Duane From RI

Resistant Protection allows a character to buy resistant Flash Defense, Mental Defense and Power Defense as part of a force field or amulet or what-have-you. Flash Defense, Mental Defense and Power Defense are Special Powers. Do they remain Special when bought via Resistant Protection or do they suddenly become Standard?

6E2 21 says a character cannot Abort to "shield his eyes" or otherwise protect himself from Flash. Does this preclude a character from Aborting to Flash Defense - assuming that they have bought Flash Defense in such a way that it often isn't on (for example they may have bought Flash Defense with Lockout on other enhanced senses and so the Flash Defense is often turned off)

Re: What makes Luck "Special" I will admit that Resistant Protection flies completely in the face of "Special". In fact it is such a gaping loophole to "Special" that I am firing off a question to Steve Long for some clarification.

Re: What makes Luck "Special" I think the Special Power definition is simply a reminder to people new to the game and to obstinate players that the GM is going to get to make the call on these in a framework. It takes up one column of one page and provides a specific example that the GM can use to quell a revolt in his play group. The specific example uses two different powers in its illustration so repeating the example on a power-by-power basis is probably a mistake. This example is pretty important. Duplication is not allowed by example because the GM uses the "I said so" card. There are very few blatant "I said so" moments in the book. Most of the book is written with "I will allow it" moments. This example mixes a "I will allow it" moment with a "I said so" moment and uses key words to explain why one can occur and not the other - "reasonable" and "potentially unbalancing". The example does not go into how a GM might find something "reasonable". The GM with obstinate players gets to point to this paragraph and then define what he decides is reasonable. Again, the section is one column. This one column with one clear example of the fact that it is up to the GM will quell many an argument. It might not make the obstinate player happy but it ends the argument. Anything that ends an argument with obstinate players is never a waste of space.

Re: What makes Luck "Special" 6E1226 discusses being prepared for a Flash. The paragraph describes "defensive actions" as "covering their eyes with their hands or something similar" and specifies that you can't Abort to that, you must be prepared. 6E2 21 says that "generally" a character cannot abort to "shield his eyes" or "otherwise protect himself" and then very purposefully refers to "the rules" on being prepared. The way these two are written, "otherwise protect himself" on 6E2 21 lines up as equivalent to "or something similar". OK. So the big question I have to ask myself is this: How is "covering their eyes" different from Blocking a Ranged Attack (6E2 59) such that you have to be "prepared". What do we know from what is written that sets apart a Flash from a Laser Beam? As near as I can tell the only thing that sets apart Flash from a Laser Beam is that you need your senses to participate in the battle and are thus very open with your senses. So how far does "or something similar" go? The concrete example of "shield his eyes" specifically means that you are taking your vision away. Based on just what can be specifically gleaned from the written words, I would say you have to be "prepared" to take your sense away. As a GM, this is what I would use to guide my interpretation of the word "Generally". As a stickler of a GM I might go so far as to say you have to be prepared to do anything that will even momentarily bullox your sense and therefore rule based on special effect. Putting on sunglasses might get in the way of seeing even if just for a moment. Switching on overload protectors in your cyber eyes probably doesn't. And therefore putting Flash Defense in a framework can be "unbalancing". A Cybereye multipower with Flash Defense and Enhanced Senses allows the user to save a TON of points considering he is never going to need Microscopic Vision on the phase that he aborted to Flash Defense.

Re: Where is the rule that says that dropped equipment can not be used in super heroi 6E 29 bottom of right column

Re: Reloading a revolver I think if you want the feel of The Magnificent Seven whereby you have to duck down and reload, then go with that. Rules are nice but the BEAUTY of Hero system is that YOU THE GM are allowed to make your own rules. You aren't being arbitrary here. If your players want to know why they need to take time to reload, show them a clip from Magnificent Seven and tell them that this is what you are going for. If someone asks you if he can fan his pistol and put six shots center mass, ask him what movie he is basing his idea on. Tell them that Quick and the Dead is out of bounds, tell them that you are little more cinematic than Unforgiven, but not quite as cinematic as Silverado. My point is the target FEEL is the defacto rule.

Re: What makes Luck "Special" The italics on 6E 161 has two very important words that govern how Special powers might end up in a framework. The first key word is "reasonable". The GM decides that 5 points of Flash Defense is "reasonable". The second key word (actually two word phrase) is "potentially unbalance". The Gm decides that Duplication is potentially unbalancing. It doesn't matter if a framework is cosmic or not, it doesn't matter if they are foci or not. The key is the GM determines if a power in a framework is potentially unbalancing or reasonable. Reasonable doesn't have to imply a real world example, doesn't have to imply something with limits. The only possible definition of "reasonable" that can be gleaned from the words in the example is that it is NOT potentially unbalancing. No other aspect of campaign, real world, limits or any such other considerations are discussed in the example. That's the way I read the Technon example.

Re: What makes Luck "Special" The key to the Flash Defense and Enhanced Sense debate in frameworks is that the GM needs to set ground rules early on what he won't allow due to balance reasons and what it takes to bring something into balance so that he will allow it. For Example: The GM says at the beginning of the campaign that "anything goes" is off the table. He will consider allowing Flash Defense or Enhanced Senses in a framework if there is some sort of limit on what is available such that the GM can say at each available moment that the item doesn't exist at a particular power level. The GM further states that he will be generous with things at the lower end of each scale. So a player goes ahead and makes a character called Shoplifter. Shoplifter can reach into his fake belly prothesis and pull out anything that he might have been able to find in the real world. Sunglasses are obvious, but he could also have a microscope from some high school lab. The balance is that the GM can make the call that a high school microscope is at the lower end of the microscopic vision scale but a Electron Microscope is too far up the microscopic vision scale to be allowed. Now assume a similar GM but a different player who wants to make a character called Conjurer. The GM reminds the player at the beginning of the campaign that there are balance limts on SPECIAL powers. The player checks with the GM to see if he can conjure the magic equivalent of an Electronic Microscope. The GM says no - he specifies that this is strictly a balance issue not a comment on Conjurer's special effect and encourages the playerto build something into his special effect as to why he can't conjure an electronic microscope. If the player of Conjurer is adult enough he accepts the game balance argument and then gets creative to build limits into his special effect.

Consider the two following constructions of Entagle: 1) Bioshock-reinforced Kick to the Head: Entangle, Works Against CON not STR, Takes No Damage From Attacks 2) Riddle Me This: Entangle, Works Against INT not STR, Takes No Damage From Attacks, Alternate Combat Value These might not be plain vanilla entangles but they follow the rules easily enough. Here is the fly in the ointment: What if other characters can attack the Entangle but with something completely different than an Attack. For Example: 1) The Bioshock effect can be attacked with Healing or Aid that is based on bioelectricity or even a wider range of special effects (divine healing should heal this kind of attack as well) 2) The Riddle effect can be attacked with someone with Telepathy and their own INT, kind of like other characters can use their own STR to help a character that is vanilla entangled SO... What to do. My idea is very general, very GM whim. Set the Takes No Damage From Attacks to +3/4 and then just make a blanket statement about the kinds of powers that attack the entangle. Is there a better way than GM whim? Is +3/4 the right price? Is +1 a better price and then put a Limitation on the Advantage appropriate to how much the other powers will show up (GM permission is assumed)?

Re: Affecting another players charges As an addendum - I am thinking specifically about Superheroic with no focus.

Re: Community compilation of powers? I've seen many powers posted in various threads, and one of the things that I see popping up is the use of GM permission construction. Right there is going to be a problem with a fan-based power list; which of us is going to give permission for which of the constructions.

Has anyone out there constructed a power that affects another character's charges? For example a spell that causes arrows in a quiver to disappear. Or a spell that causes new arrows to appear in a quiver. I was thinking this is probably possible with Transform, but has anyone thought of other ways?

Re: What makes Luck "Special" The way I see it, you only get to roll Luck in certain circumstances. Thus the player doesn't have to allocate points until the 1) battle isn't going his way or 2) he's missed a clue or so on. Since Luck is so cheap that would be major unfair to allow in a vpp or multipower. Compounding this is the amount of luck you might need in a battle versus the amount of luck you might need out of combat. In a fight, a single SIX on a luck roll can make the battle go much better. 15 pts of Luck gives you a 50% of getting a single SIX. Out of battle or in dire circumstances you may want two SIXES so 30 pts of Luck could be dialled up. Again - major unfair. Luck is clearly a "Special" power. Thanks guys for the input!!!!

Re: What makes Duplication "Special" The Recombination thing seems to be a big reason why this is "Special". I can think of the following example: A Wizard makes an Astral Projection. The Astral Projection gets captured in a magic circle by a demon (hey if humans can catch demons in magic circles why not the other way around). What do do? Even if the wizard has ranged recombination, its not fair to the demon that simple trick lets the wizard escape the magic circle. Meanwhile there are no rules stated whatsoever about multipowers or vpps being "stuck" on a slot. This simple example makes it obvious that Duplication should be treated as Special unless there are really, really good story elements that address these. Thanks guys for the input!!!!

I am going over all basic assumptions right now as I design a campaign that has some features that make it much more seat of the pants. One of the assumptions I am going over is what makes each Special power so "Special" that you can't put it in a framework. I have come up with reasoning for Enhanced Senses, Skills, Mental/Power/Flash Defense. My question to the forum: What makes Luck "Special"? Why is it unbalancing to put in a multipower or vpp?

I am going over all basic assumptions right now as I design a campaign that has some features that make it much more seat of the pants. One of the assumptions I am going over is what makes each Special power so "Special" that you can't put it in a framework. I have come up with reasoning for Enhanced Senses, Skills, Mental/Power/Flash Defense. My question to the forum: What makes Extra Limbs "Special"? Why is it unbalancing to put in a multipower or vpp?

I am going over all basic assumptions right now as I design a campaign that has some features that make it much more seat of the pants. One of the assumptions I am going over is what makes each Special power so "Special" that you can't put it in a framework. I have come up with reasoning for Enhanced Senses, Skills, Mental/Power/Flash Defense. My question to the forum: What makes Duplication "Special"? Why is it unbalancing to put in a multipower or vpp?

Re: Aid as a way to get around Healing My intent with healing is to allow significant healing In-Combat but at a particular price point. I want to close the loophole with Aid as a way to heal because I don't want to mess with its price. The main function of Aid is to boost powers. Its secondary function if you take the Only to Starting Values limitation is to counteract Drain. I feel Aid is at the right price point for both these. However, consider this math: 5d6 AID only to starting values will heal 20 STUN if used a couple times in a single round (easy enough to do since you can multiple attack) at a cost of 20 Active Points. Then for every single turn of combat, the AIDer can heal another 5 STUN, assuming the target has taken some damage. Over 5 turns (one minute) that is 40 STUN healed. Take also into consideration the END needed to achieve 40 STUN of healing. The initial 20 STUN would likely require 4 END and each turn would require 1 END for a total of 8 END on the part of the AIDer. To get even close to these numbers, healing has to be changed from max per day to max per turn. If you do that and continue to follow all other healing rules, 2d6 Healing (also 20 Active Points) would likely heal 45 STUN in 5 turns but at a END cost of 40 END. Here's why - extra Healing rolls in a turn don't have an impact unless they are higher than previous. So let's say you make four Healing rolls in a turn, you are likely to get a 9 at least once. On one turn you may get a 10 and on another turn you may never exceed 8. If I were making a character I'd rather go the AID route and know how much STUN I'm going to heal and how much END its going to take. My goal is to promote Healing as the only form of heal so that I can set its price according to the "feel" I'm looking for. Regeneration UOO is specifically forbidden without GM permission so I don't have to worry about that. My concern is anytime one tinkers with a mechanic, there may be unforseen damage. In this case I want to take away a function of AID and I'm looking for ideas as to what might go wrong with AID if I do that.

The campaign I'm working on, healers are important and therefore I intend there to be fewer limits on healing - in other words the once per day paradigm is out. Nonetheless I want to set the cost of healing at a certain point to encourage the use of limitations such as extra time, concentration and so on. BUT... Aid has a built in heal feature. If you Aid someone's STUN, when they take STUN damage it comes off the aided portion. When the aided portion fades a little, no further STUN is lost. And with the aided portion faded a touch, you can throw a die or two of Aid that person's way to give them more STUN up to the amount that faded. Setting the price point for Healing will be a task in and of itself. Balancing that costing exercise with the possibility that characters could use Aid to some effect makes the chore too hard. SO... I want to close the "comes off the aided portion loophole". My thought is that if you Aid someone's STUN and they take STUN damage, it comes out of their base STUN. More importantly when Aid fades, the STUN is actually lost. From a purely mechanical point of view, what is the drawback of closing this loophole? Looking for thoughts.

The Fade Rate of Aid is normally 5 points per turn. However it could be advantageous to have a higher Fade Rate. If someone Aids Body, Stun or END - damage taken to those characteristics comes out of the Aided portion first. If the target were to take 5 character points of damage to any of these characteristics, the 5 points of Fade at the end of the turn would not reduce the characteristic further. However on the next turn, the characteristic could be re-Aided by 5 points. Some players and GMs may notice that a higher Fade Rate can be of value. If the GM is looking to run a campaign that significantly values healers and buffers, ought he allow in increased Fade Rate? If so, would an Advantage cost be appropriate?

The cost of Autofire jumps up by +1 if the Autofire is not applied against normal defenses. Non-Selective and Selective Area Effects require a to-hit against DCV 3 (the area) but also require a to-hit against the DCV of the appropriate targets. Does the cost of Autofire jump up by +1 if the Area Effect is Non-selective/Selective?

I envision a character with a Follower. The Follower is this vision has multiform. One of the forms in this vision is that of a figurine. The figurine is sentient, has powers, can communicate mentally and do some other fantastic stuff. My question is this, can the follower be built to include selling back STR, DEX, Running, Leaping and Swimming to 0? Does it get the extra points for the sell back? If it sells back STR to 0, does it only get to sell back half its Running, Leaping and Swimming since those are halved by being STR 0?

Swordmaster has 30 Stun. Swordmaster has an amulet with 5d6 Aid to Stun. Fade rate is 5 per turn. Swordmaster juices up his stun for several phases before going into a fight. He enters the fight with 60 Stun. During the early portion of the fight he takes 20 Stun. He now has 40 Stun. The turn ends and some of his Aid fades, specifically 5 points. However since the damage came off of the aided stun, he loses no stun. Swordmaster wants to juice his amulet again. Technically he can eek another 5 points out because 5 points have faded. Question: Does Swordmaster have to roll all 5d6 again for a cost of 3 END, or can he roll just 2d6 for a cost of 1END?

Re: HERO System Advanced Players Guide II now in store. Chill just went down my neck!!! I am so anticipating this!!!!