Lezentauw

Re: VPPs and Aid, a problem? Though my previous answers do not actually answer your questions. Let me see if I can give a couple of different other ideas. You can have a house rule that states that a person can only be affected by the highest aid. It does not matter if 30 mages cast str aid on a warrior, he is still only going to be affected by the single strongest version. Some people use NCM to limit aid from getting out of hand. Example 1; Str NCM is 20, every 10 pts there after that cost doubles. So Str 21-30, costs 2x; Str 31-40 costs 4x; and so on. Example 2; Str NCM is 20, the next 10 pts cost double, and a character cannot exceed NCM by more than 10. Using example 1, an aid worth +40 str to a warrior with a 20 STR already, would end up with a STR of 35. That is +3 DC, instead of +8 DC, Using example 2, an aid worth +40 str to a warrior with a 20 STR already, would only end up with a STR of 30. No matter how many points is used, his str is maxed out.

Re: VPPs and Aid, a problem? I guess, the OP is saying that in his opinion, this is reducing the challenges that he is setting up. The issue is, that with one person at 24d6, they are bypassing the defenses. Just to keep it simple, say for 12 DC only 4 DC gets past defenses. So 3 people attacking and hitting would do 12 DC. But one person super buffed would do 16 DC. Of course the 3 attackers would have to hit to do that much damage. Where as they are buffing the tank so he is certainly guaranteed to hit. Perhaps putting them up against a steel golem. Automaton rules and above normal defenses would be a good counter. A 30-40' tall Giant with thick armor on as well, have him using a hammer that can be used to target an area, because it is so big. All the while the tank is only able to hit is feet or legs with his sword, that is when he gets inside the giants reach Or you could put them up against a non-corporeal opponent. The tank's sword would be useless at that point, and he would become a liability in that fight. I don't really play High Fantasy anymore, but those are some ideas you can use, and yet allow the PCs to play their gimmick...

Re: Spell Multipliers in 6e? I prefer Spell Familiarities. I believe that the cost for learning to cast the spell should be the same as learning how to wield a weapon. Once you set the costs for spells as a Spell Familiarity, you need to look at other costs, to help balance everything out. I require a caster to purchase a talent at creation to be able to cast spells. This has to be done at creation, as it defines whether or not a character is born with the ability to cast spells. I use different skill rolls for the different sources of magic. I do this to represent that not all mages can cast from all sources of magic, and even if they could, they are not equally as good with each source of magic. A caster then has to pay points for the different schools to cast the spells and then they still have to pay points for OCV to hit with those spells. I require all spells to be built the same. I use the alternate rule in the APG for skill rolls, to show that a better skilled mage can increase the potential of the spell. Since a person only pays 1 pt to learn a spell, disadvantages could become ignored if you allowed them to in this system. What I do to handle that, if a disadvantage is required for the special affect, it still has to be built into it. The other disadvantages, like gestures, incantations and extra time can be used to increase the caster ability to cast the spell. Right now I have the talents set up so a caster is required to have certain crutches, if he is not that strong of a mage. The more powerful the caster, the less number of crutches is needed. If a caster tries to cast a spell without a crutch, he gets a penalty. This is a bit thinking out of the box, but it does seem to work for me... So while the spells are cheap, in this system, there are other factors that increase the costs. I have not tried this with High Fantasy, nor with the amount of points for High Fantasy. So I could not say how it would work.

Re: Anyone running any online games? I have something that just came up. I am not sure if I will make it back home for the start of the session. I should be there by break time though...

Re: 6th edition Min Str I agree with the above, and perhaps to reflect that you need to add in OCV or Range skill levels to reflect that. Another factor, that you can do, has to do with the Set maneuver. Aiming with a drawn bow should require full end until the arrow is shot. A crossbow, only the other hand only spends full end to load it. That would be a pretty big advantage, if you have make use of the Set maneuver between the two... I agree with handling swords this way. By itself, the sword is no better than an ax, perhaps even a little inferior in certain ways (damage). But, once you get trained properly, aka MAs, the sword starts to become superior... Besides if you give swords a +1 ocv, and the Axes +1 dc, IMO that makes them balanced...

Re: 6th edition Min Str Well, I am sure I read somewhere else on these boards, that people like you do not agree with how axes now seem a better than swords. As has been stated though, if you don't like what was presented then change it. HERO is a toolkit after all, nothing says you have to follow it verbatim. Here is what I like for weapons in my campaign. I actually want each weapon type to have an advantage over other weapons. Axes do more damage due to a design that utilizes momentum. Swords are better at parrying, and get an OCV bonus for parrying. Spears are capable of setting for charge and have a better reach. Flails are better at ignoring shields Bashing weapons get a +1 Stun Multiplier. Piercing weapons get some form of armor piercing If you give each weapon their own unique advantage, IMO it can add flavor to the different weapon choices...

Re: Anyone running any online games? Hope you get feeling better

Re: Anyone running any online games? I have no issue with an observer. I am also fine with the change to the body stat...

Re: Anyone running any online games? I am fine with the changes. The healing change should actually help out my concept of his healing spell. It is more of a slow progress over time, rather than a big heal...

Re: Anyone running any online games? Ok here is the newest version of Geoffrey.

Re: Anyone running any online games? Sorry the wife, gave me some errands to do. I have add a couple of things, then I will add him for you

Re: Anyone running any online games? Here is Geoffrey

Re: Anyone running any online games? I have the basic character & concept done for Geoffrey Ailemer done. I think I have about 60 points left, but I have yet to purchase anything for his actual spellcasting yet. I was hoping that you would have a sample caster up, so I could kinda see how you want things built... Geoffrey is in the islands as he took to the seas, after the inquisition burned his mother for being a witch. Needless to say, he is not very rational when known members of the Inquisition is around... This is a preliminary concept

Re: Anyone running any online games? I really don't own the 7th Sea, so I do not know much about the setting. The general premise, that I am getting, is that this is a variation of Pirates of the Caribbean movies. While I may not own any of the referred campaign material, I do have to say that I like the concept... Right now I am toying with the idea of playing a male wicken, aka a warlock. I am not sure if you actually have witches in this campaign, but since you were stating that you were kinda trying to keep it similar to our history, I thought that there may be a chance. I am also on the assumption that the inquisition also has a part in the campaign. Let me know how off base I am or if I am good to continue along these lines...

Re: Anyone running any online games? I was able to get Maptools installed on this computer, so I would be interested as well...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear Sorry Tesuji, but all I see when I read your post is irony. You use an example that really can be used to explain of how town wear was demonstrated in Die Hard. Did McClain have a M4? Nope. Did McClain have an Assault Shotgun? Nope. Did McClain have his bullet proof vest on? Nope. What did he have, IIRC a 9mm with a couple of clips. To most gun enthusiast, they call a 9mm a Mickey Mouse due to its lack of stopping power. He did not even have a .40 or a .45... Sounds to me like he had is town gear on... Then to really pull his fangs, the 'gm' pulled his backup from him. So that takes away any chance he has to outnumber his opponent. The 'gm' took away the swat team, there goes his chance to out gun his opponent. So McClain was out gunned, and out manned. Ohh my the 'gm' must of been screwing him... Guess not, because he was able to use his wits and use his CVs to win the day... Not much different from a warrior who goes into a slum area of town without all of his battle gear. He is going to be out numbered, but at least he will not be out gunned like McClain was. He will have his wits, and most likely his greater strength and CVs. Will he be walking away a bloody mess like McClain, probably. But, guess what, he will be the one walking away... Thank you for giving us an example of how Town Wear was used in a movie about today's society, and yet the 'pc' could still rise to save the day...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear To go along with what Markdoc said. A friend and I noticed, that when you have a High Magic campaign, you usually always end up having to answer more questions than it solves. At least if you want the world to make some sort of logical sense. We noticed that with the High Magic worlds, that we started to answer those questions by logically escalating the other side to form the balance. But, it never quite worked out that simple. What ended up happening was an escalation war. When we finally said enough was enough, many of our original concepts were altered so much, that we no longer could recognize them. Some times our answers would remove things that we very much wanted to keep, like castles... I think you hit it on the head, when you stated that a "medieval society" cannot function the same as it did in our history when you start making major changes. The biggest change that is typically brought into a world is magic. The more magic is like technology, the more it is going to advance the society. Just like how every form of technology advances us today, the same can be said about a "medieval society".

Re: Anyone running any online games? I would be interested, but my main machine is down at the moment..

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear I am willing to bet, that the people that are actually for this idea have not seen any of the above in quite some time. Those that are against this idea, seem to all play High Magic campaigns... If everything you state above is true, would not the city already be prepared to handle such situations on their own? Otherwise, how would the city survive without the pcs being there to save the day all the time? So, if a city could handle all such situation on their own, would they not want to maintain the peace so the civilians can rest assured that they are safe? I know that in my campaign, it is kinda hard to raise the dead from a graveyard. Only one culture actually buries their dead, and they bury them upside down & chop off a foot so they can't walk again. Most of the cultures burn the dead or cast them to the sea. Either way a Necromancer is going to find it hard to raise a mass army, unless he happens to find a nice war with lots of fresh bodies...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear I agree with Curufea... Besides, if the pc does not have his armor, then more times than not his opponents will not either... What might of been a cake walk before, would actually become a challenge...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear I remember playing D&D, and as long as the question Why was not asked, things were good. But, once you started to ask questions, things started to break down for us. If mages in an adventuring group rarely made a magical item, then who would make all of those magical items? If you could make a +3 just as easy as a +1 item, why make that +1 item? Why would court mages not come up forms of defense for their liege lord? Why would not a town be warded from fires? Why would there not be more utility form of magic and magic items? Ever see a couple dozen mages & a magical creature go off on a town? Not a pretty sight. If magic can destroy a castle so easily, then why where they built? Either you have to amp up the magic, and start providing counter forms of magic. Or, you have to bring the level of magic down. More is not necessarily better, especially when it seems to cause more questions to be asked. It is far easier to bring the level of magic down, which then brings the game closer to our history, and therefore is easier to understand...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear Just because D&D did not do things to address the balance of offensive magic & defensive magic does not mean that every other setting is limited to that predestined route. With some forethought, I am sure that you can come up with ways to suppress magic, or at least increase detection of magic. Wards against fire, any type of fire, would be something highly desired in a town. After all, fire was one of the most feared things to a town... With every advancement, there is a potential for a counter. You get a new undetectable poison, and someone will sooner or later someone will come up with a way to detect it or the anti-toxin. You come up with a new radar guided missile, and someone will come up with a way to shoot that missile down before it gets to its target. Magic is no different. If mages really do throw fireballs around as much as you propose, well there will be magic to deter such things from happening. Once the magic plane is evened again, then you are back to limiting swords. As has been stated numerous times, the guards of a town are going to what they can to keep the people safe as they can. IF they don't, then they could pay for it with their life. Even if you think it is not logical, they would still rather only deal with magic rather than a city full of invaders with swords & magic. Besides if magic is so common, then would not mages also be a part of the guard? Where these ideas really come to play, is in a campaign where magic is not so prevalent. Low Magic campaigns or Sword & Sorcery campaigns both can really benefit from these ideas. Can you say 5 minutes to summon the entity to cast the desired spell anyone? And, no the idea does not fly in the face of the genre, just some peoples interpretation of the genre... After all low magic and sword & sorcery are very much a part of the genre... Instead, by being so against this idea, I interpret what you are saying that since the guards think that because they cannot stop magic, that they should also be inept and just let any group of strangers into town fully armed. After all since they can't stop magic, they might as well just let this group of armed assassins in...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear Well said Markdoc...

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear Now that everyone has displayed their paranoia using today's mentality, let's try to get back to the OP's original idea. If you are in a civilized town, I think that what you are presenting is more than reasonable. In our history, only the gentry and the guards were allowed to bear arms inside of a civilized area. Though, that was mostly to keep the peasantry from uprising, it also did help with maintaining the peace. Even then, they did not go around in chain or plate mail except during time of war... If the players are truly in a civilized area, perhaps they will not even be allowed to bear arms out of town. The local patrols maintain the roads, and there would be no need for common folk to bear arms in such areas. In such areas, if the pcs wanted their gear with them, they would have to have some way to keep it stored, or just go without. If the players are in an area where it is viewed to be acceptable for their safety to bear arms outside of town, but not in, you can do a couple of things. If they have a chest to store their gear in, prior to getting to town, they can keep their gear and take it and store it where they are staying. If they don't have a chest, they can leave it with the guards, and expect the gear to be there when they leave. You could have a guard escort them to an inn, for a minor fee as the guard has to leave his post, and they can then leave the gear there. They could allow it where the guards will take their to gear to the where they are staying at, once they are informed of the location. This would happen when after a guard is no longer on duty, and for a tip. If the players chose to keep the gear in their room, they should be pretty sure that nothing will happen to it. You can emphasize that this time period, is not like it is today. If they are at an inn, the inn keeper would greatly fear any negative reputation that he let one of his guests get robbed. So inns would be guarded, just for their own reputation. During our medieval age, locks did exist, but they were not that good. The most important thing that deterred a thief was the repercussion he would suffer if he got caught, most likely a death sentence. As you move to the areas that are more untamed, then the laws should be more lax, as the travelers would be allowed to protect themselves. These are the areas that many people naturally assume every town to be like. In these towns, while the player may not be allowed to bear the heavy armors and heavy weapons, they may be allowed to bear smaller weapons. In some towns, that could be considered like the wild west, they could be allowed to wear light armors. It really depends on what you want to allow in those semi-dangerous areas. And, even though the town is more lax, it does not mean that thievery is going to be any more prevalent... A thief would still be risking that death sentence, though this time it they may not make it to trial... When it comes down to thievery, a thief is not going to be stupid about it. If you do incorporate these rules, you also get some added benefits from them. A thief, much like today, is not going to take something that is big and bulky, much less something that is obvious he has no right to bear. The thief has to be able to fence his goods. While the artisans during this time period would do what it took to get ahead, they were still for the most part honest people. They would not buy a sword from a commoner, nor a suit of armor, especially if that person is a local. If the thief cannot fence the stolen goods, then they do no good to him. The thief, also would want to have a way to get away from the scene unnoticed. In most cases, that would mean that he would be after smaller items; money and jewelry come easiest to mind. Fancy clothing, if the thief has enough time to change, would be a very valuable thing during this time period.

Re: battle Wear vs. Town Wear You can take an item away from the players, and give them the opportunity to get it back... Back when I did run D&D, I treated weaponsmiths and armorsmiths as artisans. That means that a specific artisan is not going to be able to make two 'longswords' identical, nor would he want to. This in turn means that there are going to be differences between each 'longsword'. So, a player will have a pretty good chance to recognizing 'his' 'longsword' when he spots it. This of course also had the added bonus of detracting the group rogue from playing switch-a-roo with every flipping item in the game... It is kinda hard for a rogue to explain why his longsword went from matte black, to being highly polished and adorned with runes... Of course said rogue does not need to explain anything, when another group member sticks him in the gut, for denying the fact that he was holding out on them, with his own 'old' sword...