New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

[schir1964]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Mike W, thanks for your time and effort. I'll have to come back to this another day to continue the discussion.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I don't see Manipulation as complimentary to a grab or escape. Fine motor skill won't help you with either one. That's pure grip strength.

 

...................

 

Talk to Harry Houdini or any martial artist (well, except possibly karate) about that. You'll note that 'contortionist' already gives you bonuses to escape...

 

Does this pay for itself? It gives more definition to the system for those who like their reality. It is not simply repeating something that is already there. It may not be used by many players but then I hardly ever use the hit location rules, and almost always regret it when I do - ashould we ditch them?. I can see swathes of 5ER that would be improved by replacement with stuff like this.

[Mike W]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Talk to Harry Houdini or any martial artist (well, except possibly karate) about that. You'll note that 'contortionist' already gives you bonuses to escape...

 

Does this pay for itself? It gives more definition to the system for those who like their reality. It is not simply repeating something that is already there. It may not be used by many players but then I hardly ever use the hit location rules, and almost always regret it when I do - ashould we ditch them?. I can see swathes of 5ER that would be improved by replacement with stuff like this.

 

Houdini's escapes and escaping a grab by another character are two different things. Having highly flexible fingers isn't going to justify a bonus to escaping a choke hold. It might however, give you a bonus to trying to pick a lock behind your back.

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

This begs the questions:

 

Would you relegate the Guidelines for Perception Rules with Bonus/Penalties to Digital Hero Articles and removed from the core book?

 

Would you relegate the Guidelines and Rules for Hit Locations to a Digital Hero Article and remove them from the core book?

 

How about Talents? The basics for building them exist with Skills and Powers. Based on your reasoning these should also be relegated to simply being a Digital Hero Article.

 

Long Term Endurance? Relevant extra set of rules or just a Digital Hero Article?

 

How about all those extra rules that are added with Supplements? Are they only worthy of being Digital Hero Articles?

 

Now let's look at what it means to be a Digital Hero Article.

 

[-- Very, very much clipped --]

 

Does this help clarify anything?

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Unfortunately, yes. Great googly moogly, Mullins. Sour grapes much?

 

'Waah!! You aren't taking me seriously!! Let me rip apart everything else in the book the way you're dissecting my minutely intricate idea and get offended against you!!"

 

You just can't take a hard critique, can you? 'It's an interesting idea,' says we, 'and it'd be a good article, but this level of detail and further granulation of the game concepts, while apparently necessary for your one specific campaign, is several steps too far, too complicated, more work to assemble and play with than it is worth.' It doesn't pay for itself. 3 minutes figuring out the various intricate modifiers, 3 seconds making the roll.

 

*sighs* Jumpin' Jehosaphat, don't be so touchy. Don't argue how THE HERO SYSTEM NEEDS THIS MECHANIC BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE IT YET!!!11! The system doesn't need the mechanic, but the mechanic may be a valuable tool for a particular session, adventure, or campaign -- and might be written up as an interesting article in Digital Hero, but that's probably as far as it goes -- again, because it's TOO GRANULAR.

 

This is the same problem I have with further splitting Intelligence, Dexterity, Strength, Presence, all of the rest of the 8 primary attributes: they're too granular, and mucking around with now 18 Primary Characteristics means I need to spend three times the amount of time on them -- and twice as much as I used to spend trying to work out out all my secondary Figured Characteristics. If something needs to be indicated on a more minute level, use 'Limited Power' -- from -1/4 to -2 or more. Or make an attribute-based skill that people can buy up, whatever is required.

 

But don't start saying that because YOUR hypergranular dissection of one stinkin' part of Dexterity isn't seen as being worthy of a place in the next edition, all the other five-edition-strong optional rules really shouldn't be in the core book after all...

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

But don't start saying that because YOUR hypergranular dissection of one stinkin' part of Dexterity isn't seen as being worthy of a place in the next edition' date=' all the other five-edition-strong optional rules really shouldn't be in the core book after all...[/quote']I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that Chris Mullins is desperately creating obscene numbers of marginally useful (or even counterproductive) additions to the Hero System in the hope that at least one of them will be included in 6th Edition. While many of his ideas have been... interesting, I honestly can't recall any that made me go "Aha! How did we ever get along without rules for that!?" *smacks forehead*

 

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

[Utech]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I'm all for inventing new skills. I can't imagine using this particular one, but I'm all for inventing them. You clearly spent a lot of time on Manipulation and thought it through well. Kudos.

 

One of the things I really enjoy about the Call of Cthulhu game is the NPCs with skills such as:

Scream Incoherently

Stare Into Space

Cling Stubbornly To Beliefs

I think adding these to the game really helped get a quick feel for the character. I feel much the same way about HERO characters with skills (often science skills) that do not have obvious utility -- and would not at all be appropriate for general adoption for PCs or NPCs in a game -- but which add a great deal of flavor to the character. As a GM I make a great deal of effort to put those skills into play. That's not just a matter of ensuring that the player gets his "money's worth" for the skill; it's because I'm genuinely interested in these skills. I just love seeing skills like:

KS: Paper Dolls

PS: Roadie

SS: Plasma-Based Lighting Devices

Am I alone in this?

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Houdini's escapes and escaping a grab by another character are two different things. Having highly flexible fingers isn't going to justify a bonus to escaping a choke hold. It might however' date=' give you a bonus to trying to pick a lock behind your back.[/quote']

 

Whenever I'm trying to choke my 13 year old son (roughly twice an hour) he can often escape by:

 

1. Reaching out for a heavy object and pounding me over the skull with it.

2. Worming a finger under mine and snapping my pinkie.

3. Finding that pressure point just at the point my jaw meets my skull and pushing - sure takes your mind off choking.

 

Thing is I'm still stronger than him, and, at his current rate of growth will be for at least two more weeks, but I'm rarely able to actually kill him. Arguably that is because I've taught him too much anatomy, or at least too much low cunning, but to put such KSs into practice you need a physical skill. You could call it a straight DEX roll, but Manipulation seems to fit the bill at least as well and adds richness and variety to the character.

 

What?

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I'm all for inventing new skills. I can't imagine using this particular one, but I'm all for inventing them. You clearly spent a lot of time on Manipulation and thought it through well. Kudos.

 

 

One of the things I really enjoy about the Call of Cthulhu game is the NPCs with skills such as:

Scream Incoherently

 

Stare Into Space

 

Cling Stubbornly To Beliefs

I think adding these to the game really helped get a quick feel for the character. I feel much the same way about HERO characters with skills (often science skills) that do not have obvious utility -- and would not at all be appropriate for general adoption for PCs or NPCs in a game -- but which add a great deal of flavor to the character. As a GM I make a great deal of effort to put those skills into play. That's not just a matter of ensuring that the player gets his "money's worth" for the skill; it's because I'm genuinely interested in these skills. I just love seeing skills like:

KS: Paper Dolls

 

PS: Roadie

 

SS: Plasma-Based Lighting Devices

Am I alone in this?

 

No, not alone, you are one of the select few who have splashed out points on KS: Esoteric Skill Appreciation.

[casualplayer]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Here's another way of looking at the difference between Manipulation and DEX.

 

You have two characters. One is an Arcturian and another is Flagian. They are identical in all respects except for the following. They both have super perception (I'm removing those penalties from the equation).

 

Arcturian Arms (Human Structure but Advanced Nerve Development: 10 STR, 50 DEX

Flavian Arms (Two 50mm Strands with thousands of monofiliment phalanges): 10 STR, 50 DEX

 

Flavians can change DNA strands by manipulating them with their phalanges. It is one of their prized marketable skills.

 

Now if we use DEX as the method of handling Manipulation, Arcturians have the same chance of manipulating DNA as the Flavians.

 

With the method I've proposed, there is an actual mechanical difference in the ability to manipulate objects.

 

Does this help clarify anything?

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

This actually sounds more like Flavians buying Microscopic on their Touch Sense Group.

 

I still like the OP, viewed as Manipulation being an Everyman Skill that can be bought up to an 11> or a 9+DEX/5>. Could have been an interesting addition to UltSkill.

[schir1964]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Unfortunately, yes. Great googly moogly, Mullins. Sour grapes much?

 

'Waah!! You aren't taking me seriously!! Let me rip apart everything else in the book the way you're dissecting my minutely intricate idea and get offended against you!!"

Relax Wyrm Ouroboros. That post wasn't directed at you anyway. Although it seems to have touched off a nerve.

 

I simply took the rationale for rejecting my idea and applied it consistently to existing rules. Sorry you think I'm offended, I'm not. I just don't like wasting a lot of posts on trying to convince someone to accept an idea when it is obvious they won't accept it on criteria that I don't agree with. That's all.

 

You think it adds too much complexity. Did I say you were wrong for thinking that? Did I even respond directly to your post? I understood where you coming from and didn't see any reason to try to convince you otherwise.

 

You just can't take a hard critique' date=' can you?[/quote']

To me, there is a difference between Constructive Criticism and Destructive Criticism. I've already taken several Hard Critiques (that were Constructive) and responded positively to them.

 

'It's an interesting idea' date='' says we, 'and it'd be a good article, but this level of detail and further granulation of the game concepts, while apparently necessary for your one specific campaign, is several steps [i']too far[/i], too complicated, more work to assemble and play with than it is worth.' It doesn't pay for itself. 3 minutes figuring out the various intricate modifiers, 3 seconds making the roll.

To you, it doesn't pay for itself, to me it does.

And here we are again, this seems to beg for me to try to convince you otherwise, I'm not going to.

 

*sighs* Jumpin' Jehosaphat' date=' don't be so touchy. Don't argue how THE HERO SYSTEM NEEDS THIS MECHANIC BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE IT YET!!!11![/quote']

I never claimed this as a reason to have the mechanic. I said in this thread and in other threads that I'm working on making a Well World Campaign.

 

Such a world has creatures with vastly different levels of Manipulation. The current system doesn't have any guidelines or rules to handle this. Thus, my proposal.

 

This is a far cry from saying, the hero system needs this mechanic because it is missing. The fact that the campaign I'm building needs it is the reason, the fact that such rules don't exist is simply a fact.

 

The system doesn't need the mechanic' date=' but the mechanic may be a valuable tool for a particular session, adventure, or campaign -- and might be written up as an interesting article in Digital Hero, but that's [i']probably[/i] as far as it goes -- again, because it's TOO GRANULAR.

As you note above, you just repeated what I've already said in my initial post.

Again, this gives the impression that I somehow want to force everyone to use these rules. I don't.

 

This is the same problem I have with further splitting Intelligence' date=' Dexterity, Strength, Presence, all of the rest of the 8 primary attributes: they're too granular, and mucking around with now [b']18[/b] Primary Characteristics means I need to spend three times the amount of time on them -- and twice as much as I used to spend trying to work out out all my secondary Figured Characteristics. If something needs to be indicated on a more minute level, use 'Limited Power' -- from -1/4 to -2 or more. Or make an attribute-based skill that people can buy up, whatever is required.

Okay, then don't do that. No one is forcing a gun to your head and saying you have to.

 

Do you seriously think that any of these ideas are going to see print, mine or others. You're certainly more optimistic about that than I am if you do.

 

But don't start saying that because YOUR hypergranular dissection of one stinkin' part of Dexterity isn't seen as being worthy of a place in the next edition' date=' all the other five-edition-strong optional rules really shouldn't be in the core book after all...[/quote']

Could you please provide a link where I said any of this. Or perhaps a post which would lead you to this conclusion.

 

I'm sorry, but you seem to have vastly incorrect impression of my goals here.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that Chris Mullins is desperately creating obscene numbers of marginally useful (or even counterproductive) additions to the Hero System in the hope that at least one of them will be included in 6th Edition. While many of his ideas have been... interesting, I honestly can't recall any that made me go "Aha! How did we ever get along without rules for that!?" *smacks forehead*

 

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

Right. My goal to posting these ideas is seeing one my ideas in print. Okay, good luck with that.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[ghost-angel]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I don't think we need a whole new Skill.

 

Hero has 67 already, a pretty good number, toss in the Ultimate Skill's optional/new ones and the number jumps to over 70. They cover pretty much everything really.

 

In fact - a number of skills require the 'manipulation' of objects as part of their base concept (Mechanics, Inventor, Electronics, Riding) to some degree.

 

What I do like here is the number of possible modifiers a GM can utilize. Sometimes what we need is not a new Mechanics but new uses for existing mechanics. Skill Modifiers have an almost infinite level of possibility and potential granularity.

 

You may not use all of them all the time, but it's nice to help create a list/table of modifiers for various bits to create Campaign Consistency.

 

I'd toss your new Skill out the window - but I think I'll keep the rest of your suggestions and apply them to other skills as appropriate.

 

BTW: here are the Skills in Hero centered around the ability to manipulate an object: Sleight Of Hand, Fast Draw, Hoist. A number of other skills include manipulating objects (Mechanics, Bugging, Concealment, etc. . .).

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Some time ago I was running this agent level campaign. The characters were all agents of the Paranormal Research Institute (PRI - I still chuckle). Anyway, one of them was an amnesiac who was very good at pretty much everything she tried her hand at - Michelle Flux was her name IIRC* - but she couldn't REMEMBER anything, except a shed load of religous dogma and pankration - an ancient greek martial art.

 

Anyway, I can see something like a manipulation skill being ideal here - I can buy that up, rather than loads of frakily limited skills or just masses of DEX, then I can let her have a pop at pretty much any physical skill involving manipulation with a manipulation skill roll and a -3 non-proficiency penalty.

 

Sure I could just buy DEX levels and do the same thing, but I like this better

 

 

 

*or not, as it turned out

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Anyway, point of order, Chris makes a valuable contibution to these boards and usually makes a damn sight more sense than I do with the wacky ideas*.

 

So what if a lot of the cunning new plans don't get off the ground? We're all friends here** and if one in ten new ideas make sense to enough people to enhance their games then, by golly, it is worth it. Eevn if you don't agree with the idea, at least it is stimulating debate and if we, after considered and reasoned conversation about it decide that it is not helpful, it has still served a purpose - it has made us consider the rules we might not have looked at and decide they are the best fit for the job. That enhanced understanding and insight is worth something. Hell, it is worth a lot.

 

 

 

*OK, perhaps I 'm not the best yardstick

 

**And, as your friend, can I just point out that you have not bought a round recently?

[ghost-angel]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

Some time ago I was running this agent level campaign. The characters were all agents of the Paranormal Research Institute (PRI - I still chuckle). Anyway, one of them was an amnesiac who was very good at pretty much everything she tried her hand at - Michelle Flux was her name IIRC* - but she couldn't REMEMBER anything, except a shed load of religous dogma and pankration - an ancient greek martial art.

 

Anyway, I can see something like a manipulation skill being ideal here - I can buy that up, rather than loads of frakily limited skills or just masses of DEX, then I can let her have a pop at pretty much any physical skill involving manipulation with a manipulation skill roll and a -3 non-proficiency penalty.

 

Sure I could just buy DEX levels and do the same thing, but I like this better

 

 

 

*or not, as it turned out

 

I would do this with a combination of Skill Levels and Penalty Skill Levels.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

So, what you are suggesting is that, instead of buying a manipulation skill, we buy +1 level with DEX skills (5 points) only for skills that involve manual dexterity (-1) for 2 points? Yeah, that could work, but even if we did that, the modifiers are still a useful addition to the armamentarium.

[ghost-angel]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

So' date=' what you are suggesting is that, instead of buying a manipulation skill, we buy +1 level with DEX skills (5 points) only for skills that involve manual dexterity (-1) for 2 points? Yeah, that could work, but even if we did that, the modifiers are still a useful addition to the armamentarium.[/quote']

 

More simply: 2 Point Penalty Skills Levels vs Manipulation Modifiers.

 

And yes - the Modifiers are an excellent addition to the Hero Arsenal.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I never claimed this as a reason to have the mechanic. I said in this thread and in other threads that I'm working on making a Well World Campaign.

 

Such a world has creatures with vastly different levels of Manipulation. The current system doesn't have any guidelines or rules to handle this. Thus, my proposal.

 

Better manipulation than DEX would allow: Skill levels with DEX rolls for manipulation.

 

Poorer manipulation than DEX would allow: Physical Limitation

 

DONE!

 

Now, if this were a significant feature of my game, as it seems it will be in yours, I would stat out some examples from the source material, and translate their bonuses or penalties into game terms to help get my players on common ground. But I don't need a full-blown mechanic separate from all that has come before in order to implement this in my games. The first rule, to me, is to build on what already exists as much as possible.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

This begs the questions:

 

Would you relegate the Guidelines for Perception Rules with Bonus/Penalties to Digital Hero Articles and removed from the core book?

 

Would you relegate the Guidelines and Rules for Hit Locations to a Digital Hero Article and remove them from the core book?

 

How about Talents? The basics for building them exist with Skills and Powers. Based on your reasoning these should also be relegated to simply being a Digital Hero Article.

 

Long Term Endurance? Relevant extra set of rules or just a Digital Hero Article?

 

How about all those extra rules that are added with Supplements? Are they only worthy of being Digital Hero Articles?

 

If they were not in the rules as written, I would see them as useful DH articles. How useful depends - I personally use some a lot more than others.

 

I also see nothing "only" for DH Articles. They are suggestions on how to use the rules in your game. I would se nothing wrong with adding more insights on the bonuses/penalties for various stat and skill rolls to the core rules, or rules supplements. But I don't see a need for a whole new mechanic when a few guidelines for modifiers to existing rolls will do the trick just as well. Like Treb, I don't need a phone book setting out every possible modifier that might apply in a game. If it's not in the book, extrapolate from the existing guidelines for roll modifiers and proceed. If it's in common use in your game, stat up the modifiers beforehand. If you make the cal on the fly, write it down so it will be the same next time.

 

So if the guidelines for Manipulation were printed in a Digital Hero Article and then ended up as "Official" by appearing in a Supplement' date=' why the fuss over treating these guidelines as if they were worthy of being an optional rule in the core book?[/quote']

 

I do not see a brand new mechanic for such an issue meritting space as a rule, optional or otherwise. I see the expansion of skill roll modifiers as being potentially useful as an inclusion in an "official" rulebook, including modifiers to a DEX roll for manipulation of objects.

 

Could you give a page reference for where "remembering" aka Memory is based on INT in the mechanics?

 

5er p 61: Knowledge Skill. You pay 3 points for PS: Law Your likelihood of remembering a particularly obscure legal case is based on your INT roll, modified for your skill with law and the difficulty of the task.

 

The same way your ability to manipulate an object would be a DEX roll, modified by any skill levels you choose to buy with such manipulation and the difficulty of the task. The same way manipulating a lock pick to pick a lock is governed by DEX, your skill and the difficulty of picking the lock. [5er p64]

 

However' date=' you've just described Manipulation used DEX as the base value, and then being modified from there. That's not how I would do it, but I did include that option in my proposal so I don't see why you have a problem with it beyond just that you yourself don't need it. I'm sure there are numerous rules/options that you rarely if ever use, does that make those rules worthless?[/quote']

 

If they add nothing to the game, YES they are useless. And I don't see creating a new mechanic for something handled just fine by the existing rules to add anything to the game. They do not pass the cost/benefit test. Use the page for something which can't be done just fine with the rules as written already.

 

What about Clinging?

 

What about it?

 

Climbing a rope' date=' Climbing a tree, Climbing a rock face, or even Climbing a ceiling, are they all based on DEX or subset of DEX or is STR a critical factor?[/quote']

 

They are all based on DEX. Climbing is a DEX skill [5er p 52]. STR is complimentary, and can thus contribute as a modifier, but it is not the basis for one's ability to climb.

 

True, this is how the system currently works.

The real question is, "Should they all be impacted equally?"

But that is another thread.

 

I think the system strikes a sufficient balance now. It does not need 3,287 characteristics, each governing some minute aspect of one of the existing characteristics, in order to be effective. Each addition of complexity makes the game that much more cumbersome until, eventually, it collapses under its own weight. Your proposal, and the similar granularity of every other function of DEX, creates such needless complexity. To take just one example, if I adopt your "manipulation" theory, should that new stat or DEX govern Lockpicking? Lockpicking, after al, is a skill which works by manipulation of small objects. Now, which combat-related applications should move to Manipulation? Throwing a knife, swinging a sword and firing a pistol are all manipulating the knife/sword/pistol, aren't they? Now I need to review what Manip does and what DEX does to assess their relative costs, which should ideally sum to 3 per +1 in each to equate to current levels of ability.

 

No, thank you. DEX alone is less than perfect, but splitting it into two or more sub-stats is even more less than perfect.

 

Okay, this is good question.

I have a character that due to a radiation accident has one human arm but the other arm is now just a monofiliment arm (Zero STR or possibly less) that they have complete control over and has the ability to carry and place individual cells from one location to another without damage. And such an ability may play a critical role in a Well World Campaign.

 

How is this built using existing rules without any GM hand waving of legality of the rules. One of the results adding new official rules/options is legitimacy of certain SFX builds and constructs.

 

Based on what I know of the current rules, this can't be done since there is no mechanic/guideline to distinguish what the default two limbs a character has can or can't do with enough DEX. 5th Edition Revised has changed or added some rule that might allow it.

 

One takes a physical limitation for what the arm cannot do which an ordinary arm could. One then buys extra statistics, skills, powers, etc., which define what that arm can do which an ordinary arm cannot. This comes from Basic Hero 101, and is called "reasoning from effect".

 

What's the penalty' date=' besides perception, for grabbing a specific cell out of millions. How slippery is a cell? How fragile? And so forth. Saying that it is just GM call might work if it was just for a single time or even few times, but for an ability that will be common a GM call every time just won't cut it.[/quote']

 

What is the EFFECT of grabbing a single cell out of millions?

 

You have two characters. One is an Arcturian and another is Flagian. They are identical in all respects except for the following. They both have super perception (I'm removing those penalties from the equation).

 

Arcturian Arms (Human Structure but Advanced Nerve Development: 10 STR, 50 DEX

Flavian Arms (Two 50mm Strands with thousands of monofiliment phalanges): 10 STR, 50 DEX

 

Flavians can change DNA strands by manipulating them with their phalanges. It is one of their prized marketable skills.

 

Now if we use DEX as the method of handling Manipulation, Arcturians have the same chance of manipulating DNA as the Flavians.

 

Yup. Until the Flavians, by utilizing the ability to Reason from Effect, purchase a Transform ability to convert their special effect of manipulating DNA with their phalanges into Hero System mechanics.

 

With the method I've proposed' date=' there is an actual mechanical difference in the ability to manipulate objects.[/quote']

 

Which does not tell us what happens when one moves a strand of DNA. Transform does. And it doesn't require a whole new system of mechanics to accomplish that goal.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I think it would have made far more sense to simply have created a simple penalty/bonus chart to cover these potential manipulation issues rather than creating an entirely new mechanic. A DEX roll with appropriate modifiers would plug right into the existing system without the need for a page-long (and IMHO totally unneeded) mechanic.

 

Is there ANY part of the Hero system you feel doesn't merit reworking? It's pretty clear that if you (re)designed the system to your taste, the Hero rulebook would vie with a Manhattan phone book for bulk.

 

 

"You must spread REP around"...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I think a good part of the reason we always ask "why do we need this rule?" is that it's a natural part of our process. Before we decide to add more rules' date=' we try to see if the current rules can handle the situation. If they can handle it well, then there is no need for additional rules. So part of our trying to understand the new rules you want to hammer out is trying to figure out what they can do that the current rules can't - and that basically boils down to the question of whether we need them or not. [/quote']

 

Well said and Repp'd.

 

Still can't rep TREB though...

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I can't figure out any part of Manipulation as presented by schir1964 that can't be more easily handled with Enhanced Perception (Sight and/or Touch) and perhaps a touch of Transform. Seems to me this sort of thing is precisely what the Microscopic sense modifier was designed for. Manipulating DNA would probably require 5 or 6 levels of it (x100,000 or x1,000,000 magnification). That would cost 15 or 18 CP before Limitations, which sounds about right.

 

Me, I'd just handwave it as a racial attribute of a particular species. It's not like you're going to want to use the same precision digits that can manipulate individual molecules to punch out opponents in combat.

[schir1964]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

I don't think we need a whole new Skill.

 

Hero has 67 already, a pretty good number, toss in the Ultimate Skill's optional/new ones and the number jumps to over 70. They cover pretty much everything really.

 

In fact - a number of skills require the 'manipulation' of objects as part of their base concept (Mechanics, Inventor, Electronics, Riding) to some degree.

 

What I do like here is the number of possible modifiers a GM can utilize. Sometimes what we need is not a new Mechanics but new uses for existing mechanics. Skill Modifiers have an almost infinite level of possibility and potential granularity.

 

You may not use all of them all the time, but it's nice to help create a list/table of modifiers for various bits to create Campaign Consistency.

 

I'd toss your new Skill out the window - but I think I'll keep the rest of your suggestions and apply them to other skills as appropriate.

 

BTW: here are the Skills in Hero centered around the ability to manipulate an object: Sleight Of Hand, Fast Draw, Hoist. A number of other skills include manipulating objects (Mechanics, Bugging, Concealment, etc. . .).

I respect that.

 

I can expect no more that this from anyone who might not agree with adding a new mechanic.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

What is the EFFECT of grabbing a single cell out of millions?

So they can be placed somewhere else to be analyzed separately by someone else.

 

That's the SFX, being able to carry small things without damaging them.

 

Yup. Until the Flavians' date=' by utilizing the ability to Reason from Effect, purchase a Transform ability to convert their special effect of manipulating DNA with their phalanges into Hero System mechanics.[/quote']

I did, see above. Try again Hugh.

 

Of course, you'll probably say this isn't worth anything since you'll probably never run a campaign where such an ability is useful.

 

However, in mine it will be.

 

Which does not tell us what happens when one moves a strand of DNA. Transform does. And it doesn't require a whole new system of mechanics to accomplish that goal.

Really, so just any character can move DNA as long as they have high enough DEX.

 

If that is how you want to run your games, fine. Not how I'm going to run mine.

 

Again, we are back to the impression that I am required to convince you of the need of the mechanic in order to get any constructive help. Not going to happen.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Mechanic: Manipulation (Campaign Rules)

 

So they can be placed somewhere else to be analyzed separately by someone else.

 

That's the SFX, being able to carry small things without damaging them.

You wrote an entirely new 716 word power so a character can do the same thing CSI's Gil Grissom accomplishes with a sterile Q-Tip and a test tube?