Hugh Neilson

Re: Re: Haste Spell You could also reduce the cost to 16 points, a big 6 points extra, at the cost of leaving the roll for the side effect. Now you average 21 END cost, but risk fluctuations in that amount. Reduce the cost to 20 by making it a -1 side effect (4d6 END drain) and you average 14 END, and need a pretty high roll to beat the 18 charged above. It would likely be more efficient (but riskier) to use that approach. Spend the 2 points you saved on END. Save 18 CP at the cost of 18 END for each use of the power. Actually, I don't see a more practical way to achieve the effect. As an alternative, you could take costs END (-1/2), 3x END (-1), only costs END to activate (cut limitation by half to -3/4 in total), and get the same -3/4 limitation. You now only lose 12 END for starting up the power. Problem is, while 12 END for 4 extra phases is 3 END per phase (and may be reasonable), technically I think the power can then remain up indefinitely. Since you only paid END on startup, I'm not convinced you must shut the power down to take a recovery (off PS 12, of course). Without any "rules support", I'm inclined to say I would allow this on one of two bases. One - you must shut the power down if you wisah to take a recovery other than PS 12 (which may be correct anyway). Two - the power is "activated" once per turn, so you pay 12 END each turn to maintain the power. Now we're paying 3 END per bonus phase, which doesn't seem unreasonable on either side. [To me - the player will call it highway robbery, and Farkling will call me a munchkin enabler for considering it I think the 1 1/2 d6 side effect mentioned below is more in the game, but that's now 5 points per phase (1/2 die will average 2 so that should be the standard effect). Given the nominal variance and frequency of die rolls, I think you're wasting points to go with a standard effect. Mind you, if you figure the character is almost certain to have a base Speed of 3 or 4, he's spending 35 or 40 END per turn on this - the power is self-defeating. OVERALL: I think either side effect or susceptibility works better than SPD - Costs END due to the mechanics of speed. Costs END only to activate also works reasonably well if appropriately defined, but no way would I let a player spend 12 END when he wakes up and keep +4 Speed running for free until he's forced to shut the power down. "SPD costs END" in any formn should mean significant END while the SPD is in use. Speed that takes an END toll isn't unreasonable, at least in my opinion. The bigger question is whether you would allow someone to achieve a Speed that high in any case. I'd be pretty leery of +4 SPD in, say, Fantasy Hero without some pretty crushing limits. Definitely time to take the player aside and discuss the availability of this effect to NPC's as well. In a Champions campaign, it may not be as devestating, depending on the character, but a high Speed remains very valuable, so it would definitely be a character by character decision. Speeds above a certain level is a definite "Stop Sign" in my books.

I'd be inclined to stick to the +1/4 "only when activated" - saving an extra 5 points on 4 bonus SPD hardly seems worth it for the huge multiplier on your END costs. If you had a 4 SPD to begin with, say, that's the difference between 4 END once and 32 END per turn. Better to just pay 2x END to start it (-1 x 1/2 = -1/2). The more I look at this, the more I think a susceptibility to using your bonus phases, which does END damage rather than STUN, is the better way to model SPD which costs END.

On reflection, my assertion that you should pay END for the bonus SPD in each phase of use also has a pretty big hole. Each phase of use only provides +1 Spd being used, so should only be 1 END. The problem with SPD is that it's an unusal characteristic. It's the only characteristic which is actually used by the turn, rather than by the phase, and the only one with an absolute maximum. This is what makes applying Costs END so weird. Compounding this, Speed is actually relatively cheap for the benefit it provides. The more I think about it, the more I come to agree with Farkling's preference to simply find another approach. A minor side effect would work, but that brings us back to how often this happens (phase or turn), but I think the susceptibility is the best approach. It's likely Very Common to use your extra Speed, so say 1d6 END loss each turn for each extra phase used (noting that 2d6 END equates to 1d6 STUN) and you get a 15 or 20 point disad. Plus, this is actually disadvantageous enough to be worth some points - average 3.5 END per extra phase.

+1 Speed costs 10 points, costs no END and doesn't require any actions to make it happen. Limiting speed as "costs END" doesn't save a heck of a lot.

Actually, the quote is that defenses defined by a lack of something are usually inapppropriate, not that it's illegal. With the right SFX, I might well allow "not having a force field up", but certainly not in tandem with "NND: force field" BTW, "not breathing" would be another term for "LS (elf contained breathing) or holds breath", so starting with "not" clearly doesn't eliminate the power.

Ditto It would be nice to see how this has worked in a game, rather than speculating on it. A lot depends on how much END the character has, and how much he uses for other purposes, but that could be said about a lot of constructs. I picture it as a phase by phase power. One point of Speed buys you one more phase. This is what you get, so it's what you pay for. Any other ability costs END when you use it, not for the privilege of having it. I see no reasons "Speed costs END" should be different. A character with an AID that costs END doesn't pay END for the privilege of being able to use an AID, he pays when he actually puts it into action. For Speed, that's when he decides to use the phase. I hadn't thought about aborting, to be honest. The character could abort his next phase in any case, however, so I think if he aborts between a "regular" phase and a "bonus" phase, he'd have to pay the END at the start of his "bonus phase" or he'll lose the next regular phase. As far as balance goes, I think my previous post makes it pretty clear - if charging every phase is for balance purposes, then it's missed the mark. I've played since 1st Ed, and I find it pretty tough to classify STR, CON, DEX, BOD as roleplaying stats rather than combat stats. BOD, in particular, serves basically the same purpose as STUN - it measures how much damage can you absorb before you can go no more. Obviously, you choose to activate your PD before you're struck (maybe instantaneously before when you abort, but before nonetheless). But you can choose to have it on or off in any given phase. If you choose, at the start of your phase, not to have that extra PD, you don't pay END. Having the choice to have PD available does not cost END - having the extra defense costs END. If I look at the tactical situation in ph 4, I may decide I can afford to shut off my extra PD until my next phase. Likewise, having the choice to take an extra phase or not should not cost END. The decision to "activate" that extra phase should cost END. When my turn comes up in [bonus] phase 2, I can either pay the end and have a phase, or I can decide the tactical situation is such that I will forego the opportunity, not pay the END and not have that phase available to me. What I would not allow the character to do is decide in mid-phase 3 that he now wants to pay the END for phase 2 and take his "reserved phase". Either you pay the END points when the phase would otherwise start, or forget it. Although, as discussed below, I'm starting to think maybe an earlier commitment would be appropriate. The sad thing about paying every phase (extra phase and regular phase alike) is that the guy getting the greatest benefit pays the least. I'd say +3 onto a 3 Speed in an NCM campaign is more effective than +3 onto a 6 SPD in a spers campaign. I don;t like the "ph 12" restriction, as it is merely a construct of the artificial breakdown of time into 12 phase turns. There's no magic to when the character activates any other power, and the "speed change" optional system covers this off well enough for me. However, as I think on it, I wonder whether it would be better to make the player commit in his actual phase. So, if you have 3 SPD, +3 costs END, perhaps you should have to pay END of 3 on Phase 12 if you want Phase 2 to be available. In other words, you start "pushing" to move faster in ph 12 and the effect occurs in ph 2. The character would next choose in ph 4 whether he wants to pay 3 END and move in Ph 6, or save the END and move next on Ph 8. If he foregoes the extra phase in Ph 4, and the opposition gathers reinforcements on Ph 5, it's too late - you'll have to wait until Ph 8 to activate "hypermove" again. Whichever method you choose will have pros and cons. Make that Susceptibility per turn, for example, with 1d6 for each extra phase used, and the character avoids the detrimental effects for all phases occuring in the last turn of battle (which, in my experience, is a significant portion of all combat turns)

I'd say it is Gestures, but only if you accept the character cannot be encumbered, Grabbed, etc. and still use the power. Absent that restriction, it's probably just a special effect. The Shield is Constantly Gestures (throughout power; -1/2). Note that one handed gestures are the norm - if he needed two hands to gesture for one power, that's an additional -1/4.

So the motivation for players to spend points on these skills would be what? You're letting them get the benefits and avoid the point costs. I owuld be tempted to put some investigative leads in a scenario and, if they don't follow up, they miss some crucial opportunity to foil the villain's plans and he gets away with something. Then have a police detective or nosy reporter find the missing clue, and get it published - "Heros Missed the Boat - Film at 11". Better (worse?) introduce a rival team of heroes that includes members with skills and have them foil crimes "our heroes" missed. See how fast some xp gets spent in rectifying this deficiency. You think a head hit is painful, try a solid blow to the ego!

I'll weigh in on the "play the NPC's" side as well. This is also a good way of simulating those "Two Teams Get Togather" scenarios when tyey break into sub-teams. Let the guys on the other mission run the allies on this one.

Ummm...why not just buy +14 DCV, costs END to activate? Same real cost; 1/3 the END; same likelihood I'd approve it... which was the point of the exercise I guess the CE has the advantage of looking like it doesn't violate campaign CV restrictions.

Rule Zero applies nicely here. If the players foci are easily broken, so are the villains' foci. If the players's foci are all unbreakable, so are the villains. Don't you choose between Breakable and Unbreakable when you make the focus anyway? [Cheap shot - I wouldn't let you have an "unbreakable" handgun either.] But the fact there's no cost difference implies the benefits of easy replacement should offset the drawbacks of it being breakable in the first place. I don't see a lot of focus breakage, but disarming an OAF is clearly a logical combat tactic. In some cases, so is using it against you.

I do see your poiint here, but you also have the option to use your other powers, even if they aren't activated, and you don't suck up END for that. The question comes down to when do you actually USE that bonus speed. You don't pay END for the privilege of having extra STR that you don't use. That can be used between phases (for example for casual STR when grabbed or entangled), but the exertion costs END? Why should Speed cost END for being available, instead of for being used? To me, the bigger issue isn't "Will I allow a limitation on the SPD", but "WIll I allow this SPD in the first place". SPD isn't all that expensive, so my "Munchkin" approach would be to just buy it up as high as possible and suck up the point cost. Maybe limit it to certain actions (see Menton and grond for examples), but not set it up to cost me END (I need that for my overpowered attacks and defenses) or actually be UNAVAILABLE sometimes. Maybe your munchkins aren't as bright. Or maybe they see something I don't in limiting the Speed. My answer is far more likely to be "Limited or not, you aren't getting a 10 Speed" than quibbling over the value or mechanics of the limitation itself. With that in mind, let's assume you are a munchkin, and you have to choose between the various options of: +4 Speed - 40 points, no END, always available +4 Speed - costs END to activate, 2x END - that's 8 END to activate and it stays up until I'm KO'd. Cost: 27 points (limitation of +1 halved because it's only to activate) I have to wait for my first normal phase to activate it (but that will often be Phase 12 when combat starts). +4 Speed, costs END - same 27 points, but now I spend 16 END a turn, assuming my "lenient" approach (way more if I spend every phase in the turn). Maybe (my lenient approach) I don't have to wait until my normal phase to activate it. Same point cost, but way more END spent, even under my approach. Now I'm thinking costs end per phase isn't a big enough limit at +1/2. Is the Munchkin going to take "costs END" under either approach? Why should he? The character that takes Costs End under either approach is taking on a greater limitation for exactly the same point break, so anyone focusing on efficient character design won't take it. I looked at an Aid mechanic to get the same effect, but it would be way more expensive (even if you took Costs END and is Self Only - better to just buy more stats), so we won't go there. [i lost my post, so I don't want to type it again.] RSR...hmmm...the skill's fairly cheap, and RSR's a +1/2. Hmmm...if it does have an activation roll (or a RSR), when does he roll? Once to activate or every time he wants to use it? Based on your comments (way) above, it must only be when he activates it. Until he activates his Speed, he doesn't have a phase to try to activate it, does he? SPD onlky costs 10 points per, so the minuses are manageable. If you put Persistent on it as well, so it doesn't stop when you're knocked out, you get back to having +4 Speed (and it costs the same 40 points, so why not?). MUNCHKIN MODE ON: "Mr GM, Sir, I'm in the shower after getting up and I take a 0 Phase action to activate my Speed Bonus. < Under my methodology, since he would pay END in each extra phase (ie when he decides to use the bonus Speed), he would also roll activation in each extra phase. NITRO MODE ON: "OK, Kid, you activated one extra phase in the shower. You get to work 2 seconds early. If you want to activate it again, you'll have to roll again. EVERY PHASE you want gets a roll. And quit wasting game time or I'll penalize you XP until you're an Incompetent Normal."NITRO MODE OFF <> Either a Side Effect or the Susceptibility to simulate the END loss is defintely another way to go. That side effect will be pretty high end unless your Speed has an activation roll/skill roll, even if relatively low power, since it happens every time. The susceptibility can be set to go off only after X Phases of use, so allows for the most customized END loss. SUMMARIZED: 1. The Munchkin issue comes down more to how much Speed allowed than what limitations it can have. 2. Only a completely incompetent munchkin couldn't find a better way to squeeze out a +1/2 limitation than Costs END. 3. The detrimental impact of Costs END should be at least somewhat balanced with the effects of other limitations of equal value.

What else is likely in the hex? I got my target - if I throw around some other debris it may not be an issue. I think TK - 1 hex could be devestating against martial artists, speedsters and other high DCV characters. Not only does the attackget around their high DCV, but they are now "stuck" until they can break out, which meanms others may be able to get a solid hit in.

Well, all the SOB talk forced me to actually look at all the online stuff and I'll be shelling out some more $$ before too long...Hero is about the only line I don't even think about - if it's released for a genre I'll use, just buy it. Steve, you can't win. If you don't release a great product every time, we'll complain that you let down the fans. When you keep releasing great products at a rapid pace, we'll complain that you're grabbing all our cash. Oh well - if we had nothing to gripe about, we'd never be happy. If only my worst problem was too much great stuff from Hero

In Segment 2, the character benefits. He's moving earlier than he normally wpould, and it costs him none of his later phases. Therefore, he should pay END to have access to phase 2. In phase 4, however, he would have moved anyway. Why should he pay again to access phase 4? As well, why should a 2 speed character who buys +2 SPD, costs END, pay 8 END per turn, but a 6 SPD character who buys +2 SPD costs END pay 16 END? He's certainly not getting twice the benefits the first one gets! I agree with you that Speed should be monitored very closely, and that includes limited Speed. I don't have a specific usage in mind; the issue comes from another thread. It's beneficial to have +20 STR. That's why you pay points for it. However, if you haven't used it in a given phase, you don't pay any END for it, despite the fact it may benefit you at some other time in the turn. Similarly, there's no benefit from +2 SPD in phase 12. Which official way? The one Steve ruled this morning, or the FAQ? If you turn your force field off at the start of your phase, do you pay END for it that phase? Generally, once you stop paying END the power shuts off. Arguably, that means the bonus speed shuts off immediately, but if the bonus speed is not available, the character lacks a phase in which to take the zero phase action to shut off the power. Changing speeds is a zero phase action. The character next acts in the next phase which is a phase for both speeds. Segment 4 is a phase for both 3 and 6 speeds, so the character whose speed changes on Phase 2 should next act on Phase 4 - and turn his Speed Bonus back on. Appropriately, the character should have a choice at each "bonus phase" - if you want the phase to be available, you pay the END immediately on your turn. Otherwise, you wait for your next phase as normal.

I like original characters if there's a need for them, but why clutter up the landscape? If you need an energy projector, there's lots already out there, so give us a name from an existing product, and an idea of his abilities that are central to his purpose in the adventure so those who prefer to use, choose or design their own can do so. If I can get 12 pages more adventure because you use some pre-existing villains not central to the story, I'm happy.

At least make the defense "Life Support" so it's not obviously targeted at him. HEY - You just gave me the power! Multipower (60 point base) Slot 1: 6d6 NND: DEF Force Field Slot 2: 6d6 NND: DEF not having a force field COST: 72 points (ultra slots) I had a player try to bring in this construct many years ago. While I considered every villain having a small force field with an 11- activation, I decided to just deny the power instead

Sorry; I can't fiigure out whether you're arguing for or against my point here, Tim, but your first sentence sums of the crux of the issue. Either way, thanks for clarifying the issue. The question is which phases you are "using" +Speed. COMMENCE TIRADE: Why should it cost more END per turn for a 6 Speed character to add two to his Speed than it costs for a 2 Speed character to add 2 to his speed? I can see no reason in terms of logic, and no reason in terms of game balance. They pay for EB each phase it is used, and they get an attack each phase they use it. They pay for STR each phase they use it, not just for the privilege of being strong. They pay END to move each phase they move, and they move each phase. Why should they pay for extra Speed when it's not actually in use? You pay END when you USE an ability, not just for the privilege of having it available for use. The only reason for wanting him to pay END in each phase is because we look at a turn as a discrete 12 segment time period, instead of a concenience to chunk up time for game measurement. Do you think the characters somehow "know" that this is Phase 12, so a new turn will start momentarily? The character is not benefiting from extra Speed in those segments he would get an action anyway. Let's assume a 3 SPD with +3 Speed, costs END. He can turn the power on and off at will, like any power (including constant powers). Combat starts in phase 12. So he turns the power on, pays 3 END, and recovers it in post segment 12. His extra speed is on, so he moves in phase 2. The first thing he does is shut off the power. It lasts until the end of his phase (see FAQ re being stunned), so he then acts normally on Phase 2. On Phase 4, his bonus speed is off, but he mnoves on Phase 4 anyway. Activate +3 Speed, costs END. Pay 3 END. Move in Phase 4. Wash, rinse, repeat. In the course of a turn, assuming he chooses to pay the END, the character pays 9 End (3 x 3) and gets 3 extra phases. 1 extra phase = 1 END cost. The character pays the same END as if he paid end on his extra phases - exactly as he should. END TIRADE

Sorry to offend. I just found it odd to see the same issue ruled two different ways and was hoping you might comment on the issue further. My thinking was that it's not a clear-cut rules issue given you had effectively ruled both ways. Mind you, it also shows how careful any GM has to be in considering rulings - the other way was persuasive enough to make the FAQ, and this morning's post saw a complete 180 on that ruling. Present the right arguments, and the wrong conclusion is easy to obtain. I'd be curious to see how either approach has worked out by anyone who's run/GM'd a character with Speed that costs END.

Or buy 1 hex area - it's a lot tougher to miss then. Especially if you make the power BoECV - then you get no range penalties.

I like the -30 approach - a KO with spillover shouldn't equate to body damage from a non-lethal attack. And it need not be BOD damage. Maybe it's a Sleep spell which logically doesn't do BOD (unless you hit your head on the way down, I guess). But maybe if you keep "sleeping" the target long enough, he develops a sleep disorder - narcolepsy, maybe. That knockout gas causes a respiratory ailment, perhaps a long-term END or REC drain. And if the special effect fits, maybe you have an attack that literally can never do anything permanent.

It's a role playing game. Not every character will take the most tactically sound approach, nor should they. I'm as much a fan of the role playing side of the campaign. If my character is an idealistic hero, hitting a man when he's down is not an option. If my character loses because he's played within his limitations, well I guess he loses. I'd likely have ditched the campaign you described as well, as opposition that only knows one tactic (fight til you're dead) gets boring in a pretty short period. Looked at from the other side, if the five agents managed to knock the hero out, do they take a few more shots "just to make sure", or do they go back to robbing the bank while our hero takes recoveries? I can tell you which one is smarter tactically, but I can also tell you what the superhero genre favours.

I would expect the "selfish, evil, obviously flawed supervillains" to be far more willing to hit a guy when he's down, which is where the discussion started. Your world-conquering schemes have been foiled 7 times by the Caped Avenger, but this time you were better prepared and, after a hard-fought battle, you knocked him out. Do you, the "selfish, evil, obviously flawed supervillain", leave him where he lies and go bask in your glory, or finish him off so he won't be a problem in the future? Common sense says kill him off. But genre says "the villains don't behave like that". So you walk away, or you wait for him to recover and gloat, or you put him in a fiendish deathtrap he can escape if he has his wits about him. Assume the villain recovers in PS 12 from being at -11 Stun. Let's say he's a mercenary - no special reason for fighting to the death. he's going to take a look around him. Let's say there's a couple down on each side, and the fight still looks fairly even. He'll probably rejoin the fight - there's still a fair chance of achieving whatever the objective was. If there's one last ally left and the heroes are all over him, the first inkling Our Heroes will have that this guy woke up will be when they count the prisoners - he'll be long gone. But how often does he zap one of the fallen heroes to "make sure he'll stay down"? Well, IMO, about as often as the PC's zap their fallen opponents. Essentially, the PC's are establishing what the "genre convention" is - let the villains play along.

Buy them two separate claws and a bite (for example) and let them multiple power attack. Or they can Sweep, or use Two weapon fighting.

Sure it is. Based on the FAQ, I'll let you hit d6-1 times. Tell you what - let's be generous and make it a WHOLE d6! But I would allow that power, so I guess it's outside the thread