Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

This is exactly what I mean... and it is not about legalese... it is about design intent. The designers use the word "avoid" and then explain what they mean by that. Dictionary definitions may be equally appropriate depending on circumstances... but for a game, choosing one definition and building consistently from that as the intended way is exactly what I'm looking for.

 

Say they chose "prevent from happening" (which is insanely flawed as a definition in so many ways). Does that mean that Missile Deflection means that I somehow stopped you from firing the Energy Blast in the first place? I don't think anyone would accept that in a game. It violates all kinds of social contract issues in that I've not just said "I stopped your attack from hitting me" but have effectively reversed game time, gone back and taken director stance over your character and said that what you said happened, never actually took place.

 

There are actually some systems that provide for this type of play... but is it legitimate interpretation for Hero? I'd think not.

 

Dictionary defintions are just the starting place... the point is to put in "inteded design/game play effecting" definitions for the system.

Looking at the context of the example given in the definition, common sense, random use of the English Language (is there any other kind?) and so and so on.. Prevent From Happening means Prevents The Consquences From Occuring.

 

Missile Deflection (to stick with this example):

Attacker Fires Attack

Defender Attempts to "Missile Deflect" (quotes indicate mechanical reference only, not intent of actual SFX) by absorbing into his Mighty Pecs O' Doom.

Success: Prevented (Avoided) Damage.

Failure: Sucks to be him.

 

By Preventing Damage you have also Avoided Damage. They are, in some ways, synonymous terms.

 

There's a reason legalese (something designed to leave as little room for doubt and misinterpretation as possible) is so convoluted and lengthy: Because everyone applies their own context, experiences, desires, meanings and interpretations to everything.

 

There is no such thing as Absolute Truth.

[Conduit]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Yup... exactly. The point being that there is a real disconnect between the idea that you can make any character any way you want to... and the fact that those character's need to interact in a consistent, non-exploitive way in actual game play. Hero tries to have it both ways... "You can do anything you want!" with all kinds of kludgy "but you really should do it this way..." details hidden in the fine print or assumed.

 

What I'm saying is that the SFX Mechanic dichotomy is a perfect place to stop messing about with the kludgy and be very EXPLICIT on what the expected/designed/intended game play is. Then you can have things like "Use desol to emulate invulnerabilty if you wish... just recognize that this violates design intent as well as a core Hero axiom that the system does not accept absolutes... so any inconsistencies in game play is not a problem with the system... it's you."

 

Ok... it can be nicer than that, but you know what I mean.

 

I think the issue is more that people are willing to accept mechanics that lead to sfx that don't make sense. You can build it any way you want, but it should still make sense. That is why Superman not noticing bullets built as missle deflection doesn't work because it doesn't make sense. Superman is just tough enough that he doesn't notice any force of that level, and that is defense and KB resistance.

 

If a chosen mechanic leads to wierd situations, it should be rejected by the GM.

 

In all of the campaigns that I play in, all of the players, experianced or not, sit down with the GM and make the character together. It prevents a lot of these issues.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

I think the issue is more that people are willing to accept mechanics that lead to sfx that don't make sense. You can build it any way you want, but it should still make sense. That is why Superman not noticing bullets built as missle deflection doesn't work because it doesn't make sense. Superman is just tough enough that he doesn't notice any force of that level, and that is defense and KB resistance.

 

If a chosen mechanic leads to wierd situations, it should be rejected by the GM.

 

In all of the campaigns that I play in, all of the players, experianced or not, sit down with the GM and make the character together. It prevents a lot of these issues.

 

"Makes sense" is a nice, succinct way to put it. What I'm looking for is the designers thoughts on what "made sense" when they were building the mechanics and the system and the game. This gives you a baseline for understanding and "making sense" of your own game.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Looking at the context of the example given in the definition, common sense, random use of the English Language (is there any other kind?) and so and so on.. Prevent From Happening means Prevents The Consquences From Occuring.

 

Missile Deflection (to stick with this example):

Attacker Fires Attack

Defender Attempts to "Missile Deflect" (quotes indicate mechanical reference only, not intent of actual SFX) by absorbing into his Mighty Pecs O' Doom.

Success: Prevented (Avoided) Damage.

Failure: Sucks to be him.

 

By Preventing Damage you have also Avoided Damage. They are, in some ways, synonymous terms.

 

There's a reason legalese (something designed to leave as little room for doubt and misinterpretation as possible) is so convoluted and lengthy: Because everyone applies their own context, experiences, desires, meanings and interpretations to everything.

 

There is no such thing as Absolute Truth.

 

Not looking for absolute truth... I'm looking for well thought out intent as described through game play effect/SFX. It doesn't have to be convoluted in the writing... but it does require it to be well thought out before being written down. Unlike the law... where convolution comes through massive precedence and creation of new laws to purposefully conflict/overturn old ones... that doesn't have to be in a game system. Just rewrite the original rule/mechanic to be better, more precise. Understanding the impact of your choice of words. New editions should allow for more precisely defined mechanics and rules... not more convoluted interpretations of them that are conflicting and inconsistent.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

To actually "sit down at the gaming table' date=' and roll some dice!" requires interpreting "What do these dice mean? What effect do they have? How does this fit my expectations?" etc. [/quote']

 

Note that I’m not one of the “big brains†of this outfit. I’m a journeyman with the rules, at best, and certainly no expert. Maybe that’s why I’m having such a difficult time with this concept. That is, the concept of needing some sort of specific answer to a non-specific question. I know and understand Neil’s intent, but I don’t understand how one can take the game this far.

 

I used to play Pretend. That’s a game, you know. Pretend. I imagined myself to be someone else, somewhere else, somewhen else. In my Pretend world, I was different. I was better there than I was here. I could do whatever I wanted. Every so often I was lucky enough to find someone (or someones) who wanted to play Pretend with me. We set rules like, “Okay, but you can’t be Superman or Captain America or someone like that. You have to make up your own guy.†Sometimes we got a little more detailed, but not by much.

 

The Hero System is a highly-detailed and categorized system of rules that all come from the game of Pretend. You don’t need those rules to play Pretend. You shouldn’t need rules to play Pretend. You should just...well, pretend, and let it go from there. If you do have rules, they should make sense of course. Yes, you bought Flash Defense as a pair of sunglasses, but no, sunglasses aren’t going to work against a swath of darkness. That wouldn’t make sense, and I don’t care how many points you spent. By the same token, it doesn’t make sense that someone could poke you in the eye while you're wearing sunglasses, either. You didn’t buy 1PD Armor, Eyes Only, but I’d probably give it to you, just because it made sense. And no, I don't really care too much what the book might say in that situation, because right then and there it made sense to me to do it that way.

 

Rules should help balance things, not knock ‘em out of whack. Rules are something to work with, not work for. Champions is a Game. Hero System is the rules by which you can play that game, not by which you have to play. If you don’t like the rule, change it or throw it out. Don’t seek enlightenment from the rules, seek it in spite of the rules.

 

Sorry if the above sounds overly simplistic in light of what’s trying to be accomplished, but I honestly believe that the questions posed by Neil and others actually drag them (and others) farther away from the Game.

 

You shouldn’t ever need rules to play Pretend, in my opinion, and if you do—if you really need rules to play Pretend—then perhaps you shouldn’t be looking at the rules or the game, but something inside.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Not looking for absolute truth... I'm looking for well thought out intent as described through game play effect/SFX. It doesn't have to be convoluted in the writing... but it does require it to be well thought out before being written down. Unlike the law... where convolution comes through massive precedence and creation of new laws to purposefully conflict/overturn old ones... that doesn't have to be in a game system. Just rewrite the original rule/mechanic to be better' date=' more precise. Understanding the impact of your choice of words. New editions should allow for more precisely defined mechanics and rules... not more convoluted interpretations of them that are conflicting and inconsistent.[/quote']

Why? To what final purpose?

 

Is the game playable? Is it fun?

 

Let's take the word "Hack." What is a good hack? I'm not talking about breaking into computer systems - I'm talking about reintending something from it's original purpose to a new purpose.

 

That's what we're doing all the time when we're being creative.

 

Overstating the Intent (as your seem want to have done) so it's perfectly and utterly clear what SFX a Mechanic is supposed to accomplish (vs what Dice your Roll and What Mechanically does and does not happen) will cause more problems than the deliberately vagueness as it stands.

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

So, maybe something like:

 

"When a clear mechanic exists to get the desired effect, and a build uses a second mechanic to emulate the first mechanic, take a hard look at why it was done that way instead of just using the first mechanic. Also consider the possible unintended consequences and interactions with other mechanics.

 

Example: DCV is the existing mechanic for 'hard to hit'. To become harder to hit, one normally buys up their DCV through higher DEX or Levels. That is the default, clear mechanic. However, one could also use the HERO rules to buy Desolidification defined as 'super dodge/hard to hit' with some Limitations not allowing the character to pass through solid objects or spaces the character could not normally fit through.

 

With this power active, the character is impossible to be hit, regardless of the attacker's OCV, bypassing the default mechanic. Possible unintended consequences and odd interactions include - character is also immune to Area Effect attacks, which normally could not be dodged, character can be affected normally by attacks with the "Affects Desolid" Advantage, even if the character could normally easily 'super dodge' all other attacks made by the same attacker.

 

Knowing this, another character buys an attack with the "Affects Desolid" Advantage, defined as 'super accurate' specifically so he can affect characters with a 'super dodge' Desolidification power. Somehow though, this 'super accurate' attack interacts normally with the target's DCV, not having any inherent bonus to OCV. It also allows him to affect characters whose Desolidification was bought with another effect, such as 'lowered density' or 'ghost form', neither of which would probably be affected based on a 'super accurate' attack.

 

And around and around we go.

 

This is not to say that you definitely should not construct a power a certain way. However, each change or bypassing of the default mechanics inherent in HERO will have a ripple effect that you should think about before creating a character with an unusual construct or approving that character for your game."

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Part of the problem comes from looking at powers (here defined as a Mechanic + A Special Effect) out of context.

 

Dave, in real life, is a martial artist. He knows how to clench his muscles and adjust his weight to take punches without actually parrying. He decides to play an “Invulnerable” brick, one who is normally tough and can take almost anything if he’s braced for it. This matches Dave’s real life experience fairly well.

 

The Brick is built as “Invulnerable” using the following powers:

 

24 PD / 24 ED Armor, Hardened. Special Effect: Impervious Flesh

 

Block. Special Effect: Braces Himself and takes the punch.

 

Martial Strike. Special Effect: Steel Hard Fists.

 

Martial Grab. Special Effect: Steel Hard Muscles.

 

Missile Deflection. Special Effect: Braces Himself and takes the hit.

 

In play, this construction makes sense to me. It’s also book legal, using power examples Dave could have found by flipping through canon characters and power write ups. If he blows his rolls, he still has his defenses to simulate Invulnerability, and the Stun and KB are explained by the character failing to properly brace himself. Dave’s real world martial arts experience tells him that this makes sense. As GM, I’d probably let Dave switch freely between Missile Deflection and Block in a phase, because they share a single SFX and are mechanically similar. I consider that a small enough benefit that I wouldn’t charge for it, though another GM might make it a 5 point adder to Missile Deflection or refuse to allow it entirely.

 

If Dave were to come up with the same concept but fail to purchase any “Invulnerability” powers other than Missile Deflection, I’d send back the character and ask him to try again.

 

Without context, many SFX debates are impossible to resolve.

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Example: DCV is the existing mechanic for 'hard to hit'. To become harder to hit, one normally buys up their DCV through higher DEX or Levels. That is the default, clear mechanic. However, one could also use the HERO rules to buy Desolidification defined as 'super dodge/hard to hit' with some Limitations not allowing the character to pass through solid objects or spaces the character could not normally fit through.

 

With this power active, the character is impossible to be hit, regardless of the attacker's OCV, bypassing the default mechanic. Possible unintended consequences and odd interactions include - character is also immune to Area Effect attacks, which normally could not be dodged, character can be affected normally by attacks with the "Affects Desolid" Advantage, even if the character could normally easily 'super dodge' all other attacks made by the same attacker.

 

This is, imo, in part a case of the Special Effect not being thought through clearly. If the SFX is Super Dodge, the common set of SFX that can hit the desolid character should include Area Attacks.

 

As to ADSO attacks being able to hit the character, that's a problem. I try to counter it by requiring the +1/4 version of ADSO, so that only one SFX is affecteg.

 

Knowing this, another character buys an attack with the "Affects Desolid" Advantage, defined as 'super accurate' specifically so he can affect characters with a 'super dodge' Desolidification power. Somehow though, this 'super accurate' attack interacts normally with the target's DCV, not having any inherent bonus to OCV. It also allows him to affect characters whose Desolidification was bought with another effect, such as 'lowered density' or 'ghost form', neither of which would probably be affected based on a 'super accurate' attack.

 

He should have purchased the power with 1 Hex Accurate, or the +1/4 version of ADSO. Conceptually, there's no reason his Super Accurate attack should hit a Ghost.

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Oddhat: I agree. The whole point was to provide an example of how something could be done that would have unintended consequences, and that you would need to consider those before finalizing the build. Some of the suggestions you make are possible ways to deal with those consequences.

 

Not looking for answers there, was intended as a relatively short example that could be used to reinforce a "think before you play" message.

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Oddhat: I agree. The whole point was to provide an example of how something could be done that would have unintended consequences, and that you would need to consider those before finalizing the build. Some of the suggestions you make are possible ways to deal with those consequences.

 

Not looking for answers there, was intended as a relatively short example that could be used to reinforce a "think before you play" message.

 

Sorry. I should step away from the keyboard.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Why? To what final purpose?

 

Is the game playable? Is it fun?

 

Let's take the word "Hack." What is a good hack? I'm not talking about breaking into computer systems - I'm talking about reintending something from it's original purpose to a new purpose.

 

That's what we're doing all the time when we're being creative.

 

Overstating the Intent (as your seem want to have done) so it's perfectly and utterly clear what SFX a Mechanic is supposed to accomplish (vs what Dice your Roll and What Mechanically does and does not happen) will cause more problems than the deliberately vagueness as it stands.

 

If Hero were still a "game" like Champions... where the overarching intent of all the mechanics were understood to be representing bronze age style supers... ok... then you have boundaries in which vague interpretations can stand.

 

But with 5th not being a game at all... but a convoluted kludge of mechanics and tools and such that are SUPPOSED to be generic... but aren't... when they open up all kinds of cross expectation issues because one person is building Missile Deflection from a Silver Age supers POV... and another is thinking in terms of heavy kite shields vs. arrows concept... well then you have all kinds of conflict that affects how the play is accepted, how the imaginary world is imagined. SFX need to be a part of the mechanics in as much as they describe the intended use of the mechanic.

 

I'd bet that you are one who says that it is important to "build to concept" in order to have a fun, productive game play. My question is... what is "in concept" when the rules say you can apply any SFX, handwaive basic mechanic features, and completely change a power from it's intended use just to make the claim of "in concept." It comes down to "do I like it or not?" as your post above said.

 

I'm saying that is not good enough if you claim to be a useful tool for generic RPG action/adventure building. I'm not playing pretend... I'm not trying to play "any game I imagine" I'm trying to play a Hero game... a game that has "can do" and "can't do's" built into it. Limitations are good. Boundaries are good. They force consistency and creativity... not whimsy and arbitrary ideas. A well designed game should indicate ways to build "in concept" but also indicate what is "out of concept" for the game entirely.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

I'm saying that is not good enough if you claim to be a useful tool for generic RPG action/adventure building. I'm not playing pretend... I'm not trying to play "any game I imagine" I'm trying to play a Hero game... a game that has "can do" and "can't do's" built into it. Limitations are good. Boundaries are good. They force consistency and creativity... not whimsy and arbitrary ideas. A well designed game should indicate ways to build "in concept" but also indicate what is "out of concept" for the game entirely.

I don't seperate the two.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

This is not to say that you definitely should not construct a power a certain way. However, each change or bypassing of the default mechanics inherent in HERO will have a ripple effect that you should think about before creating a character with an unusual construct or approving that character for your game."

 

BING BING BING! We have a winner!

 

This is exactly what I mean... and all I'm asking for is more explicit "default mechanics inherent in Hero" rather than having to guess. Bringing SFX into mechanic (at least as much as explaining how the power is intended to affect the game world) is therefor important.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Have you looked at GURPS4e... I was just reading that yesterday while babysitting at a friends ... it does pretty much just that: Brings SFX into Mechanics. I had to put it down, not my style at all.

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Have you looked at GURPS4e... I was just reading that yesterday while babysitting at a friends ... it does pretty much just that: Brings SFX into Mechanics. I had to put it down' date=' not my style at all.[/quote']

 

That has always been a part of GURPS. It has its advantages. GURPS also allows you to create new powers and vary special effects.

 

One of the (minor) downsides is that you can feel straightjacketed by the rules, but no system is perfect.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

I don't seperate the two.

 

 

Really... I can imagine a game of D&D... but it isn't Hero. I can imagine Polaris, or DitV or Burning Wheel... but those aren't Hero games. Maybe you don't want to play those games... fine... but to say that you can't separate "any game you imagine" from "Hero" ... I can't believe that is true.

 

I would likely say you can't imagine any genre emulation that you couldn't approximate with Hero... and that's fair... but it would still be a Hero version of a fantasy world... not a D&D version. The mechanics, the SFX, the design... all that matters. System matters. You can play Keep On The Borderlands in D&D as intended... or you can take the storyline, characters, map, etc., stat them out in Hero, create Hero PCs, etc. I guarantee you'll be playing a very different game than originally intended.

 

Heck... take SAS, M&M and Champions... stat out the "same" charcters in each, run the same scenario in each, vs. the same villains in each... you know that every one of those games will be different in feel and tone and likely drastically affect game play and the resultant story. Because the systems matter.

 

Hero though... internally... is trying to make the claim that system doesn't matter. That no matter how you interpret the mechanics, each game is equally good, equally viable, and equally the same game. It ties itself up in knots saying "Hero does X really well... but ignore that if you want to do Y... inconsistency won't matter" when it absolutely does. The game is the system and an incoherent system is an incoherent game. For a system that is so rational in it's concept, it seems to be in denial of the incoherence that has grown within it.

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

For a system that is so rational in it's concept' date=' it seems to be in denial of the incoherence that has grown within it.[/quote']

 

And de Nile ain't just a river in Egypt?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Really... I can imagine a game of D&D... but it isn't Hero. I can imagine Polaris, or DitV or Burning Wheel... but those aren't Hero games. Maybe you don't want to play those games... fine... but to say that you can't separate "any game you imagine" from "Hero" ... I can't believe that is true.

 

I would likely say you can't imagine any genre emulation that you couldn't approximate with Hero... and that's fair... but it would still be a Hero version of a fantasy world... not a D&D version. The mechanics, the SFX, the design... all that matters. System matters. You can play Keep On The Borderlands in D&D as intended... or you can take the storyline, characters, map, etc., stat them out in Hero, create Hero PCs, etc. I guarantee you'll be playing a very different game than originally intended.

 

Heck... take SAS, M&M and Champions... stat out the "same" charcters in each, run the same scenario in each, vs. the same villains in each... you know that every one of those games will be different in feel and tone and likely drastically affect game play and the resultant story. Because the systems matter.

 

Hero though... internally... is trying to make the claim that system doesn't matter. That no matter how you interpret the mechanics, each game is equally good, equally viable, and equally the same game. It ties itself up in knots saying "Hero does X really well... but ignore that if you want to do Y... inconsistency won't matter" when it absolutely does. The game is the system and an incoherent system is an incoherent game. For a system that is so rational in it's concept, it seems to be in denial of the incoherence that has grown within it.

DnD is a System that Emulates a Fantasy Genre. It's a crappy system IMO, but it's just the system - it's the mechanics. It ties the Mechanics to the SFX just like you are seemingly wanting to do. Which means I can't take the DnD System and play a Sci-Fi Game - I'm stuck in the DnD System Game Genre.

 

Hero seperates them out, at the cost of a bit of vagueness in the System, so the Genre and the Game are not part of the System but simply built up from the System.

 

The System is the foundation. The Genre is the building. The Game is what goes on inside the building. Hero makes them all seperate enough to let you build a myriad of buildings without having to rebuild the Foundation every time.

 

Most other Systems can't and don't do that. I go out and buy DnD D20 System and my Foundation and Building are irrevocably bolted together, it's always the same basic shape. I want another Building (Genre) I have to go get another System Book and have a new Foundation and Building to work up from.

 

There's a compromise that happens when you place that much flexability in the hands of the players - the System has to be deliberately vague or at least open to interpretations.

[Kristopher]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Personally, I dislike a lot of the strange builds, like using Desolidification to represent anything other than a character being, well, desolidified in some way. I dislike using it to build some kind of Invulnerability. Why?

 

Because the mechanics don't support it...they're built around Desol being Desol. But I guess other people have addressed that.

 

I'm blanking out on other examples at the moment, but I'm at work without my books...and the published characters and power occasionally have a build that makes me want to throw the book across the room.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

I think the idea and concept of reapplying the rules and powers beyond the explicit "intent" is part of the fun of the system.

 

There are those that do it for some "edge" in the game, perhaps driven by a need to "win" or simply be "better"

 

There are those that do it simply because what they have in mind can't be easily replicated with everything "as is" because the creators of the Game never will think of everything everyone will want

 

There are those that do it just to do it

 

There are those that do it because they are looking to achieve a given Mechanical outcome within a set of SFX that don't always work well together, but can in some occasions

 

nothing is applicable to all games, settings, groups, genres, ideas, concepts, systems, positions, et cetera...

 

That's WHY some of us keep coming back - it's a system of ever expanding ideas and applications of those ideas. I want to stop being able to reapply the rules I'll go back to DnD where every new concept requires a new rule.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

I think the idea and concept of reapplying the rules and powers beyond the explicit "intent" is part of the fun of the system.

 

There are those that do it for some "edge" in the game, perhaps driven by a need to "win" or simply be "better"

 

There are those that do it simply because what they have in mind can't be easily replicated with everything "as is" because the creators of the Game never will think of everything everyone will want

 

There are those that do it just to do it

 

There are those that do it because they are looking to achieve a given Mechanical outcome within a set of SFX that don't always work well together, but can in some occasions

 

nothing is applicable to all games, settings, groups, genres, ideas, concepts, systems, positions, et cetera...

 

That's WHY some of us keep coming back - it's a system of ever expanding ideas and applications of those ideas. I want to stop being able to reapply the rules I'll go back to DnD where every new concept requires a new rule.

 

And even though all of the above are things I dislike about Hero... nothing I've asked for would in ANYWAY stop you from doing all of the above. In fact, it would facilitate actually using all those builds in play.

 

The point is that Hero... for all it's vagueness... has a TON of implied SFX built in... and a ton of kludgy explanations and "rules" that come up over time trying to account for the SFX issues that hadn't been thought of when they first wrote down the power. Only 20 years of play testing will reveal the hidden inconsistencies. What happened with 5th is that going the "full toolkit" route they had to choose between "being vague" and "covering every eventuality" and they tried to do both... creating an inconsistent kludge without precision or clarity.

 

Adopting an overt design philosophy that was demonstrated through consistent application of SFX tied to mechanics... that actually helps to make all the changes and and variations part of a logical progression... not idle whimsey and a "see what happens... it's all good" attitude.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

Granted I've only been playing 10 years, but I don't see all these implied SFX built in...

 

I'm letting it go at that.

[Lucius]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

What I'm saying is that the SFX Mechanic dichotomy is a perfect place to stop messing about with the kludgy and be very EXPLICIT on what the expected/designed/intended game play is. Then you can have things like "Use desol to emulate invulnerabilty if you wish... just recognize that this violates design intent as well as a core Hero axiom that the system does not accept absolutes... so any inconsistencies in game play is not a problem with the system... it's you."

 

Ok... it can be nicer than that, but you know what I mean.

 

Nope, the problem here is with the system.

 

The problem is that Desolid IS a "special effect" (or rather a set of similar special effects) that implies two SEPERATE powers, one a movement power and one a defense power.

 

It's as if, instead of having Swinging and Entangle, they just had "Webbing" that gave you both, forcing you to, for example, buy Webbing and limit it if you want Swinging.

 

cos players - costumed players?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Insert palindromedary tagline here

[OddHat]

Re: Mechanics vs. SFX... Where is the line?

 

 

cos players - costumed players?

 

Costume Players. Mostly teens through late twenty-somethings who like to dress up as their favorite Anime and Manga characters. Lots of overlap with Comic Book, Sci Fi and LARP fandom.