Hugh Neilson

Mine's a third printing (Aug/02). The book's copywritten '02. Hmmm...Intro is dated Jan/02. Two printings sold through in under 8 months. Impressive...most impressive!

Re: GM advice: balancing flash Well, extra targets = less dice, so that's step 1. I agree with your first instinct, but I see your problem. Try this: The next villain team encountered has one or two members who ALSO have flash attacks. They will use them on the same basis as this player. Now, when the players start discussing Flash Defense and/or compensatory senses, note what percentage of the PC's "should have" (or do have) such powers because it's "in character". Look puzzled. Point at FlashMan's player. Say "but from his comments, I would have thought almost no one would ever have flash defense. I'm very confused. Let's discuss, as a group, how common flash defense should be for everyone - player characters and NPC's." A little peer pressure never hurt a GM looking for reasonableness. You may have noticed that I'm not sympathetic with this guy. Here's a few thoughts: - enlist the other players. "Man, I'm tired of your whinefest - anyone else think Crybaby should suck it up and get on with the game?" Again peer pressure. - Interpret the whining in-game. His "heroic character" is reported in the press as nearly in tears when a villain resisted his Flash. The other villains start calling him "Wonder Whiner" and "Captain Crybaby". [With any luck, so will other players.] - Once his rep as a crybaby gets around, start docking PRE attack dice. - Then dock him some xp for making the game less fun for everyone involved. - for an easier out, use only published supervillain teams. When the griping starts, point to the book and say "It's not MY fault - the writer gave it to him." Try to modulate your voice to sound as whiny as his does. Normally, I'd say "talk to him first", but it sounds like that option's exhausted. You're stuck with him becuase you're filling in as GM. That also leaves him stuck with you. If it's to the point it's no fun, say so, and tell everyone either this guy starts acting like he's more than 10 years old, or there won't BE a game until the regular GM gets back (unless someone else wants to run a game for Captain Crybaby and his cohorts). As to the "what %" question, I give characters powers that make sense in their concept. Thinking of my group of PC's (who generally don't use Flash), I think about half have flash defense or a compensatory sense. I fail to see why villain proportions would differ substantially.

I don't feel it should be necessary to "make" the advantage workable only in stacking situations. If it is, NND should also be surcharged so it ios not useful outside stacking, as should numerous other advantages.

Here, the question becomes whether spreading should cost a damage class of the advantaged power (as it currently does) or a damage class of the base power (ie 1d6 EB no matter how many advantages are piled upon it). This would reduce somewhat the value of advantages if one spreads attacks a lot. I'm not advocating this change. I am saying don't leap to the conclusion that Rapid Fire is the problem, but look at all the components which lead to the perceived problem. For me, Rapid fire and Sweep may be best left to Heroic campaigns, much like hit locations, where the OCV and DCV spread is generally narrower. But I'll wait until seeing it in action before deciding. Sure can. But this doesn't make the flier any closer to the other characters, or broaden your area of effect, so they really aren't resolving his problem if our flier is 4" up (or 6" up, etc.). He can't get everyone in that area unless they're clustered in all three dimensions. No superscientists in your world, I take it. Most experienced characters have some contacts. Some have gadget pools. Some IIF Rad Shields/Force fields would not be impossible to obtain.

Re: Re: Join me Perhaps we might give Almafeta the benefit of the doubt and call these "inaccuracies" (ie asume they were unintentional, rather than intentional, misstatements)?

Gary, my reason for a cap (as stated a number of times) is that killing attacks are intended to KILL. Buying +10 Multiples does not, to me, retain an attack intended to kill, so I disallow such powers. And I remain unpersuaded that +1/4 is not balanced within the statement of the rules that more than +2 is a "GM Permission" ability. From that statement, it is not intended this advantage be purchased to more than the +1/2 level. Perhaps 6e can simply say "+1 SM costs +1/4. +2 costs +1/2. No higher level may be purchased, as the attack has then ceased to have the dealing of lethal damage as its main purpose." Finally, your "fix" leaves a power with this advantage inferior in all respects to a normal power at the same AP. This is not, therefore, fixed. It is merely unbalanced in a different direction. Any revised pricing should result in a power with this advantage being more powerful in some situations, and less powerful in others, than a power without the advantage. It seems we disagree on this fundamental point. I don't see much else which can be said.

That 40% advantage exists whether Rapid Fire is an option or not. How much more expensive should be make NND, since it seems to be the problem? +1 1/2 would make a 5d6 NND cost just a bit more than a 12d6 EB. 5d6 would average 17.5 STUN vs 15 from EB. That's pretty close. I guess that makes AVLD +2 (or + 1 3/4). How much should we price ego attacks at to make sure everything is equal for STUN purposes? [How many powers get modified? Are we still playing the same game when we're done?] Centering 2" off the ground means less than a 4" radius on the ground will be covered. As the ground area gets smaller, the ability to hit all targets is commensurateky reduced. If she's 4" in the air, you'll need to center the AoE on her hex, but ground level, to hit her, or raise the target hex, reducing the ground level hexes you can hit. And penalty skill levels to offset, say, -4 range mod isn't that expensive. Every 2 more doubles how far away you can be (but you need telescopic vision at some point) tut tut...placing power over conception in so shameless a fashion! This depends on how high in the air, how far away horizontally and whether the flyer is worried about range penalties. And he can also close after your attack (you're assuming you get the first move, remember?). Besides, if he's taking no range penalties, he's close enough that you're now risking catching your bodyguard in your AoE. But I'd agree extraordinary precautions would be required to hold NND Lad to one target. If they know about his special attack, they can come prepared. Oh look - they ALL have newly acquired hard ear coverings - sub your defense accordingly. Now he's hosed. A defense impossible to simulate is pretty tough to consider "reasonably common". I think you underestimate the difficulty taking out someone hidden like that, but he's a very unusual character - there won't be one like him on many teams. Numerous different powers, abilities, tactics and lucky rolls can provide (or eliminate) a significant advantage. Simply having an attack one member of the opposing team is especially vulnerable to, especially if it's a fairly obvious one, can have a huge impact. That's part of the game. To state that the NND example does not provide a major advantage in the right circumstances would be foolish. But no more foolish than believing it guarantees an autowin.

.96 vs 0. On a 15 point power, I don't think I would dismiss this. You can't measure two different ways then claim comparability. [Well, I suppose you can - after all, you did - but you can't reasonably expect to be perceived as credible when doing it.] Maybe 50.3% is reasonable. I don't think so, but then that's why I would simply cap the multiples. What about it? This is merely another outgrowth of enhanced STUN damage. For some characters, 30 STUN (or less) is unconscious anyway, so once we hit 40, or 50, who really cares how much higher it gets? Gosh, those constructs don't seem manipulative at all, do they? Perhaps this is evidence that a Hand Attack type fix needs to be applied to those powers so all attacks have a base 5 pt cost (eg. Flash gets a -1/2 limit if it targets a non-targeting sense only; Dispel is purchased as Suppress with -1/2 for immediate fade, etc.). Or perhaps GM's simply need to be alert for power constructs that are intended to milk the system - if we only see double KB on those powers, maybe the advantage needs to carry a premium on 3 point base attack powers.

NND Lad is down for the count. MA teammate is attacking a "poor choice" foe. The other team has one character down. Things are evening up. The difference, however, attributes to the differences bgetween NND and EB, not Rapid Fire. Rapid Fire serves only to exacerbate, and highlight, the discrepancy by tripling it in our example. The NND does 21 STUN per hit, the EB 15. The NND is 60% greater than the EB. This would seem to imply (by the logic you express on the Stun Multiple thread) that NND is far too cheap, even before advantage stacking. Yup. You know what else we've been ignoring? The third dimension. The Weather Witch (the most vulnerable character from Farkling's five person example) is flying, and up high enough that the cyborg must leap to catch her lest she go **splat**. If she's at a significant altitude, getting your AE to get her and the guys on the ground is a lot more challenging. And if you center on her hex, anyone not directly below her (assuming she's only 4" up) will be "overshot" by the radius. All or nothing is a -1/2 limit noted quite clearly. Some players take this to simulate older version characters where non-cumulative was the default. It's not common, but then Transform isn't exactly 1 character in 5 either. With NND Lad having the advantage of knowing they're coming, he will get a shot off (at some range perhaps) while his team is out of danger. But my players also generally try to have a flyer on each side, which (as discussed above) can further limit NND Boy's options for hitting everyone. And one of them may have the defense, as well. Which would add to my assessment of his overall offensive capabilities in determining whether to allow him as written. I generally require a good justification for multiple NND's - I don't care how many points he spends. BTW, this reminds me that Farkling's players are also disadavntaged in that he only allows them one power framework each. And still they will give NND Boy's team a tough fight even if NND Boy gets all the advantages up front! I think the issue here is that Wheels doesn't look like anything - he's in cover. It would certainly be an interesting battle to fight through. Three times, say, once where NND Boy gets his choice of terrain, once where the other team does and a third in a more neutral setting. It's a powerful ability, but it certainly doesn't guarantee a win. And who wants Supers who have no powerful abilities?

This simply gets into tactical issues. And it assumes that none of the other team have powers which happen to be exceptionally useful against NND Lad's Legion of Lad Protectors. What prevents Wheels, Cyborg and Cory from working TOGETHER? [Ego Blast the martial artist to stun him and no more block. Too bad! Mind Control him to strike at Cory - before she attacks NND Lad - and she takes a few STUN, maybe, but we still end up with NND Paste] Not if the three group members not KO'd all fire on him. -11 STUN is all it will take... I'd have to see it on a case by case basis, though I can't think of any. Still, let's carry on under the assumption it would be allowed. Now we're getting back to Rapid Attack as a whole. Let's ignore Spreading for the moment and assume one has a sufficient OCV to expect to hit consistently. Using 12d6 EB and 27 DEF (from another thread), 3 hits = 45 STUN. Using 6d6 NND, it's 63 or none. Ego Blast is similar. All Rapid Fire does is enhance the differences between these attacks. If they're overpowered fired three at a time, they're also overpowered without Rapid Attack. All of this assumes that the opposition is within 4 hexes, but has not closed enough for combat. Further out means range modifiers. I've seen rare characters who can't cover 4" in a half move, but not too many teams in "transport mode". So OCV 6 seems a reasonable end result. And if you spread, we're now down to about 30 STUN, so Cyborg's in better shape, Plasma Boy gets an attack and Cory's recovering pretty much everything on PS 12. It's definitely never good! reread my statement. It said a NON-CUMULATIVE transform either takes out a target a phase or is useless. Fairly large, although I also use a wide variety of ordinary maps. When Mr. "90 STR in a pinch" smacks an opponent and rolls snake eyes for knockback, we need some space. Generally, if they're all clustered in, it's because they're exiting a vehicle or a building. Or because the opposition is all clustered and they move in to engage, I suppose. Approaching a known "hot zone", they like to come in from at least two angles, mainly to minimize the risk of missing seeing something important. YMMV I look twice at multiple NND's. It smacks of players frantically trying to eliminate any situation where the characters could be at a disadvantage. His four buddies can't defend him and attack us at the same time. And I've watched Ward recover from amazing disadvantages to clean up the field.

Someone has to! I appreciate it - Gary's so persistent you can almost start to believe him after a while if you get no support. Mine neither. And they'll normally suggest a change if something develops to be overpowered. At least SOMEONE is using it! BTW, I think Cory's power pool is one of the most logical and creative use of the framework I've seen. Kudos!

ummm...let's use 11 DEF. Average from a 3d6 EB is also 0 if you don't trot out the big statistical analysis machine. By using one model for one power and a different one for the other, you skew the results. 17.3% less STUN = power is less useful in all respects, since it has an advantage only in STUN. The results of your analysis can hardly be surprising, Gary. If I buy an advantage on a power that serves ONLY to increase the STUN it inflicts, I would expect it to have an advantage in terms of inflicting STUN. The ADVANTAGE only affects STUN. Thus, I would expect the power to have a STUN ADVANTAGE. Is a 50.3% advantage excessive? Honestly, it probably is. That's why more than +2 SM is "only with GM permission". Possibly because the thread is discussing increased Stun multiples... My general feeling is that any ability which is generally shunned is probably overpriced. But I don't care about "Double Knockback" enough to want to adjust it. Of course, the same can be said of "+8 Stun Multiple". It's better to just cap it.

Average damage is average damage. Analysis of the breakpoint where 15d6 EB does 0 or less STUN isn't worth the time. One drawback of normal KA's is the possibility they inflict no STUN whatsoever, so the guy with 1 STUN remaining just keeps going. 46d/+1 SM 7.6% more STUN, 6.7% less BOD and a reduced chance of knockback. Doesn't seem unbalanced to me. 3d6/+3 SM: 19.5% more STUN, 30% less BOD, even less chance of knockback. Still in the game, although this is the point where I'm not seing a Killing Attack any more and considering denying GM permission. 2d6/+6 SM - 50.3% greater stun, 53.3% less BOD, generally no kncokback and about a 0% chance I'm giving GM permission because this is no longer a killing attack. 17.3% less STUN than the EB is ludicrous - less Stun, less BOD and less kncokback, and you call it "balanced". Just ban more than +2 (or whatever) to the Stun Multiple and move along. When one considers only STUN and no other effect of the power? Sure. Why not shave the costs of all the powers by making them do neither BOD nor Knockback, then? I've NEVER had anyone buy Double Knockback. It is overpriced, so we ignore it. Buy extra dice that only doi knockback instead! Violates AP limits? So what? They're highly limited dice so it's not unbalancing.

Isn't that in the rules right beside "If your INT falls below -30, you spend your days posting reviews of games you bought even though you hate them." Or do I misremember?

From the review, out oif context, and with my comments following: Caveat #1: Succor was added so that characters from Hero 4 with Aid could be easily 'grandfathered in' (5 points, costs END, both of which were changed in Hero 5). As well has having a stupid name, doesn't that defeat the entire purpose of fixing Aid? MY COMMENT: Actually, Succor costs END every phase the enhancement remained. Aid cost END only once, when adding stats, in 4e. So no, it does not defeat the entire purpose, it provides an added option. I seem to recall a version of Succor somewhere in 4e rules, but the exact location escapes me. Caveat #2: For being an effect-based system, not every power is based on an effect. For example, to build a portable hole, you have to buy Extra-Dimensional Movement... which is also the power you buy to travel through time. MY COMMENT: This is a subjective determination. Time is a dimension. The extradimensional space (from the writeups of the item) accessed by a portable hole is in a different dimension. Caveat #3: Yes, you still need to know precalculus to do the math in this section. Why not switch to a simpler algebra equation, I don't know; not to mention the fact that a system based on multiples of 5 is virtually screaming for a simple percentile system. MY COMMENT: I've never seen anyone bright enough to read the book who wasn't capable of working the math after someone sat down with him for a few minutes to provide some example computations. Caveat #4: It costs more to make a power AVLD (reducing a normal defense) than to make it NND (unable to be defended against). WTY? MY COMMENT: Because it should cost less for an attack which is porevented absiolutely by having any level of (say) Power Defense than having one whose damage is simply reduced by the amount of that same Power Defense? Caveat #5: A ranged Killing attack costs as much as a melee Killing attack; there is no difference other than one reaches 75 tiles away per level. MY COMMENT: Actually, the Hand to Hand killing attack is increased by the user's strength, where the ranged killing attack is not. This is, to me, a pretty significant advantage. I suppose we could fold "Killing Attack" into one power that has no range, does not increase for strength, costs 10 points per die and can have those advantages added later. But why? Caveat #6: The system only works well for 'flashy', innate powers; it gets less and less usable the further from four-color you get. For example, an effect like 'warm up this room' cannot be built in Hero, because there is no point cost for 70 degrees Farenheit -- you'd have to make it a special effect of a 'real' power, i.e., one that has some kind of combat effect. Good luck writing your own rules if you want Hero to do something that is not an 'innate' feature (such as a divine blessing or D&D-style magic). MY COMMENT: Actually, the bility you describe would be a Change Environment with no combat penalties, which is contrary to your assessment of Change Environment. As for applying it to the fantasy genre, well, you may want to look at the Fantasy Hero line. For example, a dagger costs 10 character points; you could buy a Masters in english for fewer points. It is suggested in a few places that there is an option for 'heroic' campaigns to not have to pay points for gear; however, how gear exactly is purchased if not with character points is not explained. As this has not been fixed, a point was taken off of Substance MY COMMENT: Actually, it's explained as requiring money (much like in D&D, one pays for equipment). Which equipment is available and how much it costs depends on the genre, however, making it impossible to cover in a rules book rather than a genre book. [And before we get on "how many books does it take to get the game rules down", you need at least three to play D&D, and many more to get all the options] Combat is still based on tactical superhero combat; real-world measurements are eschewed in Hero, replaced by wholly abstract units of measurement. MY COMMENT: A Turn is defined as 12 seconds, a segment as 1 second, and 1" as 2 meters. What definitions were you looking for? If these questions were answered in the book, I couldn't find it. MY COMMENT: Yes, I'd noticed you seem to have some problems in that regard. In fairness, it is a very big book and, as a rules book only, doesn't have a lot of fluff which can safely be skipped over. Many times, you are told to "Roll Xd6 and figure the 'body'". This refers to an obscure section of the combat chapter. Please name this mechanic, if you are going to use it so often! MY COMMENT: It is called "figuring the Body". Like many game mechanics, it's one that seems complex on paper and rapidly becomes second nature in play. "Although some good documents for Hero have been put on online here (link would go to http://www.herogames.com/FreeStuff/freedocs/HSGBG%20Final.pdf but these forums don't allow for HTML code) that tells you how to use the system in different genres, they haven't put any of these in the core rulebook. Come on, Hero Games -- couldn't you have fit these in -somewhere-?" MY COMMENT: And this gels with your comments about the length of the book how, precisely? D&D has a book for players' rules, one for DM's rules and one for creature stats since it provides no basis for designing balanced creatures on your own. Hero provides one book of rules, and publishes genre books for specific genres. I find it hard to view one as superior to the other. MY FINAL COMMENT: I encurage Hero supporters to read some of the feedback to this "review". However poorly Almafeta reviewed Hero, it still scores way better (even on her scale) than her review scores with her peers! [Don't bother reading the review though; Killer Shrike sums it up quite nicely]

I agree with your comments, but I'm getting at items in FREd which specifically indicate "cannot be purchased without GM permission". Two examples are special powers in a framework (which I've commonly handwaved in a Supers game), and more than +2 Stun Multiple on a KA (which I have not). Conversely, all powers in an EC must cost END - as opposed to requiring GM permission to have powers which cost no END. [This is also something I generally handwave, as it strikes me as arbitrary that an EC can have Healing bought to 0 END, but no Aid unless it Costs END).

I seem to recall Fantasy Hero having a suggestion that 2 weapon fighting was too expensive compared to the alternatives and suggesting some additions for that genre. Maybe that's it?

In my mind, FREd has five categories of power construct. These are as follows: 1. Normal construct (no special caveats) 2. Caution SIgn (consider carefully) 3. Stop Sign (consider even more carefully) 4. "Requires GM Permission" 5. Outright illegal Ordering of 1-3 and 5 I'm comfortable with. However, when you use #4, where do you intend this appear on the GM radar screen? I've always read it as something like "Technically this is legal, and we don't want to shut out the concept entirely because that culd shut down a valid construct, but any proposed ability should be scrutinized with extreme care", so worse than Stop Sign and better than "Never Allowed". Is that the intended interpretation? If not, what is?

Gary, all of your comparisons are with +4 stun multiples, +8 stun multiples, etc. Given FREd sets more than +2 as requiring GM permission (about as close to illegal as one can get without banning a power outright), I would be more inclined to base analyses on +2 Stun Multiple. And yet "NND Defense" is dismissed by you as non-limiting in many other threads. Now let's apply your supposed "fix". The NND still does 21 STUN. The EB still does 42 gross Stun or 15 STUN versus 27 DEF. The KA does 20.67 STUN against the same DEF level under existing rules (and assuming GM permission for a +4 SM). Change this to GaryWorld, where +4 SM is now +1.5. Let's use a 1 1/2d6 KA (62.5 AP). Average BOD? 5.5 SM? 6.67. STUN 36.7 - 27 = 9. It also does less BOD and KB than the EB. You haven't banned it, but you may as well. And the +2 SM (not specifically requiring GM permission) is 2d6+1 (61.25 AP), does 8 BOD x 4.67 = 37.36 STUN or 10 vs 27 DEF - again, whol;ly inferior to the EB. Just ban the advantage and get it over with, Gary! This is a tough level to compare your fix - +1 1/2 on 30 AP leaves a 12 AP attack. Now to GaryWorld, where 49 points gets us 1d6 + 6 SM, which will do 18 net Stun. Less STUN, BOD and everything else than a 9d6 EB. My point here is not that huge stun multiple bonuses would not be unbalancing - they easily could be. That's why the require explicit GM permission (a statement in FREd that generally implies "should not normally be permitted"). But changing the cost so it's not worth buying at all is no solution - it's just a backwards means of banning the power. If I don't like Transform, I can ban it honestly (NO transofrms. Ever!) or I can raise the cost 50% (you can buy it, but you're wadting your points), efectively banning it, or I can punish those buying it by giving every opponent 15 points of power defense only vs transforms. Be honest, and just ban it the offensive power outright.

It's a pretty devestating 1 shot attack - no denying that. But the character becomes a one hit wonder. He's now at 1/2 DCV and down significant END. The rest of the group is now focused on him as their primary target - a second shot is, at best, unlikely. And based on Farkling's comments, the cyborg should be considered immune. To comment individually: 1. 1 character in my group; and I classify anyone who holds their breath as immune to such effects, so good luck getting a second hit. [in fairness, one characetr IMC is vulnerable to gas and toxins] 2. One character in my group. A second has a force wall shield which I would consider effective, but not against AoE as it only has a 3 hex side facing. This one's tough to simulate, but use of contacts to get a few VIPER force field belts would do it. And I would allow a superscientist to create a +5/+5 Force Field, does not add to PD/ED in excess of 5 (-2) to simulate a force field which does not defend against any other form of damage (just because force field has no "take an action to defend" approach). 3. Power no; ear coverings a couple; anyone could get some made; and I'd include special action to protect one's ears (ie hands over the ears). 4. Heat/cold - one character has it; I agree it doesn't sound that common, except that many supers will buy full suite LS and, more important, it can be simulated with appropriate equipment (hot and cold weather gear is pretty easy to come by; rad suits aren't as simple, but not impossible) 5. Power defense, IME, is common enough that an AVLD is more effective. I think two of six have it in my game, though very little. 6. One character has that, but it's not that common IME. Miund you, we don't use FW much. Given this, I would require some better definition and probably an expanded defense, and modify any published characters accordingly. 7. Three, but for soem reaosn they all hardened some defenses for concept reasons. Still, I would expect one or two in any group to have some hardened defense (even Combat Luck is a defense!) In a group of 5 or 6 (mine's 6) I would expect someone to be defended against most NND's. Any holes would be random chance. I think I'd have to carefully select a defense to get around a whole group of five. "Reasonably common" is more than 1 in 10 supers, in my opinion. A less common "natural" defense would have to be offset by a fairly easy way of dealing with it if you don't have the defense (eg. cold weather gear). Actually, it indicates my feeling that more gas somehow doing more damage in the same timeframe, rather than just spreading out over a wider area, does not make logical or dramatic sense. I also don't believe that, when two continuous Flaming Walls overlap, the damage in that hex is doubled. To the extent a balance issue is involved, I am not persuaded it is Rapid Fire which creates the problem, rather than the NND advantage, lack of a sufficiently common defense, or area effect. Realistically, it is a combination of all of these. However, if anything, it is the combination of Rapid Fire and Area Effect which creates the issue - Rapid Fire imposes those nasty OCV penalties, but area effect attacks don't really suffer from OCV penalties. As Farkling notes, it's funny how these "unbalanced maneuver" threads all seem to come back to attacks that need no roll to hit and have non-standard defenses. Maybe it's area effect NND's which should be banned! [i AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS] Mind you, if NND Lad has a 10 OCV, he retains a 6 with 3 shot rapid fire. The hex he targets is likely more than 4" away, or he's in the attack (likely with that martial artist friend you noted, who likely lacks the defense), so that's OCV 4. You hit on a 12 or less. On average, you'll miss with at least one shot, losing control over the spread of the attack. On a roll of, say, 15 (not likely, but possible) on the first attack, you could miss by 3" and rapid fire your own team instead. Friendly advice...NEVER roll an 18! Sooner or later, we all roll an 18. The area effect allows you to avoid a to hit roll. Try it with a Non-Selective area and see how effective it is when you have to roll to hit each opponent with the OCV penaltiues applied by Rapid Fire. I'm assuming this is why you haven't argued Selective Area to avoid the risk of hitting your teammates. And a non-cumulative Transform can generally wreck a character a phase. If it can't, it's useless. According to Farkling, END. Sounds like Wheels, for all the "mentalist sniper" image conjured up, is a pretty balanced character. That's Gary's area covered. Anyone else? And are these bannings preemptive or reactive? I am looking for someone who has seen the problem arise in an actual game and, as a consequence, has banned this maneuver. 8" between the two members furthest apart? I don't find this uncommon. They might all be clustered if NND Lad ambushes them. Otherwise, some have likely already moved forward. Actually, one drawback of "delay delay dealay" is that the group normally starts pretty clustered, so you expose yourself to AE's if you all stand around waiting. Permission for two+ NND's? No, that's never a "matter of course". I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe it suggests multiple NND's require GM permission. I've allowed it in limited circumstances (an archer with a lot of charged attacks comes to mind), but a character looking for two or three different areas of effect better provide me with a pretty compelling justification. Note that I would rather veto the unbalancing power than make a blanket ban on use of a maneuver. Actually, one member who habitually takes point, or habitually hangs back, is not uncommon. Again, you assume no one hasd the defense, which is a bold assertion. And it's one shot only - I know my players would unload on NND Boy with full force and worry about his allies afterwards. May as well fire three shots - you won't be needing that END next turn anyway - not after leaving yourself at 1/2 DCV. Unless he says "battle going poorly - no way I can turn the tide. I'll have to flee and come back with reinforcements (or follow and act when the odds are more favourable). My players (with some exceptions due to specific character personalities) are quite capable of tactical thinking that goes beyond "keep exchanging attacks until one side is all down". They're also quite willing to accept that the genre convention allows for battles the heros just aren't meant to win (even though they sometimes turn the tide and win those anyway).

Of 5, one member down for the count, a second just barely down, and a third injured. Whether that's "half out of the fight" is open to interpretation. I would also expect a balanced 5 man supergroup to have at least one member with that NND's "reasonably common defense". Based on Farkling's ppost, I suspect that would be the cyborg. And I've already noted that I would be inclined to set limits on the area effect NND rapid fired such as overlapping spaces take damage only once. The problem is not Rapid Fire. It is not even Rapid Fire coupled with NND. It is a Rapid Fire attack with no defense which affects an area and costs no END. Would I allow that? No. But then, I look at area effects and NND's fairly close. And yet this IS NOT HAPPENING in real games. Why is that? But now you aren't firing the attack a few hexes behind them to avoid catching your own teammates, are you? Now I have to allow a character with at least two different NND Area Effects for this to be viable. Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen! And the 9" cone is 9" wide only at its furthest extreme. Provided you get the drop on them and they are arrayed as you wish them to be. Many players vastly prefer to approach an area from two sides (sending faster movers aroound to flank) rather than all come in as one big cluster. Farkling can correct me if I'm mistaken, but I'm guessing "detect minds" was used to replace "mind scan" so there would be a range modifier. And you can't dogpile him if you can't see him. He wins - and he can save 20% on his mental powers by buying them "cannot rapid fire"! He's got time.

Then ditch NND's, which generally act against zero defenses. AVLD's and mental attacks must go as well. A +1 advantage eliminates all defenses against many opponents or gets +4 SM against all opponents. In Supers, I agree. What about Fantasy? 6 Armor/Force Field plus 3 - 6 DEF = 9 - 12. 3-4 DC attacks are prettly light in most fantasy campaigns I've seen. 6 DC seems a norm, and 9 DC is not out of the question. That's a range of 1 - 2. I can't speak for Star Hero, but I'm guessing the attack/defense multiple is similar or worse. Westerns, Pulps or Spy games will likely see 0 defenses, at least against guns - bullet proof vests aren't the norm in these genres. Horror games too, and here larger attacks might even be expected, depending on the subgenre.

Lots of attacks can mess up lots of targets. Going back to Farkling's example, the Weather Witch is out and Plasma Boy is just KO'd. Cyborg, Cory and Wheels all have phases. And they also get PS 12 recoveries - Cory will recover at least 2/3 of her lost STun based on the stats given unless she sold REC back. Farkling's example assumes the NND trick is not common. If it is, consider Wheels' Ego Attack and Plasma Boy's 1 hex area attack. The Cyborg likely has a good attack for rapid fire too, especially if an opponent is at 1/2 DCV. [i assume a Sweep from Cory is out of the question...] 1/2. This means they must be even closer clustered for the attack to have full effect. 3. It would also reduce the hexes, again meaning they must be clustered closer together. Especially "Any Area" - what's that 1 hex per 10 points in the power? 4. After one attack sequence, the opponents close, making most Area Effects dangerous to allies as well as adversaries. 5. Detect Minds Targetting + Mental Illusions/Mind Control...Farkling, do any characters besides Wheels even need to throw a punch here? An Illusion placing characters elsewhere means NND Noy misses, but an illusion superimposing them over NND Lad's Legion of Super Allies, or a Mind Control lets NND Lad wipe out his own group.

If Farkling and I agree, it MUST be true! Great example using a real group of characters. I have minor comments. First, you give NND boy evrey advantage , which for purposes of illustration seems reasonable. These include: - no one immune to his NND - I've yet to se an NND everyone in my game was affected by in practice. - the escaping a 90 STR (I assume from the damage) Grab - knowing Cory is still conscious due to massive STUN and CON, and not assuming she has the NND defense, and switching attacks - assuming Plasma Boy selects the wrong attack and misses with it - merging the three attacks for CON stunning (already pointed out above) Well, in GaryLand, NNDBoy would move at DEX 0.000001 so he can abort immediately to avoid the DCV penalty. While that may impact Cory, it would presumably work to the advantage of other characters - for example, those who choose to attack NND Lad rather than delaying. This assumes Wheels isn't a "sauce for the goose" type of guy. If he rapid fires that Ego Attack... That seems quite reasonable to me - the characters had the opportunity to perceive the burst, so there's no reason they can't abort now that they know an area effect NND is at issue. Finally, we come to the "second encounter". If the characters know NNDBoy will be there, they won't come in clustered. They have probably used their contacts with various agencies to research the defense to the NND, and may be equipped with gizmos (or tactics - gas works poorly against a Brick holding his breath) to nullify it. At the least, they are ready to dive for cover at the first shot. Magic smoke? Perhaps the Weather Witch can use wind powers to deflect or dissipate it, possibly with use of the Power skill. Maybe NNDBoy still gets one or two of them, but they'll be making it pretty tough to strike more than one at a time (and my recollection is that only one of the characters described is restricted to HTH combat). And if NND Boy always holds to 1, a coordinated attack at Cory's Dex will likely see his phase used to recover from being Stunned... Does NND Boy have allies? Probably - but we all know that, when there's one villain the whole team is vulnerable to, you focus on neutralizing him immediately. A group with no egoist will target the egoist first - they have to!

There is a question below regarding recovery of an END reserve costing END. The answer is that END would be paid when the REC is used (normally PS 12, but S1 since no action is taken on PS 12). Can you clarify the application of Costs END to characteristics? I looked in the FAQ, but didn't find it (I could easily have missed it - I checked "costs END"). For example, STR costs END normally, and END is paid when, and to the extent, it is used. If I have SPD that Costs END, my understanding is the END cost is paid every phase (unless I choose not to use that bonus Speed for the turn). As I read these, each "costs END" stat requires a decision of when it is and is not in effect. If it is, pay the END and the stat works until your next phase (so PD, Costs End, is much oike a force field - which is reasonable since, if I also make it resistant, it has the same cost). Speed is an exception only because it impacts the whole turn, so switching it on and off phase by phase is impractical. Is this correct as a default rule? [ASIDE: For those wishing bonus Speed that costs END per turn, some form of either Side Effect or Susuceptibility would seem a reasonable approach - "Takes 1d6 END per turn, standard effect, when using bonus Speed", for example, would cost 6 END per turn] This also makes REC a bit of a special case. Since you can't spend END and take a recovery, the bonus REC is useless during the turn (the same as the END Battery END). It's only valuable on PS 12. Presumably, the player should decide whether to use the END at PS 12 and, if they do, mark off the END in S1. This would also mean that bonus REC (for END battery or normal REC) cannot be used if the character is unconscious (below 0 STUN) as they have no END to spend, wouldn't it? Thanks Hugh