Lightning91 Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I do not believe there was anything like the Allocatable advantage to Resistant Protection (previously Armor) in 5e. (6e1-276) I also do not see the Impermiable or Protects Carried Items adders either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Protects Carried Items 6E1 p276 Impermeable 6E1 p276 (both right next to Allocatable) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torchwolf Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here This is not a big issue and has next to no impact on character building, but the Characteristics Comparison Table (6E1 p48) now lists the "Superhuman" values of INT, EGO & PRE as 51+. This is of course GM preference territory by campaign, but still... IMO, I thought this was rather odd for COM in 5ER, also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Those were listed as 51+ in 5E as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torchwolf Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I stand corrected. It had, furthermore, listed COM as Superhuman at 31+, so I was simply wrong on every count. I am a waste of space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjcurrie Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Protects Carried Items 6E1 p276 Impermeable 6E1 p276 (both right next to Allocatable) Ummm, Ghost-Angel, he was saying that there was nothing like them in 5e not that they weren't in 6e. And, Lightning91, Protects Carreied Items comes from Force Fields in 5E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Main Man Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I stand corrected. It had, furthermore, listed COM as Superhuman at 31+, so I was simply wrong on every count. I am a waste of space. Oh, don't be like that, just get the heck out of here before we eat you alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Ummm, Ghost-Angel, he was saying that there was nothing like them in 5e not that they weren't in 6e. And, Lightning91, Protects Carreied Items comes from Force Fields in 5E. Ah, yes, I read that completely backwards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobGreenwade Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I'm not sure whether this counts as a "gotcha" as defined in the original question, but working with HD I noticed that there's now no longer such a thing as a BODY Roll. I'd been using BODY Rolls in place of CON Rolls for many functions. I may just have to house-rule that back in. (Or hope it gets into APG2.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torchwolf Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Oh' date=' don't be like that, just get the heck out of here before we eat you alive. [/quote'] Yikes! *makes PRE Roll* *returns* An anti-gotcha: I was surprised to see the Hit Location STUNx column unaltered; I was almost expecting (after reading about the upcoming change of the Stun Multiplier to 1d3 and figuring out the averages on the Hit Location Charts) that particular column to disappear and simply be replaced by the N STUN values. So I'll guess I'll still hurt more when you all eat me - assuming you're using the Hit Location Chart when you eat me. Am I in a Heroic Genre right now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightning91 Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I was also surprised to see that Change Environment can be used to target an individual in 6e. In fact it is now the base for buying it, with comments indicating that it is commonly bought with the Area of Effect advantage. Interesting change! (and yes, I meant that I had not seen the others in 5er, but I forgot to look at force field. Thanks! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I was surprised to see the Hit Location STUNx column unaltered; I was almost expecting (after reading about the upcoming change of the Stun Multiplier to 1d3 and figuring out the averages on the Hit Location Charts) that particular column to disappear and simply be replaced by the N STUN values. So I'll guess I'll still hurt more when you all eat me - assuming you're using the Hit Location Chart when you eat me. Am I in a Heroic Genre right now? It also hurts more when you get punched in the head if the hit location table is in use. In my experience, the Stun Multiple was more a problem than the hit location rules because the latter provided for enhanced damage from all types of attack - normal or killing - if you hit a good location. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torchwolf Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here It also hurts more when you get punched in the head if the hit location table is in use. In my experience' date=' the Stun Multiple was more a problem than the hit location rules because the latter provided for enhanced damage from all types of attack - normal or killing - if you hit a good location.[/quote'] I quite agree and I'm happy they kept the Hit Location Table as original. From what I've read of the discussions on the old 6e threads and the pre-release ones, many had a beef with the Stun Multiple. Personally, I dodged the issue sometime during 3rd edition and used the Hit Location Chart for all campaigns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Something I noticed, that could cause arguments is a new option for Haymaker called offensicve Haymaker, -5 OCV insteead of DCV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Set...and I may have misunderstood it in 5th Now you set, and as long as you either keep shooting at the target or say you are keeping your set (Aiming) at them you get to keep the +1 OCV until you stop doing it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Something I noticed' date=' that could cause arguments is a new option for Haymaker called offensive Haymaker, -5 OCV instead of DCV[/quote'] Odd name. Seems like Defensive Haymaker would be appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here That's how it worked under 5E as well. And 4E IIRC (which I probably don't). I don't think Set has changed all that much over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here That's how it worked under 5E as well. And 4E IIRC (which I probably don't). I don't think Set has changed all that much over the years. To the best of my knowledge that is how Set has always worked. Certainly how I have always used it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I guess I have always done it wrong, I always made them redo the set after the first time they fired...well Mistakes happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaws Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I guess I have always done it wrong' date=' I always made them redo the set after the first time they fired...well Mistakes happen[/quote'] You owe your players big.. how will you ever amend your sins.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcan Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here You owe your players big.. how will you ever amend your sins.... Bribes of XP's usually work well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here inbetween groups now Anyways another one, if I am reading and remembering right HA can now have ranged placed on it for making throwable weapons, Special GM permision is required. This changes it from a solid no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here Yeah, the paragraph almost contradicts itself - but it's really nice to see that the system has several suggestions to account for a non-killing Hand Attack Weapon that can also be thrown. Which leads right into the really cool Throw Maneuver (not really a "gotcha" - just cool). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireg0lem Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here I quite agree and I'm happy they kept the Hit Location Table as original. From what I've read of the discussions on the old 6e threads and the pre-release ones, many had a beef with the Stun Multiple. Personally, I dodged the issue sometime during 3rd edition and used the Hit Location Chart for all campaigns. I've been doing the same, never had much of a problem. I do think it's a touch odd in that it make's KAs just fine in HitLoc games but pretty lousy for anything but destroying objects/automata otherwise, but eh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lairian Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Re: Post "gotchas" here 5e had Visible powers perceived by three sense groups (pg. 98). 6e has Obvious powers perceived by two sense groups (pg. 124). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.