Heavy Drinker

[PerennialRook]

My gnome, Ramne (shortened to Rom by my party because aparently the two sylables were to hard to remember), is a heavy drinker, though quite resistant to alcohol's effects. To simulate this (because I was not allowed to buy life support: immunity to alcohol) my dm said I could increasew my CON roll vs the effects of alcohol by +1 fro every three points I spend. I'm new to the game and all, but isn't this a little expensive?

 

-Preston

[Kintara]

Hmm, it seems high, yes. Immunity to alcohol is 3 points, so it is logical that a simple resistance would be less. But I'll concede to the GM that Life Support is rather supernatural in power. I'm assuming he's applying some sort of limitation on Constitution. I'd say the limitation should be at least -1 1/2 (I'd give -2) for the Limited Power, and -1/2 for No Figured Characteristics. That would be at least one third cost, the problem is that you need five levels before you recieve a bonus on characteristic rolls. So that does come out to around 3 points a level.

 

Of course, that's pretty high. I'd say a far more equitable way would be to allow you to buy limited Power Defense vs. Imbibed Alcohol. Of course, he probably has the same concerns with this as he does with LS.

 

Edit: Ask if you could take penalty skill levels instead. That might be a way to simulate the effects. Similarly, point him to the Talents section. The sidebar for Environmental Movement gives another example of how to deal with this. Personally, I don't understand the GM's ruling, to be honest.

[Uncle Shecky]

+1 for 3 pts is unfairly expensive when immunity is only 3 pts, but I think Kintara is right that this is the GM's reasoning: +1 CON roll takes +5 CON and costs 10 pts, so even with all the possible lims, you won't get +1 for less than 2 or 3 pts.

 

I think you could argue that you should be able to buy +1 for 1 or 2 pts by looking at it as a skill level. After all, your GM probably isn't treating acohol as an attack modeled with the HERO system (STUN drain? negative skill levels? EGO attack?): he's just treating it as something to address with a CON roll. If that's the case, you should be able to modify that roll very cheaply, just like you can modify a perception roll.

 

I think it should be as cheap as buying up your PER roll with a single sense: +1 per 1 pt. That's still a rip-off given that total immunity is only 3 pts, but it's a much better deal. And you can still get drunk due to excessive intake (even gnomes have a limit) or due to a blown skill roll (perhaps representing you losing track of how much you've had).

[RadeFox]

You could also see if your GM will let you buy a verison of the Talent, Resistance, which would only be vs Alcohol's effects. This would be both cheap and simple. Huzzah!!! Another round of ale, Innkeep!

[CrosshairCollie]

You could also, maybe, get Environmental Movement: Not affected by Intoxication. Drunk, but who cares?

[Talon]

Or see if he'll let you take LS: Immunity to Alcohol with a Limitation "not really immune, just gets +X to rolls", so you end up with what you want (cheap cost for a minor effect) and what he wants (still affected by alcohol).

 

If he refuses this, watch out for beer-breathing dragons.

[The Mad GM]

Life Support offers lower cost variants for Aging, to model very long lived but mortal characters. I don't see why Immunity to alcohol couldn't be subdivided the same way:

 

1 pt - Character can consume two times as much alcohol for the same effect

2 pt - Character can consume four times as much...

3 pt - Immune to alcohol

 

The multipliers are frankly arbitrary. Even if they don't want to use this construct, a 3 pt level for a single stat roll only under certain conditions is waaay to much. Especially for something that is only really background color.

[Vondy]

I would buy the immunity and give it an activation roll of something akin to 15- with some name like "obscene alcohol tolerance"

 

It would cost 2 points, wouldn't be "suprnatural", and would be rolled whenever the character had downed a lot of booze.

[Demonsong]

As the GM in question I have a set list of powers and abilities that I will allow PC to have. I have no reason to just keep adding to that list every time a PC wants to do something different. I was not (and am not) going to add Immunity to Alcohol (or any other poisons) to my normal fantasy Heroes game.

 

Above and beyond that instead of simply saying “no you can’t have that power†I gave the character in question another option.

 

CON +5 (10points) -2 disadvantage only for alcohol tolerance rolls = 3pts per +1

 

 

It may not be the best option or the most cost effective. But it’s what I came up with and it’s what I am going to use.

 

The player has the option to take or leave it. His choice.

 

I was doing him a favor to begin with.

[Vondy]

The player asked a question and we answered. No one here gave you advice on how to run your game, nor did anyone criticize you. In hero there are a number of valid ways to construct things, and a number of valid ways to adjudicate games.

 

If you want them to use your construct and you don't want to consider other options that's your business, but I don't think "I don't want to do it that way so you guys shouldn't even talk about it or make suggestions" - which is the tack you are taking - is a valid stance to take on the boards. I don't think it will lead to strong hero-fu, either.

 

Personally, I think your method is overpriced and clunky - there, now you have some criticism to complain about - but its your game and you have the power to be as inflexible as your little heart desires. As for me, my only questions tend towards: "is it in concept?", "is it abusive?", "and is it elegant?"

 

To each his own.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

As the GM in question I have a set list of powers and abilities that I will allow PC to have. I have no reason to just keep adding to that list every time a PC wants to do something different. I was not (and am not) going to add Immunity to Alcohol (or any other poisons) to my normal fantasy Heroes game.

 

Above and beyond that instead of simply saying “no you can’t have that power†I gave the character in question another option.

 

CON +5 (10points) -2 disadvantage only for alcohol tolerance rolls = 3pts per +1

 

 

It may not be the best option or the most cost effective. But it’s what I came up with and it’s what I am going to use.

 

The player has the option to take or leave it. His choice.

 

I was doing him a favor to begin with.

 

hmmm...a standard list of powers and abilities that characters can have. If it's not on the list, you can't have it! Sounds like a different game system than the very flexible Hero System. Perhaps "Feat: Resistant to Alcohol" might be appropriate?

 

I'm with D-Man on this one (but far less tactful). What's the point of having a fkexible game system if you're just going to make it into an inflexible system? Lines have to be drawn, but Immunity to Alcohol doesn't strike me as a game breaker.

[The Mad GM]

Dudes, lay off the guy

 

What's the point of having a flexible system if you can't use it to support the setting that you want? It sounds like a low magic game with players who like to push things. The whole booze thing is trivial, really, but out of context, there's no reason to dis either side.

[Demonsong]

I think that I may not be expressing my self very well, let me try again.

 

I am running what I would call a more realistic Fantasy Hero campaign. Yes I know….. Lets just say it’s as a realistic as one can be in Fantasy setting. In my mind what I have laid out keeps every thing balanced and equal. I have kept the overly strange, odd or unusual to a minimum. I would include a little 3 and 1/2 foot tall Gnome that can out drink your average ogre in that very unusual group.

 

So I have limited some things, and not let PC have access to others, all for the greater good, or balance. Has this limited some options for PC’s? Maybe a little, but I have received no negative feed back about that. And believe me I have asked, several time. I have received a lot of neutral and good feed back about the Hero system, my game mastering, and the world we game in.

 

Now keeping that in mind, I am not about to let players start taking immunities to poisons. So why would I let one take immunity to alcohol?

 

But as I stated before, I didn’t just say no. I gave him another option for his character. And I let him make the choice to take or leave it.

 

I have even admitted that it may not be the most cost effective way to do it, or the cleanest way. But it is the way I have chosen to do it. Because that is my prerogative as GM to do what I feel is best in my world. The world that I am Gaming Mastering. Now if any one on this board does not like the way I am doing it, or has a better way to do. Good for them. Use it in your own campaign. Hell I am even happy to hear it. But I am not going to potentially unbalance my world because some one doesn’t like my decision, or my rule.

 

 

And finally, if any one is wondering about the game balance implications. The largest military force in my world is made up of Krag Mountain Orcs. Think of them as Greater Orcs. Any way consuming alcohol is a right of passage, a test of man hood, and as a gauge to judge how worthy an opponent or comrade is. It is not taken lightly by Krag Orcs. And in a campaign where the party could potentially be ambassadors to that army, you can see that it could be a big deal, and certainly worth more than 2 or 3 points.

(Regardless of weather you think it’s overpriced or clunky d-man. But thanks for the non-constructive criticism any way.)

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Demonsong

(Regardless of weather you think it’s overpriced or clunky d-man. But thanks for the non-constructive criticism any way.)

 

Struck a nerve?

 

If immunity to alcohol with an activation roll is potentially unbalancing in your world you've got bigger problems than people on the boards could ever hope to advise you on.

 

I already said you should do it your way, but if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. The boards are about sharing ideas and opinions. No one here is trying to force anything on you - so what is the point of being so pissy about the free exchange of ideas?

 

If you don't like the ideas don't use them - but don't come in here and get all defensive because people gave one of your players an idea you didn't consider, or suggested an alternative to your own ineffable construct, or hurt your little feelings of fictional-world-godkeit.

 

The tone of your initial post was: "I made a decision so you guys should stop talking about it." Nonsense. You weren't the one who asked the question, but you were the one who wanted to keep the question from being answered. Boo-hoo-hoo.

 

Welcome to the sandbox of hero ideas. We talk about what we want, when we want.

[Demonsong]

Now who is getting uppity? Relax man. Breath deep. Count to ten. OK are we better.

 

You can infer what you like from my posts. It doesn’t make your option correct. Get over your self. Other people have different views than you. And if you can’t share them, talk about them and not be offended when some one doesn’t agree with you or your options you need to stay off the boards.

 

As I said I am happy to hear what any one has to say about it. But it is not going to change my ruling on the mater. You can accept that or you don’t. I don’t really care. But if you’re so insecure with your self that you can’t handle some one not using your idea then you need to stop posting.

 

On a personal note if a little thing like this get you in such an irate state you might want to think about seeing a doctor. Just trying to be helpful.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Demonsong

On a personal note if a little thing like this get you in such an irate state you might want to think about seeing a doctor. Just trying to be helpful.

 

I did strike a nerve, didn't I Sonny-Jim?

 

I ended my post with "to each his own" and you ended yours with a pointed reference to me because I said anything to you - or about your construct - at all.

 

Like I said: boo-hoo-hoo.

[Demonsong]

Now you’re just trying to be belligerent. No real input. But "This guy doesn’t agree with me so I will flame him." Well I hope it will strengthen your fragile Ego and make you feel better.

 

Good Luck to you.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Demonsong

Now you’re just trying to be belligerent. No real input. But "This guy doesn’t agree with me so I will flame him." Well I hope it will strengthen your fragile Ego and make you feel better.

 

Good Luck to you.

 

No - I already said I don't care what you do in your own game and I really meant it. The opening statement of my post was that there were multiple valid constructs. The thrust of my post was at the attitude your initial post was written with.

 

My post was directed at the context of your initial post, which was that you had given the player an option and, as such, we shouldn't be discussing it with them. Why on earth not? You can always tells them "no" without coming in here and trying to manage what people who aren't even in your game have to say.

 

There was also an undercurrent of "since you guys are discussing it with one of my players you are giving me unwanted advice and I'm not interested - so be quiet." I wasn't aware GameMasters had such rights on their players time and contacts.

 

Oh - and my therapist says you're projecting (see I can be snide and get down in the trenches, too, when I want to).

[Demonsong]

That is like the 3rd time you have read in to my post. It’s not what I really said, it’s you read in to what I wrote. You are pathetic.

 

I am done with this now. You are not worth my time.

[Hugh Neilson]

My...aren't there a lot of new posts on this thread.

 

After reading them, my initial conclusion stands - I side with D-Man on this one.

[RadeFox]

heh, I still think the Resistance talent is totally the easiest way to handle alcohol tolerance, without allowing an immunity. It just give its bonus to the CON roll instead of the EGO roll as normal. But hey, as D-man says, "To each his own".

[PerennialRook]

The shit hath hitteth the fan...eth. (Yes, I was just watching "10 things I hate about you")

 

Wow. Get me in trouble with my GM why don't you? Demonsong is an excellent GM. His rulings, with a little room for discussion, are final. I agree, in the campaign immunity to alcohol is overpowered. I was asking about the 3 point per +1 vs drinking, and how other people would have handled it. I do not apreciate people flaming my GM for comming and saying that his rule was final, and I really don't see why people would take great offence to him chiming in with that, this being an open forum for EVERYONE to post their opinion. Everyone, including Demonsong.

 

If I ever GM a Fantasy Hero game will I make players pay 3 points for it? No. Am I going to push the issue after my GM has made a final ruling and I have no other valid points to bring up (valid points being why I posted it at all)? Not if I don't want to start acumulating unstated Unluck.

 

D-Man, if you go and reread Demonsong's origional post you can see that he stated his case for the cost structure. After I had asked for immunity to alcohol he said "no," though, as a favor, gave me another option at a steeper cost. He did not tell everyone else they were wrong, that they shouldn't post, or that I had no right bringing the question up.

 

As I see it, D-Man, you think that you are right, thus you must flame others who disagree with you because they, using a different construct, must be wrong. But that's just my entitled opinion, right?

 

-Preston

[Kintara]

Well, my only concern is that the GM said himself that it probably isn't cost effective. If it probably isn't, then why not make it cheaper? If you aren't going to make it cheaper, then it is still easy to fix. All you have to do is make it as important as it really costs. I'd suggest making sure that the setting material you already cited, that might increase the practical value of the ability, be used fairly often. Even give him some reputation perks a little more liberally than normal.

[PerennialRook]

What does "cost effective" mean really?

 

What could I do with the 6 points I spent on +2 resistance to alcohol?:

 

-Crank my STR back up to 14 (this would be helpful)

-Buy two more skills or various skill levels

-Get my CON to from 16 to 17 (with 2 points left over)

-Buy Fast Draw for my my Sling

-6 more PS' (Hmm...)

-Etc...

 

Would I trade any of that for the ability to keep up with someone who has a CON of 23 in a drinking contest? No.

 

Is it prohibitively expensive? Yes, but that just makes Ramne a rare breed of heavy drinker.

 

It is not "cost effective", but it is worth it.

 

Me I think my PS: Brewing and Distilling should be a complimentary skill.

 

-Preston

[AnotherSkip]

Actually there are many ways to handle the Cost of the advantage.

 

You could Suggest PS: Heavy Drinker as a complimentary roll to the CON Roll. the disads are it won't always help, but it might occasionally let you wildly succeed

 

Since Demonsong isn't into "powers not on the list" though his statements of "realism" and "No immunities" are contradictory since (blast it cant remember the Roman Senator who was immune to Arsenic through "training") <-X tried to poison himself to avoid being captured as a prisoner and didn't die and was captured.... because he had built up an immunity to several poisons because of his fear of being assassinated. Sucks to have been him eh?

 

 

And having heard enough horror Stories from Cops I have been friends with (1.0001 on the breathalyzer!!!! Technically the guy was dead!!!) IMNSHO Immunity to alcohol is actually possible in the real world. The side effects on the people are enough to make me not want to do it....

 

Besides im not worried about it, 6 points can take a STR from 20 to 23, not necessarily cost effective, but enough to make a character rare.