SableWyvern Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 First up, I'd like to thank everyone who's helped me out in the past with my earlier issues coming to grips with HERO. In that case, I was working on a fairly straightforward dragon character. Now, I'm building an intelligent sword (the PC) being wielded by a possessed NPC. As with the dragon, this is just my attempt at a build who's final implementation will actually be put together by the PC's player. Here's the sword part of the build (300 points + 50 disads). Primary Characteristics Strength: 0 Dexterity: 0 Constitution: 0 Body: 30 Intelligence: 18 Ego: 18 Presence: 23 Comeliness: 0 Cost: 23 Derived Characteristics PD: 10/r10 ED: 10r10 Speed: 1 Recovery: 0 Endurance: 0 Stun: 0 Cost: 30 Movement Running: 0 Swimming: 0 Leap: 0 Cost: -14 Perks Takes No Stun: 60 - This should also triple the cost of defences. However, due to the fact that the sword itself is unlikely to be the target of many attacks, I decided that the 60 point cost is already sufficient penalty for this ability (see also comments on Life Support, below). No Hit Locations: 10 Wielder (Follower): 30 (But see comments on Mind Control) Skills Scholar 5 x KS (13-) 3 x Fluent Languages (including starting language) 2 x Basic Languages Cost: 19 Powers Flash Defence (Sight): 10 Mental Defence 14 (20 total): 14 Telepathy 4d6 - 0 End (+1/2) - Constant (+1) - Communication Only (-1/4) Active Points 50, Real Cost 40 Detect Magic, Sense, Discriminatory: 13 Anti-Magic Suppress 5d6 - BOECV (+1) - Limited Group, One at a Time (Characteristics linked to magical skill rolls, +1/4) - Limited Range (20", -1/4) - Charges (8, -1/2) Active Points 56, Real Cost 37 Mind Control 3d6 - Cumulative (Up to 8x, +1 1/4) - Difficult to Dispel (+1/4) - Constant (+1) - 0 End (+1/2) - No Range (-1/4) - Gradual (1 week, -2) Active Points 60, Real Cost 18 The No Range lim limits the power to the sword's wielder and a range of a few feet. In conjunction with the Gradual Lim, this makes the power practically useless beyond making the basic concept actually viable. As such, I'm counting it's cost towards the Follower perk (meaning the 30CP follower only actually costs 12). Life Support (Full) I'm not going to charge for any of the Life Support options. Since the sword is almost entirely dependant on his wielder, who will not have Life Support, there is virtually no actual benefit to any Life Support option. I'm a Sword Multipower Multipower Reserve: 60 -Strength Min 18 (-1) - 2 Hands (-1/2) Real Cost: 24 2u HKA 2 1/2d6, AP 2u HKA 4d6 Combat Enhancement VPP 30 Useable on Others (+1/4) Very Limited Class (-1/4) Control Cost: 9 VPP provides access to Skills as Powers: Martial Manoeuvres, 3pt CSLs, Quickdraw, Defensive Manoeuvre, Weapon Familiarity etc... If it's not obvious, these are for powering up the sword's wielder. Total Cost 350 50pts Disads required I've ignored a few official rules to make it work, but I think I've done so for sensisble reasons, and without creating a character that is unfairly powerful. So, thoughts, feedback, criticism? I'd say there's a fair chance that this is the most complex and out-there PC I'll have to deal with in the campaign, and if I can make this workable, I think it bodes well for my future as a HERO GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KA. Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. SableWyvern, Nice to meet you. It sounds like you are planning to GM, and you are building things just to learn the rules. If that is the case, you have picked an interesting project. Before I get too deep into the details of the build, there are a couple of things I want to bring up. It looks like you are thinking of having a PC that is like Stormbringer (not as powerful, of course), so that the sword would have its' own agenda. It is an interesting idea, but as a GM I would hesitate to allow it, as built, in my game. Why? Because, as written, the sword could easily choose to get its' current host killed in combat. It could even choose which opponent got to kill the host, by having the host engage them in combat. Then the sword could attach itself to a much more powerful warrior. It would not take much Mind Control to get a warrior to want to use a powerful magic sword, which means that it wouldn't be long before the sword went from being wielded by the 30 point follower to being wielded by the 150 point "Most Powerful Swordsman in the land". Which means that the Sword/Follower combination would now be way above the campaign limits, which would probably annoy the other players, and possibly unbalance your game. You could build the same concept by having a fairly normal character with most abilities bought "Only in Hero ID", and the rest bought "OIF" through the sword. You could include some Psych Lims like Berserk, that would be explained by the sword going into a 'killing frenzy', etc. You could even have something like "Accidental Change" where the character with the sword might revert to their normal form under some circumstances (They temporarily broke free of the sword's influence.) This does not mean that your way is wrong, but just that you need to remember that there is always more than one way, and that some ways are more trouble prone than others. KA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boulder Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. If you really want the sword to work get rid of the telephathy and take mind link..... Then slowly start to take over the chacter because his mind is totally accessed threw the mind link. You can latter get someone who has mental powers or mental awareness notice the evil taint of the sword effecting the user. Your best bet is to give this sword to A NPC who the party has to rescue because he has gone mad, than just wait droolking when a new person picks it up and the "sword" tries to talk it's way into getting a better host. "Thank the Gods, you saved me from that maniac!! He killed my poor owner and I was forced in the hands of that monster, oh woe is me! and my poor master! So are you my new owner? Oh, I think the big guy over there can use me much more effective!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Thanks for your thoughts, KA. It sounds like you are planning to GM, and you are building things just to learn the rules. Pretty much. At the moment, I'm focusing on building the concepts the players are looking to build, both for my general benefit and so I can help them with the process (we're all completely new to HERO). I have considered building the sword as ancillary to the wielder, rather than "accurately" modelling the sword as the PC. Certainly, I will leave that as an option for the player in question, if he would rather go down that route. For some reason though, modelling the PC as the sword feels ... more right ... to me, despite the rule bending it has required so far. As to issues of the sword "powering-up" in play by finding more skilled wielders, that's something I plan to avoid by working through the concept with the player and setting some RPing limits on his decisions. The group as a whole, and thus the sword PC as well, will be essentially "good" guys, so possessing people willy-nilly won't be an option. My favourite limiting idea so far is that the sword is actually some kind of justice device -- from time to time throughout the ages, particularly vile criminals are sentenced to possession by the sword. Dedication to this cause would preclude seeking wielders of opportunity. At the least, your comments have made me realise I need to discuss the matter quite specifically with the player in question and make sure we're both on the same page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. If you really want the sword to work get rid of the telephathy and take mind link..... Then slowly start to take over the chacter because his mind is totally accessed threw the mind link. No idea what mind link does, I'll look into that as an option. The sword does need to be able to communicate generally, though, so if mind link doesn't do that, I'll need to keep telepathy. Your best bet is to give this sword to A NPC who the party has to rescue because he has gone mad, than just wait droolking when a new person picks it up and the "sword" tries to talk it's way into getting a better host. "Thank the Gods, you saved me from that maniac!! He killed my poor owner and I was forced in the hands of that monster, oh woe is me! and my poor master! So are you my new owner? Oh, I think the big guy over there can use me much more effective!! I may not have been clear, but the sword is going to actually be a PC, not a plot device or a piece of equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchman Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Personally, I would buy a Mind Link rather than Telepathy, and if you want to go for the creepy One Ring type of obsessive wielders (or whatever) I'd use a continuous Major Transform: Wielder into Wielder with Psych Lim (Slavishly Loyal to Sword) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boulder Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Well, thats no fun!! I would suggest you stay with simple things for a new game, it doesn't take much for a party to turn a simple item into a GM nightmare. Also relize as the GM you don't have to have...everything written up if you want the player to have a magic sword that talks just let him know what the sword can do as a ...focus, and keep the strange quirks to yourself, makes it a little better. But what do I know? I have rock in the head! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Ok, I see that Mind Link is definitely a better option than Telepathy. That Transform is an interesting option as well, and might make for a much simpler alternative to Mind Control. I'll look into that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Well, thats no fun!! I would suggest you stay with simple things for a new game, it doesn't take much for a party to turn a simple item into a GM nightmare. Heh. Actually, the reason I chose HERO for this specific campaign is because it will let me model a whole host of really, really bizarre options and combinations. Fortunately, I have no fear of complexity, and enjoy tinkering with systems. The actual game is also more than 12 months away (I've got a Conan campaign to finish up and then an a|state campaign before I get to HERO). So, I've got a lot of time to come to terms with everything I'm going to need to get a handle on. But what do I know? I have rock in the head! Please keep your rock-headed ideas coming, Sir Boulder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Democracy Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. If I were the GM looking at this as a submission I would have a few quibbles with it. Stun: 0 Perks Takes No Stun: 60 - This should also triple the cost of defences. However, due to the fact that the sword itself is unlikely to be the target of many attacks, I decided that the 60 point cost is already sufficient penalty for this ability (see also comments on Life Support, below). First the character has no STUN. In the system, 0 STUN = unconcious. The takes no stun power was designed for automatons who have no conciousness to lose. You have, for 60 points, provided the character with the ability to ignore any and all attacks that would cause unconciousness and your handwave would allow them to ensure that they could easily become immune to most, if not all, killing attacks. They become invulnerable (yup, Lucius - I said it, invulnerable). I would require the character to have STUN and would limit the takes no stun power to physical attacks - then I might allow the defences handwave but probably not. Wielder (Follower): 30 (But see comments on Mind Control) Mind Control 3d6 - Cumulative (Up to 8x, +1 1/4) - Difficult to Dispel (+1/4) - Constant (+1) - 0 End (+1/2) - No Range (-1/4) - Gradual (1 week, -2) Active Points 60, Real Cost 18 The No Range lim limits the power to the sword's wielder and a range of a few feet. In conjunction with the Gradual Lim, this makes the power practically useless beyond making the basic concept actually viable. As such, I'm counting it's cost towards the Follower perk (meaning the 30CP follower only actually costs 12). This would flash all kinds of warning bells in my mind as well. Because you are a sword and get carried around you have sold back all of your movement abilities and bought a follower. That sounds reasonable. But you also use the purchase of mind control to justify reducing the cost of that follower by 60%. A creative player will get their 18 points of value from that Mind Control without it providing a discount on the follower... Life Support (Full) I'm not going to charge for any of the Life Support options. Since the sword is almost entirely dependant on his wielder, who will not have Life Support, there is virtually no actual benefit to any Life Support option. So there is no benefit from being able to survive without food, in hostile environments or when exposed to acids and toxins? Dexterity: 0 I'm a Sword Multipower Multipower Reserve: 60 -Strength Min 18 (-1) - 2 Hands (-1/2) Real Cost: 24 2u HKA 2 1/2d6, AP 2u HKA 4d6 Note the CV of 0. The killing attacks that you have bought are not usable by others and so it would be the sword doing the attacks - thus having to use its own CV. I would be careful about that CV as well. If someone was to know that this was an intelligent sword then attacks directed at the sword would be against a DCV of 0 as well. I think this is a difficult concept to model but you have to be careful that the character doesn't benefit unduly from the concept rather than abilities that any other character would have to buy to benefit from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. There are some pretty impressive advantages to being a magical sword. Unless you take 'aura of evil', reputation (nasty mind sucking magical artifact) or hunteds then the PC is never going to be killed or destroyed, maybe stolen and used by someone else - until they are taken over - but rarely actually attacked. Now as for the mind control thing - get rid of it. Allow the sword to talk normally or just give it mind link (any one mind, limited range): that way at least the player can not assume that they can make the wielder do anything they like - the wielder's (let's call him Bob) Bob's personality and desires have to be taken into consideration and if Bob is killed then the sword (let's call him Klash) Klash will have to actually spend some time and effort persuading someone else to use him, if the fabulous magic powers are not enough. Much more fun from a role-playing POV. Now I'd be inclined to buy yourself some DEXterity and STRength, no figured, only useable when wielded (-1/2) and then actually do the fighting yourself....which means that if Bob gets good enough he might not need Klash any more.... Bit confused by the anti-magic supress: Limited Group, One at a Time (Characteristics linked to magical skill rolls, +1/4) Does this mean supressing INT/EGO? Not sure i'd be keen to allow that if it does. One other point in passing: senses. Now Klash does not have any 360 degree senses, or anything that can see through, for instance, a scabbard. Might be worth shelling out for spacial awareness, danger sense or something like that. Finally for the moment, if this is a FH campaign, that's one expensive character.... Tell you how I'd go about this one. Multiform with a focus (magical sword). Basically the character is in the sword, that's form 1. When he finds a wielder he possesses them and they become, in effect, form 2 - in effect the character is not the sword, or the wielder, but a spirit bound to the sword. I'd have to think through the details, but it sounds like it might have legs.....you might need transform to prepare the vessel for possession.....hmmm...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. First the character has no STUN. In the system, 0 STUN = unconcious. The takes no stun power was designed for automatons who have no conciousness to lose. You have, for 60 points, provided the character with the ability to ignore any and all attacks that would cause unconciousness and your handwave would allow them to ensure that they could easily become immune to most, if not all, killing attacks. They become invulnerable (yup, Lucius - I said it, invulnerable). . Yep, you said it. Now I'm going to sit back and see if it triggers anyone's Berserk. Meanwhile, back on topic: I disagree with giving Life Support for "free" and also I'm not sure I agree with not tripling defense if you use Takes no Stun. I'm not entirely sure about having a follower either - nor about the Mind Control. If you don't want the sword "powering up" i.e. getting tougher and tougher wielders until it's held by the land's greatest warrior, make sure there are psych limits to prevent that - and enforce them. What I would do, is consider letting the sword be wielded by a player character. Now THERE's an interesting roleplaying situation. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary contemplates a vulnerability to rust..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiree Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. I personally would buy the sword as an Automaton/Follower to the PC Player (wielder). I did this a while back trying to figure out the system myself. I based my magical sword off of the Anime Silent Mobius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Johnston Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Yes, it's wrong to give it life support for free. Being dependant on it's wielder is it's own set of disadvantages (Physical Disad: can't walk, no hands, can't talk,). But those disadvantages don't obviate the advantage the sword has that it won't be killed by that gas, or infected by that plague. If it loses it's victim, it can usually get another one easily enough. But it is much more important to me to point out the obvious. Did you in fact intend to have Mr. Condemned Prisoner carrying a sword almost as big and probably a bit heavier than he is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ockham's Spoon Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Fascinating though the sword build is, you are thinking way too hard. The sword is basically useless without a wielder, so from a roleplaying standpoint you are always going to have someone around. So have the player build a random character, but he/she/it has to buy all the swords abilities as part of the writeup. The disads would include things specific to the sword in addition to whatever other problems the person had. Whenever the sword changes hands, the player (or more fiendishly, the GM) works up a new character that must buy all the sword's abilities again. Now during actual roleplaying, let the player be the sword and the wielder (unless the wielder becomes a mindless slave while holding the sword, but that is a lot less fun). Or you as GM play the wielder to provide a little more interaction. GM and player should agree ahead of time how much sway the sword has over the wielder. In any event, come combat time, the player runs this character. This sounds like a fun concept, but to me it is really just a way to easily swap abilities for a character by changing the wielder. _______________________________________________________ "Why follow me to higher ground, lost as you swear I am?" - Ed Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Ok, that's a lot to take in all at once, although the general sentiment is clearly that I need to seriously reassess this situation. Perhaps I am indeed being too generous. As a general question to quite a few of you, say I build the wielder as the PC, and give him the sword as an item. In that instance, the sword will have things like life support automatically (as all swords do). Since the SFX of the situation will still have the sword as the controlling intellect in the pairing, won't that give me much the same results as in my original build? Some other specific replies: I would require the character to have STUN and would limit the takes no stun power to physical attacks - then I might allow the defences handwave but probably not. Good call. I hadn't really considered non-physical damage, a foolish oversight on my behalf. So there is no benefit from being able to survive without food, in hostile environments or when exposed to acids and toxins? I should have taken a closer look at Life Support. I was mainly thinking of eating, sleeping and breathing. Still, I refer you to my earlier (and sincere) question in this post -- how does free life-support in this instance differ from the implied free life-support that this sword would have if bought as an attack power for the wielder? Note the CV of 0. The killing attacks that you have bought are not usable by others and so it would be the sword doing the attacks - thus having to use its own CV. Do normal weapons have useable by other? I might have missed that. I am pretty sure I left out some advantage or other that most weapons have, I'll look into that. What I would do, is consider letting the sword be wielded by a player character. Now THERE's an interesting roleplaying situation. While a perfectly valid idea, the player is interested in playing the sword, and the rest of the group really likes the idea as well. I'd be quite happy for the situation to be reversed, but I'm not going to apply any pressure on the player to do so. The palindromedary contemplates a vulnerability to rust..... No real weapon lim. But those disadvantages don't obviate the advantage the sword has that it won't be killed by that gas, or infected by that plague. This is at least partially offset by the fact that I have decided to make ressurection readily available for the PCs in this campaign (although I plan to implement some kind of drawback, of currently undetermined nature). Hence, all the PCs are effectively immortal. And I'm still not convinced that an immobile sword with a dead wielder, in the middle of nowhere, is nearly as badly off as a dead sword. Certainly, he'll have to avoid toxic gasses and vacuums just as much as something not resistant to them. I'll still give the matter plenty of thought, in any case. The number of responses along this line preclude me just ignoring them out of hand. Allow the sword to talk normally or just give it mind link (any one mind, limited range): that way at least the player can not assume that they can make the wielder do anything they like. Well, a possessing sword was the concept, and I've made it clear to the players in this game that it's an anything-magical-goes campaign, so I'm going to be working with the players preferences in mind as much as is possible. The player in question has indicated he'd like less than perfect control however, which we planned to implement as psych disad of some kind. The earlier suggestion of swapping out mind control for a transform goes some way towards modelling this more easily, as well. Did you in fact intend to have Mr. Condemned Prisoner carrying a sword almost as big and probably a bit heavier than he is? As far as size goes, probably. Regarding weight, I'm perfectly happy to ascribe any arbitrary weight and gleefully ignore any system mechanics that might claim I should do otherwise. Thanks for everybody's input so far. I have much to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. What I meant was, have the player play the sword...and have ANOTHER player play the warrior carrying it. No, swords don't usually have "usable by other" but swords aren't usually characters. If the sword is built as a character, and has an attack power, and has 0 DEX, the that attack power is only usable by the SWORD, to whom you have given a CV of ZER0. Finally, a "Dancing Sword" may be a good idea and a way to get around the idea of having some low point value, probably unwilling, oaf carrying the sword around. Buy down movement (as you did) buy Flight, either on charges or with only so much END available, so that most of the time the sword still has to be carried around, but in combat, it can be let loose and then all the characters, sword included, are fighting their own battles. Finally, consider doing a Multipower that changes a character into an Artificial Intelligence (possibly with a Focus limitation) but that doesn't change back - you can either say the character's spirit was somehow channelled into the blade, or you can say the character was NEVER really human and buying it as "multiform" is a kind of "legal fiction" to fit the concept into the game. However, any way you do it, you're probably creating a very powerful character. Lucius Alexander Palindromedary Enterprises Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Johnston Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Do normal weapons have useable by other? I might have missed that. I am pretty sure I left out some advantage or other that most weapons have, I'll look into that. Normal weapons aren't characters. And a 30 point character's CV is going to suck anyway. He's far better off giving the sword itself a CV and leaving the follower to just be the answer to his physical disabilities. Which is why he doesn't care about getting a better sword wielder, of course. Because he does the fighting. His wearer just carries him around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestidigitator Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Normal weapons aren't characters. And a 30 point character's CV is going to suck anyway. He's far better off giving the sword itself a CV and leaving the follower to just be the answer to his physical disabilities. Which is why he doesn't care about getting a better sword wielder, of course. Because he does the fighting. His wearer just carries him around. A psychological attachment (Psychological Disadvantage or maybe DNPC) might also be helpful. Otherwise, while finding a more powerful wielder may not increase direct combat effectiveness, it may afford better protection, better complimentary physique and skills, etc. Want to create a game/story reason for the character to stay with its, "wielder?" Well, there you go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Ok. I've swapped out Telepathy for Mindlink, and turned the Mind Control into a Major Transform (Worships Sword as a God). Looking at some of the things I've heard strong objections to, I have decided the Transform will not count towards the Follower. Since a normal Follower would not be as subserviant as the sword's wielder, it does make sense to have to pay for the degree of control that will be required. I have also clarified that Takes No Stun is physical only, and then bought up CON (vs mental attacks only) and a bit of Recovery. And a 30 point character's CV is going to suck anyway 30 points of Follower makes for a 150 + Disads character. A psychological attachment (Psychological Disadvantage or maybe DNPC) might also be helpful. If the player takes up my theory that he is a device for justice, then we'll probably apply a Psych Disad "Dedicated to Meting Out His Justice" or somesuch, which will cover this aspect nicely. Plus, a few things I missed replying to earlier: Limited Group, One at a Time (Characteristics linked to magical skill rolls, +1/4) Does this mean supressing INT/EGO? Not sure i'd be keen to allow that if it does. Yeah. The player was after an anti-magic effect, but I was leery of giving him anything that covered magic completely, given that this is to be a high magic world with a wide variety of magical styles. It clicked that I could cover a wide variety of bases by making a drain/suppress that affected characteristics tied to casting. This then covers all RSR magical styles. It's also intended that it not be useable on any target who doesn't have a magical RSR characteristic. What is your problem with the power? It seems perfectly legitimate under the rules, to me. Have I missed something? One other point in passing: senses. Now Klash does not have any 360 degree senses, or anything that can see through, for instance, a scabbard. Might be worth shelling out for spacial awareness, danger sense or something like that. I've given that some consideration, and decided to just stick with regular senses for the moment. I will point out exactly what you have, to the player, however, and let him make his own decision on the matter. Finally for the moment, if this is a FH campaign, that's one expensive character.... Yup. It's a high powered game. A grittier version of what Shrike terms Super Fantasy. The PCs are starting the game as great heroes already, in a high magic setting, so lotsa points are in order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchman Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Yeah. The player was after an anti-magic effect, but I was leery of giving him anything that covered magic completely, given that this is to be a high magic world with a wide variety of magical styles. It clicked that I could cover a wide variety of bases by making a drain/suppress that affected characteristics tied to casting. This then covers all RSR magical styles. It's also intended that it not be useable on any target who doesn't have a magical RSR characteristic. What is your problem with the power? It seems perfectly legitimate under the rules, to me. Have I missed something? If you want to give a penalty to magic skill rolls, why not use Negative Skill Levels or Change Environment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Long time ago we had this game going and one of the players had a bit of a whack character concept: he had been a test pilot for a new weapon system. Basically what happens is that the pilot had his brain physically removed from his body and encased in a like support system that was then integrated into what was basically a mechanical wolf. There was a bit of wolf brain incorporated intot the system to do processing tasks, like make the legs work right and interpret smells. The pilot drove the thing around like a miniature vehicle; in fact that's how we built it - as a very low point character (he was basically a brain encased in a lightly armoured life support system) and a vehicle (the mechanical wolf). The character called himself Cyberus (geddit?) Interesting effects - as he was driving a vehicle we did not need to worry about stun damage too much, unless the vehicle was actually destroyed or we got mentally attacked, so we did not need the automata rules (I'm not sure we had automata rules back then). Worked out really well. I've considered doing the same sort of thing for an 'Iron Man' type character. Now I know it is a bit of a whack idea, but have you considered the sword being a vehicle for the character's consciousness? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableWyvern Posted March 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. If you want to give a penalty to magic skill rolls' date=' why not use Negative Skill Levels or Change Environment?[/quote'] 'Cause I'm a noob? I'll look into that. Now I know it is a bit of a whack idea, but have you considered the sword being a vehicle for the character's consciousness? I'm not quite sure what your suggesting here that I'm not already doing. Care to explain a bit more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Democracy Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Ok' date=' that's a lot to take in all at once, although the general sentiment is clearly that I need to seriously reassess this situation. Perhaps I am indeed being too generous.[/quote'] Well, the big problem you face is the inherent human template built into the system. The default abilities of a Hero system character is human - which makes sense as most characters are actually, or in essence, human in ability. That means the game (players and GMs) can safely make assumptions about certain things. All of this falls down when someone really does want to play a character which is not, at core, human-like. A sword is not human and you have to make huge changes to the template to get to something that _is_ a sword. You are finding some of those problems already. As you say a sword in the game is often represented by 1D6+1 Killing (OAF). There are a lot of assumptions about that sword - like what it can withstand in the way of hostile environments, whether it gets stunned or falls unconscious etc etc and what it can do without someone to use it. As far as game mechanics go - it is easy to dismiss it to a short line on the character sheet and look at what happens to the focus about it getting damaged. When you want a character to be a sword there are a lot of plusses about being a sword rather than a human. Swords don't need to breathe or eat or many other things that a human does. Problem is the things that a sword doesn't do that a human does - like have consciousness, have free will and volition. If you wanted to handwave all of the abilities of a sword as not fair to charge the character for then you would have to handwave all of the human abilities sold back because he is not a human. It would be nice to have a few templates other than human on which to base a character and then the template could come with all of its own sets of assumptions. Until then a character like this is a lot of work to make it feel and play properly. Doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarek Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: A very strange build for critiquing. Seems to me this would be a perfect use for the AI template. You have a magical intelligence inside an item, which is very much like an artificial intelligence in a computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.