Trebuchet

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

 

Due to the classic STR and CON "pumps", designing a character whose premise is that they are very good at HTH combat is almost inevitably cheaper to do with high STR and CON values than via any other method.

IOW, build the classic brick.

 

If one attempts to build a highly effective HTH combat character w/o high STR, it ends up being more expensive points-wise. Sometime much more.

 

Example. The character in question is THE master of a martial art like Aikijitsu or Aikido.

 

Background

So we all are talking about the same MA, here's a 2 sentence description of the difference between jujitsu/judo vs aikijitsu/aikido:

If you find yourself on the ground or flying through the air after feeling a joint twisted or your body lifted, that's "ju".

If you find yourself on the ground or flying through the air and don't know how it happened, that's "aiki".

 

Note that the above is independent of the common knowledge both styles have of joint locks/breaks and pressure points (for both "atemi", AKA strikes, as well as controls or submission holds)

 

Another difference that needs to be noted is that the aiki arts have a strong weapons component in them. Including Bow and arrow.

/Background

 

Said character has been practicing and refining their understanding of the art for more than 50 years. This is the classic "unassuming little old man". Until he reveals himself.

 

Staves vibrate with the force of his snap strikes. Thrusts can shatter staves.

Students 2-3x or more his mass go flying the length of the practice matt.

He can gently put his hands on you and suddenly inflict _excruciating_ pain, or remove such, because of his knowledge of accupressure.

He can lock up multiple attackers simultaneously to the point where they must submit or risk having their joints torn from their ligaments if they insist on trying to fight the hold.

 

On the rare occasions where he gives demos with deady weapons, he does things with them that are awe inspiring. Sword demos are so fast and accurate you can't see the blade or its results until after the damage is done.

Bow demos involve both accuracy and rate of fire that match feats described in legends (Splitting arrows with others. Firing 6-12 shots per minute with outrageous accuracy. Often through armor as part of the demo. etc)

 

This guy can't lift more than the average guy on the street can.

But he can run herd animals into exhaustion, move so fast that you find it hard to believe, hit so hard that he routinely breaks the force measuring devices at circuses or fairs (both the swing something at them and the hit them directly types), and if you put a bathroom scale into his hands and ask him to squeeze, it reads 250+ Lbs.

 

And none of the above speaks to his teaching skills, EGO, PRE, or the skills based on those stats which are every bit as impressive as the physical stuff.

 

(yes, folks I've known more than one RW martial artist of this type.)

 

In every way except how much he can lift or carry, this sensei deserves a 25 STR in game terms.

(I'm assuming a world where 25 is the NCM limit.)

But he probably can't lift much more than the average guy (STR 10 in game terms).

 

So how much of a Limitation is

"STR in every way except in how much you can carry or lift."?

This is nothing new. What you're looking for are called Damage Classes and can be found in the Martial Arts sections of 5E and 6E.

"ZACKENBERG RESEARCH STATION, GREENLAND—Claiming it to be one of the most dramatic and visible signs of climate change to date, researchers said Monday that receding polar ice caps have revealed nearly 200 clandestine lairs once buried deep beneath hundreds of feet of Arctic ice...."

 

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/melting_ice_caps_expose_hundreds?utm_source=c-section

 

One can only hope global warming will reveal the secret Nazi base in the Antarctic soon too.

Re: Does this work in 6e?

 

Would this sort of attack work against characters using Density Increase's inherent knockback resistance, or only versus characters with the Power Knockback Resistance (and of course those with none at all)?

Re: 6E Mess

 

I know I am a total newbie, so please forgive but...

 

In Balabanto Stadium example, to benefit of his massive AOE his hero is supposed to be flying 32 meters above the stadium, right ? Any altitude lower will shorten the radius of the AOE in proportion.

 

Of course he could fly lower and shoot in diagons but his result will be an oblong circle not of very larger area....

 

So my question is : is it really such a tremendous advantage if you consider the trouble he have for being flying so high above... Times to go up there, vulnerability (no place to hide, plain view of everyone ), worse L.O.S. because there is plenty of vertical coverage (foilage, flags,tents, umbrella) that make his target identification harder. Just go up a 10 story builidng and look below you, plenty of things are now covered that weren't at groud level... and interior of buildings are probably now out of reach...

 

Also there is the trouble not to affect friends and civilians in the blast, at this distance there is some delay before impact and situation is moving rapidly...

 

P.S. European I.Q of 165 ... hoped it was enough to post...

Balabanto's rant against AoE Cone (post #59) was ludicrously overstated. According to 6E (p 320), the base area affected by an AoE Cone is only 8 meters on a side. I'm not much good at math, but if I figured right that's much closer to being 8 meters in diameter than 32 meters. A 32 meter diameter cone would cost +¾.

 

The 6E AoE got cheaper. It also covers a smaller area. It's a wash IMO.

 

Welcome to Hero, where we'll be debating nitpicky details until Hell freezes over.

Re: 6E Mess

 

Well' date=' Treb, if they do that, just take it away! See, I run a game where ICA=ICC. If someone decides in his SID to do something that a villain gets wind of, and then the villain shows up, that's just comic book logic talking. The villain's not gonna come looking for the hero in Hero ID, and villains like big entrances, dramatic poses, etc. Not every villain can hurl around a bus, but sometimes...it does happen.[/quote']I was thinking more along the lines of defenses or enhanced senses not working while the character in in his civilian ID, so they'd be considerably more vulnerable to surprise attacks or other emergencies. Bad enough to be caught by surprise (thus taking 2X Stun damage) but the character's defenses might well be half or less of what they are in their hero ID. Something as mundane as a car crash, construction site accident, or liquor store robbery could be a significant threat. Even if the character aborts to a defensive action, it will take a Phase to get the OIHID/OIAID Powers active.

 

To me, that's certainly worth a -¼ Limitation.

Re: 6E Mess

 

It's not a question of want. It's a question of physical transformation. If you are a DEX 10 guy who turns into a Dex 23 guy, you don't get to transform until Dex 10. Only in Alternate ID is meant to be a limitation in and out of combat. I only let people who have a "Physical Transformation" power have it in the first place. You can't abort to change into Hero ID, because it requires an entire phase to get it to work. So if on Dex 11, the character gets caught in a 3d6 Killing Explosion (Huge in my game, but reasonable), chances are, he's bleeding to death on the ground. He's not in his hero ID, he's just bleeding to death on the ground. That's why it's a limitation. This limitation can kill a PC dead in less time than you can say "Jack Robinson." The argument that this is a zero point limitation would only apply if the limitation itself was also worth a zero and was a power manifestation, as mentioned earlier. Then you could abort to turn it on instantly. But once you take the power limitation, you can't anymore.

 

Often, villains do attack places where the heroes are in Secret ID. Sometimes, they even have destructive actions that occur before the PC's get to go or do anything. It's "The Advantage of Being Evil." How many scenes have you seen in movies and comics where the first thing that happens is Spidey's Danger sense goes off, or the characters are talking in a perfectly ordinary restaurant, and someone throws a bus through the window? Now, if the character has OIAID, he's going to probably take some damage from the bus with no defenses whatsoever. We'll call it "A lot." If he's even conscious after the bus has landed, he can fight the villain. More than likely, however, he won't be. That's what the limitation is meant to represent, because you can't abort to OIAID.

 

That's why this limitation can still be -1/4 even if you can instantly transform, because not everyone is aware that the bus is coming. Now, if the player with OIAID bought Danger Sense that worked all the time, I would definitely say "For you, this limitation is a zero, because you almost always know when the attack is going to happen, and that reduces the value to less than the 1/4 limit." 360 Degree Spatial Awareness would probably also do this too, unless it stopped at the window of the restaurant, in which case it would probably be a little too late to notice the bus at the moment it shatters the glass.

We deal with OIHID in our campaign the same way you do. I agree that not having Powers available 100% of the time has some value as a Limitation; and it can certainly generate a certain synergy with trying to maintain a Secret ID if a character's powers are in any way obvious. As you noted certain power combinations might negate the discount, but I think normally the minor price break provided by OIHID (a 20% discount if it's the only Limitation; even less if it's stacked with others) will let most things fly as long as the character spends a significant amount of time in civilian ID. OTOH, if they always power up before leaving the Fortress of Invincibility to pick up a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread, they're bypassing the intent of the Limitation.

Re: 6E Mess

 

AP Blast Max of 11d6 is correct. That's 69 points.

 

The Narrow Cone AP Blast Max should be 8d6. +1/4 for AP, and +1/2 for Narrow cone. (That's 1/4 less advantage from 3/4), or 70.

Reread the new rules carefully. 6E AoE Cone is not equal to 5E's. It only shoots out 8 meters from the point of origin, or a mere 4 hexes in 5th Edition terms. A 5th Edition one would have covered 4 or 5 times as much area for the same amount of points. You're not going to hit very many people with a 60° cone-shaped blast only 26 feet long; certainly not a stadium full.

 

I guess I can't see the problem here. Even if AoE Cone stacked with AP was so devastating, you're the GM and you already have extensive house rules. You have several valid choices:

 

1) Forbid stacking these Advantages

 

2) Change the cost of either AoE Cone, AP, or both Advantages, back to -½

 

3) Stick with 5E

Re: Thoughts on Damage Negation (6e)

 

It might have made more sense to remove the largest rolls first, as in Explosion, or even subtract the DN damage directly from the attack damage.

 

Something for 6ER, I guess.

Re: Some Help for WWII Icons

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601091&sid=ajTs2JeE.r4s

 

Evidently not.

What was your point? It's Italian soldiers dying, not French ones.

 

And why bring politics into a quasi-humorous thread?

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

A shot putter, I'll give you, has the wrong sort of muscle for optimum DEX (although that's some pretty fancy footwork). To me, DEX encompasses overall coordination (getting your body to go where you want it to), strength to weight (someone too weak for their frame will have low DEX) but also hand-eye coordination and 'steadiness' (which don't sit that well together, IMO) and also the ability to act quickly in combat. The elements of DEX sit together rather uneasily IMO.

 

In addition smaller people have a mechanical advantage with the lever principle, in terms of speed and relative strength. A normal human probably sould never be built with 20 DEX and 10 STR: to an extent it is a trade off, so, yes, an Olympic swimmer probably has more (absolute) strength and less DEX than a gymnast, but I'd strongly argue that, despite the fact that, in Hero terms, their sport has relatively little to do with DEX, in fact, in terms of actual world agility, a swimmer would be nearly as agile as a gymnast: the big difference would come in their training: the actrobatics skill, and levels as opposed to extra swimming.

 

A different 'dextrous' archetype might be a watchmaker - someone good with their hands. The may have little overall coordination (or they may have good overall coordination - the point is there is no corrrelation). Of course a gymnast may have little talent as a watchmaker, even if trained in the basics: in Hero terms that would mean the character shouldn't have a high overall DEX, but plenty of skill levels int he appropriate area. Mechanically there is no difference between DEX and skill levels for something like acrobatics.

 

Of course getting it 'right' is an art not a science, and as such will be appreciated differently by different people, but no one is saying that everyone has to have human level characteristics. The point is there should be some reason if they do not. It might be a campaign reason: all superhumans have superhuman characteristics because the mutation that allows superpowers also makes the body much faster, tougher and stronger, or it might be a character-centric reason: I have the natural ability to generate and fling lightning, and part of that is that I have platinum wire instead of nerves, giving me almost instantaneous reactions (which I originally mis-typed as eractions, which could have given the wrong impression altogether ).

DEX, like all the Hero system Characteristics, is an abstraction. I could see a watchmaker with a high DEX, or Skill Levels with various DEX skills, or just a PS: Watchmaker 15- as all being reasonable builds.

 

He might not have any combat skills at all. He might also be a former Navy SEAL or a superhero in his alternate ID. Any of these are equally valid in Hero.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

Yup. I see a lot of arguments about why some people enjoy limiting their supers to being normal humans that are only super in certain limited areas. Cool for them' date=' I'm glad they enjoy that kind of game. Heck, I've enjoyed such games myself. I just don't see why at least some of them seem to feel that since it is now easier to do, the CU should be changed into this type of setting. *shrug*[/quote']People should play the kind of campaign they enjoy without feeling it necessary to tell others doing it differently that they're doing it wrong. If you think mooks should rate an 18 DEX and supers don't really start until you hit 30+ DEX, that's fine with me. Just don't tell me I've got to emulate your method in order to be playing "real" Champions.

 

I'd like to think we've figured out something right in our campaign's 17 years, but maybe we were just deluding ourselves.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

I fear I don't see the issue. Benchmarks are flexible. The CU's benchmarks don't have to match any of our games' date=' and our games don't have to match the CU. Its just a matter of design preference and campaign norms. If thugs are running DX 14 on average then, yeah, the brick needs an 18+ more or less. But if the mooks are running 10-11 DX on average (and I'm not sure why Joe Street thug, or even a great many infantrymen need to run much higher than 10-12 DX, then the brick should do just fine with a solidly athletic 14+ DX. Its all relative. Also, the fact that the book examples might inspire people to fall in line with its norms doesn't disturb me. There's nothing wrong with that. Its there game. So long as it works for them and they are having fun they're doing it right. The same goes for those of us who design settings with different benchmarks and assumptions in play.[/quote']I agree. I typically put mooks at DEX 11 and elite commandos will get a DEX 14 plus a couple levels.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

Very true - Treb' date=' if that Olympic gymnast has a DEX 18, and 2 skill levels, or +2 with Acrobatics, (or make it 4 if you want 17 as the de minimis level) she's quite agile and a spectacular gymnast. If he has a 28 (38) DEX instead, she also need only train a bit in other areas to be a professional juggler, lockpick, etc. Given the extent of Olympic training, I think they have a lot more skill bonuses than flat characteristics.[/quote']Yes. My backstory for Zl'f has her a 1996 Olympic Silver Medalist in gymnastics before she got her superhuman powers, so she was already one of the best in the world. Gaining those powers put her into an entirely new realm of performance; one that rendered further competition entirely pointless.

 

Sean's other points are also dead on. If we set Olympic contenders at DEX 18 - 20, we raise the bar for any other character we want to be highly agile. If we lower it, we lower the bar.

You call that raising the bar; we call it increased granularity. We couldn't see any reason to cram everyone's Characteristics into territory occupied by what are, after all, ordinary humans. I don't think any Olympic contender has a high DEX by definition. I'd be hard pressed to see why a swimmer or shot-putter would have a DEX beyond that of a normal athletic human.

 

I'm pretty sure Z'lf's DEX 43 comes from a discussion with the GM that 43 means "she is the highest DEX in the world". Maybe there's a couple of characters out there with a 41 or 42, but she's the fastest bar none, so no one else has a 43. If the highest any other character would ever be permitted is, say, a DEX of 31 or 32, and a 26+ were as rare in the game world as a 36+ is in a typical Champions game, then Z'lf would undoubtedly have a DEX of 33 - and still be incredibly agile, and the best in the world.

Yes, there was just such a discussion: The agreement was that Zl'f would be the most agile human on Earth - period. Anyone her equal or more agile would be either of extraterrestrial origin or some sort of Deity of DEX.

 

So far as I've seen, the next highest DEX in our campaign is a mere 38. What a klutz!

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

- base level Supers don't become olympic gymnastics competitors if they take a beginner's tumbling class.

That's because it probably takes 15- or better Acrobatics roll to be an Olympic-caliber gymnast; meaning the character has a 30+ DEX' date=' extra levels in Acrobatics, or both. I built Zl'f with a 17- Acrobatics roll - which I rated as Silver Medal caliber - [i']without[/i] her Powers. With them, she hits 22- before I apply her Overall Levels. The 12- or 13- from a "base level Super" with an 18 - 23 DEX doesn't even come close.

 

In a 6E rebuild she'd still have a 22- Acrobatics roll even if her DEX drops into the 30's. That's her schtick and it's not going to change because of a trivial thing like rewriting the rules.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

However' date=' I think your defense expectations are pre-5e. The expected defenses dropped from 30 being high to 25 being high between 5e and 4e, although a lot of us old guard players carried right along with higher defenses, and Bricks who take a lot of typical hits to take down (how many 12 STUN hits can a typical Brick absorb?).[/quote']IME, 6 or even 7 in Champions. Most don't have a STUN in the 70's or higher, but even a single Recovery (Post-12 or otherwise) can keep many bricks on their feet long after any other archetype would be face down in the mud.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

I think a mix of all-new characters and prior examples would have been useful' date=' but the prior examples in my ideal would have set out how things [b']changed[/b] in 6e, not just taken the abilities the characters had in 5e, recosted them to the 6e pricing and added/subtracted ancillary abilities to balance. It would have been the same character description and concept from 5e reimagined using the 6e framework.

Agreed. My point was that, by using 100% ported-from-5th characters instead of including some entirely new characters, DoJ missed a golden opportunity to illustrate what 6E could do better rather than how it could emulate 5E. If all you're going to do with 6E is emulate 5E, why not simply stick with 5E?

 

Unquestionably it's a problem carried forward from prior editions, but the question of caps was raised, and there's the answer. And, again, the 6e characters suggest "everyone at the same caps with various SFX", rather than variation in character abilities.

Which simply illustrates the point Tasha made upthread: that the most likely result of using caps is that everyone ends up with characters that differ significantly only in their sfx. Similar DEX, similar OCV/DCV, similar defenses, similar Damage Classes. Yawn. That's not the way to create a dynamic and interesting team.

 

The suggestion put forward is that Superhuman characters are Super in all respects - across the characteristics. The rebuttal was that this seems apparent in some, but far from all, characteristics in-game. My list simply covers those abilities I would expect to be most commonly Superhuman based partially on genre and partially on in-game rationalization. A setting rationalization that part of being superhuman is having a "base template" of legendary to superhuman characteristics, or even only certain characteristics, could work very well. However, it should not be implicit in character designs (especially generic "here's how the rules work" sample characters) but explicit in the setting material, in my view.

 

As to "he's superhuman, why can't he have superhuman DEX", I come back to concept. Does Superhuman justify a mishmash of random superhuman abilities, or a carefully considered and realized concept? I can no more agree that "every/most Superhero" should have a legendary or greater DEX" than I can suggest this with any other characteristic. Is Z'lf less Superhuman because she lacks Legendary STR and CON? Are the vast majority of published characters "not all that Super" because their INT, EGO and BOD fail to reach Legendary levels? I don't think so.

I think the idea of what's superheroic and what's merely heroic has very little meaning in a superhero game. Frankly, I don't see a DEX of 23 to be something that automatically puts a character into the realm of the superhuman. It's useful (although a lot less useful in 6E), but I don't feel that a Characteristic has to be from the Superheroic column to make a character superhuman. To use your example of Zl'f, of all her Characteristics only her DEX and SPD are officially "Superhuman" according to RAW; all the others fall into the Skilled, Competent, or Legendary columns. Would I claim she's not superhuman? Of course not, but it's not because she passed some invisible point along the DEX continuum that suddenly elevated her to superhuman status: It's a combination of factors. To my mind her STR 15 (given her size and physique) is also superhuman. Were she to lose her DEX and SPD, I'd still consider her superhuman because she could still do things that "normal" humans cannot do. She might be somewhat less superhuman, but she'd still be superhuman - whatever that means.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

I'm going to quibble the bolded point. Please tell me how Taurus' high DEX makes up for lower defenses. This may have been the case in 5e, where that high DEX not only translated into a higher DCV, but was the only way to increase DCV that was always available. In 6e, DEX enhances your DEX skills and initiative only. It does not reduce the likelihood of an opponent hitting Taurus, or reduce the damage he takes from such a hit.

 

In 5e, a character who relied on avoiding, rather than absorbing, damage would have low defenses and high DEX. In 6e, such a character does not need high DEX. He needs high DCV.

 

Here again, he needs DCV. DEX has become more of a niche player, a necessity to very few characters. In the process of shifting from 5e to 6e, we need to adapt to that new paradigm. Retaining the 5e "everyone has a high DEX" approach for the 6e sample characters fails to illustrate the fundamental change in DEX - it was a prime attribute for anyone capable in combat. In 6e, it is ancillary in combat.

All these example - absolutely true observations, BTW - illustrate why 6E should have built entirely new characters from scratch rather than reworking pre-existing characters. The new rules create a whole new paradigm for character design; characters imported from 5E get the worst of both worlds.

 

This is a trend I've seen in, and even before, 5e. With 350 (now 400) points, when the maximum damage is 12d6, the maximum CV is 10, Speed caps at 6 or 7, and the maximum defenses are 25, it is trivially easy to have a character hit the max in every area with points to spare. The maximum becomes the minimum and everyone becomes generic.

This has nothing to do with deficiencies in 6E; it merely illustrates the inherent problem with caps which were just as troublesome in 5E or before. Point caps are not even official rules; they are and always have been house rules. There are plenty of valid reasons to criticize 6E; let's not beat on it for something that was just as problematical in all prior editions.

 

A good point. I would suggest there are very few characteristics I would tend to expect all Supers to be above and beyond the norm (as opposed to above average to "competent normal" 15 range). The ones that come to mind?

 

- CON - an unhealthy person would likely not survive most origins. Supers get a lot of physical exercise, so being in excellent physical shape seems like a given. The STUN mechanic makes this a necessity, so all Supers are high in this area.

 

- EGO - what kind of person, granted powers and abilities far beyond those of normal humans, chooses to use those powers to assist and defend his fellow man, shunning reward and even concealing his true identity? That 11-14 range afforded the sample characters seems to me a bit light on the willpower to resist the temptation to use one's powers for personal gain - not necessarily as a criminal, but in the many legal ways such powers could be used to generate wealth and celebrity.

 

- Speed - Heroes get panel time, and regular exposure to split-second decisionmaking would tend to enhance this ability. It might be reasonable to have a 2-3 SPD rookie hero, but I know where I would expect his xp to be directed.

 

- STUN/END/REC - this comes back to CON above. A person engaged in the lifestyle of a superhero would be physically fit, and these stats back that up. It's no coincidence they were linked to CON in the past. Again, a weakness in one of these areas for a rookie might not be uncommon, but the level of exercise they'll get will soon build that cardio, so I know where their xp is likely going. High CON has typically resulted in these stats bulking up.

All of this sounds like metagaming rationalization to me. If a superhuman character supposedly can't justify a DEX in the 20's, then why should a superhumanly high CON (20+), OVC/DCV, and/or STUN be any more acceptable simply because survival in the campaign requires it? This smacks more of an anti-DEX bias than anything else.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

It's even more ridiculous considering that OMCV' date=' unlike OCV, is pretty useless if you're not a mentalist, meaning someone who has a Mental Power or someone with an ACV Attack.[/quote']Can anyone provide a reason for a non-mentalist character to have OMCV? Does it do anything if you don't have mentalist Powers?

 

Someone in our gaming group suggested you might use it to break out of a mental Entangle, but that doesn't make any sense - you don't need to make an attack roll to break out of a physical Entangle, so why would you on a mental one?

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

2) There's no New sample characters. Just converted ones. Woulda been cool to expand the Genre By Genre with some more sample characters - especially since Champions gets 4' date=' Fantasy and Star get 2, Pulp, Cyber and Ninja get 1, and a bunch get none. More samples in more genres would have been extra cool.[/quote']I can't help thinking that characters built from scratch in 6E are going to be different from characters converted from 5th Edition to 6th Edition; and that creating entirely new sample characters would have done far more to illustrate the strengths of the new rules than trying to shoehorn "old" characters into 6E. A generous mix would have been the best way - hopefully the 6E genre books will have some of both.

Re: Some Help for WWII Icons

 

He's not' date=' it's clockwise from the upper left. The guy eating the hamburger is America, Italy is standing to his left and eating a slice of pizza.[/quote']And, I can't help noticing, waving a white flag.

 

Shouldn't that be France?

Re: Social Limitation: Pet (5e)

 

Yes' date=' being a pet is what I mean. Sorry, I should have made that more clear.[/quote']I wouldn't think that would be much different from being a slave, with the possible exception that it may be voluntary. Yah, 20 or 25 points as a Disad.

Re: Social Limitation: Pet (5e)

 

What' date=' in your opinion, would be a fair value for such?[/quote']Unless it's rather extreme (such as a tiger), I'd say it's worth -0.

 

You could make a better case for pets being DNPCs.

Re: Disad Value (5e)

 

Yeah, it'd be pretty severe, essentially a license to be treated like the androids in Bladerunner or the heroine in Robert A. Heinlein's Friday.

Re: Thats one nimble little bull

 

Oh' date=' I'll agree with that one. I don't give every superhero over 20. That's typically just in the Characteristics where they shine. Why, just the other day I generated a superhero with a 15 Str and a 10 Int. Heh.[/quote']I think it's entirely reasonable that supers generally not have Characteristics out of the normal human range except in those specific areas they're supposed to be superhuman in. Keeping in mind that a STR of 8 is a typical man on the street*, a STR 15 one is a very strong man indeed and a STR of 20 makes him someone who can beat a normal to death with fists alone...

 

 

*At least in 5E; I don't know if that's changed in 6E.

Re: combat luck when grabbed

 

We may well be arguing the same point with different terminology but the limitation (call it luck or call it something else) does not cover anything in your description except (maybe) out of combat (and being attacked out of combat is relatively rare) and movethroughs (which you can decide not to do, and so may never be a problem). Being asleep/unconscious (and sometimes 'out of combat') are all covered by 'nonpersistent'.

 

Now one thing here is this: whilst Power/Talent names should not be taken to imply any particular effect, and so can give no real clue as to function, sfx names are absolutely and vitally linked to effect. Therefore there is no problem calling it Combat Luck - that is as meaningless as calling it Blue Alpha Seven - but having a limitation 'luck based' is completely about defining effect. If it is not Luck Based (and I think that the general consensus is that it is NOT) then the limitation should be differently labelled.

 

IMO

I agree the Limitation should probably be labeled differently; even though as I've said I think 'luck' in this context is only used as a shorthand. Personally, I dislike long and overly precise Limitation descriptions, especially for small (-½ or less) discounts. I prefer a shorter more flexible interpretation, at least in a four-color supers or pulp game.

 

In our group we don't really pay attention to the build - we use it as a pure Talent and in our Pulp Hero campaign every single character has it for the simple fact the bad guys all use guns or swords and without Combat Luck every fight would leave characters crippled for weeks. It really doesn't make much difference whether we call it "Luck Based, "Blue Alpha Seven," or "The PCs Get Extra Protection Because They're The Heroes."