System cap on creativity

[Shaft]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Banishment?

 

Why not Dispell Summon?

 

Summon is an Instant power, so therefore I believe that Dispel Summon would only be effective while the Summoning process is in progress. Once the Summoned being is "on site", the Summon is over.

 

If the Summon Power were changed to a Constant power that had to be maintained to keep the Summoned being on site, then Dispel would be appropriate.

 

I think Teleportation or Extra-Dimensional Travel, Usable As An Attack with a Skill Roll that can be contested by the target's EGO might be the way to go if it's some kind of resistance that you want.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

From this post' date=' I gather that experience with HERO's ruleset can limit us when it comes to envisioning effects which we know cannot be modelled with the (core) rules. How badly do you think the HERO system "locks out" legitimate ideas through its own imperfections?[/quote']Robyn,

 

I have a reply in that thread that I think is a core book-legal method (other than using Rapid Fire, which has been mentioned previously in this thread).

 

For the multiple-limb Stretching, I'd do it the same way that allows a character to 'make a Full Move and then Attack' - buy additional inches of Running that are Limited to only making Half Moves.

 

I think that very few legitimate ideas are locked out of Hero System. Mostly, it's creatively using the rules to produce what you want. I know that I did not understand the richness of the Hero System until I started reading these boards (well, a couple of versions earlier, anyway ).

 

Absolute effects (immune to fire damage) are in general not considered legitimate in Hero System, but there are suggested ways to model them (although not in the core book, IIRC).

[Hyper-Man]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

You'll need to give a concrete example of what you're asking. There are things HERO doesn't model WELL' date=' because those things are built on rules handwaves -- such as [i']Wish[/i] and Time Stop. You CAN do them, but to do them properly would cost a STUPID amount of points.

 

I also can't seem to build a Banishment spell that I'm happy with, but that's not because it isn't LEGAL in the rules (Teleport UOO) but because it's ... too simple. I don't like, it needs work. I need a Reistance mechanic, that's the only thing that irks me.

 

Any power bought with Usable As Attack should be written up with an appropriate defense just like NND.

 

Building a Summon with a built in Teleport or EDM with UAA Trigger might get complicated but should be doable.

[Peter_Knutsen]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Well give me an example of a legit concept that the rules knock down? Most of the time it's not the rules but the GM's the costumized/campaign rules that knock concept' date='[/quote']

 

Ultra-cramming. Up until the publication of TUS, there was no officially legal way of doing that. As for the higher cramming skills/slots in TUS, I think they look a bit too cheap, but the concept of an ultra-crammer itself is entirely legitimate.

[Bloodstone]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Up until the publication of TUS, there was no officially legal way of doing that.

 

We did it with a Skills VPP. Which is really just as much of an Optional Rule as the new cramming skills in TUS...

[Manic Typist]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

 

If he could do that, why couldn't he use Noncombat Stretching (40") to stretch 40" in one direction?

 

Assuming the two robbers are each 40" away (are we doing this on a standard hex map? ), and it's Noncombat time, he can reach one of them but (by the rules) not both of them.

 

True, and true, but in that case Reed Richards needs to either: buy more Stretching, and/or create a custom Advantage for his Stretching (which is a part of the core rules, and thus I feel covers this scenario adequately).

[schir1964]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

True' date=' and true, but in that case Reed Richards needs to either: buy more Stretching, and/or create a custom Advantage for his Stretching (which is a part of the core rules, and thus I feel covers this scenario adequately).[/quote']

But that is not the issue.

 

Pick a maximum that Reed Richards can stretch via the source material, it really doesn't matter what the maximum is, and of course one exists.

 

Whatever that maximum is, Reed Richards can stretch any and all parts of himself to that maximum simultaneously, and not one part farther than that.

 

And again, this goes back to the presumed viewpoint of Robyn. If Robyn's viewpoint is that GM created custom Limitations/Advantages are considered part of the core ruleset, then the answer is "yes, the ruleset covers it". If Robyn's viewpoint is that GM created custom Limitations/Advantages are considered House Rules to overcome the inflexibility of the ruleset, then the answer is "no, the current ruleset doesn't allow it".

 

Robyn must decide in this instance whether it is considered part of the ruleset or just a House Rule.

 

There will never be a consensus on this.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I believe there have been occasional isues where Reed Richards has been "stretched to the limit", showing his legs, torso and arms all stretched as far as they would go. Perhaps that should be the interpretation of "maximum non-combat stretch".

 

Presumably, he annoyt stretch his hand out from his shoulder to the same distance his fingertips can stretch from his heels.

[Robyn]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

And again, this goes back to the presumed viewpoint of Robyn. If Robyn's viewpoint is that GM created custom Limitations/Advantages are considered part of the core ruleset, then the answer is "yes, the ruleset covers it". If Robyn's viewpoint is that GM created custom Limitations/Advantages are considered House Rules to overcome the inflexibility of the ruleset, then the answer is "no, the current ruleset doesn't allow it".

 

Robyn must descide in this instance whether it is considered part of the ruleset or just a House Rule.

 

I hadn't realized you wanted my input (I thought you were just making an observation) . . . I'll have to lean towards the former, with an emphasis on Limitations in published characters/constructs. If it can be seen in the core rulebook, it specifically can be considered part of the core ruleset; anything else, only generally.

[Grailknight]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

That's more your intrepretation of the source material than a flaw in the rules. If your Reed Richards can stretch 20" to either side you can just as easily say he has 40" of stretching and then the rules cover the situation perfectly. You might also want to consider "pushing" .

 

The case with the blast, I would define as variable sfx + rapid fire or autofire.

[schir1964]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I hadn't realized you wanted my input (I thought you were just making an observation) . . . I'll have to lean towards the former' date=' with an emphasis on Limitations in published characters/constructs. If it can be seen in the core rulebook, it [i']specifically[/i] can be considered part of the core ruleset; anything else, only generally.

Based on that, then there is technically nothing that the ruleset forbids, since the GM can always create an Adder/Subtractor/Advantage/Limitation that may overrule any strictly worded rule or definition in the system.

 

Now as has already been observed, there are certain concepts/SFX that are either complex or powerful just from their description and may require so many active points to build satisfactorily that it exceeds the Active Point Maximum the GM has imposed.

 

So I gather it is those kinds of concepts/SFX that you are looking for then?

 

I'll have to think on it some. I know on the boards we've discussed some things that when we attempted to build them they ended up having extremely high active points.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I tend toward the view that having to make a custom Advantage is not in the core rules set, but that deciding on the appropriate value for a custom Limitation is in the core rules set.

[Robyn]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Based on that' date=' then there is technically nothing that the ruleset forbids, since the GM can always create an Adder/Subtractor/Advantage/Limitation that may overrule any strictly worded rule or definition in the system.[/quote']

 

I only addressed Limitations . . . you did say Advantages too, I hadn't caught that until now, but I think Advantages would have to fall outside of the core rules, since there is no entry for "custom Advantages" under that section as there is for Limitations.

 

Additionally, a Limitation only expands the existing prohibitions - an Advantage removes them, so they can potentially rewrite the entire ruleset.

[Sean Waters]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Couple of fixes:

 

1. For the original problem, archer shooting at you you fire back destroying his arrow and hitting him:

 

Missile deflection is an attack action and so I can see no reason you cannot sweep MPA targetting the arrow and the archer: basically the MPA allows you to use both the Missile Deflection and a RKA simultaneously and the sweep allows you multiple targets. Now this is OK and works fine if you have a held action. If you don't then you can't really do it without a little handwaving and a ranged MD targetted at the point of origin of the attack (i.e. the archer) with a triggered one hex aoe accurate RKA (to hit the archer). You need triggered to get around the problem of circumventing the rule about not doing damage with an abort action. I would be wary of allowing it but it is perfectly rules legal.

 

2. Simultaneous stretching:

 

20" stretching 100 points

+20" stretching linked -1/2 and stretch target(s) cannot be more than 20" from character (-1/2) for 50 points.

 

Best of luck if you want to stretch 20" with your leg and kick some one too....then you'd need a genuinely massive accurate AOE naked advantage on strength, in all likelihood.

 

The point is that there is almost nothing that CAN'T be done given suficient free points.

 

There is an awful lot that SHOULDN'T be done.

 

For instance the arrow block/attack, I'd probably allow as a one off as a power trick rather than requiring an unusual build.

[Sean Waters]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

In fact the more I look at it the more I become tooth-grindingly convinced that the rule-set is so heavily modified by the dread 'with GM permission....for dramatic sense....' that calling it a rule-set is becoming increasingly inaccurate, and we ought to be calling it a suggestion-set. This is not a development I'm happy with.

[Karmakaze]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I always interpreted the stretching as a radius thing as well. So it's not that each arm can stretch exactly 20", it's that the character can reach out to things up to 20" from the starting hex. Note that when you see Mr Fantastic stretching long distances, they usually show at least the torso stretching as well.

[Sean Waters]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I always interpreted the stretching as a radius thing as well. So it's not that each arm can stretch exactly 20"' date=' it's that the character can reach out to things up to 20" from the starting hex. Note that when you see Mr Fantastic stretching long distances, they usually show at least the torso stretching as well.[/quote']

 

What Hero does not allow, for good, solid balance reasons, is both sides of the radius to be touched simultaneously. Having to stretch your torso, which you only have one of, is a good way to enforce this conceptually.

[schir1964]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

In fact the more I look at it the more I become tooth-grindingly convinced that the rule-set is so heavily modified by the dread 'with GM permission....for dramatic sense....' that calling it a rule-set is becoming increasingly inaccurate' date=' and we ought to be calling it a suggestion-set. This is not a development I'm happy with.[/quote']

Totally agree.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[MitchellS]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

1. For the original problem' date=' archer shooting at you you fire back destroying his arrow and hitting him:[/quote']

I'd just use the contest of power rules from Ninja Hero [and they really should've been in Champions].

 

2. Simultaneous stretching:

As a gm I'd just require the character to use NCM stretching if he wants to attack two different people at the extreme range of his stretching. You'd take a cv loss but you are talking about your extreme distance.

 

And Reed can stretch 1,500' before it starts to become painful so his 125 inches of stretching [assuming non-combat] are more then enough to get done what he needs to do.

[Sean Waters]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

I'd just use the contest of power rules from Ninja Hero [and they really should've been in Champions].

 

 

As a gm I'd just require the character to use NCM stretching if he wants to attack two different people at the extreme range of his stretching. You'd take a cv loss but you are talking about your extreme distance.

 

And Reed can stretch 1,500' before it starts to become painful so his 125 inches of stretching [assuming non-combat] are more then enough to get done what he needs to do.

 

Given that he doesn't seem to get much thinner when he stretches, I wonder what he weighs when fully stretched out

[zornwil]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Like a lot of systems, I don't think we can say it overtly caps creativity. I think it guides a thought process too oriented on points and abstract, rather than in-play, guidelines for balance. It also guides us against absolutes, as mentioned above, and certain builds can seem insurmountable in certain points ranges (and they might because they would indeed be too powerful from a balance perspective). However, it's nature also opens us up to think we can build "anything," so that in my mind encourages some creativity - I know I was encouraged by it when first encountering it compared to systems that give you powers and abilities with no context for how their values and abilities were derived and at least in theory balanced. Because of this, I think that the system is quite good at encouraging creativity but like every system it has at-least-subtle inhibitors for certain approaches and builds that are at odds with the philosopy of the game. That's my perspective on its influence on creativity.

[sbarron]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

When you say "new optional rules" are you referring to the core rules of Hero 5th Edition or the Revised? Or a rule that is in one of the Supplements?

 

One of the great things that Hero had going for it was that all you ever needed was the core rule book. But it seems that as more supplements come out, that strength is gets weaker.

 

If it's an optional rule in a supplement, that's great, but it doesn't help the gm or players that don't have that supplement. Therefore, the core rules don't allow it.- Christopher Mullins

I don't really see HERO as adding new rules so much as it is giving more examples of ways in which the rules can be tinkered to suit your game. Almost every "new" rule works off the existing framework, it just shows a new direction you can take.

 

To me, that's the strength of the HERO system. Everything is optional. Everything requires GM approval before it goes in his game. Is it book legal for a GM to require characters to pay 10 pts for per 1d6 EB? The book says it's 5/per, but it also says its the GMs call. To me, that means 10/per is book legal. Charging 10/per doesn't change the framework. It just adjusts the rule to a different setting.

 

In fact the more I look at it the more I become tooth-grindingly convinced that the rule-set is so heavily modified by the dread 'with GM permission....for dramatic sense....' that calling it a rule-set is becoming increasingly inaccurate' date=' and we ought to be calling it a suggestion-set. This is not a development I'm happy with.[/quote']Why? The Hero System for right or wrong isn't a rule set. I guess it's more a rule framework. Its a set of assumptions that can be used to model and play roleplaying games. Those assumptions can be tweaked to suit each player or GMs fancy, and they'll all still be playing within the framework.

 

To alleviate some of the uncertainty that is generated by everything coming with a "with GM permission....for dramatic sense...." asterisk, I'd like to see HERO, or if they won't do it someone else, create some settings that actually do make all the decisions for a game.

 

Not just which talents are allowed, or skills, or power and point caps, either. I want a list of packages that are allowed. I want a list of all the spells that exist in the game. I want magic to work in some specified, setting specific manner. I want the gods explained, and priestly orders defined. A list of all the monsters, an atlas of maps, etc. And I want it all to be power balanced based on playtesting.

 

At the end of this roleplaying game setting, HERO can say..."This setting can be added to or subtracted from only with GM permission, based on his awareness of dratic sense and game purpose, using the HERO System.":thumbup:

[tesuji]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Does HERO limit creativity...

 

IMO...

 

not overly so. I tend to agree with zornwill on the build your own being far more "sparking" creativity than particular rules stopping it.

 

At the same time, my feeling is that it does tend to, by trying to be universal, lose some of the flavor that genre or setting specific rulesets can enjoy. I agree with zorbwill that having a couple examples of "fully fleshed out campaign settings" which did do quite a bit of customization would be great. Too many people want to treat it as a game not a toolkit and so they tend to change too little being able to settle for "ok" genre flavor.

 

The area where I think HERO falls down is not that it uses too much "common sense... dramatic sense... etc" but that it fails to really provide any real guidance on how to make such decisions, when to make those etc and does tend to act like "we are rules" far more than it needs to. A better focus on "results in play" over "results on paper" would go a long way IMo towards getting its players to see the full potential and get "better" games.

[Robyn]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

Given that he doesn't seem to get much thinner when he stretches' date=' I wonder what he weighs when fully stretched out [/quote']

 

The same mass, but he redistributes from the inside, so he is actually fully hollow then?

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: System cap on creativity

 

From the 'Frameworks modifying frameworks' thread: "5Er, p.358: "Characters cannot use defensive maneuvers or actions (such as Block or Missile Deflection) as part of a multiple-power attack."

 

So, that doesn't work.

 

For a Robin Hood / Green Arrow type character, I'd be inclined as a GM to allow the player to buy Missile Deflection separately with a Trigger to allow the 'shoot the oncoming arrow / energy blast and continue on to damage the target' - possibly with a Limitation that the main attack used is reduced by some multiple of the Active Points of the attack that was deflected."