SideKick: Equipment rules

[Fergal1982]

I've just purchased the sidekick PDF, and have been reading it over to see how much I like it. However, I've encountered something I dont quite understand, and was hoping someone could help me out:

 

Firstly:

Wielding HTH weapons costs endurance' date=' but the END cost depends on the STR used with the weapon (if any). For example, if a character has 20 STR and wields a Broadsword, he spends 2 END every phase he uses it.[/quote']

This confuses me a bit. I gather this relies on the power rule that using a power costs 1 END per 10 Active Points. Now, the broadsword in the tables has an Active cost of 30 (so thats 3END to use). Is that right? I dont see how the STR is modifying it in that case. Can someone point me in the right direction on this?

 

Secondly: It states that Heroic Characters pay for equipment with currency (which means that they need to have the familiarity skills to use the weapon). Superheroic just spend Character points to accumulate what they want, which gives them automatic proficiency with whatever they buy. Thats all fine, but it doesnt seem to mention what the actual costs are in relation to the items. I'm assuming its some sort of conversion based off the Real cost of a power/item, but I cant seem to see where this is mentioned, can someone point this out for me too?

 

Thanks

Fergal

[ghost-angel]

Equipment is almost always built with the Costs 0 END Advantage.

 

Monetary Costs are based on what the GM sets them in the Campaign. Hero System does not assume to know what your campaigns economy is - and as some advice basing price off of Point Costs is a generally bad idea.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

I've just purchased the sidekick PDF, and have been reading it over to see how much I like it. However, I've encountered something I dont quite understand, and was hoping someone could help me out:

 

Firstly:

 

This confuses me a bit. I gather this relies on the power rule that using a power costs 1 END per 10 Active Points. Now, the broadsword in the tables has an Active cost of 30 (so thats 3END to use). Is that right? I dont see how the STR is modifying it in that case. Can someone point me in the right direction on this?

 

The HTH weapons listed in Sidekick and other HERO books are designed using the HERO Powers rules, but for simplicity's sake those design elements aren't shown. However, by the way that they're designed the Active Points for all these weapons includes the Advantage Reduced Endurance, so that none of them actually cost any of the wielder's Endurance to use. The only Endurance the weapon's user expends is for the Strength he employs when swinging the weapon.

 

Secondly: It states that Heroic Characters pay for equipment with currency (which means that they need to have the familiarity skills to use the weapon). Superheroic just spend Character points to accumulate what they want' date=' which gives them automatic proficiency with whatever they buy. Thats all fine, but it doesnt seem to mention what the actual costs [i']are[/i] in relation to the items. I'm assuming its some sort of conversion based off the Real cost of a power/item, but I cant seem to see where this is mentioned, can someone point this out for me too?

 

Thanks

Fergal

 

As ghost-angel points out above, the monetary costs may vary a lot depending on how you want your campaign world's economy to work. Some HERO sourcebooks, such as the Fantasy HERO genre book, contain suggested price lists for many mundane items, but those are just guidelines.

 

Fergal, if that isn't clear enough, or you have other questions, feel free to post them. We'll do our best to answer. And welcome to the community!

[The Suave]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

The reason the broadsword only takes 2 END to wield probably has to do with the STR Minimum of the weapon. For example: when you swing a sword with a STR Min of 13, you only pay END for 13 STR. I'm not sure of the STR Min of the Broadsword they're talking about, but this is the solution that immediately jumps to mind. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Fergal1982]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

AH. I get you now. I see where you are getting the 2 END from:

 

STR costs Endurance to use - 1 END per 10 points of STR

 

So that accounts for the 2 END to wield the broadsword at 20 STR, this is above the STR minimum for the broadsword (12), so they dont suffer any penalties to OCV or Damage class.

 

Question, does that mean you could pull your punches, or otherwise hit weaker than normal? For instance, I have 20 STR. hitting someone costs me 2 END, but I only have 1 remaining. Could I still take the shot, but only apply half my STR to the attack?

[ghost-angel]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

AH. I get you now. I see where you are getting the 2 END from:

 

 

 

So that accounts for the 2 END to wield the broadsword at 20 STR, this is above the STR minimum for the broadsword (12), so they dont suffer any penalties to OCV or Damage class.

 

Question, does that mean you could pull your punches, or otherwise hit weaker than normal? For instance, I have 20 STR. hitting someone costs me 2 END, but I only have 1 remaining. Could I still take the shot, but only apply half my STR to the attack?

 

You can use any amount of STR equal to or greater than the STR Minimum listed. If you only use 12STR for the broadsword you only do the Damage listed and use 1 END, if you use 20STR with the broadsword you do the Sword Damage + 8STR Damage (20 STR Used - 12 STR Minimum) and use 2 END.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

IIRC, Heroic Characters use their weapons at a 1:5 ratio, not a 1:10 ratio, but I have to look that up. Otherwise, you've got the gist; you're spending END for the STR used -- irregardless of the weapons Str Minima (which imposes an accuracy penalty if it isn't met, not an additional END cost).

[MorpheousXO]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

IIRC' date=' Heroic Characters use their weapons at a 1:5 ratio, not a 1:10 ratio, but I have to look that up. Otherwise, you've got the gist; you're spending END for the STR used -- irregardless of the weapons Str Minima (which imposes an accuracy penalty if it isn't met, not an additional END cost).[/quote']

 

Yup! Generally it's advised that Heroic Characters spend 1 END per 5 Points of STR (I think that's overall, not just weapons, but it's only STR).

 

Now, I'm sorry to nitpick, but... irregardless isn't a word, it's just regardless... please don't smite me with the ice creams!!!!

[Thia Halmades]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

Irregardless is too a word; it's just a non standard one.

 

Thia Halmades glares at you, ready to attack!

"You've ruined your own lexicon! You'll not ruin mine!"

 

*smacks Morpheus upside his head with the HICCoS on principal*

[MorpheousXO]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

Irregardless is too a word; it's just a non standard one.

 

Thia Halmades glares at you, ready to attack!

"You've ruined your own lexicon! You'll not ruin mine!"

 

*smacks Morpheus upside his head with the HICCoS on principal*

 

*lick* mmm, creamy!

 

Well, whaddayaknow, learn something new everyday. Didn't know it was making a plodding way towards being an excepted word.

 

Ok, enough of the thread jack (I'm getting good at that ), CARRY ON!!!!

[Thia Halmades]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

*lick* mmm, creamy!

 

Well, whaddayaknow, learn something new everyday. Didn't know it was making a plodding way towards being an excepted word.

 

Ok, enough of the thread jack (I'm getting good at that ), CARRY ON!!!!

 

Not to pick a nit, but the word isn't becoming 'excepted.' It's becoming 'accepted.' It isn't being left out (excepted) but included (accepted).

[ghost-angel]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

It should be excepted.

 

I don't care if they put it in the dictionary. It's a word only because people are ignorant.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

irregardless of their education level, it's in common usage. Use of a word does not, automatically, imply ignorance.

 

*hack, cough*

[Kdansky]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

Irregardless is too a word; it's just a non standard one.

 

Thia Halmades glares at you, ready to attack!

"You've ruined your own lexicon! You'll not ruin mine!"

 

*...on principal*

 

You're hitting a principal!? Don't you mean on principle?

[ghost-angel]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

irregardless of their education level, it's in common usage. Use of a word does not, automatically, imply ignorance.

 

*hack, cough*

 

education has nothing to do with ignorance.

 

This is probably the only instance of vocabularization that actually pisses me off simply because it's making up a word for a word that already exists.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

education has nothing to do with ignorance.

 

This is probably the only instance of vocabularization that actually pisses me off simply because it's making up a word for a word that already exists.

 

GA, I'm not trying to antagonize you; let's be clear about that. However, we're talking about English, a language that happens to be a pastiche of a half dozen other languages to begin with. If "irregardless" is in my vocabulary, and everyone knows what I mean, and it's been around for nearly a century, why does it get under your skin this badly? I could say "It's irrelevant to the conversation," and I could say "regardless of the design," but for whatever reason, damned if I know, I've picked up "irregardless" and it's stuck.

 

I just don't see why you're throwing this big a fit.

 

And yes, I meant "principle." Shows what I get for returning snipe for snipe.

[ghost-angel]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

When I write if I make up a new word, or create a new tense for a word it's because its meaning/usage didn't exist.

 

"irregardless" is not creating a new word for an unused situation, it is making up a word to replace a word that already exists, without even adding nuance (like large and huge and giant... nuances on a concept). It's just bad English. Not even Slang English, just Bad English.

 

The word has no reason to exist other than people couldn't be bothered to understand both what they were saying (since "irregardless" manages to contain a double negative all by itself) and that the word they really wanted was in point of fact "regardless" (which doesn't contain a double negative).

 

It's sloppy. And not in a "oh, that was interesting" kind of way.

[Akiva]

Re: SideKick: Equipment rules

 

Sorry, Thia, but I have to agree with GA on this one. The English language is quite a bit like HERO: just because you can do something with it doesn't mean that you should.