Normal Human

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

It's in the bloodly description of the mechanic.

 

 

Where?

 

Can you cite a page reference please?

 

I've just checked 5er and there is no mention of the word "Human" anywhere under NCM that I can find.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

sure it isn't. I don't hate NCM at all' date=' I've argued for it for a while. [/quote']

Then I apologize for the misconception.

 

You've ceased to amuse me, plonk.

Wasn't trying to amuse you. Not real happy with my interaction with you at the moment either.

 

and what is a "plonk"?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

 

and what is a "plonk"?

 

google is your friend.

plonk

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

Where?

 

Can you cite a page reference please?

 

I've just checked 5ER and there is no mention of the word "Human" anywhere under NCM that I can find.

And you won't. "Human" is not the operative term. "Human" is meaningless when we could be playing on any conceivable game world.

 

"normal" is the operative term. In a world based on humans, a normal character => a member of homo sapiens sapiens. Eg, normal human.

 

On a game world where the base character race is intelligent dogs, "normal" => normal intelligent dog. Whatever that means for that game world.

(Diito Kzinti or any other imagined character race.)

 

The NCM DisAd is for playing a character that is heroic for that game world when running a superheroic campaign in that game world.

 

See post #214 by Peregrine in this thread for reference.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

google is your friend.

plonk

A horrible overreaction to a discussion.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

And you won't. "Human" is not the operative term. "Human" is meaningless when we could be playing on any conceivable game world.

 

"normal" is the operative term. In a world based on humans, a normal character => a member of homo sapiens sapiens. Eg, normal human.

 

On a game world where the base character race is intelligent dogs, "normal" => normal intelligent dog. Whatever that means for that game world.

(Diito Kzinti or any other imagined character race.)

 

The NCM DisAd is for playing a character that is heroic for that game world when running a superheroic campaign in that game world.

 

See post #214 by Peregrine in this thread for reference.

 

So, you are defending your additional house-rule sfx derived connotations associated with NCM by quoting the rulebook whose very sections quoted only deal with characteristics and nothing else.

 

Not a very convincing argument.

 

I've also noted that you ignored my earlier Iron-Man comparison as well.

(heck, I'm still waiting for a concrete numbers answer to the Superman/choke-hold question in the other thread, I even posted a link to my version of the character to apply the number too).

[Peregrine]

Re: Normal Human

 

It's in the bloodly description of the mechanic.

 

That's as "default" as it gets.

 

Not. Any. More.

 

It =was= in the description of the mechanic in 4e RAW.

 

It =is no longer= in the description of the mechanic starting with 5e; by =5e= (and later) RAW, that SFX is no longer in the description of or the default for that mechanic. I have posted the relevant page references and text upthread and will not spam the board by reposting.

 

So if you are running 4e and/or are using 4e RAW as your reference point, fine. But if so, there is no longer any common ground for discussing this topic, because the rest of us (or a high supermajority thereof) are using 5e and later (5eR, 6e), and the RAW therein are as indicated =multiple times= in this thread, including above in this post.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

So' date=' you are defending your additional house-rule sfx derived connotations associated with NCM by quoting the rulebook whose very sections quoted [u']only[/u] deal with characteristics and nothing else.

 

Not a very convincing argument.

Maybe not to you. To me it is axiomatic that every effect in HERO has a SFX associated with it; and that properly simulating an effect includes properly simulating its associated SFX and the implications of the SFX.

 

The SFX of NCM is that you are genetically a "normal" in your campaign world.

You get points for NCM because you are DisAd when competing in certain ways with your world's "super humanity" (whatever "humanity" means for that game world.)

Properly playing and GMing a character with NCM means properly taking that SFX into account.

 

so noted that you ignored my earlier Iron-Man comparison as well.

(heck, I'm still waiting for a concrete numbers answer to the Superman/choke-hold question in the other thread, I even posted a link to my version of the character to apply the number too).

You may have noticed I'm getting a bit inundated?

I -do- have a "real life" you know.

 

Yours are not the only posts I have not responded to every single one of.

 

I -am- trying to chew through all this is some sort of reasonable priority order.

 

...and there are other reasons I am on these boards.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

Not. Any. More.

 

It =was= in the description of the mechanic in 4e RAW.

 

It =is no longer= in the description of the mechanic starting with 5e; by =5e= (and later) RAW, that SFX is no longer in the description of or the default for that mechanic. I have posted the relevant page references and text upthread and will not spam the board by reposting.

 

So if you are running 4e and/or are using 4e RAW as your reference point, fine. But if so, there is no longer any common ground for discussing this topic, because the rest of us (or a high supermajority thereof) are using 5e and later (5eR, 6e), and the RAW therein are as indicated =multiple times= in this thread, including above in this post.

As long as it is called Normal Characteristic Maximum, the implication is there is in the description since titles are part of what is being described.

 

I do not see a way around that.

[jtelson]

Re: Normal Human

 

As long as it is called Normal Characteristic Maximum, the implication is there is in the description since titles are part of what is being described.

 

I do not see a way around that.

 

Consider if you will Force Field and Energy Blast, neither requiring or implying Force or Energy.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

The frequency argument can be used equally well vs. a character like Iron-Man (or Champions own Defender for that matter), the seemingly 'Poster Boy' for NCM. How often did the person wearing the Iron-Man suit not have access to its abilities in the classic* Avengers stories?

 

*Pre-Civil War.

Now I'll try and get to this.

 

A lot depends on exactly how the points were spent to buy the PA.

Whether the PA is a SFX, a OIF, etc clearly matters.

 

Traditionally Tony Stark almost never has a problem getting to and into his PA

 

In short, the armor is mostly a SFX rather than a Limitation.

 

Now we could easily design things so that Tony can't as easily conceal, transport, or put on his PA.

=Then= we could have a Limitation based on the frequency with which Tony can't get into his armor even if he wants to.

 

Nastier is to make it so that Iron Man sometimes has to get =out= of his PA when he doesn't want to (The _Iron Man Armored Adventures_ cartoon simulates this by teen-age Tony needing to get out of the armor reasonably often while using it because it runs out of power.)

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

That's a very 'interesting' way to sidestep the question.

 

I imagine that nearly 90% of the champion playing board members here would use OIHID to build a powered armor character (just like Defender, who is essentially an Iron Man clone just like the Champions are a fuzzy homage to the Avengers).

 

There are other ways to do it of course like OIF & Multiform but I don't recall anyone suggesting to build one without any of them.

[Peregrine]

Re: Normal Human

 

As long as it is called Normal Characteristic Maximum, the implication is there is in the description since titles are part of what is being described.

 

I do not see a way around that.

 

1. It is no longer called that in 6e; it is officially just Characteristic Maxima; I would guess probably to dispel the interpretation you are suggesting, though I have no firm evidence.

 

2. If you can show me in =5eR= RAW where the word Normal as used in that rule name is stated as referring to "non-supers", rather than the dictionary definition "common, usual", (which would render the name of the rule "(Common or Usual) Characteristic Maxima"), I will concede your point.

 

However, the use of the word "normal" to refer to "non-supers" elsewhere in the rules is not sufficient proof, unless the word "normal" is =only/exclusively= used for that purpose, is defined as =generally= being used for that purpose "unless otherwise stated", or there is other unambiguous support for the word "normal" as generally referring to non-supers.

 

I suggest, though, that the association of NCM in 5e with Heroic genres as a standard rule, and the presence of the same NCM in Superheroic genres as a per-character exception, would preclude that as the most valid interpretation of the word as used. Also, the change in the description of the rule from 4e to 5e (the latter of which was intended to stand on its own as complete rules not requiring any reference to any prior editions), which removed the explicit reference to NCM as distinguishing non-supers from supers in a Superheroic setting, implies that the correct definition of "Normal" as used in NCM is the dictionary definition referenced above.

 

In short, you found and were able to reference your copies of 5eR in the middle of this discussion, and appear to be trying to interpret the new (to you for this discussion) rules by the old understanding, disregarding the high probability that the new author intended to change the meaning when he changed the words. I offer as supporting evidence the further change of wording (by the same author) in 6e, which removes Characteristic Maxima even farther from its 4e definition.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

That's a very 'interesting' way to sidestep the question.

 

I imagine that nearly 90% of the Champion playing board members here would use OIHID to build a powered armor character (just like Defender, who is essentially an Iron Man clone just like the Champions are a fuzzy homage to the Avengers).

 

There are other ways to do it of course like OIF & Multiform but I don't recall anyone suggesting to build one without any of them.

I was not trying to sidestep anything.

I've seen players make all sorts of mini-max attempts at getting a desired result as cheaply as possible and with as little downside as possible.

 

The example of a suit of PA being an SFX unless it has access/usability Limitations that actually affect game play is a standard one that's been around for as long as Champions has.

 

To get the OIHID bonus, there has to some problem associated with getting into or staying in your Hero ID that actually affects game play.

 

For example Donald Blake can not change into Thor unless he has his walking stick +and+ he can get outside +and+ be unobserved. In addition, Thor reverts to Don Blake if he is separated from Mjolnir for 61 secs.

This is a valid OIHID concept.

 

OTOH, a particular version of Tony Stark almost never has any problems changing into Iron Man. He could be sun bathing in Capri with nothing but a bathing suit and yet he "somehow" has easy access to his armor and can become Iron Man at will when needed.

Tony Stark's armor is a SFX in this interpretation.

This version of Iron Man does -not- get the OIHID bonus.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

Sure.

 

I have no doubt that some more recent incarnations of Iron Man never show him have problems changing into the suit. But earlier versions of the character DID have issues changing and therefore such a character would qualify for NCM. Heck, it can be argued that Iron Man/Tony Stark is really just an amalgram of Superman & Batman (essentially what Bruce Wayne might do in a world without a Superman).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Normal Human

 

A Limitation that does not Limit the character during actual game play is not worth points.

 

As long as Supes spends the vast majority of his time -not- under a red sun, he is not in a campaign where the effects of a red sun matter.

 

A novice attempting to get this Limitation is showing that they do not understand HERO. An experienced HERO user attempting to get this Limitation is Trying To Pull A Fast One. (AKA "munchkin" behavior.)

 

On the the vast majority of game worlds, Supes stats are not powers unless you can come up with some other rationale that will hold up to the RAW.

(if your campaign -is- going to spend a very large percentage of its time under a red sun, that clearly changes things.)

 

First off, depending on the era one reads, there are many periods where Supes finds himself without his powers due to red sun radiation pretty routinely.

 

Second, "a limitation which is not sufficiently limiting to generate points" is typically a -0 limitation. In games where a red sun will not come up often enough to merit a -1/4 limitation, it is a -0 limitation. That still leaves his STR as a power. As well, one could easily limit Supes' stats to be Drained like they were part of a "Kryptonian EC". This is also a limitation and would also remove his characteristics from NCM.

 

As to the munchkin issue, every use of NCM that I have ever seen has been on a character who spends less than 20 points on characteristics over the maximum. His Disadvantage restricts him less than it should for the points he gets. That sounds like the definition of munchkin building.

 

You didn't address him taking NCM I notice.

 

In fact, your entire argument of NCM comes from a non-RAW point of view so you don't get to shove RAW at us now.

 

Very true.

 

NCM implies normal human of what we ITRW call ordinary flesh, blood, and bone.

 

That SFX has in play implications just as choosing your EB as Ice Blast does or choosing that you are super strong because you are super dense or ...

 

NCM is a standard in most heroic games. In a typical space opera game, I can play any number of alien beings (wookies, ithorians, andromedans, minbari, cantauri, catmen, hawkmen, bugmen, treemen, rockmen, androids, robots, etc.) all of whom have NCM. They aren't genetically normal humans. In fantasy games, I can play a dwarf, elf, goblin, gargoyle, walking stone statue, animated skeleton, faerie, winged one, merman, orc, gnome, demon or seraph. They all have NCM as well. It is a MECHANIC, not a special effect.

 

NCM implies nothing of the sort.

 

Once More - NCM only states you pay double for Characteristics after a certain point (default 20 for Primaries).

 

There is no attached SFX of "normal person" in any way. Stop adding one.

 

Bingo.

 

Consider if you will Force Field and Energy Blast' date=' neither requiring or implying Force or Energy.[/quote']

 

1. It is no longer called that in 6e; it is officially just Characteristic Maxima; I would guess probably to dispel the interpretation you are suggesting' date=' though I have no firm evidence.[/quote']

 

As evidence, the fact that "energy" was removed from "blast" and force field folded into a mechanic used for that and many other effects (as was force wall) seem pretty good.

 

By the way "Flash" can take away hearing and "Darkness" need not be to sight. The names of the mechanics, as jtelson indicates, are descriptors for the mechanics, not hanging SFX on them.

 

In the end, NCM does one thing. It doubles the cost of certain purchases. I can build a 30 DEX Elf with NCM, or a 60 STR Wookie. I can do this in a 150 point game, much less a 250, 350 or 400 point Supers game. Nothing about NCM prevents this. It serves only to change the cost.

[Greywind]

Re: Normal Human

 

The frequency argument can be used equally well vs. a character like Iron-Man (or Champions own Defender for that matter), the seemingly 'Poster Boy' for NCM. How often did the person wearing the Iron-Man suit not have access to its abilities in the classic* Avengers stories?

 

*Pre-Civil War.

Never. Now, in his own title, on the other hand...

 

Ki-Rin, answer a simple question for me if you would. By your definition using NCM, would every single person in the game that does not have super powers/abilities, be entitled to NCM as a disad?

 

Normals.

 

DNPCs.

 

Furniture/wallpaper characters.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

Hugh,

 

I do not give -0 Limitations. Those are essentially SFX.

 

At this point, it is clear we are not going to agree about the SFX implications of NCM.

 

Not a problem. We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

The rest of your more recent post has been responded to in different posts by me to others.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

Never. Now, in his own title, on the other hand...

 

Ki-Rin, answer a simple question for me if you would. By your definition using NCM, would every single person in the game that does not have super powers/abilities, be entitled to NCM as a disad?

 

Normals.

 

DNPCs.

 

Furniture/wallpaper characters.

NCM is a possible bonus to be given to heroic characters competing against superheros in a superheroic campaign. It's a DisAd bonus for those worlds.

 

It can also be used as a (potentially very ham handed) game balance tool for heroic campaigns. But that is a different topic than what we are presently discussing.

 

Heroic characters in supers campaigns do not need to take NCM. This means that they do not want these SFX issues to come up in play in such a manner as to affect how they are played.

OTOH, Heroic characters who -do- take NCM in a supers campaign are getting extra points up front for character design in exchange for

a= restrictions on how they can develop in the future

b= having the implications of their "merely mortal" SFX come up in game play.

 

So,

1= non characters are not entitled to NCM

(so no NCM inanimate or nonsentient objects.)

2= Normals and DNPCs might be depending on context.

3= NPC's and PC's might be depending on character concept and GM or player choice.

[Greywind]

Re: Normal Human

 

NCM is a possible bonus to be given to heroic characters competing against superheros in a superheroic campaign. It's a DisAd bonus for those worlds.

 

It can also be used as a (potentially very ham handed) game balance tool for heroic campaigns. But that is a different topic than what we are presently discussing.

 

Heroic characters in supers campaigns do not need to take NCM. This means that they do not want these SFX issues to come up in play in such a manner as to affect how they are played.

OTOH, Heroic characters who -do- take NCM in a supers campaign are getting extra points up front for character design in exchange for

a= restrictions on how they can develop in the future

b= having the implications of their "merely mortal" SFX come up in game play.

 

So,

1= non characters are not entitled to NCM

(so no NCM inanimate or nonsentient objects.)

2= Normals and DNPCs might be depending on context.

3= NPC's and PC's might be depending on character concept and GM or player choice.

Which is what, from my understanding, was the biggest argument against it. It was not balanced. Technically, every character that is defined intrinsically as "normal" should be qualified for it. Whether they are player or non, so long as they are "normal."

 

Unless you take characteristics in excess of the cap to justify the disad, then it is really not a disad, seems to be the argument.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

Which is what' date=' from my understanding, was the biggest argument against it. It was not balanced. Technically, every character that is defined intrinsically as "normal" should be qualified for NCM. Whether they are player or non, so long as they are "normal."[/quote']

..and they are. Look at my post.

 

But "qualify" does not mean "must take". The example of Bats in JLA and Cap in The Avengers shows that it is certainly canon for a superheroic normal to be in a campaign w/o having to deal with there being a constant annoying reminder that they are a normal compared to their more god-like brethren.

 

Unless you take characteristics in excess of the cap to justify the disad, then it is really not a disad, seems to be the argument.

Yep, and I've been pointing out the flaw in that interpretation quite vigorously during my entire participation in this thread.

 

Every game mechanic or group of mechanics in HERO that results in a game effect has SFX.

Every. Single. One.

If you are playing or GMing HERO properly, ONE MUST SIMULATE AS BEST AS POSSIBLE THE SFX OF AN EFFECT IN BOTH COSTS AND PLAY

In fact many of the ways munchkins try to manipulate the system basically boil down to violating this meta principle.

 

If you've bought a stat or group of stats with NCM or CM on them, there is a SFX involved. And that SFX must and should be simulated as best we need to in play if we want to keep things fair and fun.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Normal Human

 

I find it interesting that you keep tossing Cap into this. Cap isn't a mainline human. He was altered by the Super Soldier serum. This indirectly makes him a "mutate." His strength' date=' regardless of all the builds that put him at 20, was above a 25. His Dex would/should be pushing 30. I honestly would not ever consider Cap a possibility for NCM.[/quote']

I =finally= get to respond to this.

 

Well established Marvel canon is the effect of his origin story is to put Steve Rogers at the peak of what is physically possible for normal humans.

 

There has even been one very notable plot line where Steve decided to experiment with having true superpowers to overcome what he felt was a growing power gap between his physical abilities and those of common opponents.

He ended up deciding that the effects "unbalanced" him (his term in the comic) to the point where it hampered his effectiveness.

 

Except in plot lines like above, (where Cap has had STR as high as 35-40)

My most accurate homage build of Cap gives him a STR and DEX of about 25 and =lot's= of skill with both using those stats and Pushing them.

 

Cap being best modeled with stats in the 25 range was in fact a critical factor in my decision to set NCM at 25 in my game worlds.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

You do realize that the default 'cap of 20' on base stats from NCM is not actually a maximum right? It is just the point at which any increase beyond costs double. 30 is the actual 'hard cap' that would apply to most base stats of 'normal humans' like Captain America and Batman.

[jtelson]

Re: Normal Human

 

You do realize that the default 'cap of 20' on base stats from NCM is not actually a maximum right? It is just the point at which any increase beyond costs double. 30 is the actual 'hard cap' that would apply to most base stats of 'normal humans' like Captain America and Batman.

 

There is no actual 'hard cap' defined by the disadvantage in 4th, 5th or 5th Revised.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Normal Human

 

There is no actual 'hard cap' defined by the disadvantage in 4th' date=' 5th or 5th Revised.[/quote']

 

I was referring to the suggested values on page 40 of 5er:

 

CHARACTERISTICS COMPARISON TABLE

Legendary = 21-30

Superhuman = 31+

 

The next page also has this sentence:

 

The upper limit of Legendary is the upper limit of normal human attainment.

 

It may not be included in the description of NCM but it IS in the book. 20 is not a hard cap.