Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Considering only Superman really does it without a vehicle of some kind? Lots.

 

I'll try to break it down as best I can: a Rocket's exhaust (at least the Space Shuttle) is 6-8d RKA Plus 18D normal damage, both calculated separately for damage. The Shuttle's exhaust temperature is 3,315 °C. The sun's interior is 14999726.85 °C. So that's about 452 times. Since each damage class is a doubling, it's about 8-9 DCs higher, putting it at most 11d RKA, meaning you'd need 66 rED, and a boatload of regular ED, to be okay in the Sun.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Just buy the fires with 'not vs. targets with LS: Heat' and you're covered.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Just buy the fires with 'not vs. targets with LS: Heat' and you're covered.

Might as well make the Sun a 1 pip KA when in the center of it.

 

I don't like teddy bear GMs, takes half the fun out of the game.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

*shrug* If the rules don't support the genre you're trying to run, or the story you're trying to tell, then you change the rules. Hero System basic tenet. Deal with it.

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

"Can't change the rules! The universe will end!"

[Cassandra]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Reality is overrated!

 

This is a role playing Game in the Superhero Genre! Impossible things are second nature to us!

 

That means the GM should allow a EB to blow out a fire.

 

It means that the heroes shouldn't freeze to death before getting into the Villains arctic fortress as long as they hurry inside even if they don't have LS: Intense Cold.

 

It means that you can actually stop a train with only 50 STR.

 

It's called poetic license.

 

But in all cases it might be a good idea to have a 5 point VPP just in case.

[massey]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

We're going in circles here, and I think people are arguing now just for the sake of arguing. That's normally my job.

 

One group seems to be championing (heh) the Hero System as the "ultimate toolkit" to create your universe. Nothing is absolute. Change the stats, change the rules, set your own benchmarks, play your game how you want it. The other group argues that there are set benchmarks that shouldn't be changed. That X is always X and should normally always be X.

 

The "toolkit group" says that a thug's gun can be a 3D6 energy blast, a bolt of lightning a 6D6 EB, and a tank cannon can fire 8D6 EB explosions. There's nothing inherently wrong with that if that's what you want in your universe. Heck, I think the book writeups for weapons are way too high for damage and tone them down myself.

 

The "benchmark group" says that people need characters to compare new writeups to, and the most commonly available writeups are those in the books.

 

I don't think either group is arguing that there is some set, defined, holy grail of comic book character abilities where we discover what Superman (or any other character) "really has" for stats. The question becomes "what stats and abilities allow Superman to fulfill his Supermanly duties as portrayed in the majority of his era-appropriate appearances?" Of course this will depend upon how things are written up in the game world, and how he interacts with other characters. There will be a lot of judgment calls that have to be made. There may not be an "exact right" way to build Superman.

 

That said, I do think there are "wrong" ways to build him. The "I'm okay you're okay" stuff only goes so far. Providing Superman with the Care Bear Stare power and the ability to disappear in a puff of brimstone is clearly incorrect. "Well that's how I see Superman." Well, you're wrong. So, we're left somewhere in between an undefined sliding scale of power, and a writeup encompassing most of the more powerful moments of the Silver Age. 99% of Superman's appearances (besides that crappy energy Superman story) will fall somewhere between these two examples. So, what are we making this character for? A new player to learn the game? Character modeling? A high end example? Those decisions will affect how the character is built. In the end, however, it is important that he be recognizable as Superman.

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

. . . The "toolkit group" says that a thug's gun can be a 3D6 energy blast, a bolt of lightning a 6D6 EB, and a tank cannon can fire 8D6 EB explosions. There's nothing inherently wrong with that if that's what you want in your universe. Heck, I think the book writeups for weapons are way too high for damage and tone them down myself.

 

The "benchmark group" says that people need characters to compare new writeups to, and the most commonly available writeups are those in the books. . . .

I think you are largely right. Just to further confuse the matter, however, is the fact that even the 'benchmarks' are rather inconsistent. As I pointed out earlier you've got such issues as a howitzer shell being listed as a 5dk RKA explosion in one book and a tank shell being listed as a 7 1/2d6 AP RKA in another. Yes, they aren't identical attacks but they should still probably be a lot closer to one another in terms of effect.

 

Adding in to the confusion you have Firewing who is categorically stated as being "generally acknowledged to be the most powerful energy projector on Earth" with a 24d6 blast. Sure, we could take those benchmarks at full face value and assume that the most powerful energy projector on Earth is actually almost 5 full DCs weaker than a WWII tank, but for cosmic level heroes I suspect that we want tanks to be weaker than our strongest characters (NPC or PC).

 

So what are the right benchmarks and what needs to be changed? Probably depends on your campaign. Strange as it sounds I think that in a Golden Age campaign you probably want to leave the tank where it is. In a Golden Age setting generally getting hit with a tank was a Very Bad Thing . In a Bronze Age campaign however tough characters get hit by tanks now and again and sort of shrug it off (and I'm not just referring to Superman. Look at the first Iron Man movie).

 

Now yes, you could simply increase the point totals of people in those campaigns to ridiculous levels an then adjust up the damage that doesn't agree with your baseline (the tank shell) but you're probably going to run into problems of getting bogged down with the number of dice ("Firewing hits you. Can somebody run out to the store to buy another couple of cubes of dice?") and you're still making adjustments to some of your benchmarks. I personally would probably use the 5d6 Howitzer shell as my baseline and adjust around that, but that's just me. End result winds up being pretty much the same (Toughest heroes can be shot by a tank with minimal injury).

 

Alternately you can view the benchmarks as sacrosanct (a tank shell is more powerful than the most powerful energy projector on Earth in a cosmically powerful campaign and those howitzer shells are clearly referring to very tiny howitzers) but I think that's a mistake. There's good reason for the inconsistencies in benchmarks in the Hero Game system and if you're pulling something that was possibly meant for a different style of campaign (such as a Golden Age style when you are playing Bronze Age) then you should probably adjust it. Unfortunately vehicle/weapon/character designs are almost never fully noted as to what sort of campaign they are intended for.

 

(BTW, all of this talk about adjustments is really intended primarily for 'outlier' cases. Tanks, Firewing, etc. I would probably leave the more common end of the range of handguns, knives, swords, etc. pretty much in place. Otherwise it's just too much work and those damage levels tend to work pretty well regardless of campaign settings. If there's something you find really off with them, leave them where they are and then toolkit weapon damage as a whole. They give you a good starting point for your damage. Decide where the upper end should be and then adjust intervening damages as needed)

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

A howitzer is an artillery round and not a df weapon. As such the uses of and the parameters of the weapon effect are different.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

... Providing Superman with the Care Bear Stare power and the ability to disappear in a puff of brimstone is clearly incorrect....

 

Was this commentary in regards to someone's posted build?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

It appears the main subject of conversation has shifted to an area I attempted to start a discussion on a while back.

Scale of Detail in HERO gaming

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

A howitzer is an artillery round and not a df weapon. As such the uses of and the parameters of the weapon effect are different.

As I said, they are not identical. However there is a strong similarity to them (exploding shells of roughly the same size) and so the damage ratings probably shouldn't be that far apart. The specific differences would probably take effect more in the form of explosion with increased radius as opposed to AP with a much smaller explosive radius. Would the damage definitely be 5d6 both times? No, but you're talking about adding 8 more damage classes and armor piercing. That's an awful big change.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Some howitzers are capable of direct fire.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htart/20080115.aspx

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Howitzers also vary wildly in size. I was using the stats given for the howitzers of the day, not whatever caliber Viper is using.

[RexMundi]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Makes me want to start that comparative scale and the environment thread......

 

~Rex

[massey]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Was this commentary in regards to someone's posted build?

 

Did you see it in anyone's build?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Did you see it in anyone's build?

Was my question too simple?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Life Support Heat doesn't. That's for living in the desert, not standing in fire.

 

Again, if your Superman is 250 points, then your Pulsar better be 50 points. If Batman is 250, then Nighthawk is 150.

 

Why? What prevents Pulsar being a powerful Energy Projector on the same level of power as (a starting) Superman? Looking at that 250 point Superman, I would certainly not use the 5e Pulsar writeup in the same game - they are clearly designed to different benchmarks - but there would be nothing wrong with Pulsar being a powerful EP who challenges even Superman.

 

Similarly, if Nighthawk is the Champions Universe's Batman, why would he need to have lower point totals? What requires published DC characters be more powerful than CU game characters?

 

When I was a new Champions player' date=' I always pestered the old-timers with questions like "How strong is Superman?" or "How much Dex does Spider-Man have?" The answer of "in my game world Spidey has a 20 Dex" is unsatisfying. I wanted to know what the [i']real[/i] Superman had.

 

There is no REAL Superman. There is a fictional character whose abilities are not scoped and structured in game terms. I expect Superman will be stronger than Cyborg, and Cyborg will be stronger than Green Arrow. That, I can see from the source material. I'd also suggest GA should be in human range, but above average. They might be STR 25; 60; 90 in a game that adopts those parameters. That will certainly work. Or they could be STR 13/35/50 in a game that has adopted much lower parameters. Both are valid executions of the concept.

 

Because even though I didn't know it at the time' date=' the real question I was asking was "How does my character measure up to the guys I see in the comics?" When Superman picks up a sinking battleship that's half filled with water, I want to know where my character needs to be to do something similar. Even if Superman doesn't exist in this campaign world, it's helpful to have someone to gauge your power against. Frequently new players aren't that familiar with the abilities of every comic book character. They just know that certain characters are good at certain things, and they want to know how good.[/quote']

 

I also find players want to define their characters as competitive with those published example. If we set Superman at STR 250 and Spidey at DEX 45, OCV 15, DCV 20, SPD 11, then tell the player "but your character can't exceed STR 60, DEX 30, OCV 10, DCV 10, SPD 6 (and you can't max them all out!), then I think we have created a failed game. The players want to play Super Heros, not comic relief sidekicks. Too often, we bulk up the fictional characters through a form of hero worship, and forget that our characters are the Legendary Superheroes of our campaign world.

 

I recall an old D&D article on creating new classes which suggested, too often, that class gives all the abilities its archetype has exhibited at L1 and adds a bunch more as levels rise. Rather, the article suggested, we should recognize that characters like Conan, Tarzan and Elric are not only very high level characters, but are also fictional heroes who tend to roll a lot of '20's when the need arises.

 

How good a martial artist is Captain Karate-Chop? They want comparisons to characters they know. If you say "Silver Age Superman probably had a 200 Strength or more. Sometimes he'd have 400 or 500 if the plot required it. Modern Superman is probably closer to 125 in most stories. Animated Superman is maybe a 75 or 80" then that's useful to the player. Giving a guy a 250 point writeup doesn't fulfill any of that.

 

Giving a guy a stat range that his character can't come close to doesn't fulfill any useful purpose either. That 250 point writeup that says "This is Superman in this game milieu" tells the player his character doesn't need a 75 STR to be a powerful brick in this game. If Superman has a 125 STR, my 40 STR character feels pretty useless. If Supes has STR 50, then 40 STR seems a lot more respectable.

 

I'll try to break it down as best I can: a Rocket's exhaust (at least the Space Shuttle) is 6-8d RKA Plus 18D normal damage' date=' both calculated separately for damage. The Shuttle's exhaust temperature is 3,315 °C. The sun's interior is 14999726.85 °C. So that's about 452 times. Since each damage class is a doubling, it's about 8-9 DCs higher, putting it at most 11d RKA, meaning you'd need 66 rED, and a boatload of regular ED, to be okay in the Sun.[/quote']

 

And yet characters in the comics manage to survive in a star - Gladiator and Firelord, for two quick examples. If we decide that means they must have 66 rED plus another 100 ED, then we need characters with attacks in the 52d6 range to pose any kind of threat (182 average roll passing 16 STUN past defenses). Why? How often does "surviving in the heart of the Sun" actually impact the game? In my opinion, not often enough that Life Support can't reasonably cover it so we can move on. Those Cosmic characters that crow "I, who am comfortable at the heart of the sun" still seem to struggle against attacks that don't do as much collateral damage as one would expect contact with the Sun to inflict.

 

You assume that the problem is the stats applied to characters, rather than the stats applied to the environment, or to conventional weaponry. Why is it impossible that the stats applied to Howitzers are inappropriate? I don't find characters rolling 50 - 75 dice are inherently more interesting than characters rolling 10 - 15 dice, so why gross up the power level to no good purpose?

 

Of course, we then look at the result and moan that "the howitzer won't kill a tough guy normal on an average hit". So what? Supers games aren't about tough guy normals - they are about Super Heroes. Joe Tough Guy and the Howitzer are background scenery.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

I think there's too much of a fixation on point levels and dice totals among Hero gamers, anyway. There's nothing inherently "right" or "wrong" about a particular point total or number of damage dice. Too often I see a mentality that "X number of points is the correct number of points to run a campaign in, and Y number of dice is the correct damage range. Hero can't handle power levels above Z very well". WTF? Of course it can! It's an exponential system, with stats, powers and advantages able to scale to astronomical levels. People take the level they're comfortable with and then assume that's just the way things should be. Not so much.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Cripes that's a lot to respond to.

 

Superman has a reputation, if he doesn't meet that reputation, then no one will respect him, so he either has to be powerful, or he's not Superman. That's like having a guy with energy absorption powers (and only being average intellect) claim he's Batman. He's not worthy of the name. Especially since starting Superman doesn't fit in 250 points very well. Nighthawk is in a lower-powered (generally speaking) universe, so he can be built on less points, but because the universe Superman is from is so much more powerful, he should be built on more points.

 

There is the perception of Superman, what we understand of him, which most of the builds seen here do not actually meet up to. The thing is: unless you intend on rewriting everything, Superman's minimum strength is 75, he's more powerful than a locomotive, which are 75s. Unless you want locomotives to be weaker, at which point you're going to have to make their loads lighter, and now you're basically screwing with everything to make a cheaper Superman work, when you could have just made Superman stronger. You are literally missing the forest for the trees on this one.

 

You might bulk up the heroes from worship, I do not, especially since I don't actually like most superheroes (generally I'm neutral to them, Superman is on this list, despite the fact that I am still vehemently against the versions we've seen in this thread, that doesn't change the fact that I'd still allow several of them), but I'm not going to let anyone else deflate the characters in question either.

 

I'm well aware of that, nor do I expect the WWII version of Superman to be able to fly, shoot heat beams out of his eyes, or do some of his crazier moves that come with super speed, flight, invulnerability, and super strength.

 

There's a problem: you don't need to build everything in 250 points, 350/400 will also work, and for some characters you need the additional points. Take Metro Man from Megamind, there's no way he's fitting in 250 points, except when we see him as a baby. No weaknesses, all the powers of Superman, and almost as powerful as DCU (not DCnU, he's weaker) Superman. That said, the strength 40 guy doesn't feel useless, because he probably has other tricks up his sleeve aside from "I've got a 40 strength" it's why those points things are there. Furthermore: not once has Captain Atom, Hawkman, Superman, or anyone else really thought "Hey I feel useless, because Martian Manhunter has all of my powers and then some." why? Because they aren't useless. Martian Manhunter cannot be everywhere at once, despite his speed and strength, so the other heroes do what they can, and hope it's good enough.

 

Gladiator is Superman, one of Marvel's Supermans anyway. Fire Lord is a Herald of Galactus, I really shouldn't have to say anything further about that. Neither of them are easily brought down by anything or anyone, even cosmic entities like each other. Frankly if I were to run cosmic characters, I'd start off by saying that every die = 5d normally, scaling the universe up, so people don't have to roll so many dice. If the stats on howitzers are inappropriate, then so are the buildings, vehicles, and basically everything around them, leading back to the "suddenly having to readjust the universe to fit your interpretation of one thing". Howitzers shouldn't be able to kill a tough guy anyway, he's probably got luck on his side, and he won't take the full impact, it'll be a dud, or any of a dozen other possibilities, maybe something blocked part of the blast. You think a howitzer could kill John McClain at the start of a movie? I don't.

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Actually Gladiator is based off Superboy. The Elite Guard that the X-Men faced was based off the Legion.

 

And for being Cosmic, Spider-Man laid out Firelord.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Doesn't change the fact that Superboy is still Kryptonian and can still survive the sun.

 

Firelord obviously has a lower PD then doesn't he?

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Or people constantly under-rated Spider-Man.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Bit of both I imagine.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

....

 

And for being Cosmic, Spider-Man laid out Firelord.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]44429[/ATTACH]