Trencher

Sounds like an half combat value situation if you ask me.

Character A: Give extra presence bought with cumulative and indirect advantage bought seperatly so that indrerect advantage could have oaf disadvantage and persistent? Character B: Mental transform with gestures, oaf, usable by others and persistent maybe?

Its easier to count the characters who cant lift the hammer now than it is to count those who can.

The Crow! If he does not count because he is too white then I say Shaq Chi.

If you want to allow disarming a shield you should only allow it if the player has a weapon that could possible do it like and dane axe or pick. Off course if you use your bare hands you could do it as well but then you would be in danger of getting stabbed. Having your arm strapped to the shield should give you strenght bonus sure but if the attacker succeeded in disarming the shield it would cause the shieldbearer to go down to the ground instead as the pressure would bend his arm.

It makes combat go faster and each hit and attack be more dramatic. It is fun to see the players tense up eveytime an attack get thrown in their direction but it also can create a bit of problems when a mook get a lucky hit and the PC is seriously hurt. I only GM post apocalypse, fantasy and sci fi at the moment but I like to use champions enemies as major npcs to fight. (with some reduction of power offcourse) And what I have seen that could be a bit of a problem is that some of the players always try to make all intents and purposes a ninja in every campaign they are in because attacking first, being able to stealth and being hard to hit is incredible powerful compared to everything else. If they are a mage they make a ninja mage, if they are a star ship captain they want a cloaked ship that can fire while cloaked and so on. Also even if they dont make ninjas the main focus of every player is to upp the damage output, the to hit ratio which means their dex which means they also get harder to hit and at a distant third upp their armour. Stun and body is rarely a priority. Its even more pronounced in low point campaigns where players buy off a couple of body points just so they can get more dex. I cant fault their logic because what will those two less body points do really if the character get shot? Better to put more points in dex and increase the chance of not getting shot. So I guess the conclusion I can draw so far is that low point campaigns have more trouble with glass cannon syndrome than high points ones.

In my campaigns I use 25/25 or 75/75. I try to keep cvs at no more than 7 at the start and damage under 45 active points. As for Conquers, Killer and Crooks I can mention: Dr Destroyer, Ankylosaur, Anubis, Herculean and others. (But hey, Dark Seraph can actually tank two stunning blows before going down.) I never got champions 5th ed because I liked the old team better.

Ok everybody lets take a moment to appreciate that we have different opinions and that not all campaigns are alike. All the talk I seen here makes sense and the characters and point values indicate great GM's who got their game in order. The only thing that is important in accordance to balance is to stick to the creation parameters you as the GM have developed. Normal characteristics maximums not being used as the maximum for human development in many campaigns is because the games curve is way to steep. Its the only weakness of the hero system. The hero system is unique among rpgs as its rules are not really rules for simulation but rather an "language" which can be used to describe everything from a pencil to an house cat to an sentient galaxy cloud. The only problem here is that we start at different places when we set the standards, in relation to how much emphasis we put on different aspects of the stories we create. Be it ease of gameplay, realistic simulation, dramatic effect or balance. The discussion I wanted was to get each of your thoughts about players focusing on not getting hurt and doing damage themselves rather than being able to get hurt but still keep going and that the majority of characters I seen in the game goes down if they take a stunning hit twice.

Well the thing is that is that I am asking if any other people get the feeling that the characters that would be knocked out by two hits that could stun them, makes them into glass cannons? I dont really see how anyone could deliver a vicious beatdown (hitting their enemy with several stunning blows) and then have the enemy get back up and fight back. Like for instance A hero gets punched again and again and the evil villain lands punch after punch while the hero can barely stand. Then, the villain says "Now I will finish you off, and then I will go kick every puppy in the land" he draws back his foot and lands a kick. But he hits the arm and does not do enough enough damage to stun! So the hero gets a chance to fight back and having plenty of end he screams: "You will NOT punch a single puppy ever AGAIN!" while pushing his str and extra hand attack. Hitting a tremendous blow sending the foul puppy kicker flying and standing up heroically. I play only sci fi and fantasy with a heaping of martial arts thrown in so its not that noticeable there but I do see the same tendency.

Reading Conquerors killers and crooks it seems to me that most characters rarely have more than twice their con in stun. In fantasy hero there was a little bit different where I found a dwarf npc and an ogre who both had more than twice their con in stun value. However it was not that much more. I am not against glass cannon syndrome. I just noticed that the players be they fighters or wizards all tense up every time an enemy get a chance to attack them. Also the focus is on getting their con and dex stat up rather than giving their characters any stun value. I understand that from a game play point because players want the most bang for their points. But I expected to see more characters in the source books being more "controllable" with careful strikes but still being a tough guy if you know what I mean. Off course this would mean that combat would take longer as well so..

Thanks for replies. Sounds like nobody have any problem with it. To be fair players probably are more focused on pure defense anyway.

Instead of a sling she could use a custom glove crossbow that shoots spesial arrows with glass vial tips which breaks on contact.

Anyone else have trouble with glass cannon syndrome? It seems everywhere I look there are pc's and npc's who would go down if they get stunned for a round twice in a row. In fact the system encourages imo making high dex hard hitting characters or at best an controller of sorts. I kinda miss the human tank arch type who could take a lot of hits, get stunned for a round a couple of times but suddenly get back up if the enemy missed or wiffed an shot.

If you have "nature hulk" orcs like in world of warcraft I would go with a high risk and hard hitting axe and shield style. Wild swing, martial dodge, offensive block and so on. For their fist martial art they use between themselves I would use some kind of kickboxing or tae known do. A mix of the most hard hitting parts would do. As for Tolkien orcs like we saw in Shadow of Mordor or other "war clone orcs" I would go with no martial art for most orcs as they preferred method would be to push an opponent down so they could step on his neck or swing a enemy around so they could stab him in the back with a hidden dagger. Just some skill levels in hth would do. Except for the orchish elite forces where they would have the martial art suitable to their weapon, (fencing, spear fighting) and so on and Commando training.

Nice work!

So what are you guys feelings on the Suicide Squad? http://www.hottopic.com/ht-fashion/suicide-squad-lookbook/ I am starting to feel like an hipster comic book fan. "I liked comics before it was cool." "Yeah, this book is a comic called the Marquis. You probably never heard of it.. And the correct term is graphic novel uh-huumm?"

Well to be fair a Nato without USA is a scary prospect for all Nato countries.

I think the author wants to stretch the dnd alignment system to the max in every direction to tell his story. Problem is that as soon as you start thinking about the alignment system the whole thing falls apart. I sure hope he is not trying to deconstruct it.

I was thinking more of the psychological impact of not being alive not as much the corrupting force of negative energy. He always been a mind over feelings guy so now that he has lost his physical form he is loosing whatever empathy he had?

Roy's dad is getting worse and worse though. It might being an undead that is making him less human and more evil. Same thing happened to Xyzon. He has always been a douche though.

Yes I forgot about Scarlet Witch! And Ant Man too lol. She could do some stuff to even out the score.

I am a bit worried about Captain America Civil war. A couple of points that are not in the movies favour. 1: Civil war the comic series was bad. 2: Robert Downey Jr. is very popular and famous and the Iron Man franchise is bigger than the Captain America franchise this probably will lead to Iron Man being much more level headed and sympathetic in the movie version. Not that that is a bad thing but usually how Hollywood does it is that they make one guy look good by making his opposition look worse then him. Like Batman vs Superman they made Superman into a doofus just to make Batman look cooler. (The Frank Miller method if you will) 3 From the trailer all the heavy hitters are on Iron man's side. Iron man got two super scientists two flying super tanks, one android as powerful as Superman and two super level fighters. Not only does he also have Shield and the US government on his side but the super science magical kingdom of Wakanda as well. Captain America on the other hand has two super level fighters one with a shield one with an cyberarm, a top tier fighter with wings and a guy with trick arrows. When your most powerful guy on your super team is Hawkeye you got trouble. Thor and Hulk could join in on Captain Americas side and they still would be in trouble. 4: The severe difference in power probably would "force" Captains team to use dishonourable tactics, hit and run and so on. I seen so many movies and TV series where the heroes are called terrorists now that I have lost count and I worry that either the movie will try to justify such tactics or use it as an excuse to make Captain America "Darker and grittier". Dont you believe me? How about the change from Iron man 1 to Iron man 3? In the first Ten Rings were an real terror organisation but in the third... Well not spoilers but it was what it was. We all know where the sympathies of Hollywood lies when it comes to terrorists vs the western world and I worry they will try to go really political and try to convince us that their pot fueled crime groupie views are legitimate.

I get the feeling there are massive creative differences backstage. Off course I can only speculate but it seems to me that there are someone who wants Roman to look really strong. But there are also some who wants him to look like a chump and a looser who have gotten everything handed to him. And I think the first one are the ones giving the orders and the second ones are the one who implement them. So as a result we have Roman being shown as a bad ass against audience favorites then taken out of the match only to come back in later to mop up the guys who are tired and spent. And the heel that come in at last spend a lot of time in the match actually fighting and "winning" a hard fought victory. The reason I think so is that if the ones who implement the orders really wanted to make Roman look like strong they would let him stay in the match beating people up and then have everyone gang up on him kick his ass and then have HHH sneaky eliminate Lesnar for a cheap win. Its not just this match either. Roman has been shown as a cool bad ass in some segments, like when he lost his mind and just beat up everyone. But he also have been given material which I think was designed to torpedo him. "Tater tots anyone" What do you guys think? Is WWE a house divided? Too many eunuchs in the palace? Or am I wrong?

Fifty shades of dark champions? I dont really see the point of having the heroine be subservient or mind broken at all. Much easier way is to let the crime lord have a hostage. That way she would have to do some dirty things to keep the hostage alive.

I dont know wcw43921. It came off as a bit corny to me. Walking dead has kind of gotten hit and miss lately, with a lot more focus on gore and fan service than actual horror. There are still good bits here and there though.