Hugh Neilson

Does a mental Haymaker reduce your DCV or your DECV? Or both? Search on the FAQ for "Haymaker" pulls up nothing. Hopefully that means it's not there, not that the search engine doesn't work.

Re: What are the most annoying player habits! A related type: the player who will not play characters for whom he can play in character. The wisecracking player who insists on playing the Mysterious Silent Avenger - but wisecracks throughout the game and never shuts up ("but that's not what my character is doing!"), for example. The "impulsive" character whose player spends extended periods deliberating on alternatives for his next move is another example.

Re: What are the most annoying player habits!

Re: Mental Entangles and the Weak-Willed

Re: Ultimate Brick -- What Things Weigh OK, virtually every oddball item in there shoud be listed - especially slabs at Stonehenge since we were fighting there last game! [No one tried that, however]

Re: Ultimate Brick -- What Things Weigh How many extra xp does Blue Bolt receive for that? [Guess what my brand-new, only played 2 sessions, character's name is?]

Following from Javed's question, I looked at the checklist. I'd like to get you to confirm an example. The Mighty Lump is swarmed by Mechanon's Robots of Doom. Lump has a DCV of 6 at the best of times. In a desparate attempt to clear them, off, he attempts a Sweep on 3 Robots, smashinmg them all into fragments. Three more Robots half move in, and Lump is again surrounded by 6 Robots. They all attack, using their Teamwork program (21-) to co-ordinate and Multiple Attack. I calculate Lump's DCV as follows: (a) Apply modifiers to DCV: Multiple Attackers subtract 1 for each attacker beyond the first, which would be 5, but can't reduce Lump below half his DCV (perhaps better stated "The modifier cannot exceed half the defender's DCV before the Multiple Attacker modifier"). As such, the subtraction is three, and he has a 3 DCV. ( Lump used Sweep last phase, so he is also at half DCV. Halving is the last step, so we take his modified 3 DCV and halve it, which is 1.5. © Rounding is always in the character's's favour, so Lump has a 2 DCV. [Lump is about to take some serious namesakes...] Is that correct , or do I need to scurry back to my books and study harder ? Thanks

Re: What are the most annoying player habits! "The following program treats mature subject matter in a childish fashion and is consequently suitable for the entire family." is right! We often remind players that this is a "comics code" campaign. Perhaps the best thing you can do for this player is free up his game nights to see a mental health professional.

Re: Multipower and Experience I fail to see why people see this as a major concern. If it's out of conception, it would have been a problem when he created the character and is a problem now, so it should not be alowed. If the power would not have been a problem when the character was created, and he now wants to spend xpto add it, why is it a problem now? I find it odd that some people have no concern with the points saved by the multipower on powers purchased at initial character creation, but balk at this cost savings being availabke on powers purchased later.

Re: Information needed about Digital Hero. In the words of the immortal Jack Kirby "Don't ask - just buy it!" A subscription gets you 10 issues for $3 US = 640 pages for $30 on various Hero topics.

Re: THE ULTIMATE BRICK -- What Do *You* Want To See? Actually, what about including a chart for "This STR is the Strength of 10 men" - a column added in the overall STR chart, perhaps. 10 men = 26 or 27 STR (10x 1 man). 100 is 43 or 45. Might make those lower-end SR points look a little more impressive.

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder No, and yes it is, respectively This should be expected - after all, Entangle is at its base an offense power, and they tend to cost double a defense power. I'd be more inclined not to take Self Only and have a power usable for both offense and defense for 17 points more.

Re: Mobility II: Entangle & Flash "With every attack comes a defense". What are the defenses for these powers? A brief trance state seems best modeled as an Entangle based on ECV (the infamous mental paralysis), perhaps with no DEF (anyone can get out given time). 5d6 would be enough to paralyze a normal ego combatant for a turn. 3d6 would cost him at least phase in most cases. Applying the same mechanic to PRE would generate the trance state. Time manipulation is a tougher one - what gets the character out of it? Perhaps we need a concept of "NND Entangle" which cannot be broken with standard powers, but which lasts for 1 phase per BOD rolled and has no DEF as a default. What would it cost? Without doing a deep mechanical analysis, I'm inclined to cost this at 20 points per die for the ability to effectively eliminate a target's phase (or maybe 10 points per segment) unless he has the "reasonably common defense". On reflection, Dust Raven's Transform appeals. Major Transform; All or Nothing (-1/2), Heals 1 BOD per phase (say -1) might do it quite adequately. Make it NND if you want to avoid power defense. That stats out to 6 points per die, 12 for NND. If you eliminate all or nothing so repeated hits gradually nail the target (eg. the Freeze effect), you get 7.5 per die, 15 for an NND. hmmm...Extreme Cold Burst: 1d6 Ranged DEX Drain NND LS Extreme Cold (25 AP) + 1d6 Major Transform NND, heals 1 BOD per phase, Linked NND LS: Cold (30 AP; 12 RP) + 2 d6 NND EB, linked (LD Extreme Cold; 20 AP; 13 RP). 50 points (75 AP). Might be a fun little power.

Re: Critique power please OK, just to throw out another possibility (and let's make it complicated!), what about EDM Usable Against Others coupled with a VPP only for Multiforms. MECHANIC:PossessorLad sends Brick to another plane where he is only able to see what's happening in his own body, not act upon it. PossessorLad muiltiforms into Brick. EFFECT: PossessorLad disappears, moving wi9thin Brick from whence he exerts full control over him. This seems to cover Jericho of the Titans quite nicely. If the opponent is too powerful to fit the Multiform, either the character can't access some of the possessed victim's powers, or this character is immune to possession (as everyone seems to be if it's important to the plot...)

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder If you can't take people disagreeing with your ideas, posting to a public forum probably isn't very wise. It's the discussion that makes it fun! Actually, I'm pretty sure the Personal Immunity Entangle's been put to Steve before and he noted that the tactic is workable. There are the usual caveats, of course - maxiumum defenses for your campaign are potentially at risk. A "self only" entangle that doesn't hinder movement wouldn't generate a lot of limitation value in my game either. Mind you, call it "self only, does not inhibit movement" and what do you get? Call those -2 in aggregate and you're still paying 10 points for (on average) 6 resistant PD and ED that you need an attack action and END to set up and will be shot away. 18 points would have bought you 6 Resistant PD and ED that you could use whenever you want at no END - make it cost END and require a half phase and it only costs 9, stays up and needs no attack action. It's not exactly overpowered. Of course, no one says using an attack as a defense should be point-effective

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder Agreed 100%. Other examples: An entangle that can ony be used to create barriers. An entangle, self only, personal immunity, used to create a defensive shield. It's interesting that proponents of the Flash approach first cite "reason from effect", then ignore all effects of this construct other than the fact that it blocks the target's vision. The classic reasoning from effect example (acid that destroys a character's eyes) would, by this logic, be a Flash with COntinuous, and likely NND, not the TRansform which is recommended. Would I call mobility a "sense"? No, I don't think so. We would then have to deal with questions of "enhanced mobility", "Flash vs Mobility" and similar issues. Mobility is not a sense, so why try to shoehorn it in? Adding "Blocks a sense" and limiting the power to not prevent movement (where appropriate) seems quite adequate.

It might be interesting to set up an extremely difficult task to "win" against and add in the time loop. When they lose the first time, our heroes are horrified as the A Bomb goes of in the downtown core...and they wake up at the start of the same day. What mistakes did they make that they can correct this time? Once they realize what's happening, how much research can they do? How many off the wall ideas can they try? Maybe add some stress by providing some clue as to the nature of the loop that suggests it's breaking down and won't last forever (eg. the "day" keeps starting later) so they don't get the sense they have unlimited opportunities. I think this would be a great inclusion.

There's something to be said for a Multiform approach. Ether approach is a modification to the norm, however. We expect Duplicates bto act at the same time, where this construct doesn't. However, using Multiform creates the oddball issue that changing shape changes location. As well, it implies the dormant drone can't be moved while the controller is active, since only one form exists at a time. It also bears noting that the Duplication approach is more expensive, since a "completely different" duplicate is a +1 advantage. Overall, I think Duplication is the more appropriate mechanic to make this work. The "only one actove at a time" limitation will (all other things being equal) bring the cost in line with Multiform. +1 for "different forms" and -1 for "only one acts at a time".

How about a Multipower with an END drain and a STUN drain. The character has no control over which slot is used (-0 limitation), and the STUN drain only works, and switches on automatically, when the target has 0 END. I'd even handwave the STUN drain cutting in partially when the target has 0 END if he pays for standard slots intead of ultras.

I buy in to that. Actually, I have no problem if they want to extrapolate from others who move. Where I have a problem is the GM saying "OK, Segment 4", and a player then says "Oh wait, before Phase 3 ends I'll do this..." because his character has a 6 speed and he doesn't want to lose an action. To me, the correct answer to that player is "Tough luck. You held your action, and nothing happened prior to the end of Segment three. It's now segment 4." In the example you citre, I would simply say "OK, you are all surveying the scene intently. Post segment 12 recoveries, the nit's segment 1". If someone wanted to move at the end of Segment 12, too bad - he waited too long.

My personal addition: Don't announce "End of Segment 3". The characters can't tell where one segment ends. You held your action, time moved on, the next thing that happened was in Segment 4. If that cost you a phase, too bad!

And the cost of a duplicate is not reduced by the duplicate's disadvantages. I'd go the duplication rute.

OK, I could be missing the boat here. I don't play cyberpunk and I'm not familiar with the genre. But knocking off the employer never seems like a good move. Similarly "in genre", why wouldn't other mercenary groups pretend to be an employer in order to get my group into an ambush situation so they can kill us all of and have less competition for future jobs? Seems a fitting result for the "kill the employer" group.

BTW, for those seeking invulnerability, a high DEF force wall, no range, self only, can work quite nicely. Of course, it means you must buy your attacks indirect. It does eliminate the Stun lotto quite nicely, however. A 30 DefHardened Force Wall will stop all damage from a 5d6 KA every time. Of course, it costs 95 points (PD and ED, +1 hex to surround you) and you pay 15 END a shot. Making it 0 END, persistent, always on rolls it up to [150 x 2.25/2.5 =] 135. [sorry for bad costing - IDHTBIFOM] Expensive? Yes - and it should be!

You are using "chance" in a different context than I would. To me, "roll the dice; you may hit and you may miss" or "when the dice are rolled, you may or may not take damage" is chance. The action has a possibility (however slim) of success or failure. Whether the other characters have an ability that circumvents Invulnerability or "Always Hits" is not chance. It is GM planning. If your character never misses, except for Circumstance X, I as GM make the decision whether each character I create has the ability to avoid your attack, as I will be setting the scene and creating the character. That's not "chance", it's "planning". Your definitions may vary, of course, but I think that's how those not in favour of an absolute power are defining "chance".