Phone back tracter

[JmOz]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

Regarding the point cost: I see it as a ripple effect, how big does this ability ripple through the game, and how often, the bigger and the more common the more points it should cost. The rule book is a guideline, if I see a power like this getting abused the phone companies will buy better antisoftware (5-10 points of MD). The player is welcome to buy a bigger and better version, but then that will cost more points, till I feel the player has spent the right amount of points for the veristility it presents in the campaign.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

This whole conversation came to mind today at work as I argued for an hour and a half to put a Trap on a TOLL number. Wow do they hate that.

 

I kept thinking "Ugh, if only I had Mind Scan. . ."

[Sean Waters]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

This whole conversation came to mind today at work as I argued for an hour and a half to put a Trap on a TOLL number. Wow do they hate that.

 

I kept thinking "Ugh, if only I had Mind Scan. . ."

I knew you were thinking that.

 

 

 

[Eric, Omnirex]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

I go for Mind Scan cause it depends on the number of minds you're looking through rather than the area. Makes sense for picking one phone out of them all, how hard depends on how many phones not the square miles.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

I go for Mind Scan cause it depends on the number of minds you're looking through rather than the area. Makes sense for picking one phone out of them all, how hard depends on how many phones not the square miles.

 

You are right that MS has built in 'population' limitations, so it is a good pick but my concern is more the consequences for other mental powers if you allow this, you should allow them too, unless it is just a campaign rule, in which case anything goes.

[Eric, Omnirex]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

You are right that MS has built in 'population' limitations' date=' so it is a good pick but my concern is more the consequences for other mental powers if you allow this, you should allow them too, unless it is just a campaign rule, in which case anything goes.[/quote']

 

I lost. "Allow this"/"allow them" what? I don't get it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

He's talking about the use of Mental Powers (which are based on EGO values) to simulate interacting with technology as a whole.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

He's talking about the use of Mental Powers (which are based on EGO values) to simulate interacting with technology as a whole.

 

Now you're reading my mind. This is just freaky

[ghost-angel]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

oh yeah... almost forgot since we don't use it at my work:

 

411.com - for 15$ they tell you what address a phone number is registered to.

[Eric, Omnirex]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

He's talking about the use of Mental Powers (which are based on EGO values) to simulate interacting with technology as a whole.

 

OH! I see!

 

It's the old "slippery slope" (aka "sloppery thinking") argument. The idea the boss must say no to a good idea in fear he said yes someone would extend the idea to how its not good.

 

Dumb. All authority is arbitrary, so use it to your advantage. Good ideas get YES, extended to bad idea gets NO.

 

If the players go "mommymommymommymommy! Billy has a zap gun, why can't I have a killkillkill gun?" the GM should go "because it's a f*$*# bad idea." If they'll walk cause they don't get to abuse the game, let 'em. You try an keep 'em, they'll walk over you, over the other players, over the idea of cooperation. Who needs that?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

OH! I see!

 

It's the old "slippery slope" (aka "sloppery thinking") argument. The idea the boss must say no to a good idea in fear he said yes someone would extend the idea to how its not good.

 

Dumb. All authority is arbitrary, so use it to your advantage. Good ideas get YES, extended to bad idea gets NO.

 

If the players go "mommymommymommymommy! Billy has a zap gun, why can't I have a killkillkill gun?" the GM should go "because it's a f*$*# bad idea." If they'll walk cause they don't get to abuse the game, let 'em. You try an keep 'em, they'll walk over you, over the other players, over the idea of cooperation. Who needs that?

 

Actually not that dumb.

 

Hero IS a game built on principles and the principles are what gives it structure. The authority of the GM is derived from the rule set - without that the GM is just telling you a story and letting you chip in.

 

That carries certain responsibilities in game design and what the GM can and should legitimately allow. Take away the structure and you take away a lot of the point of the game.

 

I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm saying you can't be arbitrary about it. If you do it then accept the consequences for the rest of the game.

 

Moreover in a heroic game there is a much easier way. Simply require a systems operation skill roll for communication systems and require that the person making the roll has access to the appropriate technology. You don't have to build anything and you can use the existing rule structure to get exactly what you want. Hero has not, as far as I know, produced a model for the telephone system, so there's really no need to get worked up about how to manipulate it.

 

Stop swearing at players, treat them all equally and simply apply a practical, functional solution that requires no handwaving and that works within the existing game structure.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

To expand on Sean's thoughts...

 

Before you can properly model anything in the Hero System you have to know where it's going to be applied, to what style of game it is being applied in, and how you want it to affect associated aspects of that game.

 

Once you get that, you decide What Exactly it is you need the construct to do. And then you find the most appropriate (for the game) method of modeling that particular ability.

 

The above reasons are why I do not follow the meta rule of "given two equally valid builds, the most expensive is how to go" - because it is both far too subjective and assumes the Rules Set trumps the Game Concept.

 

There are, as this thread has explored, several methods of modeling the idea of locating the originating address of an incoming call.

 

Given that this is something that can be done In Real Life, you can go from extremely realistic to extremely fantastic when modeling it. RL simply requires some time, and access to some very specific databases (Skills and/or some form of Access Perk) - or Super Science could in fact create a handy little device to do it as well (Detect and Mindscan are to that come immediately to mind).

 

For Jmoz's needs he decided the device was Superscience, and that Mindscan best fit the Game Model he was working within.

[JmOz]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

To expand on Sean's thoughts...

 

Before you can properly model anything in the Hero System you have to know where it's going to be applied, to what style of game it is being applied in, and how you want it to affect associated aspects of that game.

 

Once you get that, you decide What Exactly it is you need the construct to do. And then you find the most appropriate (for the game) method of modeling that particular ability.

 

The above reasons are why I do not follow the meta rule of "given two equally valid builds, the most expensive is how to go" - because it is both far too subjective and assumes the Rules Set trumps the Game Concept.

 

There are, as this thread has explored, several methods of modeling the idea of locating the originating address of an incoming call.

 

Given that this is something that can be done In Real Life, you can go from extremely realistic to extremely fantastic when modeling it. RL simply requires some time, and access to some very specific databases (Skills and/or some form of Access Perk) - or Super Science could in fact create a handy little device to do it as well (Detect and Mindscan are to that come immediately to mind).

 

For Jmoz's needs he decided the device was Superscience, and that Mindscan best fit the Game Model he was working within.

 

small (and trivial) point of corection, for my games I discriminate between Cutting edge, bleeding edge, and superscience, this device would qualify as Bleeding Edge...

[ghost-angel]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

Indeed you could break it down however you wanted the two major categories of "Can Be Done In Real Life" and "Can't Be Done In Real Life" can help one decide on how they want to model any given ability.

[Eric, Omnirex]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

I guess I see it as being from cooperation and story telling. GM devices use the rules how is simplest, and anyone going "that means I can do yadda" is not cooperating and not there for story telling.

 

Arbitrary to keep the story moving is OK by me and who I prefer play with.

[Eric, Omnirex]

Re: Phone back tracter

 

I guess I see it as being from cooperation and story telling. GM devices use the rules how is simplest, and anyone going "that means I can do yadda" is not cooperating and not there for story telling.

 

Arbitrary to keep the story moving is OK by me and who I prefer play with.