Gary Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear 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. If people are ignoring the 'drain one drain all' limitation, then EC's do become abusive. However, they are balanced if you play the rules as written. I wouldn't mind if players put any non-special, non-0 end power in a EC at all no matter how unlike they are. They'll pay for it eventually when the drains and suppresses come out. It would have probably been simpler and more elegant to replace EC's with a -1/2 'drain one drain all at double effect' limitation, but EC's are embedded in the fabric of Champions and this is an acceptable way of limiting the abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug McCrae Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Re: Re: It's not easy being iconic Originally posted by MisterVimes What is Superman but a modern Hercules? Do you think Buffy is the current bearer of the 'strongman' mantle? The Hercules of the modern age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterVimes Posted February 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Re: Re: Re: It's not easy being iconic Originally posted by Doug McCrae Do you think Buffy is the current bearer of the 'strongman' mantle? The Hercules of the modern age. Maybe. Buffy is Chosen and from among the people and would be thought of as crazy, so I get a Joan of Arc vibe from her (substitute Vampires for the English). 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 [bWhy 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?[/b] When you really think about it, there are few powers which would not fit into a "Fire" Elemental. For example: Change Enviroment: Make things fiery Clairsentience: See through fires Darkness: So fiery no one can see through it Desolidification: Turn into fire Dispel: Turn off fires Drain: Sure, drain other fire powers Duplification: Making fiery forms which can attack Energy Blast: A given Entangle: Melt slag around the character Extra-Dimensional Movement: Move to Fire plane Flash: Yep, no problems Flight: See it all the time Force Field: See that all the time too Force Wall: Check out Firewing's Wall Of Fire Hand-to-hand: Fiery Clubs Healing: The healing kiss of fire as Regeneration Images: Human Torch does it all the time Invisibility: Make myself so hot I am invisible to sight HKA: Same fiery club as above or Damage Shield RKA: Any ranged attack Leaping: Thrusting hot air beneath yourself Mind Control: Hypnotic fires Running: Fire-sprinting making small puffs of heat beneath your feet which allow you to take larger steps Stretching: Single body part as in Flame's Touch Summon: Summoning fire elementals Suppress: Suppressing fire powers Telekinesis: Flame hands Teleportation: Fire Leaps Transform: Turn someone into a fire elemental Tunneling: Burn holes in ground That is every legal power except for these: Density Increase, Ego Attack, Growth, Mental Illusion, Mind Scan, Multiform, Shape Shift, Shrinking, Swimming, Telepathy, and Transfer. I would bet someone could also come up with proper examples to fit many of those powers into an EC as well; I just could not think of any. The point is that Fire Guy is not really limited by needing to define his SFX because almost everything works Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech 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. For the most part, I agree. However, in a recent character that was created in the campaign I'm in, something like that was allowed. It was the only one like that but it was allowed. A special case, I'll admit but it was still allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by MisterVimes 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) Not necessarily (and there is also a common "drain mutant powers" which is equally silly. It's like draining "human" powers which affects all the stats, running & swimming. Mutations are genetic and wildly different). I agree there's some crossover in terms of adjustment powers, I don't dispute that, at all. But a SFX creates a set of rules all by itself in how the environment interacts with it. Like electricity or ice. Magic, in and of itself, does not have these more common interactions because, in all our geekish glory, what affects magic is magic (and maybe a few rare elements). In terms of adjustment powers like that, the power source is considered as common as a SFX in an overall, well rounded, supers world. The number of magicians is roughly equal to the number of fire guys (a great generalization) so things that impact them might be considered on more even ground. Magic, too (and mutant, and alien) have absolutely no restrictions on them in terms of power sets. Someone who is a Fire Guy has a limited set of abilities. You can get pretty creative and invent neat stuff (a fire based STN, CON, REC drain, for example... using heat to dehydrate someone) but, ultimately, it's limited by the whole heat/fire SFX. Magic, on the other hand, isn't limited in any way. Someone with a magic pool, for example, can just as easily have a mundane machinegun that isn't magical, at all, in operation. "I cast a spell and summon a machinegun." The attack, itself, isn't magical...it's just bullets. Defenses only vs magic wouldn't work (this is why I say it doesn't count as a "limited set of effect" in terms of VPPs). The idea behind an EC, and although I don't have the book handy, I'm sure it says as much, is intended to reward a concept with a SFX set. You can only fit in powers that meet that SFX. Allowing a power source (like magic) as an SFX creates an EC (or any framework, like a VPP) allows construction of the framework without any sort of limitation to which powers can be selected. In your "Magic Elemental" discussion above... what powers are excluded? You can have literally anything with something like that. Meanwhile, a Fire Elemental isn't going to be busting out with a sonic disruption blast or a shower of cold iron as part of his power set. This is not even ground (like how the adjustment powers work). Now in an all mutant or all magic campaign, I would think the adjustment powers bought vague are out of whack, 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 Acroyear Not necessarily (and there is also a common "drain mutant powers" which is equally silly. It's like draining "human" powers which affects all the stats, running & swimming. Mutations are genetic and wildly different). I agree there's some crossover in terms of adjustment powers, I don't dispute that, at all. But a SFX creates a set of rules all by itself in how the environment interacts with it. Like electricity or ice. Magic, in and of itself, does not have these more common interactions because, in all our geekish glory, what affects magic is magic (and maybe a few rare elements). *snips long well thought out post* Now in an all mutant or all magic campaign, I would think the adjustment powers bought vague are out of whack, too. I see your point and I guess we'll just respectfully agree to disagree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 If ECs were used as they are supposed to (imo) you don't need the inter-dependent portion of them to prevent abuse. Unlike Monolith's example above, I don't believe "fire" can heal nor provide extra-dimensional movement (among other things). While it might be suitable for a magical fire being, it is certainly not due to the fire aspects of the character. And, again, even if one were to allow such things... they are stuck with a fire effect. Magic can be anything fire, cold, sonics, gremlin helpers, light, darkness, steel, plagues, magnetics, gravity, summoned spacement with rayguns, etc, etc. The problem is, people allow these super vague things to count as SFX and then complain "oh, this is unbalanced." Well, no kidding. If you allow that sort of thing, then, yeah, you need the inter-dependent nature of 5th ECs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by MisterVimes I see your point and I guess we'll just respectfully agree to disagree I am perfectly cool with that. 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 I am perfectly cool with that. See... we're all such nice people *GROUP HUG* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Let's go back to making Hermit feel inadequate.... Be happy, you're a 150 point follower... not too shabby! I'll even let you drive the Acromobile. 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 Unlike Monolith's example above, I don't believe "fire" can heal nor provide extra-dimensional movement (among other things). While it might be suitable for a magical fire being, it is certainly not due to the fire aspects of the character. I did not say fire could "heal". I said fire could give the person regenerations (he walks into fire and gets healed). Put out the character's fire, he cannot Regen back that BODY damage. And, again, even if one were to allow such things... they are stuck with a fire effect. Magic can be anything fire, cold, sonics, gremlin helpers, light, darkness, steel, plagues, magnetics, gravity, summoned spacement with rayguns, etc, etc. I think your problem is that you have too broad of a view of what magic is. Magic is not "summoned spacement with rayguns." Not in anyone's books. 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 Another potential flamewar shot down! How will I ever get my post count up without the flamewars? I'll have to start posting in the non-gaming forums now. Oh... fine... *George Bush is a Doo-doo-head! *The Scandanavisnas are barbarian animals by allowing the sun to shine at night! *Moderate politicians are stealing babies and feeding them to Michael Jackson! Is that better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith I think your problem is that you have too broad of a view of what magic is. Magic is not "summoned spacement with rayguns." Not in anyone's books. Magic can't be used to gate people from other worlds? Why not? That's the point. The spacemen with rayguns aren't magic, themselves, but with "magic powers" you could certainly summon them. If a magician summons a lion to fight someone... or a snake or whatever (both much more commonly accepted than spacemen, I would assume) neither of the animals, themselves, are magical. The lion doesn't attack with "magic" claws and the snake doesn't attack with "magic" snake venom. It's just claws and snake venom. Similarly, spacemen with rayguns are hitting you with lasers or whatever, not eldritch bolts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GestaltBennie Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear 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. The author of the 4th ed Champions Universe versions agreed with you, which is why Solitaire's is gone. :-) Mind you, if I'd done what Steve did and bought the company, the first thing I would have done would have been to take the section of the Hero rules that deals with Elemental Controls, rip them out if the manuscript and bury them under six feet of concrete. That construct would have been history faster than CLOWN. :-) Scott Bennie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GestaltBennie Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith I did vote for Mother Raven... but don't tell anyone. I didn't. "Mother Raven" indeed! Damn Eastern Canadians futzing with with West Coast myths. Stick to your own side of the country! :-) Scott Bennie 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 GestaltBennie I didn't. "Mother Raven" indeed! Damn Eastern Canadians futzing with with West Coast myths. Stick to your own side of the country! :-) True... but she LOOKED cooler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith Another potential flamewar shot down! How will I ever get my post count up without the flamewars? I'll have to start posting in the non-gaming forums now. Who was flaming?? (aside from all the fire guys we used as examples). 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 That's the point. The spacemen with rayguns aren't magic, themselves, but with "magic powers" you could certainly summon them. The difference is that I would not allow a mage in my game to summon a Deathstar. The GM does have some responsibilty to enforce genre and play balance. The rules are only guidelines for this. They are not absolutes. You are looking for an absolute, and that is just not possible within the HERO System. We each have to play our own way, but even with our differences I bet you would have some fun playing in my game and I would have some fun playing in yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by GestaltBennie The author of the 4th ed Champions Universe versions agreed with you, which is why Solitaire's is gone. :-) I'd kiss you. But I think you're to blame for goofy-ing up Deathstroke, so we'll just call it even. If not, I'll have to blame it on being Canadian or something, because I really don't want to kiss you. and this after I asked "who's flaming?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Monolith We each have to play our own way, but even with our differences I bet you would have some fun playing in my game and I would have some fun playing in yours. No you wouldn't. I suck as a GM Which is why I've been working on a pet-campaign. I figure if it's all mine and I like it, I might improve. I see, you put your restrictions on during play. We put the restrictions on in the construction... saves time, imo. We also have a huge group (11 people) so you might not be running into the same issues we do if you have a smaller one (most groups seem to be half the size or less). The guy who usually runs for us is prety damn good, in my opinion, though. Kept the team going since, hell, '82? 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 GestaltBennie Mind you, if I'd done what Steve did and bought the company, the first thing I would have done would have been to take the section of the Hero rules that deals with Elemental Controls, rip them out if the manuscript and bury them under six feet of concrete. That construct would have been history faster than CLOWN. :-) I actually like Elementals now. I did not care for them in 4th, but I like the description of them in 5th. I think there are many games on the market which just has an ambiguous name of Fire Powers. Then the player and GM must decide what "stunts" fire powers entail for the player. This is now the same with Elemental Controls. The player buys Fire Power EC and then he and the GM fill out the slots with the predefined "stunts" the player an do with the power. This makes a lot of sense to me and makes it easier to define the power rather than just throwing everything you want into it willy-nilly. If you think of the EC as the power, and the slots as the power stunts it all works out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GestaltBennie Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by Acroyear I'd kiss you. But I think you're to blame for goofy-ing up Deathstroke, so we'll just call it even. If not, I'll have to blame it on being Canadian or something, because I really don't want to kiss you. and this after I asked "who's flaming?" Actually, the 4th edition Deathstroke was the work of Scott Heine. As for the kiss, uh, urm, no comment. (Even though as a people, we Canadians are sexier than Jennifer Garner. :-)) Scott Bennie 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 GestaltBennie Actually, the 4th edition Deathstroke was the work of Scott Heine. As for the kiss, uh, urm, no comment. (Even though as a people, we Canadians are sexier than Jennifer Garner. :-)) Scott Bennie All you Scotts look alike...or is that Canadians? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acroyear Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by GestaltBennie Actually, the 4th edition Deathstroke was the work of Scott Heine. As for the kiss, uh, urm, no comment. (Even though as a people, we Canadians are sexier than Jennifer Garner. :-)) Can I blame you for it, anyway? now I have to go see who Jennifer Garner is... James Garner, I'll give you that... 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.