Hyper-Man Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 I have never understood the purpose of 'edition wars' and find it hilarious that anyone would attempt to start one on a forum supported by the owners of the current system rules. To make an informed argument (ex: saying X is better than Y after actually reading both X and Y) is one thing. But to make an uniformed argument (ex: saying X is better than Y without actually having read Y) is just silly. Hijacking a thread referring to the current rules edition in the first post in an attempt to start an argument is just rude. If someone wants to have a meaningful discussion on the merits of one edition vs. another they should: A. Start a new thread in the Hero System Discussion Forum. B. Be sure to have a copy of both rule sets being discussed. HM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardsman Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 I have never understood the purpose of 'edition wars' and find it hilarious that anyone would attempt to start one on a forum supported by the owners of the current system rules. To make an informed argument (ex: saying X is better than Y after actually reading both X and Y) is one thing. But to make an uniformed argument (ex: saying X is better than Y without actually having read Y) is just silly. Hijacking a thread referring to the current rules edition in the first post in an attempt to start an argument is just rude. If someone wants to have a meaningful discussion on the merits of one edition vs. another they should: A. Start a new thread in the Hero System Discussion Forum. B. Be sure to have a copy of both rule sets being discussed. HM I didn't start an edition war. I just made simple comment how it seem strange the new option for DS was to me. I didn't say the any edition was bad or wrong. That was the 6thers I just expressed expressed an oppinion. That's it. It is the defenders of the new holy writ who had a snit. I'm sorry I didn't know I wasn't allowed a personal opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Democracy Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 Hold on there boys! We dont need an argument about having an argument... :-) Like I say, in HERO there are a lot of ways to do things and the threads created to inform the 6th edition showed there are a lot of strongly held opinions on how to do stuff. Now there are officially suggested ways to do things but there is no-one (I cannot make that statement strongly enough) no-one who is going to come to your table and make you play in the One True Way... I have often felt a rule change was wrong until I played it and then saw why it was changed. I have also felt a rule change was wrong and felt completely justified when I played it. You know what? In the first instance I rolled with the change and in the second I ignored it. :-) We are here to explore the rules and how they might be flexed to do what we want. if someone doesn't like a suggestion there is no need to persuade them it is good, if everyone hates a suggestion, there remains no need. lets stay friends - not enough of us HERO afficionados to splinter into edition camps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja-Bear Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Dang it Doc you and your logic! I was starting to get the pitchfork and torches ready ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Now that is weird. I have say Damage shield is not an area effect unless you add area effect in my thinking(IE a fire wall with a radius) . If it helps, the Area in this case is the surface of the character. But if you ever move to 6th edition and this particular change doesn't make sense you can always house rule in the old way of doing it. Lucius Alexander Can I put a Damage Shield on one half of a palindromedary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuSoardGraphite Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Color me confused. Damage shield is cheaper in 6e (where it is a part of Area of Effect), could you explain? - E Cheaper than the 4th edition version? It was its own advantage and was only +1/2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 Its slightly more than +1/2, because you have to buy constant, but its cheaper than 5th edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eepjr24 Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 Its slightly more than +1/2, because you have to buy constant, but its cheaper than 5th edition. So with Constant it ends up being +3/4, which seems more than fair to me. I always found +1/2 in 4th to be too cheap for what it did, especially in heroic settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted July 26, 2016 Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 It's +3/4 with a -1/2 limitation in many cases, as you get No Range. I always found it a bit unfair that the powers that had no range by default were no more expensive as a Damage Shield. Of course, many became Ranged in 6e anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted July 26, 2016 Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 I agree, it seems pretty well balanced in 6th, finally. 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.