MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Ok... I've been trying to think of a way to say this without hurting anyone's feelings. I have been voting for the Champions in the Champions vs. SAS battle... but I didn't want to. I voted for the Champions because I am a team player... but I really don't like our Iconic Characters very much. I like Defender... and I like Kenetik (even though he's not officially one of the team)... and that's it. I don't like Ironclad (I miss Obsidian), I don't like the rest of them. Honestly... I didn't like most of the last team. Then in CU we'd be introduced to all these other interesting characters. You see, I was hoping for a team of Champions that looked like this: 1) Defender (l) 2) Crusader 3) Obsidian 4) Solitaire 5) Kenetik 6) *insert energy projector here* But alas, I got the new team. It's not that the new team is BAD... they just don't excite me... they don't thrill me and I don't have the feeling of familiarity of the old team (even if I didn't like 3 of them either). I know this is a minor issue... heck, it's not even an issue. It's just me expressing an opinion. I love HERO and I worship Champions... but couldn't we have had The Protectors instead? *dons flame retardant suit* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monolith Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Personally, I do not exclusively vote for one side or the other. My vote is based on whichever story I like better. So sometimes I am a Hero-maniac and other times I am a GOO-turncoat. As far as the Champions themselves, I am not sure which team I like better. Overall it might end up being the 5E team over the 4E team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith Personally, I do not exclusively vote for one side or the other. My vote is based on whichever story I like better. So sometimes I am a Hero-maniac and other times I am a GOO-turncoat. I feel so much better now... I wanted to vote for Mother Raven:o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monolith Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by MisterVimes I feel so much better now... I wanted to vote for Mother Raven:o I did vote for Mother Raven... but don't tell anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Well keep it between you and me (and 666 other registered users) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nblade Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by MisterVimes Well keep it between you and me (and 666 other registered users) I'm not sure that's possible, CNN just ran it as a story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by nblade I'm not sure that's possible, CNN just ran it as a story I hate when that happens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Scrivner Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 6) *insert energy projector here* Of course it's gotta be Sunburst, that media-loving irradiated scientist from 3rd edition. I felt unable to choose between Witchcraft and Mother Raven since I have an aversion to occultish "heroes" in general and don't permit them in my games. Mother Raven had the cooler costume, however. Power-wise they seemed evenly matched. On the frog thing, hey, if a witch can't turn someone into a ubiquitous amphibian life form what's the point? It's part of the schtick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner 6) *insert energy projector here* Of course it's gotta be Sunburst, that media-loving irradiated scientist from 3rd edition. Starburst? Isn't Sunburst the badguy with the god-complex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 I've also been been voting either HERO or GOO depending on how I felt about each character and battle. I haven't felt a particular need to be loyal to the Champions, partly because the two companies haven't put pressure on us to choose sides. I'm also a little underwhelmed by the current Champions, but I felt much the same about the previous incarnations from the BBB. I think that's partly because both incarnations were created as examples, to fill certain team roles and construction guidelines. Scott Heine's Protectors (which like for so many others, are my favorite heroes from published Champions books), were originally PCs or based on PCs. They had the depth that comes from individual attention being lavished on them, and from being played for some time in a good campaign. I have to say, though, that I was much fonder of the experienced version of the Champions that appeared in the first edition of Champions Universe - all of them well over 400 pts. thanks to Experience. All of them had had their character sheets expanded in appropriate and interesting ways, and had their personalities and histories fleshed out to reflect their experiences, as if they had actually been played. That process went even farther for Seeker in Watchers of the Dragon and Solitaire in Ultimate Mentalist. I even came to like Seeker. Perhaps when more experienced versions of the new Champs appear in a future rewrite, they'll seem meatier too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Lord Liaden Perhaps when more experienced versions of the new Champs appear in a future rewrite, they'll seem meatier too. Um... can't we start a petition to get a new hat for Blue Falcon and better shoes for Tinker-Brick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 You're thinking of Sunburst. Starburst was the guy with the Flash linked to the EB and teamed up with Crusader to stop Ogre from robbing a bank in early edition combat examples. And, iirc, is listed in the back of the BBB, also. I don't like the Champions teams, either (all three of them, counting CNM). As examples of vanilla archetypes, they are ok, I guess. But they are pretty blah otherwise. I never liked Solitaire, for example. I don't think "Magic" qualifies as tight special effect for something like an EC. I mean, let's face it, in gamer geekdom (and much to my annoyance) "magic can do anything." How or why magic should or could be the ultimate force in the universe... well, because it's magic. Would you allow "EC: Alien" or "EC: Superpowered Mutant"? I sure wouldn't. Way too vague. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesuji Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 But its not magic... it "helpful witcheries"... :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monolith Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear Would you allow "EC: Alien" or "EC: Superpowered Mutant"? I sure wouldn't. Way too vague. Same old arguments over and over. Would I allow Alien Physiology or Mutant Physiology as and EC? It depends on if it makes sense that if you drain one slot of the EC all slots get drained. Does that come up often? No, but it does come up. The same can be said for a Magic EC. If there is something about the way the spells in the EC are tied together that makes each of them weaker if one is weakened then it makes sense that it be part of an EC. What is more abusive. 100 pt Magic Pool (costing 150 points and allow you to do anything with a Magic Roll and a Full Phase) or a 60 point Magic Elemental (allowing you to have the base EC and 4 other 60 AP slots)? In the long-run the VPP is far more abusive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith What is more abusive. 100 pt Magic Pool (costing 150 points and allow you to do anything with a Magic Roll and a Full Phase) or a 60 point Magic Elemental (allowing you to have the base EC and 4 other 60 AP slots)? In the long-run the VPP is far more abusive. I'm with you on that. But I see the argument against EC (Magic) as well. If everyone in my campaign were mages, I don't think I'd allow it. But if you have a Light Elemental and an Ice Elemental in the game... why NOT a Magic Elemental? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monolith Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by MisterVimes I'm with you on that. But I see the argument against EC (Magic) as well. If everyone in my campaign were mages, I don't think I'd allow it. But if you have a Light Elemental and an Ice Elemental in the game... why NOT a Magic Elemental? That's the whole thing. If I want a Light Elemental I can buy: Energy Blast, Flash, Force Field, Darkness, and Flight for a discount. But if I want to say its a Magic Elemental I cannot buy Energy Blast, Flash, Force Field, Darkness, and Flight in the slots? That does not make sense. One SFX needs to be as valid as another. In the Light example, light dampening powers affect the whole EC. In the Magic example, magic dampening powers affect the whole EC. There is no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith One SFX needs to be as valid as another. In the Light example, light dampening powers affect the whole EC. In the Magic example, magic dampening powers affect the whole EC. There is no difference. EXACTLY! That's the crux of the whole argument. If it is a tight enough group to be defined as a SFX and can be Dispelled, Supressed, Drained, Transfered or Absorbed based on that special effect, then into an EC it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear Would you allow "EC: Alien" or "EC: Superpowered Mutant"? I sure wouldn't. Way too vague. Pre 5th edition, EC's were just cheap excuses to build 400 pt characters on 250 pts. With 5th edition rules, this type of abuse is self limiting. First of all, special powers and 0 end powers can't be placed there which limits it a lot. Second, any drain or suppress becomes downright scary. Draining or suppressing an EC character's flight now affects his EB, force field, force wall, and darkness at the same time and at double effect (or 1.5 times effect for defense powers). It basically gives you 2X vulnerability to adjustment powers and gives all attackers a free +2 advantage on their adjustment powers vs you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug McCrae Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 It's not easy being iconic It's not easy creating iconic characters. If any one of us could do it whenever we wanted, we'd be making millions in Hollywood right now. Many of the great comicbook characters - Superman, Batman, Captain America, Captain Marvel - rose out of the Golden Age when 5 new superheroes would be invented every week and the cream rose to the top. No one knows you do it for sure, except maybe Stan Lee and his great period of character creation was very brief. Four years at most, in which almost all of Marvel's iconic characters were created - Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, X-Men. For ordinary folks like ourselves and the good people at Hero, I think Busiek and Alan Moore have shown the way in Astro City and Supreme. You steal. You gotta, there's no other way. Take the essence of the character and muck around a bit with the superficial elements. Samaritan's from another time instead of another planet. Supreme got his powers from a meteor. You'll notice also that neither writer changed the name that much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Gary Pre 5th edition, EC's were just cheap excuses to build 400 pt characters on 250 pts. With 5th edition rules, this type of abuse is self limiting. First of all, special powers and 0 end powers can't be placed there which limits it a lot. Second, any drain or suppress becomes downright scary. Draining or suppressing an EC character's flight now affects his EB, force field, force wall, and darkness at the same time and at double effect (or 1.5 times effect for defense powers). It basically gives you 2X vulnerability to adjustment powers and gives all attackers a free +2 advantage on their adjustment powers vs you. Once again Gary places things in perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Same old "broken" response, as well. I think we've established that you do a whole lot of things differently, Monnie. I find the EC more abusive because it's against the spirit & the word of the rules and also unfair to other EC users at once. Why should Fire Guy not be allowed to buy his non-fire powers inside his "Fire" EC when Mutant Boy can buy anything he wants? Why not everyone just take "EC: Superhero" and save some points? Who cares about the purpose of an EC? Which is not, btw, the create a set of powers that can be drained at once... (you'll also note that many if not most of the comments concerning that change since 5th's release have been "we're ignoring that.") There's no restriction on "Magic" - that's vague. What powers can and can't be put in there (aside from powers simply disallowed as part of mechanics?). None. Now if it was "Fire Magic" at least we are getting a unified special effect. Elemental Control is named such for a reason. It's not called "Inter-dependent Powers" or whatever. People who are going to drain "all mutant powers" are going to drain all mutant powers irregardless of their framework or lack of one - theywill build their power that way. Most people all have their powers from a single source, anyway. By your logic, most everything works as an EC. There are no limits. The VPP as "magic" would only be abusive if they also took the limited special effect lim. Because "magic" is too vague of an effect which excludes nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Re: It's not easy being iconic Originally posted by Doug McCrae For ordinary folks like ourselves and the good people at Hero, I think Busiek and Alan Moore have shown the way in Astro City and Supreme. You steal. You gotta, there's no other way. Take the essence of the character and muck around a bit with the superficial elements. Samaritan's from another time instead of another planet. Supreme got his powers from a meteor. You'll notice also that neither writer changed the name that much either. I think you've hit the Head on the nail (or something like that). All of this goes back to the CORE icons. What is Superman but a modern Hercules? One's an alien from another planet, the other is an alien from Mt. Olympus... yeah, I know he's a demi-god, but you get the point). Batman owes his roots to the Shadow and the Spider who trace their roots back to Sherlock Holmes and C. Auguste Dupin. I think that League of Extraordinary Gentlemen has shown us that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Ah, here we go. This might sum up my opinion on "vague" things like magic or alien as sources of power rather than the SFX. Magic is not a special effect, it is a source of power. If you have a magic attack, you must define the special effect - for one, so that your target knows which defense to apply. While vague, "only vs magic (any special effect)" for a defense is not worth more or less of a limitation, on average, as something like "only vs fire (any power source)" because magic, in general, is probably just as common as fire. Now "only vs magic fire" would be worth more. Superman, for example, does not have "alien vision" he has "heat vision." The source of his power is his alien heritage, the SFX of the power is "heat." I'll leave it at that. Everyone will form their own opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear Ah, here we go. This might sum up my opinion on "vague" things like magic or alien as sources of power rather than the SFX. Magic is not a special effect, it is a source of power. If you have a magic attack, you must define the special effect - for one, so that your target knows which defense to apply. While vague, "only vs magic (any special effect)" for a defense is not worth more or less of a limitation, on average, as something like "only vs fire (any power source)" because magic, in general, is probably just as common as fire. Now "only vs magic fire" would be worth more. Superman, for example, does not have "alien vision" he has "heat vision." The source of his power is his alien heritage, the SFX of the power is "heat." I'll leave it at that. Everyone will form their own opinion. I completely see your point, but (and there is always a but) what about Supress and Dispel... if you can Dispel Magic or Supress Magic, doesn't tht make it a SFX? As oppossed to Dispel Alien... which is kinda silly (but funny) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KawangaKid Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 EC's and ICONs You mean I can't have EC - Alien Mutant God Powers? Isn't that a set of powers from the same SFX? I liked Astro City's iconic characters. Samaritan was one of my faves because he really was a "Man of Tomorrow". 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.