WistfulD

Traveller has antigrav so the cost of lifting that mass out of a gravity well isn't very expensive. For Harder SciFi I would agree with you

That was pretty much the point I just made, yes.

Probably range modifiers are sufficient for hexes on the ground and 3 for hexes in the air (i.e. aiming at an area of nothing) for many games.  The problem is for superheroic, it makes area effect games a bit too attractive.

I think that we're all in agreement that the decision is based on how effective area-of-effect attacks are. Given that the game started as a superheroic combat simulator and not a reality emulator, that's probably appropriate. 

I think what he's saying is that they misjudge how far they can leap. Usually when leaping from building to building, you are really leaping literally as far as you can (because you realistically aren't going to overshoot, and aiming for a specific hex is way out of most people's league). Thus people aren't missing against a DCV of 3 (or 0), they are failing their distance judging skills (not normally rolled) and attempting to make a 5 meter jump when they only have a jump of 4m.

Yeah, it's just that when I go to the trouble to build something, I like it to be as "universal" as possible, so I would build it as a Glamour, and then include a Potion of the tipsy giant/ bottle of Jack, as a alternate...

I'm fascinated by the idea that a glamour of drunkenness is a more universal conception of drunkenness than actual acohol for the drinking. Shine on you crazy diamond!

If I was building as a power...I would forgo the focus, and have some sort of "Fairy dust" or Glamour power, that then has CE as an attack...otherwise ..yeah looks just fine.

For a Creat Drunkenness glamour, sure. I was making the booze itself a-la equipment guide rules. Of course I forgot to ad an AVAD for not vs. Power Defense, but for a fairy dust, power defense works just fine.

The shift spirit power allowed you to removed someones spirit outside of their body or container and place it in another body or container. Defense was Power Defense with the advantage (Affects Spirits +1/2). NOT affects Desolid. In the old rules, Desolid and Spirits were different.

Astral being different from desolidified seems like unnecessary duplication and/or giving the rest of the PCs/NPCs one more avenue of weakness they need to all go get new defenses against.

What you seem to be asking to do is going to be expensive because what you want to do is powerful. This seems to be an ability with the advantages of desolidification, very fast movement, an offensive ability (remove someone's spirit from their body), and maybe also possession (can you then inhabit their bodies once you taken their spirit out of their?). If it was cheap in 3rd edition and never reprinted, maybe that says something.

Multiform and duplication is expensive, but you get a point break for leaving your inert body behind. Moving at the speed of thought can be teleportation, perhaps with "crosses interveining area" so you can't go through spirit-proofed walls.

Maybe you could get the teleport, transform (others into spirits and unihabited bodies), etc. as part of a power framework. The cost is offset by lower defense needs and thus lower stats in the multiform.

I guess we are trying to figure out what part of the activity needs to be rule-constructed? The shooting mid-move? Shooting while in the air? A really long jump that mimics short-term flight? Do you want to be doing any stopping mid air or anything?

IT doesn't sound like it needs much conversion at all. It's a plot resolution mechanic, right? Just switching "succeed by half" to something appropriate to the Hero Skill System (maybe succeed by 3? 4? 6?).

As to whether the GM has the character sheets or not, that's entirely up to the style of play, and whether you are crafting your adventure to the players. If the players know they are in a crime solving campaign, they'll likely have some skill in background skills for noir style professions.

 and so I don't feel it is correct

Emphasis mine.

There is no correct. There's no one looking over your shoulder. This isn't the Wizards of the Coast website in 2003 with people patting themselves on the back for how "RAW" they are. You've defined the constraints of the limitation you want to apply. Whether you give it the Limited Range limitation or the Limited Power (blablabla specific description; -1/4) is material only to yourself.

That looks like the final word. Build to the mass, or prominent dimension. That might be width in your campaign, especially if the dominant effect of the vehicle's size is (say) hanger space. Things like space on an aircraft carrier deck are measured by size category, not specifically wingspan.

Okay, so the basic rules seem relatively fine. The detachment from point cost certainly helped (people were rather upset at the idea of buying the ship's speed, plus the associated endurance for continuous powers, and then having to buy the same speed for the people manning the stick and guns as well). OCV/DCV is a sticking point. Am I correct that you're almost always at half DCV (because you're undoubtedly moving at non-combat speeds)? Are you also then at 0 OCV?

Even for relatively crunchy space opera like a Traveller I'd prefer the thruster plates, simply because fusion torches would really complicate planetary operations. It's nice to be able to land without destroying everything within a kilometer.

Realistically, all ships would use shuttles (since there's no reason to drag the interstellar drive and all that mass up and down out of gravity wells) that would have lifting bodies that could either dead-stick land or switch to atmosphere-moving engines for a low-torching landing. That isn't as much fun as flying an aluminum falcon around with a nice glowing blue patch on the back that makes the thing fly.

That's my opinion. It fits the concept better and is less open ended.

Bringing children along to be exposed to weekly threats to their existence is part and parcel of the post-TOS Trek.

What you say about their motivation for assimilating the human species sounds possible, but I would appreciate a reference to some official source which stated that. The only species I can recall a Borg stating they passed over as too unremarkable to add its distinctiveness to theirs, is the Kazon, as mentioned by Seven of Nine.

How insulting would that be? "Hi, we're in a series where species are just rubber-faced humans with one defining feature, yet you are deemed too boring to conquer."

Are we talking about a brain-in-a-can who has a combat body, and infiltration body, and a social body? ID so, use multiform. If you have a brain-in-can who changes bodies like you and I do outfits, do a power framework.

There's been at least one thread, probably several, on using variant Martial Arts rules to do dogfighting combat.

 

Chris.

Do you have any links for those? As I recall the search function is still down.

Intoxication is listed as -2 OCV/DCV in the environmental combat modifiers section. I think it is totally within the GM's right to penalize DEX and IN Skills as well, but I don't think I'd go as far as building a Drain.

Silly thought, but since Intoxication is listed as an environmental condition what about using Change Environment if we have to build it as a Power? Change Environment to Intoxicated resisted by CON roll.

Personally I'd prefer not building it as a Power at all and simply having some guidelines for determining whether or not you become intoxicated.

Well, you only consider it a power if the object "bottle of booze" is part of your equipment or gadget pool. Drinks your character drinks in the bar are simply effects that happen.

As to building a drain, the only reason the drain is a plus is that it adds a random effect per drink on top of the con roll, giving a wide variation in drunkenness for a group of characters leaving the bar, which is realistic.

Yes, I have also used it for Space Opera as well as Mecha campaigns, and the vehicles rules work very well in that context.

 

You really need to sit down with the Vehicles rules and think about how to approach them.  There's so much you can do with them.  A lot of people don't really think it out very much and thus they think vehicles in Hero are an afterthought.  They aren't.  It's really dependent upon what you put into making the vehicles that counts (Just like with characters).

 

The main thing is to balance out the Defense vs Damage ratios.  Don't forget to configure them so that they perform accordingly when you attack "squishies" as well, so you don't have characters routinely surviving a blast from a mounted plasma cannon.  This is a delicate balance that can easily be skewed, but it is achievable.

We are starting out the weakest weapons as doing much as heavy rifles and going from there (kinda like WWI fighters being equiped with lewis guns and WWII fighters using ~20mm machine guns. Our campaign is vaguely Guardians-of-the-Galaxy-ish, so if a tank character can stand up to a fighter's gun, that's fine.

I am unimpressed with the relationship between points an power for vehicles. With all the megascales adding +1-+2 to everything, OIF Bulky or immobile subtracting -1--2 to everything, the actual point cost seems to be not very related to utility. That, plus breaking their own rules (enhanced senses as a VPP much?) just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Therefore, we're going to be buying vehicles based on money and not points.

That said, I read the dogfight and intercept rules, and they do a very good job of translating what otherwise would not work at all well in the Heroes system.

They are already separate mechanisms.  Being drunk imposes negative Combat Value modifiers (the problem being there is no mechanic to determine when you become intoxicated).  Being an alcoholic uses the Dependency Complication to impose Incompetence which negatively affects Skill rolls if you don't drink.  Completely different, just like getting fall down drunk or being an alcoholic going through withdrawal are completely different.

Perhaps we should create a conceptual model* here of alcohol. If the Centaur entry is any indication, Alcohol looks something like this (and forgive me for forgetting official wording, I don't have a book in front of me):

Fifth of cheap booze

Drain Attributes 1D6 (10 base points)

4 Attributes at once (Int, Dex, OCV, DCV; +1 1/2)

Wears off -5 every hour, not every turn (+1 3/4)

Charges (17.1 "shots"; + 1/4)

(45 Active Points)

OAF (-1) add fragile if glass bottle

Requires a Roll (Make a CON check with each shot taken to suffer effects; -1/2)

Limitation: Life Support--Poison Immunity gives immunity to this; -0**

Limitation: Some people develop addiction-based dependency complication regarding this; -0**

Does that look right to people?

**Not really a limitation, just taking note of these.

*one where we don't have to argue over the specifics, but maybe agree on the core mechanics.

So that it requires being a separate mechanism? I only took Heroin Once, so...? A legal substance is still a substance that intoxicates, etc...

You don't see the difference in mechanism between intoxication and addiction?

Not sure I am able to see the difference..."I am no Alky! I just like to drink!( and cannot stop)" I think there has been several takes on how drugs etc "work" in Hero so it is not suprising to see several mechanisms floating around...

The difference I'm highlighting is the difference between being able to resist taking a drink and the ability of one's body to resist turning the act of consuming alcohol into being physically and mentally impared. I read the OP's description of centaurs ("-3 on CON Rolls to resist drunkenness") as the later, not the former.

I think the base concept is validly a (non- "-0") limitation that should be worth -1/4 to -1/2. The only question is whether it should be named Always On and follow the additional benefits and limitations that come with that. From the sense I get from most published material, they would write this as a Side Effect instead, but I think that is only semantics.

Well it sure seems like a good way to model the solid rocket boosters used on the Space Shuttle*. 

 

The values might need to be adjusted down a little for the synergy of the combination but I think it's a legit combo.

 

*Once ignited they always burned the same way every launch (like bottle rockets - no throttle control).  The Shuttle's main engines produced only a fraction of the thrust of the solid boosters but were critical because they allowed for throttle control to reach different orbits (I believe the Hubble and the International Space Station are at different altitude orbits)

Decidedly different. One of Neil Degrasse Tysons beefs with the movie Gravity.

 

Basing it on CON makes it sound like a physical dependency or addiction.

 

If they just have a hard time resisting temptation to drink, I'd change it to an EGO roll at -3 instead.

 

Am I crazy, or does that just make a little more sense?

 

You are not crazy, but I do think it is an addiction, so I think Con is a good stat, and it uses the whole He man, can drink many beers! Thang ring true (ish) as well.

 

AFAIK alchaholics do suffer withdrawal, so it is at least partially physical...

 

That's alcoholism, not drunkenness.

The way I read centaurs, they are cheap dates (it does not take a lot of booze to make them drunk). That implies that alcohol is a drain effect that allows a con roll to resist. Since there aren't printed rules for boozing, it's safe to assume that this is the case. What is harder to do is to remember not to buy your character a bonus to con to resist poisons, since all printed poisons seem to be NND(immunity), and do not require a con roll.