Snarf

I hear that BESM gives equal emphasis to physical and social abilities of characters. So if the entire game is going to be spent talking and forming alliances and such, like the episodes of the show I saw, then it should work well.

Age could be cross referenced with how it can be a social limitation (or advantage). Young people get less respect and won't be taken seriously at all in some situations.

I feel the opposite way. It's good to have generic catch-all disadvantages like Physical Limitation in the core rulebook, but in a supplement, I'd like to see those divided or spun off into more specific disadvantages with clearly specified game effects, similar to what Enraged is to Psychological Limitation.

The thing about D02 is, you don't really need to flip the coin at all. Winning or losing depends on on how well you cheat and reinterpret your character's stupid powers to fit every situation. P.S. Don't miss these free D02 supplements

As long as everyone has the extra character it's fair. The math is only necessary when some people have them and some don't, or some people have different conditions on them. From what I saw of the show, it would also work to only make a VR character and handwave the whole real world character.

You should post that in the making a supplement by commitee thread. That's exactly the sort of new optional rule that could go in The Ultimate Disadvantage.

I think one limitation could be enough. Something like "Secretly in Love With X" or "Weird Love/Hate Thing Going On With X" or "Constantly Bickers With X." The exact name given to the disadvantage wouldn't matter too much as long as it was understood what it meant.

They seem to end up being that way in my games. People can't just drive their tanks around dinner parties for instance, they have to leave them behind a lot. I thought that was what the 1/5 cost was for. That's an interesting way to do it. Just to clarify, was it roleplayed like he actually turned into the vehicle or like he was driving it? How did you handle it taking damage? By the way, I think most vehicle equipment is supposed to be OIF Bulky. Immobile is for giant battlecruiser size vehicles that are reallly inconvenient. Does anyone else have ways to do power-vehicle campaigns or characters?

Does anyone know what the reasoning is behind making vehicles cost 1 character point per 1 vehicle point after the vehicle is worth more than the character? Do you find it necessary and balancing in your games? It seems like this is would be hard on "pilot" type characters, who have little or no powers, but use an awesome vehicle, like a giant robot or that talking car from knight rider.

It doesn't make that much sense but they seem completely immersed in the game even though they just use realistic VR equipment. The outside world is almost never shown.

I think I saw this in Star Hero. It was done with extra dimensional movement. One of your forms is used in the real world and the other in the game world, with a limitation reflecting that you leave your body behind when you "cross over." I guess attacks in the game that hurt you in the real world have the transdimensional advantage.

That trebuchet is on Mail Call launching watermelons right now.

If that's the problem, the skills could all be based off of 11- and bought in isolation from stats.

Errr animals are good. They sure taste good...

But defining NND with a lack of something is naughty . Better call the defense "being good."

Cool! Did the codes break the rules of the video game or break actual Hero System rules?

I would say destroying someone's willpower and ego is represented in Hero by taking stun damage. That's how the ego attack power works. You could buy a bunch of defense and limit it so it doesn't protect against stun. It wouldn't actually transmute the damage, but you would take stun from hits instead of stun and body, which is pretty close what you wanted.

Yeah, that's why I had to add the limited power which only lets it ignite thatch and dry brush and such. Your build works way better, it accomplishes the same thing for a tiny fraction of the cost of mine.

Yeah, it's a hoot. In my parallel universes game, we use powerups from Pokemon. Err I mean Pokémon. It just occurred to me that technically someone should be able to remove the mushroom or the fire flower with the write-up I have now. It's a bad simulation because you eat the mushroom once and the effect is permanent in the game. I'm not sure how you make a focus non-removable, maybe an Always On limitation. Or maybe I should ditch the whole absorbed focus approach and restructure the item using aid or something like that. It's a bizarre interpretation of the focus rules anyway. It seems kind of abusive for the main purpose of a focus to be to absorb hits with it's free DEF and powers.

Lately, I've been having fun trying to translate insane video game items and abilities into Hero System. Has anyone else been doing stuff like this? Here's my attempt to Herofy the powerups from the original Super Mario Brothers. Super Mushroom: Super Mushroom: Growth (+20 STR, +4 BODY, +4 STUN, -4" KB, x4 weight, -2 DCV, +2 to PER Rolls, x2 width and height, +1" reach), (AP 20); IAF (destroyed by damage to anywhere on body, -1/2), (RC 13). The Super Mushroom makes you double in size. You activate it by eating it or absorbing it or whatever happens when powerups are collected in video games, and you lose it when you get hit. Specifically, when you take enough damage to lose the extra body it gave you and destroy the focus. Fire Flower: EB 4d6, Indirect (bouncing, +1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END, +1/2), (AP 20); Linked (to Super Mushroom, -1/4), IAF (destroyed by damage to anywhere on body, -1/2), (RC 11). The Fire Flower gives you the power to throw bouncy fireballs. It's linked to Super Mushroom because you can't use a Fire Flower unless you're already super-sized and you lose the fire flower when you get hit and shrink down. 1-up Mushroom: Simplified Healing 6d6, Resurrection, Trigger (death, +1/4), (AP 100); Resurrection Only (-1/2), OAF (-1), 1 Charge (never recovers, -4), (RC 15). The 1-Up Mushroom automatically brings you back to life when you die. Sadly, you'll probably die 2 or 3 times trying to get one. Star: Armor (30 PD/30 ED), Hardened (+1), (AP 180); OAF (-1), 1 Continuing Charge (1 minute, never recovers, -3), (RC 36); plus Knockback Resistance -5", (AP 10); OAF (-1), 1 Continuing Charge (1 minute, never recovers, -3), (RC 2); plus HA 10d6, Damage Shield (does damage in HTH combat, +3/4), Continuous (+1), (AP 137); OAF (-1), 1 Continuing Charge (1 minute, never recovers, -3), (RC 27). Total Cost: 65. The Star makes you an invincible killing machine for a minute. It also makes you flash yellow and plays music. Any thoughts?

That sounds pretty dangerous. I would cap the damage at instant knockout before it reached instant kill.

For the arrow can start a fire effect: 5d6 RKA with Sticky, Gradual Effect (20 minutes I guess), the Limited Power of Only Affects Extremely Flammable Materials, and an Activation Roll. That should reduce any barn to ashes.

It all comes from the costume. The guy is as scary as a sick baby without it. Don't even get me started on young Anakin...

I suggested this to my players once, but when do you ever use presence without talking? They thought it wasn't much of a limitation so they just buy the 5 presence straight. For an unpleasant voice, we would probably just do the opposite and sell back 5 presence. For terminal illness I use physical limitation, with seriousness mostly depending on the day-to-day symptoms rather than the amount of time left to live, unless it's a really short amount of time. For fairly realistic scrounging, I would make a professional skill and use the description directly out of ... that unnamed universal generic RPG. For super scrounging which can find anything I would use a gadget VPP with appropriate limitations.

I wondered about that when I looked at Fantasy Hero a little while. Does anyone know what the logic was behind creating new rules instead of just using power frameworks for magic? Were people complaining that frameworks were too restrictive or something?