Jump to content

Ninja-Bear

HERO Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,628

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Ninja-Bear

  2. Creatures from Skull Island

    in Pulp Hero

    Posted

    Re: Creatures from Skull Island

     

    Maybe I should have dumped this to a differnt thread, but what the hey. I was wandering around odd web sites, blog spots etal I came across this... a sort of Vampire attack Panda from a 1946 comic. Who said that panda's were cuddly creatures?

    http://thatsmyskull.blogspot.com/2008/07/dire-panda.html

     

    Mikey! One more for you... please

     

    Well obvisously with China's record of pollution, the vampire panda is nature gone wrong ! :eek:

  3. The Incredible Shrinking Species

    in Champions

    Posted

    Re: The Incredible Shrinking Species

     

    If you don't mind, I think I might "borrow" this plot. I like it :D Though I might change shrinking Ray to Shrinker and make this a revenge plot. Oh thought, maybe Shrinker seduced Shriking Ray for this very purpose ! :eek: He thinks he is helping humanity, and she can wreak revenge to all ! Bwhaahaa ! Oh I digress.

  4. Lock-On System

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Lock-On System

     

    you could just go for a cover maneuver and shoot if you got hit with the cover mods

    once you have the target covered you can shoot at anytime

     

    you could buy skill levels only to offset the cover mods

     

    Since cover is a manuever which seems to do what you want to do, this suggestion seems to work the best.

  6. "The Inquision Is Come"

    in Champions

    Posted

    Re: "The Inquision Is Come"

     

    "tried and found wanting"

     

    Well the hand writing is on the wall. ;) And it is obviously Terror Inc. behind this nefereous scheme.

     

    Onto things for your PCs, well they could be recruited by the Inquisition. The real reason could be they were killed because they wouldn't join. Or the heros are the targets and the villians are expendale to keep up the charade of an inquistion.

     

    For some good roleplaying, have a person who has been vocal against mutants and such and have him mobbed. Also make the person innocent from actually doing anything. Will the heros save him ? Just because he says things that are offensive, doesn't he have first amendent rights ? How is that going to play out in the public eye? What about the churchs ? Some people will use any excuse to justify the actions. So now thugs might vandal, and steal from the church because they are the inquistition, even though there is no proof.

  8. Martial Artists STR

    in Other Genres

    Posted

    Re: Martial Artists STR

     

    Thanks for the replies. I did notice something on wikipedia on the Marvel Universe: Unversal Pscionic Energy. THat is something that I'm leaning towards. That in a minor way super martia artists manipulate chi as a cross between a mentalist and an energy projector.

     

    And as I said, I wish I could just ignore it, but everytime I see the maximum str level I cringe. I just seem to want to make them "real" for some reason. Must be a psy lim. Oh wait, not the right term, now. :eek:

  9. Martial Artists STR

    in Other Genres

    Posted

    Okay he is the deal, I've always hought that martial artists str score have been too high-mainly because of the lifting capacity. I am planning a video style ma campaign-because it is similar to a regular champions campaign. The one thing in my mind that stills causes me headaches though is why would a normal, i.e. Seeker or Crusader have a high str score ? (Note their scores are 25 and 20 respectively). Also I'm not looking at reducing their scores. For years I have been trying to do that, and well the hassle is not worth the reward. So how about it, what sfx should I give guys like this ?

  10. Inherent: SFX, any?

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Inherent: SFX, any?

     

    Game effectwise you can find an SFX to make the claws do less damage without removing them from the bear. An energy dampening field as a suppress vs HKA should work here.

     

    My point about hte bear is that the way inherent is described, I think that certain things should then be included; i.e. claws. But mechanically speaking they cannot be made inherent. So now its messy. I think that if he would have called it a variation of hardened and stated that this causes the same effect and the sfx could be that it is intrinsic to the pc such as a ghost having desolid, then there would be less confusion. I think :ugly:

  15. Inherent: SFX, any?

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Inherent: SFX, any?

     

    If you're referring to Wolverine-like claws you would be better off using the Difficult To Dispel Advantage instead. Inherent can only be applied to abilities which are Persistent. Persistent is not legal on the following build because of the CSL's on 2 of the slots (which have the same justification as CSL's built as part of published weapons). Even if you removed the CSL's, Persistent would have to be added to the slots individually (at least within HeroDesigner) and would be a total (+3/4) vs. (+1/4) for DTD.

     

    63 I've Got Claws! v2: Multipower, 75-point reserve, all slots Difficult To Dispel (x2 Active Points; +1/4) (94 Active Points); all slots Restrainable (-1/2)

    [Notes: Figured damage totals assume a character with 20 STR.]

    5u 1) Slash!: (Total: 75 Active Cost, 50 Real Cost) Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1 (1 1/2d6 w/STR) (vs. PD), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Armor Piercing (x2; +1), Penetrating (x2; +1) (70 Active Points) (Real Cost: 47) plus +1 with HTH Combat (5 Active Points) (Real Cost: 3) - END=0

    5u 2) Thrust!: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 3d6+1 (4d6+1 w/STR) (vs. PD), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (75 Active Points) - END=0

    5u 3) Slash! v2: (Total: 75 Active Cost, 50 Real Cost) Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1 (1 1/2d6 w/STR) (vs. PD), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), No Normal Defense ([Force Field or Force Wall]; +1), Does BODY (+1) (70 Active Points) (Real Cost: 47) plus +1 with HTH Combat (5 Active Points) (Real Cost: 3) - END=0

     

    60 I've Got Claws! v3: Multipower, 90-point reserve, (90 Active Points); all slots Restrainable (-1/2)

    [Notes: Figured damage totals assume a character with 20 STR.]

    6u 1) Slash!: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1 (1 1/2d6 w/STR) (vs. PD), Inherent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Armor Piercing (x2; +1), Penetrating (x2; +1) (85 Active Points) - END=0

    6u 2) Thrust!: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 3d6-1 (3d6+1 w/STR) (vs. PD), Inherent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2) (90 Active Points) - END=0

    6u 3) Slash! v2: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6+1 (1 1/2d6 w/STR) (vs. PD), Inherent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), No Normal Defense ([Force Field or Force Wall]; +1), Does BODY (+1) (85 Active Points) - END=0

     

    Thanks Hyper-man, but what confused me is the term "inherent". Claws on a bear is inherent to the bear, but mechanically speaking, they cannot be because they cost end. Unless of course you bought them 0 end :eek:. So to be clear, I think one reason this is confusing is the term itself.

     

    P.S. It may be just me, but I would have never have thought of draining someone's tail or claws until this issue of inherent came up.

  16. fair cost for strength that isn't strong

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

     

    I always like the way in Star wars 2 ed (WEG) on how they limited damage and to hit by scale. What they did was put a cap on the d6. How it worked was if you were on the same scale then you get the full value of the d6. If you thried to damage something in the next class then the d6 would be limited to 5. So even if you roled a 6, you only got the value of the 5. And theis went on for several levels. I wonder how to implement something like this for Hero. Say norm str vs super str. For argument norm and super have same str of 20. Declare that any six by normal is considered only 1 body whereas the super rolls per rules? Any thoughts?

  17. Inherent: SFX, any?

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Inherent: SFX, any?

     

    Here is something else which has me befudled with inherent. I get that it is appropriate for extra limbs i.e. tail, I get that it could be used for desolid, i.e. ghost body. but what confuses me is that one person said claws should be inherent, yet because of cost end rule - it shouldn't be. :nonp:

     

    Also Ij justed got to say, that I've been a lurker on these boards for a loooong time. And I don't recall drain extra limbs as being an issue before. Its seems to me that Steve came up with a solution to a (at best) trivial problem. But with the limited explanation of the new defense, opened up a bigger problem than its creation solved.

     

    Anyways my 2 cents also

  18. Inherent: SFX, any?

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Inherent: SFX, any?

     

    First, we didn't have the point values of senses until 6E, so there wouldn't have even been an option to suppress them until now. Also, what stops the person from simply walking out of the one hex of Darkness? So you need the UAA Advantage to make it stick to the person which is a +1 Advantage (at least that’s how it was done in 5ER). Now that’s still only what? 20 points I think? But the target is, arguably, depending on SFX and how the GM rules it, in the middle of a whole hex full of Darkness making it harder to target the victim of the Darkness.

     

    I'm not really sure what my point here is other than you can't compare apples to oranges, you have to make the Powers actually acheive the same (or at least similar) things to compare pricing.

     

    Fifth ed rev. pg 351 gives the cost for sight 25 pts. This is equal to phy lim all the time, fully impairing. Just thought you ought to know.

  20. 5ER: The "Disable" element from UMA and disabling generally

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: 5ER: The "Disable" element from UMA and disabling generally

     

    Okay Prestigitator is correct. Disabling does not double damage to see if it breaks as I first thought. I have no idea where I got that from. :confused: But the element still makes it easier to break because you don't impose any location penalties to hit or damage as per normal disable rules. But yes if a person has 12 body, the limb will break after 4 body, but unless GM otherwise says, the person will not take more than 4 body. That is suppose to balance out the disable element. Oh and as for impairment. when I was fact checking, I looked at UMA 4th, ad in the text, Steve did mention that if you did less body than would take to break the limb, then you perhaps did a minor fracture. Maybe you will want to rule this as an impairment ? I don't think this would be too unbalancing.

     

    Lastly I would suggest though that you thry a couple of mock battles with this element to see how it works. At least it will give you a feel for the rules ahead of time.

     

    Also to be clear about severing a limb and sfx; if you use a sword and disable then yes the limb would be cut off. If the manuever is a kneebreak then I don't see that the limb would be severed, just broken and useless. I just wanted to make that clear.

     

    Good luck :thumbup:

  22. 5ER: The "Disable" element from UMA and disabling generally

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: 5ER: The "Disable" element from UMA and disabling generally

     

    Holy Long Post Flying Rat-man!

     

    I'll try to answer some of your questions. Note I could be wrong too. But here I go !

     

    1.) Disabled yes-severed depends on special effect.

    2.) Not that I'm aware of. Its eithered disabled or not. Though personally I'm looking for PC to be impaired instead of disabled.

    3.) The disable element doubles your body rolled to see if you can disable a limb. I.e. I roll 4D6 normal and get 3 bod with a disable manuever. I double the body to 6 for purpose of checking to see if the limb is disabled. Assuming 10 bod, the limb only has 3 bod.

    4.) I think I justed answered it for you in #3.

    5.) I think yes

    6.) No (but I could see a yes if GM desired.) and No not by stun.

     

    Well I hope that this is helpful. :)

     

    Hopefully someone else will cime in at give their insights too.

  23. Another view of Damage Negation (6e)

    in HERO System Discussion

    Posted

    Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e)

     

    At least Hero has an answer to the question - what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immoveable object?

     

    The answer is - it depends on build and who has spent the most points :)

     

    Unless dramatic sense, cinematic sense, or common sense dictates otherwise. :)

     

    But, seriously I have been thinking of a way to do this pre-6th for martial artists. This is one archetype which traditionally have a lower pd, yet can generate high amount of damage. I could see this as a way to keep their stats inline but to take the edge off some off the damage. Note, I don't have 6th so I'm entertaining the notion based on hearsay.

×
×
  • Create New...