Hugh Neilson

Rereading my post, the point I was dancing around never actually comes out. Most of us use published material and characters to some extent. If we vary from the norm for the game world, we need to do a lot more work to integrate the published material. That might involve updating defenses because our average campaign defenses exceed (or fall short of) the norm for CU. Maybe attacks have to change. If you disallow multiple power frameworks, there's a lot of work to be done bringing the NPC's back in line, or they're all more powerful than the PC's and we hear lots of reasonably justified whining. That means more than just paying full points for the abilities and adding to XP. Otherwise, all the opponents have an extra 100 points to play with, so now their numbers have to fall to make an equal playing field. And if I want to eliminate half the stats (reference to other thread), I get to rewrite all the characters I decide to use. It's a matter of taste - I do generally revise the characters I use, because my campaign doesn't always match the CU nmorm. But that means I have to do a lot more work than someone shose campaign matches the norm - he just pulls out Eurostar and he's got the evening's villains. I pull out Eurostar, paper, pen and calculator, and start redrafting them.

But you won't have the argument if Cooplness is statted out - we'll be able to see who has the higher Coolness! We need to ditch all the rules. We don't need any stats at all. RPG's only have rules because, somewhere along the line, we lost the ability to play "let's pretend" backed solely with our own imaginations. And all RPG's really are is a game of "Let's Pretend" with structure! So, we get back no "no rules" RPG's and we get all the advantages Oddhat describes, plus more! And best of all IT'S FREE!

Re: Goblin Kingdom Good luck! My store gave up on Diamond and orders through other distributors for Hero, and a lot of other RPG, products. Maybe someone at the other end of the chain (ie the guys collecting money when the sales flow through) should follow up on Diamond's delivery.

The simple fact is that it's a point-based game so people will look to get the most for their points. Multiple power frameworks are one way of accomplishing that. Having multiple attacks in an EC generally isn't as effective as having them in a multipower, even if that results in a non-attacks EC plus an attacks multipower. That said, if you don't like the structure, there's no reason to allow it. But to be reasonable, the opposition also has to have that efficiency removed. That's the "great equalizer" of ppints mongering - if the player can do it, so can the NPC's. If the players get to use a construct that saves 25 points, the NPC's also use that construct to access the same savings.

Re: Mage limitation I think the limtation works, but I also don't have a probelm finding 75+ points in disadvantages without it, so I don't know how motivated I would be to take the disadvantage. On the flip side, if all spells require Gestures, or an RSR penalized for heavy armor, this could just be free points.

"With great flexibility comes great complexity" In reading M & M, I saw a lot of quotes reiminiscent of various Hero products over the years, and the "d20 Supers" game owes at least as much to Hero as to D&D. I found the system coarser, but complexity and flexibility are always a trade off.

I had looked at the 13 EGO, but a 23 PRE attack isn't all that uncommon (7 dice), and 33 (10 dice) isn't too hard with an impressive action. Like we said earlier, everyone has their weak points anyway. An option to EGO is PRE only to defend vs. PRE attacks, just to indicate she's not that easily impressed. But if you plan to buy EGO up anyway, defensive PRE has negligible value. [Maybe EGO only to resist PRE attacks?]

Yes and no. I find Hero requires more communication because the ground rules vary with the campaign and the GM. In many other systems, it's only variances from the rulebook that need to be addressed, but the extra flexibility of Hero means a lot more is open (eg. how many DC and how much DEF is appropriate versus defined spells, weapons and armor set the numbers).

Assume a character has a multipower or a VPP. He puts "Variable Limitation" on the frameowrk (MPO base or VPP control cost), say at -1/2. Each power must now have -1 limitations. The character could choose to have each power able to change its limitations at will - ie the same Variable Limitations. Can he instead define one or more slots as having -1 of "fixed" limitations? Eg. a 10d6 Energy Blast which requires Gestures, Incantations and Requires a Skill Roll every time, thus satisfying the requirement that each power in the framework have -1 of these limitations? Assuming he can, would he then compute the cost of that power as 25 real points (50 /2) because the limits on this specific power are fixed? Adding to the above, I'm assuming the VPP is not changeable at will. At a minimum, a skill roll and/or some time is required. In a Cosmic VPP, it seems to me that all limitations would be Variable, ince the character can change the power (including its limitations) at will anyway. Thanks Hugh

This depends on how often it happens. How many spells does a player build and have rejected because the GM has done a poor job summarizing how magic will work in his campaign before the "Screw it" factor kicks in? Same thinbg for building and revising characters if the GM is less than clear about concerns and desired changes. Good communication is essential in Hero to get all the players and the GM on the same page about how things work, how common some items may be in the campaign world, etc.

Hmmm...does your GM not use a lot of PRE attacks, or does Z'lf spend a lot of time looking like

Absolute Time Sense? Maybe a limited Mind Link to simulate a videophone? You may get more useful suggestions if you tell us what it already has...

Or you might get Mutants & Masterminds - it's only got a few stats.

So if I have a fast character, and I watch everyone else move, no sense holding back - blaze away with full OCV, shut down defense i favour of offense and then shift everything to DCV in my last phase. Saved phases will stop this, but now it becomes a matter of drawing out the saved phase (or blazing away while he saves his phases and still using the last one all for defense). That's certainly as tactically annoying as anything happening under the current system. That would seem to work. How often does a character lose a phase doing a haymaker? It can only happen if he has SPD 7+ under the existing system. You could push his next phase top the following segment, but that's a bigger drawback than the current system mechanic.

I suspect one reason is getting around GM reluctance to allw the speed boost. I know I review extra SPD very carefully. Seeing a drawback like a big END hit might show me it will be used sparingly, not have the effect of granting the character an 8 or 10 Speed for most combats, and convince me the character should not have , say, very low attacks to justify this very high Speed.

Re: Active Points and effect on Endurance The problem ios that not everyone will agree which advantages "logically" increase the END cost. For example: The ghost must transmit its power across dimensions from its own near unreal state to the real world - why shouldn't this take more effort? There is also the issue of increased efficiency. Want to pay less END, but not reduced by half or eliminated entirely? Link the power to a "Heal END". Make it 0 END and take a Susceptibility that reduces END.

Re: Re: Re: Re: What's the limitation? Essentially, by taking the +1/4 limit, the mage sacrifices the ability to access a wide array of special effects. He shouldn't be using Magic Flame, Magic Blade or Magic Ice - he should have a Magic Blast. Just like a VPP Fire Powers Only doesn't get ice against the fire elemental. He could use Summon and conjure up a Magical sword weilder, I suppose. Or even a Fire Elemental or Ice Elemental. But he doesn't get to change his SFX to match the opponent. That's why he gets a limitation. Your approach provides an alternate limiting factor might also work. It imposes a limiting factor (you either have skill with that effect, or you can't use it) The catch is, Magic is a pretty broad category, even compared to the other examples in FREd - Only Attacks can't get anything Only Magic can't duplicate unless some limit is imposed. Absent an arbitrary restruction, name a power or advantage that Magic can't generate. Dispel Magic, Suppress magic - these are common magic spells. NO limitation means no Limitation, so that +1/4 has to have an impact or it's not worth a point reduction.

You heard the man! Each target needs a separate EDM!

I always laugh when I see a post about the realism of the mechanics we use when role playing comic book superheroes or swordsmen and wizards fighting fire breathing dragons.

Re: Re: What's the limitation? My general requirement is that the ONLY special effects can be magic. You can make a magic flame, but it doesn't trigger vulnerabilities to heat and flame. You can't use VSE to get around this. "Only Magic" means Magic ONLY".

Re: Silly math name quibble I'll rename mine a "google" then, consistent with the populare spelling error. [i should never post these things when I'm distracted] But I want 1 with a million zeroes charges, thanks!

Agree and diosagree. I'll throw the math out for a cool effect, but it's never a bad idea to stat it out. This is especially important for inexperienced GM's, but we can all misjudge the power of an effect. recalls new GM's villain who seemed to walk all over us. Afterwards, he shows us the character sheet. he's slipped a decimal place, and the major attack power has 10x the dice it ought to have at that cost. I wonder why he seemed so overpowered

YMMV, but to me folding all the stats in may create a workable game, but it's no longer Hero System. To say that a character's physical strength, toughness and will to live will all vary at the same rate takes out a lot of possibilities. A very small person, physically weak, could be very healthy and have a strong will to live. Low STR, high CON, decent BOD. We could have someone in poor physical condition (low STR, low CON) with a strong will to live (high BOD), or just a large individual (the sickest elephant has more BOD than a healthy mouse). As for making it easier for the new players, I don't think merging a few stats will have that powerful an effect. If it works for you, well and good. But when you change a lot of core rules (as opposed to tinker with some costs or effects), you're not playing the same game. That's not to say it's a worse game, or a better game, but it's not the same game. FWIW, I feel the same way about the switch from AD&D to D&D 3.0. This isn't the same game. AD&D 1.0 to 2.0 was an update to the game,. and 3.0 to 3.5 is tweaking. 2.0 to 3.0 is sufficiently different to constitute a different game. Which is better? No ansdwer. Are they the same game? Clearly not.

I think the concern with this type of system is the additional value of a high Speed. If one character has an 8, and the other a 4, SPD 8 knows he moves twice, then SPD 4 moves. A bit of sparring will tell him that. If SPD 8 wants a good DCV, he'll have to devote some resources to it every couple of phases. However, if I know my character has SPD 8 under your system, I'll move in Ph 1 (attack) and watch the other guy's reaction. He may attack me back (in which case I expect him to run out of phases before I do) or he may hold back. If he holds back, I may as well take my next 7 actions. BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM. He's STILL standing?? Man these 4 SPD guys are tough! For my 8th phase, I'll (martial) dodge and put all levels to DCV. See you in Phase 1! Now he gets to take all those carefully saved phases against my best dodge DCV, and all it cost me was one of my 8 attacks. At least if he reserved under the usual system, I'd either have to blow a lot of phases dodging, or take some shots at my usual DCV.