Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Trebuchet

  1. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts
  2. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts Which was precisely the point I was making. He was claiming STR and martial arts were equivalent.
  3. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts They shouldn't be forced to do either. Hero already defines what is superhuman, and it ain't 21+. It's 30+. If a player actually presented a proposed PC with all 30's in their Primary Characteristics, I'd still look at them with a raised eyebrow no matter what their character's claimed origin. I look for balance within the campaign; not just raw numbers. I certainly don't know where you got the impression I think DEX should without limits at all, much less the only Characteristic without limits. I've certainly made no such statement in this thread (or elsewhere). All I've said is that if a PC has superhuman Characteristics as defined by the rules then they're no longer entitled to claim to be merely a Trained Human. He just became a Trained Superhuman; as for example the original Captain America after taking the Super Soldier Serum was. I wouldn't allow a PC with 50 CON, 50 PD/ED and a 12 SPD because he'd be unbalancing in my campaign regardless of whether he claimed his abilities sprang from being a trained human, wearing powered armor, having mutation, or prolonged exposure to radioactive Cheez Whiz™. He'd step on the MAs' and the brick's schticks. It's not about numbers, it's about game balance. And making Batman with the same SPD and/or DEX as a Green Beret is just as damaging to game balance as allowing him a 45 DEX or 50 STR, and at least he demonstrably doesn't lift tanks. Champions is a game about supers; the trained normal is already at a disadvantage because he doesn't have superpowers. They don't need further penalties. The only difference with STR is it's the only characteristic that's actually quantifiable in real world terms - "You can lift X amount." But what does an 18 CON really mean? A 7 SPD? A 20 REC? They're relevant only in relation to other characters' Chartacteristics. The only thing we know for certain is that, all other things being equal, a character with a 20 CON is slightly more durable/tougher than one with a 19 CON. Beyond that the two numbers are meaningless. You make a far stronger case for DEX inflation in Hero than you do for SPD inflation. IMO it's a mistake to conflate the two.
  4. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts OK, let's start with: - 60 STR uses more END per Phase than equivalent damage with martial arts - 60 STR costs more than equivalent damage with martial arts - 60 STR provides additional PD - 60 STR provides additional REC - 60 STR provides additional STUN - 60 STR provides additional Lifting capability - 60 STR provides additional Leaping capability - 60 STR provides additional Throwing capability In other words, extra STR does not provide identical benefits to a character with martial arts who does the same number of damage classes. The martial artist gains: - Lower END cost - Some CV benefits - several unique combat maneuvers Hardly seems an even match, even if it were in concept for most martial artists to have 60 STR instead of a significantly lower STR plus Martial Maneuvers and Damage Classes. Some people actually build to a concept; not to maximum point efficiency. You may feel that 21+ is "superhuman" in your campaign, but your campaign is not everybody else's. Many, maybe most, GMs are not going to consider that the break point for truly superhuman levels, especially in a Champions campaign (and this entire discussion is about Champions, not some other genre). Champions officially considers 30+ to be superhuman. Not 21+ unless the character takes the NCM Disad. I as a GM wouldn't let a "trained human" concept exceed 30 DEX anymore than I'd let him buy 60 STR, but I would let him buy 30 in either Characteristic. You've been throwing around a 32 DEX straw man most of this thread when most GMs in fact probably wouldn't allow a 32 DEX to call himself a "normal" man in the first place. Of course, I wouldn't give either Batman or Captain America a DEX in the 30's either. They'd both be in the upper 20's with multiple Skill Levels; and both with a 6 SPD if I built them. Fast. Not superhuman.
  5. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts
  6. Re: Combat Skill Levels vs Martial Arts I find it vaguely amusing that some people in this thread seem to think characters like Captain America and Batman must be built with either high Characteristics or with Skill levels, as if the two approaches are mutually exclusive. I'd build either one with a combination of comfortably-above-normal DEX/SPD and Skill levels. Both are game mechanics, and represent metagamed aspects of construction. Captain America doesn't say "Wow! Spider-Man's 38 DEX and 7 SPD sure makes him hard to hit!" He says "Wow, that Spider-Man sure is fast! I'll have to use all my natural abilities and training to hit him!" We should not lose sight of the fact we're building characters; and characters (as opposed to constructs) sometimes require less efficient builds. But it shouldn't mean it always requires the less efficient build.
  7. Re: Weekend Warriors -- Campaign Log
  8. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Tangerine Dream - Poland (The Warsaw Concert)
  9. Re: New Power: Destructive Attack This is essentially just a cheaper variant of Killing Attack. The only real difference is it gets rid of the Stun Lotto. In other words, I like it better than the current method. 60 AP Killing Attack: 4d6 - Average BODY 10, Average Stun 26 60 AP Destructive Attack: 6d6 - Average BODY 7, Average Stun 21 Seems about right for a Power which costs only 2/3 as much as Killing Attacks; especially with only Resistant Defenses applying vs both Stun and BODY damage. I'm not sure it's as good at breaking things as conventional Killing Attacks since most inanimate objects have Resistant defenses by default.
  10. Re: Taming Absolutes See, here you're arguing mechanics rather than sfx. I'm sorry, but a player or GM who buys a Killing Attack simply so he can blow through walls and robots is metagaming; and I have no real sympathy for metagamers. People should buy Killing Attacks because their sfx is to poke holes in things, not because their number crunching has determined that KA is better at certain things. You want to poke holes in walls or Entangles, buy AP. How about Killing Attacks that only apply vs. Resistant Defenses, but the Stun number is equal to the BODY rolled. No Stun Multiplier at all? Same BODY as before; just less Stun. If the intent is to kill, why the emphasis on Stun? Think anyone would buy that?
  11. Re: Taming Absolutes I totally agree. It would actually make "real" weapons more like they are in the movies and comics. One could creditably make the the assertion that most heavy military projectile weapons are also AP by default if we're really interested in blowing holes in things. Who says the effect of a real world device must be constructible with only one Advantage?
  12. Re: Taming Absolutes After discussing both Sovereign Defense and Killing attacks in general with my co-GM Blackjack this evening, I've come to realize my enthusiasm for SD is driven primarily by my visceral dislike of the Stun Lotto. Were the SM to be eliminated or dialed back a bit, I really wouldn't care about SD since I don't believe in absolute invulnerability anyway, and without worrying about the Stun Multiple the desired effects of SD can be easily achieved with existing defenses, DR, and Characteristics. 50+ rPD Hardened, 75% rDR, and 50+ CON is close enough to invulnerable for government work IMO. A character like that could take an average 10d6 RKA and hardly blink; and probably wouldn't be Stunned even with a "5" SM. We'll just have to accept that we're probably not going to get "invulnerable" characters in games with defense caps or only 350 CP. Since we're not going to change Killing Attacks; I'm kind of at a loss as to what to do about SD. I guess if it becomes an official Power I'll be happy; but I can live without it until it does.
  13. Re: Taming Absolutes Amen, brother! I think half the reason we're discussing SD/invulnerability at all is the disproportionate effects of large Stun Multiples. Without SM, this would be much less of a problem within the system. Why not look at a more moderate version of SD that completely stops all BODY and all but a KA's near-perfect Stun roll? If it stops 100% of the BODY and 75% of the Stun of a certain DC or below before other defenses, isn't that enough to be a practical invulnerability? If the character wants that last 25% to leave him unfazed, then let him buy enough conventional defenses and/or CON and Stun to ignore the attack.
  14. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Steve Roach: World's Edge (2 disc set; 127 minutes of music)
  15. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Jeff Wayne: Musical Version of War of the Worlds
  16. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Emerson, Lake & Palmer: Works Volume I (2 disc set)
  17. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Tangerine Dream: Zeit (2 disc set) (I'm totally sick of Christmas music after being bombarded with it incessently for a month so I've vowed that today I will listen only to CDs; preferrably ones I haven't played in a while.)
  18. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Kitaro: Ten Years (2 disc set)
  19. Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now? Tangerine Dream Poland - The Warsaw Concert I liked New Age before it was called New Age.
  20. Re: Your greatest Champions moment
  • Create New...