Peregrine

Re: "He's bulletproof", "Fireproof", etc.

Essentially this already exists' date=' and I've used it extensively in my supers campaigns. Virtually every real-world, historical, or sci-fi weapon written up for non-supers Fifth Edition source books has the Limitation, [i']Real Weapon.[/i] Part of that Lim is explicitly that it can't harm items it "realistically" could not, no matter what number is rolled on the damage dice -- like a knife gouging tank armor. It's easy to designate a Defense threshold beyond which Real Weapons won't have any effect, or reduced effect; or have them only do full damage to Defenses that are bought with the flipside Limitation, Real Armor (which is what I often do in my campaigns.)

 

With this approach you don't have to rewrite all the published material to make supers more resistant to mundane weaponry.

I don't think I've seen this written so elegantly - and an elegant solution it is.

One detail: Real Weapon vs. super Defenses - half damage, or none?

Another: super Attack vs. Real Armor - half Defenses?

Re: Federated Super Teams (Galactic Champions)

"I find your ideas intriguing and would like to sub-" wait, no... "would like to play in such a game."

A Space Battleship Yamato-sized load of Awesome with a side of Whoopass Sauce.

"Must spread Rep" etc. etc. etc.

Re: "He's bulletproof", "Fireproof", etc.

simple rule: a 20mm weapon is a cannon, not a firearm. The largest caliber firearm/gun is probably the Russian KPV machine gun, 14.5mm--3d+1 KA, +1 Stun mult, about 12 Damage classes.

 

If you want a more typical firearm, 2d6 KA is a good level to peg it at--the aforementioned 12rPD, 24 PD, only vs. firearms(-1 or -1/2?), for 21 or 28 points seems likely to work pretty well.

For an "absolute" level of bulletproofness, 20rPD(double hardened), plus 60 PD(double hardened), for 67 or 90 points, should cover it.

Actually, to figure in the aforementioned DC adders, I'd peg it at 4d6K, maybe 5d6K depending on the overall power level of the campaign. That'd be 12-15 DC.

To keep a "bulletproof" character from being "undamageable" (unless the latter is the GM-approved SFX), I'd probably require that some of the defenses be "only physical" (rPD, DamNeg/DamRed vs. physical), if not "only vs. 'bullets'".

Re: "He's bulletproof", "Fireproof", etc.

Easier said than done' date=' as that can be quite variable if you have character that are weapon masters/martial artists that get added DC's from Maneuvers, Skill levels, MA DC's, Talents or Powers...[/quote']

 

It's called a "damage cap": "no one in this campaign setting will ever do more than x DC with a firearm* by any means whatsoever".

 

*or whatever term you want to use for a "gun" that fires a "bullet"

Re: "He's bulletproof", "Fireproof", etc.

1. What is the maximum damage that a bullet can do in the setting?

2. Decide if "bulletproof" means "takes no BODY" or "takes no STUN", the latter assuming the former as well.

3. Build the bulletproof character with sufficient defenses (rPD/DamNeg/DamRed) to achieve the result chosen in 2. when attacked by 1.

QED

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

The point of this concept isn't to design a class based system, and especially not to try and do it inside the HERO system. It isn't that at designated times people get boost to random skills and powers but that as the character makes use of something that something grows. I.e., the more I play black-jack and poker, the more adept I will become at gambling. The more Night-Crawler pushes his teleportation the more it grows.

 

All in all, it is designed to make growth/exp based on player/PC actions. This is in opt of the situations where the Player is given exp and then uses it to progress something that is either off the wall or makes less sense then another one. I.e., someone who buys up his OcV when they haven't actually gotten much chance to be in combat. Also it helps keep them from situations where they have several things that deserve to be progressed but have a limited amount of Exp. It just seems like a more realistic / fluid way to show the progression.

 

La Rose.

And the point that I was making is that what you are proposing is a half-measure that presents the appearance of offering HERO's flexibility to the players while in actuality keeping things firmly in the control of the GM. If you're going to do that, don't offer the insult (which is how I would receive it; others might feel differently) of the illusion of choice. Be honest about it and go ahead and restrict the choices in advance based on how you want the PCs to advance, and how quickly; a class-and-level system is both historically proven to achieve that objective and very familiar to most players.

Re: Controled (?) Growth Concepts

1. Build a class-and-levels system

Seriously.

HERO is a kit for building a game, not a game by itself. If you, the GM, want to control character progression, 30+ years of real-world RPG design (tabletop, MMORPG, etc.) has demonstrated that a class-and-levels system works extraordinarily well. It preserves schtick, limits the acquisition of abilities to the pattern you have created, and takes away much choice from the players, restricting them to choosing a class and then selecting from only the abilities offered by that class when they "level up". (As a side note, be wary of multi-classing, as the primary function it performs is to allow a character to bypass the limits you've established with the classes you've designed. You Have Been Warned).

Re: Two Supermassive Black Holes on Collision Course in Same Galaxy

... There is such a thing as (spoilered for decency)

autofellatio.

"If I could do that, I'd never leave home" - Unknown

Re: Theory of Relativity is WRONG. Well, maybe.

<> tags - and emoticons - are just the way to express tone of voice and inflection on the 'net. Not really sad at all.

 

But my main question was, if this is true, how would it affect time and distance in space - I assume if gravity doesn't affect light the same as other things, then that means objects in space are either further away or closer to us than previously thought, yes? If light is bent by gravity, and space is not "flat", and the math changes on how much light is bent, then wouldn't the math on calculating the true distance to something also change?

I think so, yes. Which has very interesting implications, depending on which way the error goes (shorter or longer distances than we currently calculate).

Re: OMCV Whats it good for (besides Mental Powers)

I think CrosshairCollie's solution is best.

 

After all, the book "Normal" is merely an example. Yes, it's a baseline we can all see here on the boards to be on the same starting line. But after that, it's anyone's game.

 

I might be inclined to define Normals as OMCV 2; so you can have a Weak Normal of OMCV 1.

In our own games, sure. Right of Houserule and all that.

But take note of 6E1-437-440. Granted, those are probably converted directly from their 5eR equivalents, with all of the caveats thus entailed, but they are nevertheless the de facto published standard; deviation therefrom being, by definition, exercise of the Right of Houserule, with all of the caveats likewise thus entailed.

(I emphasize the distinction because of a discussion on another thread wherein the distinction got lost, overlooked, or ignored - I never did figure out which...)

Re: Order of the Stick

Yeah. The puns were beginning to bug me, too...

Re: Terran Empire and TvTropes.org

As of the default start date for a Terran Empire campaign, the various Void Messiahs have mostly confined their activities to "neutral" space sectors, but have annihilated a few worlds at the fringes of the great powers. Some Messiahs are known to intelligence services as a result of this, and are considered a serious threat; but few have any inkling of how many there are, let alone the full devastating scope of their endgame. The Void Messiahs want to physically reshape the galaxy into patterns they believe will free the Kings of Edom into this reality. Even if that doesn't work, in the process they'll murder billions.

 

The Church of the Infinite Dark isn't a monolithic organization; the Messiahs operate independently trying to create their own patterns, and sometimes work at cross purposes. Each is uniquely, superhumanly powerful, commands a small army of fanatical followers, and a gigantic starship known as a "Darkhold" armed with bizarre super weapons. Due to the warping influence of the Kings they worship, the Messiahs and their followers are all utterly, inhumanly, horrificly insane. Often their bodies are as monstrously warped as their minds.

Hero 40K, anyone?

Re: Two Supermassive Black Holes on Collision Course in Same Galaxy

... What would you do if you misjumped and became stranded between two colliding supermassibe black holes?

Place my head between my legs and kiss my tuchis goodbye... and because of the massive warping of local space, I could actually do it!

Re: 5e to 6e Character Convertion

Also: the "Gotchas" thread on this board is a gold mine. There are a lot of subtle changes between 5e and 6e (for that matter, between 4e and 5e that long-time Hero gamers missed all these years) that can be real eye openers.

Re: Normal Human

As long as it is called Normal Characteristic Maximum, the implication is there is in the description since titles are part of what is being described.

 

I do not see a way around that.

1. It is no longer called that in 6e; it is officially just Characteristic Maxima; I would guess probably to dispel the interpretation you are suggesting, though I have no firm evidence.

2. If you can show me in =5eR= RAW where the word Normal as used in that rule name is stated as referring to "non-supers", rather than the dictionary definition "common, usual", (which would render the name of the rule "(Common or Usual) Characteristic Maxima"), I will concede your point.

However, the use of the word "normal" to refer to "non-supers" elsewhere in the rules is not sufficient proof, unless the word "normal" is =only/exclusively= used for that purpose, is defined as =generally= being used for that purpose "unless otherwise stated", or there is other unambiguous support for the word "normal" as generally referring to non-supers.

I suggest, though, that the association of NCM in 5e with Heroic genres as a standard rule, and the presence of the same NCM in Superheroic genres as a per-character exception, would preclude that as the most valid interpretation of the word as used. Also, the change in the description of the rule from 4e to 5e (the latter of which was intended to stand on its own as complete rules not requiring any reference to any prior editions), which removed the explicit reference to NCM as distinguishing non-supers from supers in a Superheroic setting, implies that the correct definition of "Normal" as used in NCM is the dictionary definition referenced above.

In short, you found and were able to reference your copies of 5eR in the middle of this discussion, and appear to be trying to interpret the new (to you for this discussion) rules by the old understanding, disregarding the high probability that the new author intended to change the meaning when he changed the words. I offer as supporting evidence the further change of wording (by the same author) in 6e, which removes Characteristic Maxima even farther from its 4e definition.

Re: Normal Human

It's in the bloodly description of the mechanic.

 

That's as "default" as it gets.

 

Not. Any. More.

It =was= in the description of the mechanic in 4e RAW.

It =is no longer= in the description of the mechanic starting with 5e; by =5e= (and later) RAW, that SFX is no longer in the description of or the default for that mechanic. I have posted the relevant page references and text upthread and will not spam the board by reposting.

So if you are running 4e and/or are using 4e RAW as your reference point, fine. But if so, there is no longer any common ground for discussing this topic, because the rest of us (or a high supermajority thereof) are using 5e and later (5eR, 6e), and the RAW therein are as indicated =multiple times= in this thread, including above in this post.

Re: Normal Human

 

You don't get points for DisAds or Limitations that do not affect game play.

If I as a GM can't take advantage of it significantly enough for it to matter to the campaign, then for all intents and purposes it does not exist.

 

So how does NCM, as per 5eR RAW and separate from your house rules, affect game play in a superheroic setting?

Re: Normal Human

I have _HERO System fifth edition revised_ ISBN 1-58366-043-7

(You know the big black hard bound with green, gray, and white lettering; a copy of which was shot with a high velocity rifle by someone around here as part of "play testing"?)

 

 

You folks are going to kick yourselves when the "D'oh!" moment hits...

 

 

*listening to elevator music in the thread while I wait...*

Bad guess on my part, then.

Re: Normal Human

Page 58 of 5ER has the descriptions for three skills (Demolitions' date=' Disguise,and Electronics). It also has a picture of a guy with a "KICK ME!" sign on his back. It does not have any reference to Normal Characteristic Maxima.[/quote']

 

It appears that he has the original HS5, not HS5R; the latter is longer and many of the page references have changed.

Re: Normal Human

This was true in =4e=. See HSR p. 122.

This =was not= true in 5e. See HS5eR p. 32 and 329, neither of which mentions NCM as in any way indicating a non-super in a Superheroic setting.

 

If you are playing 4e, it is RAW. If you are playing 5e, it is not, but has been grandfathered or houseruled in.

 

This wouldn't be the first time I've forgotten or overlooked something from that edition.

 

I don't suppose you can quote me the relevant passage? I think I still have that edition somewhere but I know if I go looking it would take me days to find it....

Incoming....

NORMAL CHARACTERISTIC MAXIMA

This represents a character who is a “normal” in a world of superheroes or other super-powerful beings. This Disadvantage can only be purchased by characters in a campaign where there are normally no restriction on Characteristics (a superheroic campaign).

NORMAL CHARACTERISTIC MAXIMA

The two Characteristics Tables list “Maximum Values” for each characteristic. This restriction, known as Normal Characteristic Maxima, applies only to Heroic campaigns; usually it acts as a “default” for the campaign and does not count as a Disadvantage. Superheroic campaigns have no such limits (unless the GM imposes them, or they voluntarily choose them as a Disadvantage [see page 329]).

Normal Characteristic Maxima

Characters in campaigns that do not impose Normal Characteristic Maxima as a default can take Normal Characteristic Maxima as a Disadvantage for 20 Character Points. (The character can also take Age as a Disadvantage and get full points for it.) This requires them to abide by the restrictions of Normal Characteristic Maximum, including paying double for characteristics above the Maximum Value.

Re: A White Wolf aneurysm

And yet there were the frothing fanboys who thought he was sooooooooooo cooooooooooool

Do I need to repeat myself?

Re: Normal Human

Yep' date=' we're done here. I can't tell you how happy I am that I'm nowhere near your gaming table.[/quote']

 

I'll see you, and raise:

 

I'm happy that I don't have to worry about him coming anywhere near my gaming table; he isn't suitable to GM for me.

Re: A White Wolf aneurysm

A blurb in End of Empires (the last Wraith book) hints that his soul got blown across the shroud and became what amounts to a Hunter.

Yep. That uber-NPC represented the absolute worst of the oWoD and the way WW handled the property.

Re: Normal Human

NCM was the standard RAW way to differentiate heroic characters from super heroic ones.

This was true in =4e=. See HSR p. 122.

This =was not= true in 5e. See HS5eR p. 32 and 329, neither of which mentions NCM as in any way indicating a non-super in a Superheroic setting.

If you are playing 4e, it is RAW. If you are playing 5e, it is not, but has been grandfathered or houseruled in.

Re: Normal Human

If there is some kind of standard “normal in a super world” Complication in the New Dispensation, I missed it, but I really hope there is and wish there were if there's not.

There isn't, and I for one am glad of it, because what that is and what effect that would have on both story and mechanics is too setting dependent. Further, the official CU setting explicitly does not have any such explicit dividing line (except for the dividing line between Legendary and Superhuman characteristics, and it is clear that a superhuman does not have to have any characteristics in the Superhuman range, while a non-superhuman can have characteristics in the Legendary range), and that is the default setting (though certainly not the exclusive setting - homebrews are as viable as they have ever been) for Superheroic campaigns.

Further reasons for the absence of any such Complication starts to get into design philosophy about what Complications are and are not, and why. I would recommend reading 6E1-414 and following (Chapter 9 - Complications) to get a clear understanding on what Complications are in 6e and how Complications differ from Disadvantages in 5eR and previous, because there is a very real difference, despite the very real similarities. One key part: Complications have a story impact; their frequency is set by "frequency of appearance in the story", not "frequency of the character's experience of the Complication in their life 24/7" (6E1-416; see especially the Frequency of Complication table)