ChampionsLawyer

Re: Dr Zero's Art Thread If you are taking new commission work at this time, please hit me up via IM. I'm currently developing a new campaign and it's always good to have someone take what's in my head and make it more tangible. I'd be interested in knowing your availability, turn around and rates. I'm in no hurry for anything, the above is more to manage my own expectations. Best, CL

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

Re: GM help with The Guild of Swords So everyone here has mentioned some good things. I'd try like heck to set things up this way (and I'm liberally taking from what's here under the auspices of "it'd be my idea too".) 1. The guild is made up of various well-off people with various individual capabilities. One of them should be a super in the conventional sense (but secretly - even to the guild members) and several should be in the guild and appreciate and need the guild but be using it to further their own connections and agendas. Reason: The conventional super could be using everyone's connections to get other things done and would give your super group someone to "defeat" at the end of the day that may or may not take out the guild proper (as the other members would feign ignorance and mind control etc. - they're not stupid) The others could be low-yield supers in their own right considering talents, perks, stats like INT etc. 2. You're best off making the guild membership global and some of the members have diplomatic immunity or high connections or high flexibility/travel/disposable income. Another subplot could be the guild contracting with people to find out the groups secret IDs. There are many, many ways to give the guild influence that can affect your super group and make the guild a problem, without direct confrontation. Personally, I think direct confrontation is a way to cheapen the concept overall. You want this thing to be "cool" and "memorable". Nothing says "standard fare" quite like hired mercs. 3. The guild should not go after conventional material things. Have them go looking for the grail. Have them try to clone Jesus from DNA off the shroud of Turin.. have them be the direct lineage of the Knights Templar and have a problem with the Hospitalers or the Order of St. John.. The Guild of Swords sounds evocative.. they should have a mission that defines them even if it's only flavor. Players don't remember that they beat up someone. They remember the unusual plot and the feeling that they have no idea what the heck is going on. 4. Lastly, for the feeling that they're something really special, make sure that whatever the players are doing with them and whatever plot they're heavily involved in, the guild has it's own stuff going on. The players should never feel as if the guild is pre-occupied with them. However, if your players become pre-occupied with the guild.. touchdown. I feel strongly about point 1 though. Your players should eventually feel like they can take down someone and get rid of the guild problem for a period of time. When they come back in another plot at another time, the fact that they recur over time only plays into their status as an org with historical significance that predates them and may last beyond them. Two cents. A PS. Forgot about the legal point. If you do things well, yes the guild can hold things up in limbo forever, but you may also be able to have the guild lose some legal fights or acquiesce a few in order to achieve a greater goal. Your players should question what they gave up to win the day's battle and be just a little on edge even in their successes. (especially when over time they learn about their enemies.)

Re: Help - I need a base Only thing I will add here is some perspective. I agree wholeheartedly with the person who said, the defense of a base against a superteam assault is another superteam. However, that doesn't mean your highly-trained evil group can't have their fun. Have enough defense in depth to force the heroes to spend END. Let the base be set up such that it's easy for them to be overconfident but still an expected challenge. Put the active points into a wild self-destruct mechanism that's brutal to overcome and all the defenses you were going to put in place to affect their ability to get in.. have them affect their ability to get out. I guarantee you, your players will NOT take the opportunity to storm your agency's base lightly again. Best, CL

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far True, but at that point you've purchased 6E. Mission accomplished.

Re: My mostly hard sci-fi campaign Thanks. I rather like conversations pertaining to setting. One other thought that comes to mind as something I left out of the initial post. The further away colonies are from Earth (government center) and the more life revolves around sustenance tasks, the more conservative it may tend to be. This will influence legal interpretation. The reverse can be said in terms of a dictatorial central government. Further away the more liberal the government may tend to be (provided that basic sustenance is a given.. hierarchy of needs.) That sliding scale to me is rather important for campaign mood. CL

Re: My mostly hard sci-fi campaign After thinking about this further, there's a point to be made about "zombification". The GM needs to determine the moral compass of his society as a whole before determining whether or not zombification works. Functionally it certainly does (assuming that the un-zombified worker "wants" to help out. Death to some is preferable to zombie-mode). Free will is a HUGE thing in terms of moral ethics and is an assumption that allows judicial process to work the way it does. If zombie mode is allowed as a form of punishment, then it stands to reason that it needs to be considered moral not only in terms of the life-saving features but in terms of unusual punishment and free will. It may be easier to work around the problem by making cyber-ware skill chips available and just eliminating the problem person entirely. This stated, the moral dilemma could be the foundation of a subplot if not an entire campaign if done well and all aspects are delved. Blah, Blah, Blah, ethicist into gaming.. I digress.

Re: My mostly hard sci-fi campaign Random thoughts on how laws and ethics change or revert based on space colonization or a reversion to colony/tribal thinking. I'll qualify these as coming from a guy who's done loads on the ethics/evolutionary law topic (trust me on this, I'd rather not turn this into a resume post.) There are two basic ethics that exist in some manner throughout all cultures from the earliest times. These "rules" existed because resources were scarce and skills were either valuable because they took years to develop (and it took years to get a replacement in training or in travel) or because the ability to define "truth" was difficult. These ethics were "Do not kill" and "Do not lie". If you killed your only doctor or metal smith, you were screwed in a dangerous environment. If you lied to your peers, no one would trust you and it broke down the ability of the social units (town) to function properly. Other tenets came later when the concept of personal property developed fully and societies were challenged to explain things that were otherwise adversely affecting specific pocket societies. (There are social explanations for the Ten Commandments and Kosher law, etc. and those social explanations account for the differences in local ethics and the need for cultural relativity). So ultimately and to make this less a discussion about ethics and more about this thread, I postulate the following in context. (and this may be very similar to the American Old West in some places and equivalent to Sumerian codex in others) 1. The closer you are to Earth and the easier it is to off-world people and get replacement skills, the more likely that punishment is an option and the more likely that people will be culturally pre-disposed towards punishment as an option. 2. At a middle-distance from Earth you may find that there exists a tenuous grip on law. We've been through the ethical considerations once and staffing a colony would require cross-training and at least one sheriff with a lot of temporal authority. Executions would happen for the most severe offenses as there needs to be a healthy amount of fear to further the expansionist agenda and keep people in line. That stated, you're not so far away that the sheriff isn't accountable for his own transgressions given communication. 3. At a far distance from Earth, there's a very subjective grip on law. Out here you're not going to find many if any sheriffs and they may only drop by once a year or more for administrative functions. Only the most gung-ho, resourceful and reliable would be out here and that carries with it a great deal of success when everything works and a great deal of failure when someone cracks under pressure. Civilian academics and Military outfits don't follow rules very often in the pursuits of their jobs. Now one other thing I should mention here is that when confronted with the unknown, people try to explain things to their satisfaction. Depending on their education level and general level of superstition etc, you may find new religions popping up around extra-terrestrial interpretations of existing faiths. You may find yourself running into people worshipping sufficiently advanced technology "indistinguishable from magic" as a new religion or god. This happening may fundamentally change your ethical worldview and potentially add new working arrangement that create new rules and new laws.. thus changing the paradigm of punishment. What happens when stuff filters back to homeworld about the actions within the Book of Revelations occurring on Neptune? Some basic thoughts to further conversation. I don't know if this is relevant or not now that I've rambled... Best, CL

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Well the beauty of this whole thread is opinion. The Hero system is great. My point on HERO/Gamma World is simply this: You can't keep selling the same game forever. Times change, gamers change and the game market takes on new forms from time to time. If you keep your game static you go the way of Gamma World. My second point was simply that once a thread goes over maybe 10 pages you know all you're going to find is whining upon whining. Maybe 10 of the posts in this thread glean some magic bean of rules knowledge that will make a difference somewhere. I just know I lost 30 minutes I'm never getting back

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Wow, just read through 81 pages of this. To summarize the cumulative points and offer my own take (not like that take matters really.): 1. "I like some of these changes" Answer: Awesome. I bet the author likes them too. Additionally a year from now, most others probably will as well. This is the D20 4th ed discussion all over again. 2. "I dislike some of these changes" Answer: Awesome. First rule of being a gamesmaster is "You make the rules." You're hardly lacking empowerment here. 3. "Steve obviously has an agenda" Answer: Yup. It's called "lets keep the game system fresh so it doesn't become Star Frontiers or Gamma World." The life of a game system relies on being interesting for the next generation while keeping itself true to its history such that it doesn't lose a majority of it's long timers. 4. "I'll stick with 4th ed or 5th ed" Answer: Awesome. You're an important part of the family cause any book that has the HERO logo on it is HERO marketing. Someone goes to look for it in a store, they'll find sixth ed. Score. 5. "I can't wait for 6th ed." Answer: Awesome. Everyone at HERO appreciates this as it justifies jobs. My own feeling is I wish 6th was out right now. I'm starting a new campaign in a few weeks and I need to get the groundwork done so I can start before some of my group goes back to school (self included). Just play the game when it comes out. If it costs a couple hundred bucks for a couple hundred hours of enjoyment, you made out. Two cents. CL