size chart I posted? It's closer to the modern model, but in no way is "the same." Part of the problem here is of course that the jumps in the chart in TUV are too significant for what we're doing.

 

Subpoint, and maybe this is part of the problem; in Battletech, they're all 30 foot tall giant robots. All of them, even light mechs. Light Mechs may have way less in options and weaponry, but they're still huge. Still huge, and still significantly weaker than their Assault Cousins. Now my understanding of Lifter Class was based on Size Class - perhaps we use the additional chart as an addendum?

 

I'm spitballing here. What I'm trying to figure out is how to model STR consistently for these things so we can build carried weapons with STR minima. Now what you're saying is simply once you pick up a weapon you don't have the Power Plant for, you're stuck. You can't move. Which isn't quite what I'm looking for. It's correct in the rules, but lacks drama and flair.

 

Since we're doing HERO, we should always keep on eye on the dramatic. So how would you model it dramatically? With a Piloting Roll? We know that firing it is a Gunnery roll, but (but!) exactly which system/mechanic is used to represent it could be picked up in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

I'll look at the chart again; the reason I edited the chart for RW is because of the massive gap - if my 990 MU Mech is a medium, than we're talking about a 249 MU mech being small (Size 3) and a 1990 MU mech... ALSO being medium, and therein lies the fatal flaw.

 

Sure, which also may have been a flaw in my 3 = small, 4 = medium, 5 = large classification. That was off the top of my head, and is one way to classify -- but in a campaign, they might be classified differently. Size Class is really only mechanical. For instance, the Terran League military might classify anything 1000 MU and below as light, 1001-2000 as medium, and anything 2001 and up as heavy.

 

What was your final opinion of the size chart I posted? It's closer to the modern model, but in no way is "the same." Part of the problem here is of course that the jumps in the chart in TUV are too significant for what we're doing.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but it's not a whole lot different from most of my attempts that I was never really satisfied with. Ummm... I'll quote Vincent "lumpley" Baker: for the love of all that is good, play it straight at least once before you start screwing with it.

 

Subpoint, and maybe this is part of the problem; in Battletech, they're all 30 foot tall giant robots. All of them, even light mechs. Light Mechs may have way less in options and weaponry, but they're still huge. Still huge, and still significantly weaker than their Assault Cousins. Now my understanding of Lifter Class was based on Size Class - perhaps we use the additional chart as an addendum?

 

Also in Battletech you can have viable 20 ton mechs. That's 200 Mass Units, which might make a viable escape pod in RW. It's entirely possible to run across carried weapons that are bigger.

 

I'm spitballing here. What I'm trying to figure out is how to model STR consistently for these things so we can build carried weapons with STR minima. Now what you're saying is simply once you pick up a weapon you don't have the Power Plant for, you're stuck. You can't move. Which isn't quite what I'm looking for. It's correct in the rules, but lacks drama and flair.

 

STR = lift capacity. I haven't given it any thought, but I imagine it's not too hard to work out. Thing is, what happens in any Hero System game when someone tries to lift something that's too big for them to lift? Either they don't lift it, or they push their STR.

 

That's if you really want to use STR Minima. I'd be inclined just to let mass vs. lift capacity be your guide; STR minima originally came out in part because it was difficult to determine just how much a sword, for instance, weighs in the Hero System. In RW, we already have mass/weight as a mechanical part of the system.

 

Also: most Carried weapons are going to be well within a mech's Lifter Capacity, and most mecha aren't coming so close to their C&PP capacity that a 125 MU Carried weapon will push them over the edge. They'll tend to be lighter for their damage because of other Limitations, usually Charges and Limited Arc.

 

Since we're doing HERO' date=' we should always keep on eye on the dramatic. So how would you model it dramatically? With a Piloting Roll? We know that firing it is a Gunnery roll, but (but!) exactly which system/mechanic is used to represent it could be picked up in the first place?[/quote']

 

Piloting, I'd say. It would be something like having your robot push its STR. A great pilot can get more out of his machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Major Tom

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

Just got my copy of Robot Warriors a couple of days ago. Do you guys think it would be worthwhile to take its rules and translate it to 5th edition HERO?

 

 

Someone's already done that; in fact, I think if you were to ask Chris Goodwin,

he could probably give you the web address where you could find the 9-page

document in question.

 

 

Major Tom :dyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

The site is money - you can see some of the adjustments I made and Chris OK'd in this thread; I'm still ticked about the size thing, but the point Chris made is two-fold: 1st, Play the game as written. 2nd, he tried it himself and couldn't do it. Everything in the size system feels very kludgey, so if you think of something clever, by all means, post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

I've only briefly skimmed Robot Warriors but the idea of it all is very intriguing. I was hoping a more straightforward correlation to 5th edition HERO to get me into it faster but alas, that seems impossible. I wish one of my friends would read up on it and be the GM instead of me. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Re: Giant Robot RPG (carry over post to SH from DC)

 

This represents a best-case and is foolhardy for planning purposes. As usual in strategy' date=' Iran's advantage rests in its ability to exploit seams; at the moment there is quite a transitional seam in Israeli politics and therefore policy. If there were plans on the drawing board for an Israeli strike, they are being shelved for sure. We are about to encounter another seam via the US election as well, wherein the entire Congress temporarily becomes entranced by domestic concerns and local politics.f Iran declares itself a nuclear power, the institutions, systems, policies and governments of the region and the world will not just snap into a new paradigm of a "cold war" with Iran, though in the longer term, that is certainly probable. Instead, from the moment Iran makes the announcement, or detonates a bomb, a new seam begins between the old policy regimes and the new. And there lies Iran's advantage. Much hay can be made while the capitals of the west are engaged in debate on a response.[/quote']

 

Necro "???"...

Spambot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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