Lezentauw

Re: Coming from D&D-question about power level of starting hero KS has done some real good work. Especially if you like High Fantasy. Even if you prefer lower scaled versions of Fantasy, his sight has a lot of good things in it. He has put a lot of work into doing D&D conversions, and as a person asking for comparisons, I would highly recommend checking his site out...

Re: Coming from D&D-question about power level of starting hero It is very understandable for the comparison that you asked for, as you understand D&D. HERO is new to you, so you were looking for a comparison to something that you and your group knows. I agree with a previous poster that a Standard Normal is the 0 level character. The Skilled Normal is the 1st level character. While the Competent Normal is about 3rd or 4th level or so. But it really depends on what you want for your game. Your characters do not necessarily need to start at an interpitated level 1. If you want your characters to have better stats, then it is perfectly acceptable to start them out as Competent Normals. This will give the players the comfortability range to get the stats that they want, and all of the skills that you will want them to have.

Re: Crippling VPPs I am not that fond of VPPs, especially cosmic VPPs. The reason that I do not like cosmic VPPs, is that it always seems like a character with the VPP constantly steps on someone else's schtick. What is the need to have teammates, if you can do everything by yourself anyways? The rest of the team is then left feeling like extra baggage. To me if a VPP allows for a character to step on another character schtick then the answer is no. If you want to use a VPP as a solo character, I "may" consider it. But like others that have posted, all of the powers must be predefined. The VPPs that you must define what is in them prior to gameplay, I am a bit more tolerable with. Like a gadget pool, that can only be re-arranged at the base as an example. I also don't like the idea that a character that pays full cost for all of his abilities is suppose to only have one AVLD or NND attack at most. But, a character with a VPP left unchecked can keep changing his, till he hits paydirt.

Re: Starting from 8's in Primary Characteristics I have seen it done, or at least attempted. There was some gripes from the players about losing points over the situation as well. I think that the players never really understood the desire for such a rule, and only saw a decrease in allotted points. I even helped to create a Hero Designer Template, so that characters could be built correctly in HD. The only drawback to doing this, is that you need to also look at all of the age categories and adjust them as well. So it is not just as easy as making one decision.

Re: Fourth Age Hero Thanks for the explanation. I obviously read into what you posted, and made some bad assumptions based upon not having all the information. Your idea is definately more plausable then when I first read it!

Re: Fourth Age Hero

Re: hit location That is not really the impression that I got out of LotR. I got the impression that they would fight the battles that they needed to fight, and not take the uneccessary risks when they could afford not to. This to me, shows that now matter how good the main characters are, that combat involves certain risks. Risks that even they can fall victom to, if they allowed themselves to engage every opponent that they ran into. And, in that it makes it a more realistic depiction IMHO... I would rather see something like that, than "Look another group of Orcs, let's squash them!" Two days later one little group of 'adventurers' wipes out a whole Orc tribe or some other nonsense like that... ::shudders at the rememberance of old D&D games that did just that::

Re: Ye Ole Wheel of Time MAGIC SYSTEM As a side note remember that it took a group of Aes Sedai to still someone. That would be using ritual magic, which would be more powerful than what any individual could master...

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming Whether you are an experienced GM or not, if a GM does it correctly, you do not know you are being led by strings. You may have experiences where it is obvious, but it is possible to be lead and it not be obvious. An experienced GM knows that you will most likely want to pursue a certain avenue, and will set things up so they can do that. By them setting up what player's characters are most likely going to want to do, they will be scripting the events for the night. I think that you are being argumentive over a bad experience. Not every GM is the same. And at some point some scripting is necessary. If there is not some form of scripting done, then you would have a very boring story. GM: 'So what do you guys want to do tonight?' Players looking at the GM with a blank stare: 'You mean you did not prepare anything for us to do? Great another haphazard game again...' Scripting allows for a GM to know things about the area and plan for possible actions that the players will take. A GM wants to set up a certain string of events. So he comes up with a couple of hooks to get the pcs to bite on his string. While not neccessary written in this manner, but the GM then goes about setting up a flowchart: If the pcs does this, then this happens. If they do not do that, then this happens. If a GM fleshes this part out enough, there is no detecting the scripting. Because they have already thought of contingency plans in advance to get the pcs involved.

Re: Scripting encounters I am not sure if you are use the same definition of scripting as Keith Curtis or HoutonGm is. I think that you are use the definition that is closer to cut screens on video games. Where you just sit back and watch what is being shown to you. I tend to think that every GM scripts to some extent or another. Unless of course you are spending a thousand hours to detail every spec of your world for each gaming night, just so your characters can do what they want when they want.... These guys are talking about writing up a set of events that will in all likelyhood take place. Just like you, they know their players, and they can plan for the most plausable actions of their players. In the case of Houston's he put his players into an situation that they did not have many choices. That helped him fulfull the story as he intended. I am sure that he did not have the dialogue all laid out, he just had 20 or so prepared lines ready. As things played out, so did he. I am not sure why you are so against scripting, but I loved Houston's "Friendly Ogre" write-up. I think it would of been even more enjoyable role-playing though it! For scripting to work the players need to be able to trust the GM. They also need to have the understanding that there may be times that the only victory that they will achieve, will be to live another day to strike back. 'Defeat' sometimes can be very profitable for a campaigns success. Then your character would have even more reasons to take a certain person down. As an example, that may require some scripting. Perhaps your character needed to lose just so you looked into who that person was working for. If you just killed him, you would of never found that out. Then the arch-villian gets to complete his plans without you having a chance to stop him.

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming I use to play with a group that play this exact way. Once characters starting dying, I got blamed for putting them into a situation that they could not get out of. When I mentioned that they could of retreated, I got scoffed at. That happened to be the last fantasy game that I GM'd for that group...

Re: Things I'd like to see more of in fantasy gaming I will agree with most of the other posters that I would not be running this Emperor in the same light that your GM is... Even if your character has the backing of 75% of the nobility, she will have some nobles gunning for you. These will be nobles that will soon be out of favor when the new Emporer steps in. I would imagine that some of them, that are in favor with the Demon worshiping Emporer are not very nice themselves. The sort that could come up with some very cruel ways to get back at your character for ruining their lives.

Re: Enterprise vs. Enterprise Well technically that is two wishes. The first wish would be to restore the time continium. The second wish would be for Q to not meddle in the universe. When he had Picard captured, and they were going through Picard's question, Picard worded in a similiar fashion as your wish. Q counted it as two questions...

Re: Exotic Methods for Executions? Since we are using methods posted in books, you could follow in the steps of Steven King. Tie a person in a chair with a rope placed horizontally about 2 feet above his head. Then tie the tails of two cats together, and then place the tied section of the tails at the rope. The two cats will dangle and claw each other, and anything that gets in between apart, to get down.

Re: Exotic Methods for Executions? Yeah I remembered something about an ant hill, but I was not sure if they smoked it or not. Hence the reason I did not post it.

Re: Exotic Methods for Executions? One of the more gruesome, was an American Indian method. I think it was the Souix the implemented this one. I know that it was used in the west where it gets hot during the day... They would lay a person on the ground and bind each limb with a leather cord to a stake as far apart as they could. So far nothing to exotic. Then they would take another leather cord and soak it in water, double it up and insert an arrowhead into the middle. They then tied that to the persons head like a sweatband, only difference is that the tip of the arrowhead was set right in the middle of the forehead. The rest was up to the sun to dehidrate and shrink the leather cord, which would slowly pull the arrowhead into the person skull...

Re: Two-Weapon Fighting Another option, would be to let a person that purchased TWF to buy +3 DCV (Only vs 1st Hand attack, when not attacking with both weapons.) This would give the character that paid the extra cost for TWF more options in combat. He could then attack twice, attack & have a limited block, or be very deffensive when blocking... Then while yes this is still more expensive, the cost effect is balanced by being able to have more options available in combat.

Re: Adapting D&D Worlds I don't have much that I would call done in a finished format. I have made some progress with areas that Kalamar did not address, notably the non-humans. I have also made certain changes so that things better fit my vision of the world, but there are still quite a few things that are very Kalamar. With that being said, I have to be carefull with the information that I release in a public format.

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer The second paragraph is correct as I understand it. Everything in real space provides a shadow in hyperspace. If a ship was to travel through that shadow, a collision would occur. It has been described that ships have created blockades to force ships out of hyperspace. All ships in Star Wars have sensors that detect for these shadows, and when they encounter one, they drop the ship out of hyperspace.

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer I agree 100% with the above. While I am more of a Star Wars fan, since it is presented in a more consistent manner, I believe that ANY Enterprise ship would win soley because they are the good guys. I believe that a writer will set things up that puts the advantage to the Enterprise. For this argument, some assumptions have to be made. The problem is that neither side ever agrees upon the assumptions. The Enterprise has been stated to be able to destroy a world. Though I don't think that it could destroy a world the way the Death Star does. Nothing is stated that an ISD cannot do the same thing. But to be fair, since it is not stated, it should be assumed that they cannot. To use this as a basis in an argument, it has to be assumed that both worlds are figured to take the same amount of firepower to destroy. This is not neccessarily a given basis. Next is the argument about both modes of FTL travel. Star Trek moves at Warp speek, and Star Wars moves at hyperspeed. As far as I understand, Star Trek ships just move faster than the speed of light, while Star Wars shift into a different dimension. While it is stated that Star Wars ships cannot fight in hyperspace, or detect another ship in hyperspace for that matter. Nothing is stated that they cannot detect a ship moving FTL in real space, like the Enterprise does. Nor is there anything stated that the Enterprise can detect ships in hyperspace either. IMO, this engagement would have to at least start in normal space at sublight speeds. The next factor is the shields. Would the ISD deflector shields work the same as Star Trek shields to nullify the transporters? It is another assumption that would need to be made, for or against. The next argument that I can think of, is the technology. Both are superior in their own way. If I remember correctly, ships in the Star Wars universe are capable of traversing half the Galaxy in under a week. I don't remember any ship in the Star Trek universe capable of going that fast. The Enterprise has replicators & transporters. As far as firepower goes, every source that I have seen, shows the ISD has more. It is possible that this could be true, as there really is no true way to measure firepower between two ships in different universes. An ISD does not have to power weapons, like ships do in Star Trek. Each weapon works independently and not in an Array like Star Trek. Star Trek has the continious phasers and photon torpedoes. Maneuverability is in the hands of the Enterprise, and that is not counting the whole fighting at Warp discussion. The Enterprise can fight behind itself, while the ISD cannot. The ISD would need its fighters to keep the Enterprise out of its aft. Once all the assumptions are made, then the writer has to come up with how the engagement is to take place. The Enterprise is an Explorer ship, and would be seeking first contact. The ISD is a military ship, and would be seeking to enforce the laws of the Empire.

Re: Five magics You could always follow the set up of Magic the Gathering. Keith Curtis did a magic system that used them.

Re: Movies Ummm, they did. Troy, King Arthur, and Alexander. All movies made to suck in the LotR fans, though not entirely fantasy movies, still pretty much in the same genre.

Re: Movies 13th Warrior, Ladyhawk & Excalibur are some of my favorites. IMO the movies that I listed are on the low side for magic. DnD really struggles with anything but high magic campaigns. A campaign made entirely of warriors/rogues would be a hard sell to a DnD group. While it is possible to create different characters from the same class in DnD, it is by far easier in Hero...