Vanguard

Re: Build ? : "Invisible to Damage" LOL. There is that. And, currently, I'd think exactly the same thing. Previously, well, I would be tearing my hair out in frustration because the GM WOULD create something that none of the PC's could hurt and then realize he made a boo-boo and either have one of his Godawful powerful NPC's come and save us or something cheesy would happen and we'd win the fight.

Re: Advantagous sfx I don't know about The Hero System of today but I do know that in Champions (Hero 4th) SFX reigned surpreme. It was all about SFX. Now, you wouldn't get huge bonues or really high powered Advantages out of them but if Firestorm launched his Fire Bolt down the dark tunnel, it would light the place up and if it hit anything flammable at the end, it would more then likely catch on fire (would be up to the GM and dependent on the material in question).

Re: How does this grab you? We usually play a Heroic level game so if one of our characters grabs a target by the neck and then squeezes, they usually wind up dead with no other roll needed. However, I don't think we were aware of ,or if we use, the "If you must make and Additional Attack roll ever phase" rule. I game tomorrow so can ask my group but I happen to agree with Sean in that, if I got you in a head lock and am crushing the life out of you, I don't need to reroll to hit your neck again. I did that last Phase with a -8 to OCV. Making me roll again almost assures that I miss. As it stands, I'm already at 1/2 DCV for your buddies that want to shot/hit/target me so if I didnt' dust you in the one Phase I got to try it, I doubt I'll get the chance if you've got friends. As for adding or subtracting SFX for free . . Hero does it all the time. It even suggest you get a few added bene's depending on circumstances and SFX's being used (IE: Increased effects for Sonics underwater, etc). Anyway, if it doesn't make sense to you or you dont' like it. Change the way it works in your game. Talk it over with your players and bounce around the potential (and very deadly) repercussions it could have and then go from there. All in all, it's your game and you can change/adjust what you want/need to ensure you have fun.

Re: Build ? : "Invisible to Damage" I would be careful with this. Depending on your group's mentality, if they see that "nothing is happening" to their target they might get discouraged and give up. I know that was a big sticking point with my first GM. We'd be in a fight and he'd say "Nothing happens" when one of us would attack. Now, granted, he wouldn't even look at the dice or wait for us to tally up the damage before he said that and if your players see you doing something (even if it's just scribbly doodles on a piece of scratch paper) then every thing might work out.

Re: Artwork in the Predators book Didn't really look at the "main" character write ups. I did like the appendix in the back that gave you the Cops, thugs, Spec-Ops, etc. I thought that was a very nice thing to include. As to the art work. Well, it stinks. And sadly, if you started to describe the bad guy and then showed me one of the pictures from Predators, I'd just laugh. Those pics don't invoke any type of fear what-so-ever. PS: Is it just me or does the art work in the HERO books seem to, with a few exceptions, be getting noticeably worse instead of better?

Can a computer use the powers/skills on a vehicle if it has the neccessary program or does it need to the have the ability itself?

Re: Why are robots always immortal? OH!! Ok, I get it now. I wasn't fully understanding the question, as you so hopefully corrected. I don't know why writers feel that robots should be immortal. Maybe because, at least the current ones, see things like Data and go "well, he's a robot, and he's immortal" and go from there. More to the point, probably, is they are using "dramatic license" and saying "Make it thus" and it was. As for the hero link analogy, I would think it's more just a mater of perception, not neccessarily (sp) them being lazy just them thinking "Well, it's a robot, it should be stranger/faster then a normal human" and not taking the time to think "but would someone *really* build a serving droid that could lift a truck?

Re: Why are robots always immortal? Right Bob, that's basically what happens. Or, what I think is happeneing. In all the write-ups I've seen. Robots/Androids/etc have all paid the X number of points for Immortality. The same way a organic character does. If people have a problem with Robots being "immortal" then why doesn't that problem extend to organic life-forms? It's easier to say a non-living, or non-organic entity can live a prolonged life because of the ease at which you can replace/repair the part. It's much harder to say that a soft squishy organic can live through the ages, especially with the ease at which said squishes can be damaged. In a nutshell, I honestly think you'd have the same problem with machine longevity as you would human. There comes a point where you just can't repair/replace anything anymore and you have to just succumb to the fact that you're done. I've read a few series where, while they didn't have immortality for humans, they did have rejuvenation treatments as well as medical technology that could repair/replace just about any damage organ or body part. Problem was, you could only have so many rejuvenation treatments before they just stopped working. Or damaged the cellular stucture to the point where you might end up a pile of bio-organic goo. Same could be said for machines/AI's. After a while, it just becomes impossible to repair/replace, for whatever reason.

Re: Why are robots always immortal? I have no reason not to think robots wouldn't be immortal. If you go along the lines that others in the thread have said it's just a game mechanic way of saying "look, if we have the parts and you get proper maintenance, you'll "live" forever". There's really nothing wrong with that.

I've read the rules for supression fire as well as checking the faq. Now, I think I understand the rules and the way they are suppose to work. I just want to ask to make sure. From what I've read, you pick X hex lines to Supress and then open fire (up to the maximum allowable shots from the weapon in question). Now, anyone that enters these hex rows can be attacked. So far, I got this and it makes perfect sense. Now we come to the part that I'm having trouble wrapping my fuzzy little brain around. Let's say you're weapon is Autofire 5. The way I read it is like this. If 5 people try to cross those surpressed hex lines you get a chance to hit all five of them. We'll say you hit them all. Now, same phase, only a few Dex later. Another 5 people rush into the hex. From what I'm reading, they get a free ride (at least till next segement). Is this the case?

Re: Vehicle question. I always found that burning down the trees helps you to see the forest beyond them a little bit better.

Re: Starship Deckplans Part of it is also incentive. When I couldn't really get things working right in CC2 (I didn't know that you could set scale in there and then it automatically adjusted things), and since I really didn't need overland maps, I just let it fall by the wayside. I think, if I do decided to get Cosmo, since it's something I'm actually rather interested in, I'll take the time to deal with the learning curve. As an old friend of mine used to say, "It's all about how bad do you want it"

Re: Starship Deckplans You might regret making that statement. If I decide to purchase Cosmo (which I'm leaning towards) I'll probably have tons of questions (probably most of which will revolve around CC2 itseld). Thanks again for the assitance and the offer of continued assitance.

Re: Starship Deckplans Never thought of it that way Spence. And with that information I think I might take the leap and buy it. Thanks for the run down and information.

Re: Starship Deckplans Getting the hang of it is part of my problem. My main concern is proportion. I have/had a devil of a time figuring out how to make things look right in CC2 and I don't want to have to deal with the same in Cosmographer. Which is sad since I've seen the previews and the completed stuff looks excellent. Unfortunately, it also looks like the pictures of food on menus. What you get never looks like the picture. So, here's a question. Would it be worth getting Cosmographer and dealing with the learning curve?

Anyone know any good freeware software to create starship deck plans? I know this was a topic of conversation a while back and someone mentioned Cosmographer Pro from Pro Fantasy. I've got Campaign Cartographer Pro 2 and well, I'm not too happy with it so a bit wary of purchasing Cosmographer. Anyone use this/have a review of it? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

Re: Walking On The Sun I didn't read the entire thread so if this was brought up, please forgive me. While there is no true, hard immunities in HERO, Fantasy hero does suggest how to do it if you want. Basically, you talk over with the GM what you want to be immune to (in this case, we'll say fire) and then the GM decides what the baseline max fire attack will be in his game. You buy the appropriate defenses to deal with that (BODY only, not stun) and then you are considered "immune" to fire for the duration of the game. Even if, let's say, the GM decided that the max attack from fire is 3d6 RKA and one day you get hit with a 5d6 fire RKA, you're still immune. It's just a suggestion/recommendation/optional rule though . . .

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity Ok, thanks guys. That makes sense. Was having a hard time wrapping my wittle brain around that.

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity So, let me see if I understand this. If I've got two weapons in hand, and the TWF skill. I *have* to attack with both weapons. I can't just strike with my dominate hand? If that's the case, it makes absolutely no sense. I've watch many a TWF attack with one hand while holding the other back. Now, if this is saying that I can't just attack with my off hand, then that makes sense.

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity In our gaming group we use both Sweep, Rapid Attack, Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiple Power Attacks. We have thought that it odd that Two-Weapon Fighting does pretty much the samething as Rapid and Sweep but we also figure that TWF was meant for Heroic level games and not Superheroic level. That being said, if you have the Rapid Skill as well as TWF then, in our games, you can basically attack 4 times in one phase (sounds overpowering but you've used 15 points to do it so we think it's justified). You get the first 2 attacks because of TWF (of course, you have to have a weapon in each hand and attack with them both. You can't just hold a dagger in one hand and attack twice with your rapier) and the second 2 because of Rapid. As for the Off-hand penalty, you only get that if you plan on attacking with a weapon that is in your off hand. As above, if you've got a dagger and rapier, and you only want to attack with the rapier, you're not going to get the off-hand penalty because you're not doing anything with the other weapon (although, I suppose you could justify it by saying you have to compensate of having something in your other hand and it's throwing off your groove). I apologize if this doesn't make any sense or doesn't even come close to what's being discussed. I'll try and do better next time. EDIT: Good point Onyx. If you're playing Heroic level then you get to do "multiple power attackes" with your equipment thanks to TWF.

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity FYI, Ambidexterity doesn't allow you to make multiple attacks in the same phase. Just lets you use your off hand at no penalty if/when you do attack. Two-Weapon Fighting allows you to make, essentially, 2 attacks in one phase.

Re: Spacecraft and END Guys, the answer is already in Star Hero. Now, granted, it says "Bases" instead of star ships but there's no good reason why you can't use it for them as well. What is says is this. For dynamic systems (IE: Shields*, Weapons, etc) the END cost is based on the SPD of the character firing/using it. So your 5 END using Blaster Cannon, used by a SPD 5 character, would use 25 end. But that same cannon used by a SPD 2 only uses 10. For systems like Life Support, Artificial Gravity, etc . . assume the Vehicle has a flat SPD of 3. Don't have a copy of Star Hero so I can't give you page # but I remember reading it there some where. (Honest, I bought Eidetic Memory). *Shields I'd almost lump with the Life Support, etc. Making the ship pay for it on SPD 3. Wouldn't be really fair any other way.

I've hashed this out with my gaming group and it still bugs me so I'm going to "The Man" to see what he says. In 5th Ed, when it talks about Mentalists, it speaks of having to decided what "group" you can affect with you powers. Then later on, it talks about when dealing with machines that have no Ego, you base the effect off the Int of said machine. Then along comes Star Hero. In the sample robots section, there are a few robots that have a Disad that says "Effect by Cyberkinesis" (or something along those lines) then it says they have anywhere from 10-15 Ego for that purpose only. This bugs me for several reasons. 1) There has already been a precident set in 5th Ed to govern this type of situation. 2) And as far as I can tell, there is no explaination of why they get the disad anywhere in Star Hero. I'ld like to understand why they got the disad and what type of situations would warrant an automaton with 0 Ego to get that particular disad. Thank you for your time. Van

Re: CVR-3 Cyclone Body Armor Thanks a ton!!! One question. Why didn't you build the Cyc's and the Alpha's with the OIF, Bulky lim on the majority of the items. It was my understanding that Vehicle stuff automatically got that limitation. Secondly, I was taking a look at the Hit Location file (again, nice job) and couldn't find anywhere in there where it mentioned the Cyclone overlapping the CVR-3 armor. Yet, there's an additional +4 DEF where they overlap. How do you determine this?