Jump to content

WistfulD

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WistfulD

  1. 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
  2. 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.
  3. 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).
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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, desolid
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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 fl
  11. 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
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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...
  15. 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.
  16. I have never gotten the hang of NND. A lot of the superhero write-ups (say the three Villians books) have NNDs that violate the rules as I understand them. For instance, I believe (I will have to check when I get home) there is a KA attack in one that is NND: Power Defense (+1). AVAD power defense for a killing attack is +1/2. NND in this instance is a hindrance (any amount of Power Defense eliminates the attack, so it should be +0 instead. Very confusing. To the OP's question. I would normally say that +0 (or -1/2 as NND) would be fine. However, there are a few things to think about: 1)
  17. No, it's only removing the limitations of something being a thing. The Focus limitations can be broken down into a number of factors: 1. Foci can be seen (obviously or inobviously). The hammer space/bad of holding takes this away, but itself might be seen. 2. Foci can be taken away (in combat if accessible, if the enemy has you unconcious or something if inaccessible). The hammer space/bad of holding takes this away, but itself might be able to be taken away. 3. Foci can be broken (usually). The hammer space/bad of holding removes this while the item is in it, but not when used. 4. Foci re
  18. That is very very deliberate and part of the game's design philosophy. The rules for hero are designed to emulate effects, with the the how and why being given over to descriptive text. Likewise, one does not ask where your Punisher knockoff gets the money to buy his guns, only that he paid the cp cost for them (heroic campaigns have a different relationship between characters and equipment). Likewise, vehicles have bodies, armor, and speed and accelleration stats, but they do not have weight or cargo capacity stats. It is entirely possible to create a point-buy game system that uses a rol
  19. That's significantly more bounded than the one in the fantasy guide. Neat! I also like Christopher's discovery that Naked Buyoff (of the focus limitation) is in fact a thing. I think that's pretty much evidence that there's ways to do this within the rules. :-)
  20. Five Posts, two posts, the nearly identical phrasing ("it might surprise you just how much weaker women are than men," "It is surprising just how much stronger men are in upper body strength than women"). It's possible that it isn't sock puppet trolling, but I don't think anyone would apologize for assuming that it is.
  21. The comedy movie review podcast How Did This Get Made (http://www.earwolf.com/show/how-did-this-get-made/) did a wonderful show about this movie.
  22. That, in the end, is really the question. We've been told that each +1 DC is a doubling. But does that hold up in 1) the builds provided, 2) the game as we play it, and 3) intrinsically does that work within the game as it is structured?
  23. Don't play into his hands. Seriously, his second post on the site was dedicated to making a undeniably provocative statement about out-of-game controversial issues. You know the playbook for this. Enjoy your short time here, HT.
  24. That is the instance I am talking about, and wanted to know what people would do. XD is an option.
  25. 1) that works for innate abilities, but not for items. How do we give that to items? 2) your point, however, is taken. If this hammerspace itself can't be taken away, than it doesn't make things inobvious, it takes away the focus limitation. Well, we can build it for an unremovable hammerspace, and for a bag of holding.
×
×
  • Create New...