Rene

Thanks! I'm addicted to fantastic fiction, so I had to learn to read English, only the tip of the iceberg gets translated to Portuguese.

RKA, Does Body, BOECV, Indirect, NND (Defense: Unusual Internal Structure, Desolidification, Density Powers).

Yep, it's artificial, but I guess that is the way it's done by the book. Theoretically, a STR 10 telekinetic could lift a thousand objects each weighing 100 kg, as long as he takes 1000 Phases, keep everything in Line of Sight and pays END for each power use per Phase (works a lot better if you have 0 END TK). The same telekinetic could NEVER lift a single 200 kg object without pushing his TK. Of course you could institute a house rule to take care of the silliness if you want. It doesn't bother me, I don't think much in a scientific way. As long as I don't get a player who would abuse stuff, I don't much care.

Well, that is part and parcel of the NND Advantage. Special Effects *do* matter when devising NNDefenses. Some Martial Maneuvers have "Rigid Armor" as defense, for instance.

I guess you're right. I don't know much about British TV SF. I'm Brazilian.

I don't really know much about British TV shows. I think my analysis apply better to written SF, generally. TV and movie SF (from all countries) usually is a mix of optimism and pessimism; on one hand, most of them have strong cautionary notes about the dangers of unbridled technology (pessimism), but also have daring heroes that save the day in the end (optmism).

Sure, being a hero is all about overcoming obstacles. But the kind of British SF I was refering to keeps crushing the characters until the very end, and often the ending is even more depressing than the beginning. The characters never stand a chance. That is the whole point of the tale; not to provide a uplifting story of overcoming the odds (that is more of a American thing), but showing that life and/or society and/or the human being is rotten almost beyond repair. Its mostly a social satire tale. But of course I'm generalizing. It's not very acurate to classify all of American SF as optimistic ("the frontier spirit") or all of British SF as pessimistic ("the decadent empire spirit"), but still those are important (though not omnipresent) tendencies in both countries's SFs.

Maybe I'm weird, but when I read this thread's title I thought you were refering to HERO campaigns based around works from British science fiction writers. That would be pretty easy to do. Just get a sadistic GM who likes to screw the characters over and over and over. Literary British SF in most cases consists of tales of powerlessness and poor little man crushed by uncaring society or uncaring nature. Not pleasant for RPG campaigns...

Sure. You should use whatever works for you. Your views are as valid as mine. I just said that I'd let a character use Transform in this case if I were the GM. But if I played in your game, I'd respect your judgment as a GM.

Making swords out of thin air as Summon and building the swords as a character complete with Life Support and stuff sounds like over-engineering to me. Much more work than it's worth, IMO. I can see how it can be a fun intelectual exercise, but in an actual game with me as GM I'd just tell the player to get on with it and make do with a Transform and be damned what the book recommends. But then that is just me. I also happen to think Mental Paralysis as Entangles with 347 Power Modifiers is over-complicating when we have Mind Control with Set Effect: Don't Move available. I also don't like how some powers are built with Aid with a billion modifiers when you could simulate them with Limited Characteristics or Skills. It's that sort of thing that scares away newbie players from HERO. Overcomplication. A sword is a Focus in superhero campaigns, sure. But in heroic campaigns ordinary swords are just objects. I don't see the harm in allowing Transform to create ordinary swords. And most Magical Transforms could have as "Untransformation" trigger any sort of Dispel Magics, for instance.

I own (and like) Exalted. One of the few good WW games, IMO. I would only change two things from your conversion: - Can Only Draw from "Special" END shouldn't really be a Limitation on powers. It's at most a -0 Limitation. Most players will buy a very high level of Special END, anyway. - The Aura definetely should be a Distinctive Features, but IMO it's Easily Concealed and that is it. You need only to avoid using your biggest powers, and that sounds like Easily Concealed to me, the character will only be distinctive in special moments like climatic battles. +10 pts for Extreme Reaction, of course. That is a 15 pt Disad.

I say just use a Transform for ordinary swords. I find it nonsensical that you can use Transform to give someone Wolverine's claws, but not a ordinary sword.

Yes, but one can say Multipowers perhaps give a greater cost break than it should. AP/10 is dirty cheap for new powers. For instance, many people think Naked Advantages are munchkinisms, but a Attack Multipower is more or less like a bunch of Naked Advantages you can apply to your attack.

But that is only a Limitation for Multipowers built with Focus. And even then the Focus will have a DEF equal to the Point Reserve, that is usually bigger than small powers built into separated Focus. Also, the same thing could be said of Elemental Control built with Focus. That is only partially true. It's hard to quantify the value of versatily. 32 EB will do nothing against a Desolified Character, for instance, and could be resisted by a Mega-Villain with 75% Damage Reduction plus high Armor, and could be easily dodged by Spiderlad, etc. Now Multipower-Man probably can whip out Drains to get the Mega-Villain, Flashes or even Affect Desolidied attacks to get the Ghost, Area Effects to get Spiderlad, and so on, and so on. "Can't use all powers simultaneously" hardly constitutes a significant limitation when almost all players use Multipowers to get a bunch of powers that they couldn't frequently use simultaneously anyway. BTW, I'm with Farkling. Multiple Frameworks in a single character almost always are bad.

I was never much of a Batman fan. I have a superstrong suspension of disbelief, I can believe in Kryptonian aliens, mutants, and Olympian Gods with no trouble, but I find it hard to believe in a guy that has every damned skill in the book and is an unparalled master with them all. Nothing gets to me more than some people saying Batman is the best superhero there is, because he is the only one who is "human" or whatever. He is only human in a strictly technical physical sense. Batman never loses (Bane had to cheat a lot to best him, throwing every Batman villain against him to wear him out). Not even James Bond is so irritating. But I have to admit I kinda like how some writers like Grant Morrison deal with Batman. It's funny in a almost satirical way to see how outrageous they can make Batman. Then it becomes something more openly like mind-boggling science fiction. I think Captain America or even Nightwing, for instance, are finer examples of supernormals who're still formidable, but can't perform brain surgery while composing symphonies and designing computer circuitry. Even Reed Richards is mostly limited to physical sciences only. You can't do Batman in less than 700 pts. The 'most human of all superheroes' my ass.

I dunno. I think flying as a power for fire characters makes sort of symbolical sense. Fire is a dynamic, mobile, very "light" element. If you mean to ask how someone scientifically fly by using fire manipulation, then I'm not the best person to answer, I'm afraid. But supers and hard science not always go hand-in-hand.

"Good" character concepts are in the eye of the beholder, like so much else in this life. It's all very relative. I have many stories of non-stereotypical super concepts that were just stinking crap. Got a player with gravitic powers who also was invisible to machines. He had two different "origins", one to account for each set of powers. He also owned a bar and was a former secret agent. He also came from the future. No element in the character had any strong connection to any other element. I always remember this player when people badmouth stereotypical characters. Sure it's easy to build stereotypical characters. Just copy some well-known hero. But it can be equally easy to build non-stereotypical characters. Just choose stuff randomly. So I came to the conclusion that the commonality of a character's basic concept has zero relation to his quality. Elemental Controls supposedly reward "unified theme" powers, not necessarily "good" (whatever you define as good) character concepts.

Any power with OAF, Reduced by Strength, and possibly thrust into a Gadget Multipower or Gadget VPP will be dirty cheap too. I'm not saying MAs are injustly rewarded in the present system, to me this isn't a matter of a preference for a certain character concept. Nor I'm saying that Elemental Controls aren't mechanically nonsensical, maybe they are. All I'm saying is that every character type in HERO has it's "cheat", some benefit more from one kind of cheat than from another. I'm not saying that EBs can't buy underpriced Chars. Only that, usually, Bricks and MAs have more free points to expend into underpriced Chars. If you get rid of ECs without changing the Chars, you tilt it more in favor of character types that still have their favored "cheat" in place. Why don't make it a two-for-one sale? Let's get rid of everything that seems to give an injust edge, so everybody can be happy.

But the point is, those 50 pts you expent don't get him just a 12d6 attack with no Range. Martial Artists have a lot of flexibility for comparatively few points. Those 50 pts are just the founding stone in a concept that requires few points to be obscenely efficient. The MA has other maneuvers without OCV penalties, he has a ridiculous Dodge, he has a obscene DEX score that is dirty cheap and probably the most cost-effective element in the entire game next to Overall Skill Levels, that probably he will have by the buttload too. I doubt all this cost a lot more than 100 pts. And then the Energy Blaster will have to pay 120 pts for two 60-pt powers? Say, 12d6 straightforward EB and 30" Flight. The MA will kick his ass around the block in a few seconds, assuming he has at least one way to reach the Energy Blaster (like a OAF Batarang). I'm all for getting rid of ECs, but first they should get around to make Characteristics and stuff like Overall Levels a little less underpriced. And not to mention Bricks and their extraordinarly efficient STR, CON, PD and ED.

But consider that Characteristics, Overall Skill Levels, and Martial Arts are REALLY cheap in HERO. So Batman is already being rewarded in a way, he don't need a EC when he can get a 15 OCV, 12d6 attack probably paying much less than the Human Torch would for his Energy Blast. There is no major superhero concept that isn't rewarded in some fashion in HERO. Bricks and Martial Artists are rewarded by cheap Chars. Energy Projector and Mentalists by Frameworks. Power Suits by Focus Lim... ECs make sense in a backward kind of way in that they seem to give a fighting chance for characters that aren't characteristic-based.

Re: Elemental Controls Like many people said, ECs usually are for movement and defense powers, while MPs are for attacks. Truth be told, all powers closely linked by special effects logically should belong in a EC, there is no reason other than "it's most cost effective this way" to put some in a EC and some in a MP. Frameworks are a polemical issue in HERO. There is this interesting theory that Frameworks are more of a game balance thing anyway. That is because most Characteristics (notably STR) are just too cheap. You kind of need Frameworks so power-based characters aren't too disadvantaged next to char-based characters.

The problem with Drain STR used to represent gravitic attacks is that Drains take a bit too long for the victim to recover, plus they require the Ranged Advantage too. TK represents the effects more elegantly. I imagine "Only to Pin" would be about -1. So you could do a 60 STR Grab for 45 pts. Not too unbalanced. It would cost a bit more if you added stuff like Uncontrolled and Invisible Power Effects.

I agree. But I don't think that is so much a problem with the system, but with how Steve Long chose to interpret certain effects. The Fighting Array is a fine example of overcomplicating what could be simulated pretty painlessly with CVs bought with certain Limitations. Sometimes the most obvious way to build something is the right way too, you know. Fighting Arrays and watching your enemy fight to gain a bonus are both best simulated with Skills, not Aid. Another thing I disagree with is Entangles used to represent stuff like Gravitic Attacks. Needlessly messy. Use Limited Telekinesis (Only to Pin Opponent Down) instead. Think about it, it just makes no sense that the Human Torch should be able to burn his way out of a Gravitic Attack. I also don't like BOECV Entangles. "Mind Control, Set Command: Freeze" takes care of everything pretty nicely without the hideously expensive BOECV Advantage.

My thoughts exactly! In Supers the problem is compounded because most characters have their special effects written all over them. Who will ever think to use fire against the Living Volcano? So their enemies won't even waste a Phase blasting him with fire, they'll use other kinds of attack. And just think how hugely useful unmodified Damage Redution and Armor are. It requires superhuman willpower (+50 EGO Only to Resist Powergame Thinking?) to buy Limited Phenomena defenses for -1/2. It's such a tiny discount and it wrecks the power completely. Even -1 is too low. Some power constructions perfectly adequate to some character concepts are hurt badly. No sane person will expend a huge amount of points in a Absorption vs. Cold Attacks (to up duration, to spread the points among several Chars. etc.) when you probably will never be hit by a Cold Attack, because only a moron will throw a ice blast against Mr. Blizzard. In practical terms, the character only gets to use his Absorption if he finds a background hazzard and throws himself into it. It's a LOT less useful than all-purpose Energy Absorption.

-1 makes a lot more sense than -1/2. But I still think it's a bit overpriced. I agree that fire and eletricity are common special effects in superhero/modern games and that a character could face such perils roughly once every three sessions. But my line of reasoning is simple: Limited Phenomena Defenses for half the cost of unmodified Armor and unmodified Damage Reduction still seems too expensive. Much better to buy standard Armor. I still think -2 is a better value for fire and eletricity. For sonics and other more exotic effects, -2 1/2 or even -3. Yes, I know, everyone is free to make it so in their games. It's just that the examples in the official books seem just too off-base.