Vanguard

Just watched it.

Squeed like a schoolgirl.

On 1/9/2019 at 11:42 AM, zslane said:

Are you sure we aren't referring to the same thing, just with different words?

Now that you mention it, I think we are.

On 1/13/2019 at 9:26 PM, zslane said:

I'm looking for something that takes the epic scope and rubber science of Star Wars, adds in a pinch of W40K-ish grimdark, features lots of powered armor and 'mechs, and a good deal of non-humanoid alien species. I'm pretty sure this is a setting I'd have to build myself, and I simply don't have the time or motivation right now.

That's something I could get behind.  But trying to find something premade with all that is nigh impossible and, as you say, would most likely require being built from the ground up. (Although, I'm not so attached to the whole "alien species" things. I can take it or leave it as I've found it's really hard to integrate aliens into a game and have them actually BE alien).

On 1/14/2019 at 12:47 PM, zslane said:

 

The BattleTech/MechWarrior universe is pretty much just humans, right? And it doesn't really feature psionics or massive space fleets or planet killers, does it? Besides, the last time I played MechWarrior (in the late 80s) the system was so bland it hurt.

Yup. Just plain, garden variety humans.  And I've got about a decadish of Mechwarrior RPG on you, so 90's, and as far as I can tell, it hasn't changed.

On 1/14/2019 at 1:01 PM, Old Man said:

IIRC Mechwarrior has mechs but is short on grimdarks and nonhumans.

 

I'm kind of in the same boat as you are--I was going to respond to the favorite-SF-setting thread and I realized that there isn't one that has everything that I like.  (In my case, that would be mechs, cyber, psi, and capital ship combat.  And kung fu.)

Ditto OM . .. Ditto.  Although I'm more of a subfighter kinda guy.  Gimme mah Viper!! or Hammerhead, or Star Fury or . . . .

On 1/6/2019 at 10:19 AM, zslane said:

 

Yes, absolutely. There is an inherent cinematicism in the Hero System that you just can't get out in the wash completely, no matter how hard you try. But honestly, I'm glad of that. It's what separates it from GURPS, in my mind.

It's not the cinematicism.  As RPMiller says, I wouldn't want to remove that, even if I could.  It's the "super-heroness" that I'd tone down if I could.  I mean, it's possible to dilute it but it's still there, lurking in the corner.  Normally it's not that big of a deal but occasionally it can surface and be a bit jarring.

On 1/2/2019 at 10:10 PM, bluesguy said:

If you want a grittier game then Hero can give you all the grit you can possible stand.  I can easily see a Hero game where characters (PC & NPC) are regularly mamed (temporarily or permanently) or killed (every few sessions).

It can.  It just takes work.

Our old Gatecrashers (heroic level) game was like that. It took us a bit to fine tune the damage vs defenses but we finally got to the point where the players had to think and be careful because our body armor was good, but not that good.

Don't get me wrong, regardless of tweaking and other things there's still, for me, that "superhero roots" feel to the game but if the players and GM are willing to put in the work, it can be dealt with.

4 hours ago, Trencher said:

I never google anything that sounds vaguely Japanese but thanks for the info.

That is probably a very safe philosophy.

On 12/25/2018 at 4:26 AM, Christopher said:

I think you are mixing up "Phase", "Segment" and "Turn". All 3 have a very specific meaning in Hero.

 

"When Activated it would go on Phase 7, then next  turn on Phase 8, and then next turn Phase 9... ect. ect...  "

It was a SPD of 1. Except slightly less then 1 (0.8), so it would be 1 Segment later every Turn.

Yep.  That's exactly what I did.

Thanks Chris

On 11/4/2018 at 9:03 PM, Scott Ruggels said:

One of our GMs used a a low speed, a really low speed, that scared the hell out of all of us. it had a speed of 0.8 (estimated). If you  buy your speed down, you get a whole lot of points, So the Shafer Death bot was born. When Activated it would go on Phase 7, then next  turn on Phase 8, and then next turn Phase 9... ect. ect...  It turned a coordinated team of superheroes into panicked screaming monkeys, when it one shotted the brick, and then slowly turned its attention to the survivors.

 

 We then had 13 segments to take it down before it  shot again, and we were speed 5 and 6.  it managed to shoot again and took out the  Speedster. Taking it down was one of those heavy sweat incidents. 

I don't get it. 

How, with a speed of .8 was it able to move on Phase 7 one turn, then phase 8 the next?  How was it able to advance phases, granted it only got the one action but why were the phases it acted on changing?

On 9/7/2018 at 12:44 AM, Pattern Ghost said:

Looks like Wildstar is dead. Not sure of the shutdown date yet, but it has been announced to the gaming press, apparently.

 

RIP.

 

I would have played more of this if the frantic combat wasn't so hard on my hands. I was kind of hoping the FTP launch would keep them going, since they fixed a lot of the initial issues. Oh, well. Another one bites the dust. Or is that bytes the dust?

You probably already know this but I just got the email saying they pull the plug on the Wildstar servers on Nov. 28th.

I'm also sorry to see it go as it was a pretty decent and fun game.

@RDU Neil

Our games use something pretty much exactly like you're chit system. Our system uses beads of different colors with each bead being with a certain amount of points and then each item on the "Luck Chart" requires a certain amount of points.  You can also combine lower ranked beads  if you need one of the higher ranked beads.  We don't use is the double of the cost after the 3rd level of luck.  Which we probably should do although, with the exception of a few PC/NPCs, it's never really been an issue. Most characters just have the 1 "draw", as they don't have any extra luck, while other may have 1 to 2 extra draws.  For a total of 3 luck beads to use during the adventure.  

We developed ours because the Luck system was too ambiguous and hard to adjudicate where as something hard and fast like the chi system had concrete things you could do with the luck.

On 8/19/2018 at 6:50 AM, Brian Stanfield said:

 

Although it's never really explained, I think that's the idea. Just pretend it never existed, or rather, it was actually called Santa Teresa. I'm not sure why she chose this route, but it always fascinated me. It solves some problems, but creates some others. But she does some other interesting things with her timeline as well, so that her books written in the '90s are still set in the '80s as if no time happened between novels. Over the course of 26 novels it's a bit disorienting, so misplacing Santa Barbara seems par for the course. 

She probably chose that route so that there was no conflict. If Santa Barbra never existed, then no one would miss it and/or question its absence.  What other problems does having the city replaced with another one create? I'd think that there would be no issue and that any references to the one city would just be replaced with the new city instead. No muss, no fuss. Or none that I can see.

The timeline thing I've seen done before. So for me, that's not all too strange. Some authors just seem more comfortable writing about/in a given time period.

19 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

 

This really is the crux of the problem, isn't it? If you've ever read any of the Sue Grafton alphabet mysteries, she simply replaces Santa Barbara with Santa Teresa. Who's going to miss Santa Barbara? But it allows her to still travel to Los Angeles and San Francisco without any sort of discontinuity. What her sleuth never does, however, is visit Santa Barbara! But that's a lot more easily ignored than if I were to replace New York City. I think maybe the "replace Newark" suggestion from Vondy is workable, because who ever goes looking for a better life in Newark? My brother lived there for a while and all he got was robbed!

Having never read the books, could the reason she never explains what happened to Santa Barbara is because in her works, the city never existed in the first place? It was always Santa Teresa?

On 8/2/2018 at 5:55 PM, Vondy said:

This is such a basic soft skill (socially) that my mind boggles at the notion while at the same time finding myself  teaching younger co-workers how to be professional in the office.

 

Gaming is just like having a work meeting and the same expectations apply: be on time, wear clean clothes, smell nice, put your phone on vibrate and leave it in your pocket, chat with the people who are in the room with you before and after the meeting. You make contacts and build teams and trust that way.

 

NO PHONES AT THE TABLE. FULL STOP.

 

Its discourteous and says "I'd rather be doing something else" than participate in your boring game. Call it out and don't budge. Its bad behavior stemming from dopamine addiction. If their kids or SO or work must be able to call them in event of emergency they can set a unique ring tone and leave it in their pocket forsaking all others. If they are there to play they owe every person at the table their undivided attention and active partcipation.

A-frakin-men!!!

3 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

 

I don't have the APGs, and still only have 5th ED Dark Champions. Is there a 6th Ed version?

 

I'll have to read through them, as I generally like to work with what seems "intuitive" from Hero, but it sounds like the alt-rules are similar to what we've come up with in places.

I don't think there's a 6th Ed. Dark Champions.

And yes, the only difference that I can think of is the new/optional autofire skills are talents and not Advantages.

On 7/17/2018 at 8:47 PM, RDU Neil said:

Autofire Optional Use

I don't know if anyone knows but there are Optional Autofire rules in both Dark Champions and the APGs. (I think the ones in the AGPs are just reprints from DC but I included them for completeness).

I think the expanded Hit Locations are in there as well. . .

@JmOz

If that's the case, then depending on how many of the thugs there are.  A decent planning session should be enough to find a way to limit the raw power of the weapons themselves.  'Cause even with those CV levels, the thugs could get lucky.

And (projecting here) that tells me the PCs (probably) did what I would've done.  Both in character and out.  Seen the raw numbers and immediately panicked and started doomsaying.  Yes, it's a personality flaw and yes I'm trying to work through it.

3 hours ago, assault said:

If the PCs get into a face to face slugging match with these thugs, they deserve what they get.

Hmm, I see your point.  Especially after the blueprints have been gone over.

So forewarned is forearmed but tactics can only take you so far.  And as we all know, no plan survives contact with the enemy.

So the PCs could plan everything down to the smallest detail, do everything right and STILL end up in a face to face slugging match.  If that happens, do they still deserve what they get?

I can understand wanting to challenge your PCs and a hard fought battle is one of the best and most fun I've had in a game.  But with the way those weapons are written up, there doesn't seem to be much wiggle room for the PCs when the lead starts to fly.

Granted I don't know the stats of the players other than they have decent CVs (But one of the slots is AoE with Penetrating so doesn't do 'em much good) so they might be alright and just having a knee jerk reaction to the raw numbers. (I'm guilty of this and try not to let it get the better of me).  Also, if these guys are truly "thugs" THEY may not have the tactical know how to deal with the PCs . . . . 

21 hours ago, Funk Thompson said:

 

Resource Points already exist, I forgetc which book they are in. But they work very well for any heroic genre that still has gear being mostly bought with points and not money.

5th (or 4th Ed) Dark Champions

Edit: Another source for Resource Point information is APG 1, pg 191.   But I'm pretty sure it's just reprinted info from Dark Champions.

It's been a while, but I don't recall Combat Luck being useful against AoE attacks . . . could be misremembering though.

And I know everything is campaign dependant and all but SIX levels of Combat Luck?  Isn't that a bit . . . excessive?

On 6/20/2018 at 4:44 PM, Woolshedwargamer said:

I have always read locations 3-5 (Head) as 3 Face, 4 Neck and 5 skull.  How do you read it?

Nearly the same only for us it's: 3 Top of head/Skull, 4 Face, 5 neck/throat. 

FYI, APG 1, page 173 has hit locations mods as well as damage multipliers for more granular hit locations. 

On 5/18/2018 at 8:19 AM, RDU Neil said:

 

This is more what I mean. The players know what the general rule is as an option... and yes, judgment requires consistency. I just meant that because in certain situations where it is dramatically appropriate to check for the effects of inadvertent blow through doesn't mean we are going to check every missed shot, every time.

 

I do tend to like rules that help adjudicate "when to apply"   i.e. taking the classic luck roll... I tend to use a "chance" roll in certain circumstances.  Player knows the battle is in a relatively crowded street, I'll say "Ok... remember, if you are blazing away, or doing big knockback in this scene, there is a chance to harm bystanders, destroy property... every miss or big knock back... if you roll unluck, you hit something you didn't want to."

In that way, you don't roll all the complex rolls for every shot, but if unluck comes up, then blow through or whatever might apply.

Exactly.

6 minutes ago, RDU Neil said:

 

This is the big truth. It has to be a quick, situational judgement on when it applies and "feels right" for the moment... compared to a hard, fast, mechanical rule you try to layer in all the times. "You just unloaded half a clip from your Galil at the guy in the living room? Ok... then... let's see who was in the bedroom on the other side of that wall!"

 

I personally think this is true of a lot of "rules" in that they only should apply when it feel appropriate for the scene/situation you want to play out... compared to "the rules force a certain scene" 

Hmm, I'm not sure about that. While some rules can be adjusted on the fly or applied only in a given situation, some of them need to enforced at all times.  Otherwise you have a consistency problem.

Take your example, if a player wantonly (or heck even accidently) and you don't worry about the stray rounds, then say you have a hostage scene and the exact same thing plays out but this time you check for blow-through, they may wonder what's going on since it wasn't an issue last time.

Plus it's nice to have at least some kind of guideline set down so players know that it is an option if they need it.  Before we changed the blow-through rules, we wouldn't even attempt it because unless it was the sniper with his .50 there was no way our assault rifles or pistols would have a chance.

On 5/16/2018 at 6:13 PM, RDU Neil said:

Just read the 5th Ed Dark Champs blowthrough... 1/2 Damage exceeds both defense and body... blowthrough.  Easy enough, but pretty restricting. Would require a 14 damage roll to blow through a 3def 3body interior wall. That seems extreme, but likely balanced for most games. My rule would make that much more easy to blow through, and I'm ok with that.

Yeah, I think we went with something along the lines of if 1/2 the attack exceeded the Def then there was blowthrough.  Otherwise,  it either didn't occur often enough and/or, as you mentioned, was nearly impossible to do without cheese on your ammo or really powerful attacks.

It most certainly requires seasoning to taste to get it just right though.

On 5/16/2018 at 12:19 PM, Surrealone said:

This sounds like you're using 5th Edition.  If so, a switch to 6th Edition would resolve this issue (huge STUN damage), since the base STUN multiplier on a Killing Attack in 6th Edition is 1/2d6 (i.e. 1d3) rather than 1d6-1.

On 5/16/2018 at 12:49 PM, RDU Neil said:

Made it a flat x3 for supers and bought powers, flat x2 for real weapons in a supers campaign.

We switched to x3 before 6th because of the Stun Lotto.  Then were tickled when we saw that 6th pretty much did the same.  If I recall correctly, I think the flat x3 is one of the optional rules.

@RDU Neil

Never thought of dropping it two x2 for Supers.  But then I haven't played in a super heroes game in a long time.

In replying to Surrealone, I'm wondering if sticking with the 1/2D6 for Stun in the heroic games might be a better way to simulate glancing blows and/or blows that might do much body but slammed into the chest plate at around the solar plexus as 1200 m/ps.

Food for thought . . . 

On 5/16/2018 at 3:50 PM, Pattern Ghost said:

 

Thanks. I only have 4th Edition Dark Champions, and no idea what box it's in at the moment.

 

 

Thanks. I thought they looked like a soft armor piece. And "ballistic groin protector" sounds better than the first thing I thought of . . . codpiece.

Welcome. If/when you do unpack your 4th Ed DC, I don't think much has changed.  But it's a been a long, long time since I've played 4th.  Also, in looking over the PDF, I can't find an Edition label so it could well be a 4th Ed book that I'm assuming is a 5th.

I know that, since some of the rules between 4th and 5th never really changed, some of the books never saw reprints as they were perfectly compatible.

Well, that's technically what it is. . .

On 5/11/2018 at 4:22 PM, Ninja-Bear said:

There is. Make an absolute. In this case it should be expensive. But doable. Before anyone argues that there are no absolutes in Hero, i’ll note that in CC under No Absolutes there is a line that you can still make one under GM discretion naturally.

The APGs also have some rules concerning Absolutes . . So it can be a thing in Hero.  Just needs the GM to be willing is all.

16 hours ago, Pattern Ghost said:

Hero just doesn't seem to model this outside of just having either armor piercing or flat out higher DCs

Blow Through is in Dark Champions pg 192

But it sounds a bit confusing as well as time consumng to adjudicate.  But i do find it's a good baseline to go off of.  I think we did something like if 1/2 the damage of the weapon was equal to or greater than the Def of the barrier.  You got blow though . . . 

15 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

That, coupled with Hit Locations, makes for a lot of Con Stunned, nearly out cold hits, so I'm wondering if removing the increased Stun Multiplier is a good idea, as you stated.

Either that or just reduce the value of the Stun X multiplier for the hit locations.  That way you don't have to alter the guns (unless you want to).  You can also use other types of defenses. In one of our older games, we had access to "kinetic dispersion gel" that was 50% Damage Reduction, stun only" but it would only protect the stomach/chest/vitals.  And it was only issued during/when the team were gearing up for assault type missions and knew the poop was about to hit the fan.