WistfulD

Hi. I'm about to play in a low-magic setting using Fantasy Hero/ Hero 6e, and am looking for some ideas of what spells a wilderness-oriented 'hedge mage' might have (and suggestions on how to construct each spell). The idea is that the guy is a wilderness expert -- tracker, survivalist, etc., but he supplements his knowledge with various skills of 'the old ways.' This allows him to do things like hide the smoke of a fire, dry out wet clothes, set night time alarms, and... I'm not sure what else. More stuff in the vein. Nothing flashy, quick, or combat related. Anyone have any thoughts? Anyone done anything like this before? Thanks in advance!

I would say that this is more of a critique of Usable by Others (or unlimited option VPPs) than anything else. Drain would in fact be a better than suppress, although LS likely is more appropriate. But again, it all depends on how poisons are built in your game.

Okay, well, you know your campaign, so I assume you will have some characters powerful enough to endure the suppress and get out. Be real careful with "the only way to get out of this is ____." powers, as they often just become X points that each player now has to spend during character creation to have a defense against (with a suppression resistant teleport, in this instance).

Yes, but mental illnesses are based on patterns, and he didn't repeat that action. So he's more of a guy who stole something once, rather than a kleptomaniac. Either way, it feeds from a more generalized mental complication: an overall attempt to gain power, prestige, symbols of self aggrandizement, etc., but without the efforts or responsibilities (or competence) required to do so. During the Col. Blake years, he's basically Starscream.

So turn someone desolidified, then entangle them with an desoli-effecting entangle that only they can break out of with their strength, but because the entangle is solid (even though it can affect desolid), and they are not, they need ARW(+2) on their STR? Not bad rule-abuse-fu. Pretty much just highlights the validity of the "!" system, though.

It specifically says you cannot transform someone into a dead someone. Anyways, Christopher's complaint effectively was that you applied a "only available to X" and "immune to X" modifier on something. To which your response should be, "Duh, that's exactly what I said I just did, didn't you see the reference to Big Stop Sign?" The rules disallow making things one's opponent can't defend against or escape, but if you add some other escape or defense avenue to it, it could be doable. In the case of entangle, there are plenty of ways to escape other than a damage effect (teleport, desolidification, contortionist), so the only real question is if these are reasonable in your campaign (or cases where you exclude these escapes as well).

Agreed. 5 points for paranoia (half the time he's not paranoid when he should be), 5 for gullible, and maybe 5 for inobservant to real situations that conflict with his internal psychosis.

Per the rules, no. This is annoying in that it is one of those "roll a successful hit, and you succeed" effects that all should get an "!" However, there are so many powers and skills which counteract throws, that I guess they decided that any genre of game would have a defense available.

I think we've throughly made it socially impossible for the OP to come back (although with nearly 5000 posts, he must have been around long enough to not take it personally). I would love to know what he was thinking or what it was for. Given the number of ways of getting out of a tangle other than damaging it, I can see how eliminating the "break it" option wouldn't automatically be broken, but I have no idea what effect one would be trying to emulate.

Realistically, he has a minor level of cowardice and paranoia, but mostly a penalty in social and observational skills. The gullibility and mindlessly patriotic bits really are part of a more general solipsism--he pays attention to a given situation and reacts (verbally and decisionwise) based on a very self interested interpretation. He thinks the Korean's puting pots in the ground are planting bombs because he happens to be focused on paranoia that week. Note, of course, that he's only the "bad guy" in that situation because he was wrong. He is very much a cartoon bad guy--having whatever flaw the writers needed that week. I wouldn't give him many penalty points except poor social skills, and probably 10 points total for the cowardice and paranoia. Most of his "flaws" aren't game book complications. He's really unlikable, but it really isn't a penalty to him to be a relatively selfish, self-interested, belittling-to-others, underhanded ferret-face, except that people react negatively to him. Frank, to me, is very much like his opposite--Sydney. He's not really a character, so much as a plot device. That's why I found Charles Emerson Winchester III an much more relatable and realistic foil, even though I preferred the earlier seasons of the show.

You need as much flight as required to counteract whatever wind you might end up going against. That's about it. As for being knocked out, I've never heard anyone suggest that you need more flight speed than the speed you are falling to break a fall. It might take longer (hope you don't wake up 20 ft. from the ground), but that's about it. Of course, if you have some magic "standing on air" thing going on, why not make it inherent? I totally want to see a superhero unconscious, lying on an invisible ledge, with his non-flying buddies going, "okay, how do we get up there to splash him with cold water?"

Which makes your "NO" comment all the more confusing, since that's exactly what I said. Assuming that the advantage were 1, it would take 2 purchased DCs to make an effective DC for the NND attack, because you have to divide it by 1+total advantage. Whether +1 is the intended advantage is not established, although Steve's ruling suggests that it is +0.

Nope. In 6E, the DCs have to be divided by the Advantage level of combat significant advantages such as AVAD:NND. So in 6E, assuming that the advantage for NND in the martial art strike is +1, the DCs for martial arts DCs or CSLs would be divided by 1+1=2. So 4 CSLs per increased DC.

Maybe you could keep it at 2D6, but declare it to be just like HKA 2D6, AVAD (NND; +1). Thus it takes 2 DCs to improve by 1 effective DC, however, the actual stun taken is multiplied by a stun modifier roll (or location, if you use hit location rolls). Now that I write this, that actually might be too powerful. Hmmm...

Correct. I meant vehicle weight and volume. My comparison game, GURPS 3e, has a vehicle system where you define the vehicle mass and volume, and calculate performance statistics based on the power (in watts, not END) of the motive drivetrain (which you purchase with dollars or the equivalent) to determine accelleration and speed. It is a very good, if exhaustive system, but the complete opposite design philosophy than Hero, where you as, "what are its performance metrics?" and pay for those, and let how it gets them be flavor text.