schir1964

My initial thoughts were a Triggered Transform with Side Effect.

He also did a review of Champions.

I was doing some searching on the internet and somehow I came across these two items that I never knew existed. It's probably old news to some of you (since it is technically old news). But I found the information quite interesting. The first link is an article articulating highlights/lowlights of the history of the Hero System. The second link is a thread dedicated to discussing the Hero 4th Edition (BBB). The Age Of Hero Hero Lets Read The Big Blue Book

It appears to me there two different ideas competing to solve the issue of the barrier for new players (at least it seems like it to me but I could be completely wrong). The first has to do with streamlining certain mechanics that have been core to the system since the beginning (as far I can tell from these posts). Making these mechanics more unified / consistent with each other would lower the barrier to those who are looking for a new or better game system. The second has to do with presenting a complete game universe whole cloth so that only those mechanics relevant to that universe are included. Making such a product would lower the barrier to those who are looking for a new or better game system. The second one is less problematic since you simply are taking the mechanics that currently exist and skinning them or modifying/replacing them as needed to create a cohesive game universe. It benefits the GM and Players alike since it can be used like other game systems that exist. The amount of work to create such a product is the major obstacle. The first one faces the problem of established mechanics be replaced with new ones (which would become the established mechanics going forward). The benefit is to make some aspects easier for anyone who doing math on the fly is considered less fun during play. Now personally, I don't have a problem with either of these being done. Both of these would make things easier for me as a GM. It would certainly make things easier for my kids. However, concerning the first idea above, I am not qualified to suggest that changing the core mechanics would be beneficial for the company and would have the desired effect of pulling in enough new players to make it worth it. It might but then again it might not. I don't know. Either of these ideas would have to be fully embraced by the current owners in order to have a lasting impact though.

The only reason I'm considering this is to make things easier for my kids (11 Years Old) who haven't played any pen and paper games. My daughter especially has trouble with doing math in her head. Also, I'm not the quickest at doing it myself, but I can rely on pre-generated/pre-calculated tables and programs to shore that up. But I want to introduce them to the Hero System and hopefully have some fun Father Son/Daughter time with them. That's why I snagged the Champions Begins once I found out what it was. Perfect timing. So my situation is somewhat an edge case I think.

I can't speak for Hugh, but the way I took his comment based on what I know of the Change Environment example is this: Normal movement or actions that work normally (without a DEX roll) on non-slippery surface but would require effort to successfully achieve when on a slippery surface (requires a DEX roll). That gives a lot of leeway for making common sense judgments by the GM. Whether everyone will agree what is a common sense judgement or not ...

Would Standard Effect on the Dice be appropriate for this?

I like this for one reason: It keeps the relevant information partitioned off to only those people it's relevant to. OCV + 3d6 is the relevant information for the player. DCV + 10 is the relevant information for the game master. I think I'll use this for the games I'm going run with my kids. One has already voiced that there appears to be a lot math (after reading the Champions Begins player manual). This should make things even easier in game play.

I'm not sure why but the idea just popped into my head and I wondered if anyone else had tried it. I'm not surprised by Jack's experience and like you I also could see this being a large advantage for faster characters. I'm not ready to try this for my games yet though. I'd like to hear about your experience if you ever try this out Duke.

A lot depends on the style you want. You say you looking for one for newer players. Does that mean you want less detail?

What I was getting at is does it make the game experience any different depending on when the declaration is made. So far the only one's who's tried it says it doesn't and slows the game down.

Yes, procedurally that is what happens, but the SFX of the action is that a SPD 2 character's phase includes Segment 1 to Segment 6.

Yes, the actions do occur at the same time. There's no stop action motion here. Mel Brooks and Usain Bolt start moving at the same time. Mel Brooks heads for the alarm button. Ursain Bolt notices this and stops him from doing it since he is faster. At least that's how I would perceive it in a movie. The Hero System makes a point that character's action is Phase based. So on Segment 1 all character's actions begin. SPD 2 character's action won't finish until Segment 6. SPD 12 character's action will finish on Segment 1. Anyway, I asked the question to see what other's experience of this was like. Looks like not enough benefit to bother with.

Does anyone have the players declare their actions from slowest to fastest on the Speed Chart? Not actually taking their actions, just declaring them to sort of simulate the effect of faster characters vs slower characters.

Wishing everyone a Merry Christmas! - Christopher Mullins

Okay, I've done some research and I would approach this completely different and it is perfectly rules legal. I would simply build a separate power to supply the anchor points (Barrier). Barrier has all the necessary components to supply any kind of anchor points you want and has the benefit that the SFX of the anchor point is tied to the Barrier power and not Swinging. It has rules for Body/Def for being attacked/destroyed It has rules for STR for how much weight the anchor point can hold without breaking. It can be invisible, floating, mobile, or anything you need with official modifiers. If it only appears when you are swinging then link it to Swinging. And the best part is that once you have figured out what you need, it's a static cost and you are through. Buy as much swinging as you like over time and the cost doesn't increase. - Christopher Mullins

If the Robots are a separate focus item then I would just make this a custom advantage +1/4 or +1/2 to Swinging and define it as you've described. You're basically providing you're own anchor points. Although I would make one change to the definition. That anyone successfully attacking the hex location of the robots or line disrupts the anchor point. I don't see any reason to make it more complicated than that. The advantage value really depends on just how easy it is to disrupt the anchor points. I wouldn't do Physical Manifestation unless you think the additional restrictions it imposes applies.

Physical Manifestation? Something new I'm not familiar with. I'll need to look that one up.

Can these Robots be attacked/destroyed? If so then It might make sense to have this defined as advantage on Swinging. If not then modified Flight with SFX. Keep in mind that Flight has a built in turn radius. Not sure if Swinging has that.

Fascinating discussion to say the least. (8^D)

My prayers are with you and all those that this affects. - Christopher Mulllins

<!--POWERS--> <!--ATTRIBUTE_VALUE-->isULTRA<!--/ATTRIBUTE_VALUE--> <!--/POWERS-->

As far as I can tell nearly everything is optional. The only reason for uploading the character data is that there is a tool that allows the GM to track phases and who is in the lineup. Brennel has created a video that details all the tools that are currently available. The tracking of stat levels and such are actually manual and every player needs to take responsibility for adjusting them (if you are even bothering using that tool). The dice rollers are nice and the common log window shows all dice rolls made.

I'm probably mistaken on that then. I just thought I remembered and example of a computer with a program to sense something (thinking it didn't have INT but maybe it did).

You mentioned Skill Rolls and Damage/Effect rolls. Obviously INT and CON have Skill Rolls. Seems like you were suggesting they also had an Effect Roll in you games. Was curious as to what that was. As far as the Perception Roll my opinion is that roll exists outside of INT. You can have a perception roll without INT. I think there are actually examples of that with Automatons and Computers that have no INT but still have a Perception Roll depending on what they designed to do. Anyway, it seems that these two Characteristics do not have an effect roll. I thought you might be excluding the figured characteristics but how you worded your statement (all the other attributes) it was unclear.