Kristopher

Any thoughts you can offer as to why you prefer B?

Originally posted by Agent Escafarc

How about a flying, energy projecting, learns languages with sexual contact, brick babe with martial arts:

Starfire! she does it all.

I didn't read Teen Titans, so I have to ask, is this for real?

Geez, what has Cartoon Network gotten themselves into? Who "taught" Starfire English

No.

I don't believe in "The Best."

I suppose.

It's just that being a good shot doesn't really make you harder to hit.

I'm creating an NPC with a VPP that allows her to use powers that she has "sampled" from other mutants in the past. In keeping with the nature of the limitation on the VPP, I'm keeping track of the characters she has taken those samples from. I'm trying to decide between two layouts for the list of available powers within the VPP:

A) Technical - organized by mechanics, with alphabetical sorting within Attacks, Defenses, Other Powers, and Characteristics. This makes them easy to find during play.

Thematic - organized by which mutant they came from. This has a better feel in terms of concetrating on story and atmosphere over mechanics, something I feel is important when using the very mechanically-oriented HERO system.

Which would you use, and why?

T'Shenk Kennet - It would depend on the NPC in question. He doesn't trust authority and cares more about justice than the law, having been a victim of corrupted legal and religious authority once already*, so he'd never expect them to just turn themselves in. The more severe the shift in the NPC's personality, the more he'd be suspicious of them, and of the Deacon. If the NPC had been of the "honorable villain" sort, he'd pay attention but give them a chance. If the NPC in question had been some kind of sociopath, he'd blow the change off as a trick.

What boggles my mind is the idea that a 3-pt CSL with a pistol can be used to improve your DCV against ranged attacks. That makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.

Personally, I don't mind a modern tank being something for most supers to fear.

I'm having a "duh" moment.

Does DEX w/NFC still affect CVs? I'm thinking it does, but I'm so fried right now I'm not sure. If someone could give me an answer and a FRED page reference (so I can read it again and hopefully not forget in the future no matter how fried), I would appreciate it.

Thank you.

(So fried that I had to edit the request to make sense.)

Originally posted by zornwil

I don't believe that's been done here, to give credit where credit is due. Or lack of blame, I suppose, more accurately put.

Check out the Hero Designer forum.

There was an NPC in one of my campaigns named Scanner, who had the inate ability to sense "weaknesses". He had a focus called a Paradox Gun, which was an EB with full variable FX.

I see. That works.

It would probably be a pain in the arse to program it to work directly.

Really? Has he said why it won't?

I mean, he seems pretty big on the whole "implementing the rules of HERO system as stated by Steve Long" thing.

HeroMaker allowed Limitations to be placed on Advantages, and it was an acceptable thing to do among the players I was in contact with during my college days.

However, as far as I can tell, Hero Designer does not allow this. Is this against the rules as they exist in 5th edition?

I'm also interested in hearing the opinions of others on this matter (as opposed to the "legality").

Originally posted by Agent X

My theory is that an administrator who gets rude is open to the same sort of replies as any other poster. I read Melessqr's posts over in Hero Designer land and he obviously was annoyed about the fractional speed issue but he didn't mock Simon as Simon did to him.

Except, of course, when that admin decides that he will have the last word, and closes the thread to futher responses after he gets his last comment in.

Originally posted by zornwil

lemming checked his 2nd ed and it does say 0 END should not be in an EC, he couldn't put his hands on the 1st

It's the difference between "should not" and "can not", then. I'm fine with a little note in the EC rules warning GMs to watch out for min-maxing constructions using ECs. What bugs me is the new text that makes it a hard-and-fast rule against putting most powers in an EC.

Originally posted by Trebuchet

I wouldn't allow such an Advantage at all, for three reasons:

 

1) It's a blatant attempt to meta-game an Advantage; and hence should be slapped down with extreme prejudice.

 

2) If such a hypothetical "all possible SFX" Advantage were permitted, some of its special effects would be mutually contradictory. How would you do a freezing heat blast, or a dark energy/light energy blast? Energy blasts can be physical attacks; would such an Advantage be both energy (vs. ED) and physical (thus vs. PD)? SFX can include grenades and lasers, how would you reconcile exploding coherent light beams? Given the virtually infinite possible SFX for energy blasts in HERO, as a purely practical measure it's unworkable.

 

3) Most importantly, this takes away the specialness of any other energy-projecting character in the group. If Evil Guyâ„¢ can only be felled by Lightning Kid's lightning bolt, how is Lightning Kid's player going to feel when Omni-Blastman's EB can also trigger Evil Guy's 2X Vulnerability to electrical attacks?

 

The rules are quite clear on this subject: Special effect trumps Power construction. This concept is pure 100% Velveeta.

You know, he does have a pretty good point there. Several, really.

I actually like HERO. It's one of two published game systems I can play where the system does not detract from my enjoyment of the game (unlike, say, d20). I've even given money to the cause by purchasing all this stuff...

4th Edition: Champions/BBB, Ninja Hero, Fantasy Hero Companion, Viper Sourcebook

5th Edition: FRED, Champions, USPD, Ultimate Martial Artist, Star Hero, Terran Empire, Hero System Bestiary, Hero Designer v1 (I'm currently using the HD v2 upgrade.)

None of which means I'm going to refrain from pointing out things that are screwed up.

...

Simon...you're missing the point about customer service. You can argue all you want that you're not a "customer service representative," and it won't change anything. Not because you're wrong on that point, but because it's entirely irrelevent to the real point.

Anyone who interacts with the customers is providing customer service. Every time you take a call, post to a message board, respond to an email, or whatever, you're doing customer service work. Yes, you're a contractor, and technically aren't part of DOJ. So what?

My job title says nothing about customer service, and I'm definately _not_ a CSR. So what? My interaction with the public, with customers, still has an impact on the company I work for. That wouldn't change if I were a temp, a contractor, or an owner of the business.

If you think you're not "doing" customer service, and that you're not a representative of DOJ, because your title isn't Customer Service Representative, then, well, you're wrong.

Originally posted by D-Man

Its good to own the own the company. When you own the company its your intent that counts. Steve and Co. own the company. McDonald and Patterson sold the company (as did ICE and Cybergames). What they may or may not have intended, or done is irrelevant.

 

The question at this point is "what does 5E have to say about it?" because HD is designed to support 5E.

If I recall correctly, somewhere along the line someone claimed that it had always been intended the way that Steve is now ruling on it. Personally, I can't find any reference in 4th to indicate either way, and I would be interested in knowing what the original creators of the game thought.

Originally posted by Gary

Variable special effects at the +1/2 level isn't as good as the power you're describing, since the user must pick out 1 single special effect each time and could guess wrong. He could also run into a foe without vulnerabilities, susceptibilities, or side effects.

 

At the +1 level, it's too expensive an advantage. That's because you could simply buy double the dice for the same cost and you're essentially inflicting a 2X "vulnerability" on every foe you face. (This does break down if you're stacking other advantages on the power).

 

Therefore, by process of deduction the advantage should be +3/4.

I concur.

Originally posted by Steve Long

I think there are plenty of instance where the relationship between a Characteristic and a special effect/power set/etc. are fairly obvious -- PG points out some good examples, such as DEX/SPD and being a speedster, or being some types of energy projector and ED.

 

The difficulty arises in that a lot of characters buy higher-than-human-normal Characteristics whose special effect really boils down to "I'm superhuman." But does that mean they derive from/are related to the character's primary special effect or powers set? Thunderbolt (CKC 112) has 25 STR, for example -- but does that really have any direct connection to Electricity Powers? I think it's more an "I'm superhuman" sort of thing, or at best tenuously related to the Electricity Powers.

 

The real issue here is the game balance implications. If a character has one set of powers -- Electricity Powers, for instance -- and all of his heightened Characteristics are attributed to that special effect, then even at a +2 level the Variable Effects "all powers of one special effect simultaneously" could significantly unbalance the campaign. That's why we have to allow for things like the GM's discretion. You can't really have hard-and-fast rules for something like this and still preserve the flexibility of the system; you have to rely on the mature and responsible behavior of the player, and the reasonable discretion of the GM, to resolve any difficult situations.

Let's see...the nerve signals that trigger muscle contraction are electrical in nature...

Originally posted by Gary

In fairness to Dan, he has been severely provoked in this thread. I agree that Hero employees shouldn't get in spitting matches with customers, but meslessqr and Kristopher have been pushing and pushing over an issue that frankly, is extremely trivial.

 

When one side is making comments that the entire Hero editorial staff should be fired because one example in the book is wrong, there is a natural tendency for the other side to react and push back.

Go back and read my statement. I did NOT suggest that anyone should be fired. I was making a sarcastic comment about Simon's position.

Originally posted by Simon

So far we've established that the rule exists and has been stated clearly enough by Steve that even the likes of Melessqr and Kristopher have been forced to admit that it exists.

Liar.

Originally posted by Simon

Still arguing...amazing...

 

The original publication of FREd assumed that these rules were already known and did not need to be elaborated on. When it became clear that this was not the case, Steve answered the questions regarding these rules in the rules forum.

 

When it became clear that a significant number of people were operating with false assumptions of what the rules regarding fractional SPD were, Steve put the clarified rules in the FAQ, where they remain to this day.

 

The FAQ is every bit as "official" as the rulebook.

 

As has been stated by others in this thread, there are many other RPG systems (in fact, to my knowledge _all_ systems) that follow this same procedure: elaboration and clarification of their rules in an online FAQ. DnD, which has been through MANY versions and revisions and has, in fact, been around longer than HERO has their own online FAQ in which they do pretty much the exact same thing.

Are you sure you want to use D&D as an example of how to do things?

This whole "that's how it was always supposed to be done" claim reminds me of when Justin Achilli had just taken over the Vampire product line at White Wolf, and changed the way that experience was spent, and tried to claim that "it was always supposed to be done the way I like it."

As for the "griping" and "work-around" issues, well, the wordarounds are inelegant kludges, and I happen to disagree with the actual ruling (_regardless_ of who made it), AND with what's being presented to back it up.

And I'm still waiting to find out why the character examples in the back of FRED sell off fractional SPD. If it's clear and unambigous, and it's "always been illegal to sell off fractional SPD," who exactly made the aggregious error of doing so in FRED, and why wasn't it immediately caught by the rest of the staff? Hell, the way Simon makes it sound, it's so clear and simple and consistant with the past that the person responsible should be fired for gross incompetence, along with all the editors.

Originally posted by Simon

Ahh...I get it: make stuff up when you're wrong.

 

There is nothing in FREd which advocates (or suggests in any way) selling off partial SPD.

There's nothing in FRED which advocates in either direction. It's entirely vague.

The Characteristics as Powers section (page 92 of FREd) contains examples for "Super Steroid Pills" (STR and +1 SPD), "Presence Defense" (PRE), "Spell of Righteous Strength" (STR, and CON), a purchase of +35 STR with Modifiers, a purchase of 100 STR with Limitations which do not affect the Figured Characteristics, and a purchase of STR with OIHID.

 

The only mention made of selling off SPD is the following:

For example, if the character's DEX was purchased with a -1 Limitation, then any points gained by selling back the character's SPD would have to be subject to the same Limitation -- selling back one points of SPD would yield 10/(1+1)=5 points.

 

That in no way contradicts anything that has been said. The SPD that is being sold back is a full point of SPD, not "fractional SPD" which cannot be sold back and is never suggested as being possible to sell back.

 

Because this was unclear to some, a FAQ entry was made which very clearly states that it is not legal.

The example, again, isn't anything like conclusive. It only states that SPD can be sold back. It NEVER says anything about fractional SPD, one way or the other.

There's nothing in FRED, or in 4th IIRC, to base your position on.

As for the sample characters in the back of FRED, well, who wrote those up? Because whoever wrote them up certainly seemed to think that fractional SPD could be sold back.