Things I May Have Forgotten

[Checkmate]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

Let's watch the snark level. It may have not been a good example' date=' but that doesn't negate all of his points, or justify a blanket statement like "you have no idea what a fight is all about." [/quote']

I think it kinda does. He's stopped even reading my posts. I've specifically said that it is not that it makes the target easier to perceive, that it is more than that, and given examples. He's arguing with me, but he has no idea what I'm saying, as proven by the last post.

 

I'm sure all your basket ball experience gives you great insight into how a glowing target would affect a gunfight. See, it goes both ways...

No my gun shooting experience does that see example with contrasting targets, having shot at both, I can tell you black and white is MUCH easier to shoot at. Talk to people that play baseball and ask them if hitting a glowing ball would be easier.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

And here's why we are at an impasse. I think you're wrong, it does matter. A basketball fake out, isn't a "stealth move". It's one on one in broad daylight. I do agree it is a slight-of-hand, and what is a slight-of-hand? Tricking you into looking where you shouldn't look. How many stage magicians would be effective if the thing they didn't want you to look at was glowing?

 

 

 

 

Yup, added the highlights:

 

So what is the defense against Sleight of Hand in Hero? A PER roll.

You've just made my case for me.

 

Re: Simon

I am sure there are other similar games where memorization is not the key component but rather seeing something lit up and reacting. That's the point I was trying to make. There is a certain point of brightness or perceptibility beyond which increasing it anymore doesn't make it any easier to target. I can light up a room with a single housefly with 1000 watts of halogen lamps or even better, I can paint the housefly with high reflective paint and light up the room. It ain't going to make catching that fly one bit easier. It might make capturing the attempt on high-speed (lower exposure time) film, but it isn't directly making the sucker slower or easier to actually catch.

 

I wonder if part of your line of reasoning for illumination of a target = DCV reduction is based on the special effects for the son's superpowers on the TV show "No Ordinary Family". They are all in the kid's head (his brain is a super-targeting computer among other things). Faerie Fire is just a physical effect on the targets, not a mental effect on friendlies viewing the targets.

 

Negative Skill levels work like a drain.

Lighting up a target does NOT drain anything except negative perception effects.

If there are no negative perception effects present (no darkness, no invisibility, no shapechange, stealth, slight of hand, etc..) then there is nothing TO drain.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

I think it kinda does. He's stopped even reading my posts. I've specifically said that it is not that it makes the target easier to perceive, that it is more than that, and given examples. He's arguing with me, but he has no idea what I'm saying, as proven by the last post.

 

 

No my gun shooting experience does that see example with contrasting targets, having shot at both, I can tell you black and white is MUCH easier to shoot at. Talk to people that play baseball and ask them if hitting a glowing ball would be easier.

 

I've read every single one of your posts and disproved them. You have yet to disprove my arguments, all you've done is say "I disagree". That's not an argument. That's denial.

I posit you are not reading all of my posts and actually considering the possibility that your stance is wrong.

 

Even ghost-angel agrees with me on the main point you refuse to acknowledge:

Personally, I would assume lighting a target up just removes penalties to hit (if any) due to darkness (and some forms of concealment), not provides a bonus to OCV/Loss of Target DCV....

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

Let’s break down your truck example. It’s a perfectly clear day (no penalties due to lighting) and perfectly flat terrain (no penalties due to coverage/concealment or whatnot). Will it be easier to see if the lights are on? At a distance, I would say yes, it will be easier to spot. At 10 feet away? No, the lights make no difference what-so-ever. What this tells me is that the headlights are reducing the Range Penalty. If the truck is easier to hit simply because its headlights are on (a point that is debatable) I would argue that it is because they are again reducing the Range Penalty, not because headlights magically lower a vehicles DCV. At 10 feet away the lights make no more difference to hit than they do to see.

 

Let’s try to put your basketball example into Hero terms. The “attacker” is using his OCV to try to get the ball. You are using your DCV to protect the ball. Then wouldn’t a “fake-out” be akin to a Defensive Maneuver of some sort? Then isn’t it possible that the fact that you are glowing is not lowering your natural DCV but simply negating the DCV bonus from the fake-out maneuver?

 

Your one point that I really agreed with originally and had some trouble figuring into the equation was the gray on gray silhouette versus the black on white silhouette. I agree that the black on white is much easier to hit. After thinking about it quite a while I have two points for you to consider. First, as detailed as Hero System is, it is simply not granular enough to account for color differences. Secondly, what does a gray on gray target represent? Are they not used to depict an indistinct target? Such as a dimly lit target or target with an unclear silhouette? If those types of targets are used to simulate dimly lit or otherwise unclear targets than I think that the argument falls apart since we have rules to deal with light penalties and unclear silhouettes (partial coverage, though many GMs don’t use coverage penalties even in crowds and such). Either way, both targets have the same base DCV in real life and game terms, and unless you want to add another whole level of complexity/bonuses/penalties to represent color differential/silhouette clarity to the system on top of the RAW, than they should be treated the same.

[Checkmate]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

I've read every single one of your posts and disproved them. You have yet to disprove my arguments, all you've done is say "I disagree". That's not an argument. That's denial.

I posit you are not reading all of my posts and actually considering the possibility that your stance is wrong.

Really? And how exactly have you disproved that a contrasting target is easier to shoot at? How have you disproved that a glowing baseball is easier to hit than a non-glowing one? How exactly have you disproved that outlining a fighter makes it harder to fake out an opponent? You can't disprove those things, just like I can't prove them to you. Heck I can't even get you to believe trying slight of hand when the part you're trying to hide is glowing is harder. So instead of saying "you're wrong" (which you are), it is less argumentative to say "I disagree". You "proof" seems to be that since HERO Mechanics don't account for it, real-world examples can't be true.

 

Even ghost-angel agrees with me on the main point you refuse to acknowledge:

Let me tell ya, quoting the only person to successfully make it to my ignore list, isn't a convincing argument.

 

Let’s try to put your basketball example into Hero terms. The “attacker” is using his OCV to try to get the ball. You are using your DCV to protect the ball. Then wouldn’t a “fake-out” be akin to a Defensive Maneuver of some sort? Then isn’t it possible that the fact that you are glowing is not lowering your natural DCV but simply negating the DCV bonus from the fake-out maneuver?

The truck was meant to prove that even when there would be no penalties, things can still be easier to see in an effort to show where game mechanics fail to take everything into account.

 

For the ball, that is one way to look at it. My contention is that the "Fake out" is inherent to the DCV. Game mechanics assume that you are bobbing and weaving and trying not to get hit. I think the game mechanics support that with the penalties you receive when your movement is hindered. Outlining an opponent reduces the effectiveness of that bobbing and weaving.

 

And that really sums up my whole argument agree or disagree as you will. So with that, I'm out, good gaming all.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Things I May Have Forgotten

 

Really? And how exactly have you disproved that a contrasting target is easier to shoot at? How have you disproved that a glowing baseball is easier to hit than a non-glowing one?

 

I guess you're right. If you believe the sky is purple there is nothing I am going to be able to say to you to prove otherwise.

 

But I'd love to play a game of pool with you using a table where the pockets and balls can be made to glow only when it's your turn. I seriously doubt that the outcome of the game(s) would be affected by the glow one bit.