Hugh Neilson

Your costs look point for point. Have I missed somewhere where the extra cost was paid? Thought about No Hit locations, but our game doesnt use em. You can always add them in. I don't use them in Supers either. The only reason I thought of it was your "No Targetting" limitation on the HKA - is that intended to represent something else? Never really liked the excessive point costs for the full suite of of automaton powers, since for like half the cost you could make a brick whos just as invulnerable, and twice as deadly. Of course, the automaton powers aren't intended for player characters, so I suspedct they have not been as carefully valued. Having to buy some regeneration so you can be defeated without being destroyed further boosts the costs. As well, as a GM, I can let the automaton be fairly fragile, but as a PC, I like to last for a while. I've never sat down and statted out an automaton as a PC, but "You have to get me with BOD" is a pretty hefty advantage, especially against killing attacks. Even with unreasonable (say 45) defenses, a 5x stun multiple on a 4d6 HKA (say 14 BOD - average) gets 25 STUN through, but just bounces off the 15 DEF automaton. Higher BOD will do some damage, but every 1 BOD is +5 STUN for our brick. Of course, only one in six hits is a 5x STUN multiple. I doubt the concept would hold much punch at the 350 level. I dont plan on playing him, just made it up to share. Ummm...near as I can tell, the character can do 14d6 - 17d6 with martial maneuvers (35 STR plus DC's), and falls just shy of 6d6 AP Killing if you combine his Off Strike with HKA (5d6+1 if you use the martial strike). OCV 13 DCV 12, average damage 18 BOD, 48 STUN AP (max STUN 90 on average BOD), and average 25" knockback (18 x 2 - 11) seems extremely powerful to me. You could probably lose all the advantages on the HKA, reduce MA damage classes somewhat, ditch the flash , reduce flight to 8", maybe take the 45 point "takes no STUN" and lose some powers as you get injured, drop Power Defence and reduce levels and other combat skills to drop into the 350 point range. Over time, you'd probably pick up a lot of these with xp (and you'd likely want a bit more DEF). Oh, and sell back your REC - what do you have to recover anyway? Before levels and skills, that shaves off about 96 points (and, of course, pares him down to a more bare-bones character - but that's what starting characters are all about, isn't it?) [Actually, if you dropped a SPD point, and bought some DEF as armor instead of PD/ED, you could have "normal characteristic maxima" - whatever those are for a sword!]

Agreed. However, as I said in an earlier post, I generally find the Hero products have solid material throughout. Also, I'm sure that, like me, you've seen 32 page products that still manage to include a lot of padding - the fact that it's smaller doesn't mean it's not padded to get as "large" as it did.

I do like the logic of getting more pages per $$ (one reason I like Hero's products) - I'll have to raise that to the naysayers. Why pay $10 for a 32 page sourcebook? For $40 you can get a 256 page Hero book - that's twice as much for the same price! For those who frequent the traditional "comic shop with the occasional game as a sideline", it never hurts to point out that Champions is a Super Hero RPG - do you think your comic reading customers (who come in every week) will more likely "Impulse buy" a product with a guy with a sword on the cover, or one with a four colour super battle? Comic readers are more likely to branch into a Supers RPG. Your comic store owner may not know anything about RPG's (some do; some don't), but he does know that any new product a customer gets interested in translates to more sales.

Steve, I'm not down on the Hero products - I'd rather spend the $25 (US - more like $40 up here in Canada!) and get a product with meat to it. Hero does a thorough job on its products, and there's no padding in a 272 page book (unlike SOME companies who seem to need third-rate material to fill 48 or 64 pages). But the per unit cost is higher, so the retailer takes a greater risk if he buys a shelf copy and no one picks it up. He can buy 4 $10 supplements (in my dollars) and, if a couple sell, he's at least broken even. With the big Hero book, he risks the whole amount sitting unsold. Of course, Hero also has the advantage of being a known name - why buy a bunch of stuff from some "d20 open license" startup which may turn out to be junk, when we can get some recognized Hero product that sells through. This makes more of a difference to a store that focuses on games than to one that just dabbles, I suppose. I always like to ask in any store where I don't see Hore products - if enough people ask "Why don't you carry this?" that translates into "Hey, you lost an easy sale" and they start looking in to the product. Hey, it's in my best interest - more sales for Hero = bigger print runs = lower costs, and more players = more demand for product = more reason for Hero to put out more good product. And I always like getting more product from Hero! [Now if you could send my gaming store the name of some distributors...seems he really has to search for some of the product - he does, because he knows he has a sale the day it arrives, but he often has to check with several distributors.]

Re: Re: Fight SMARTER, not harder! Well, World's Finest ran for years teaming Superman and Batman. The Avengers run with a Thunder God on one hand and a guy who talks to ants on the other. Compare the Thing and Mr. Fantastic. The catch is that the writer makes it work - there's always something for Superman to do, and somewhere for Batman to shine. Mind you, this leads to theories like "The scientists and super-advanced aliens just go duh, what do we do Batman - therefore Batman has an area effect INT drain." Of course, the writer doesn't have to put up with Superman's player interrupting "But I can do this to deal with it", or explaining why a gun that topples the Thunder God doesn't kill the carny guy with the trick arrows. Plus, the writer gets a month at a time to come up with a new adventure. He also gets to decide that the character who can solve it all, or who has nothing to do, is otherwise occupied. Regardless of genre, there are always some staples of the written material that just don't work well in the game.

Aren't you still Stunned if you take a hit? You need "Cannot be Stunned"? NO - INCLUDED UNDER TAKES NO STUN - SORRY I suspect "No Hit Locations" (especially since you take a hit location based limitation on your KA) may be appropriate (where are a sword's vitals?). Did you mean to lose the Restrainable on your flight? Also, all your defenses are divided by three when you Take no Stun, so I guess you have 5/5? Now I'm curious how you would scale down to 350 pts. Oh, and if you're a geezer gamer so am I

1d6 RKA, Armor Piercing Penetrating Autofire (back in the +4 OCV/10 shots) days. It was supposed to be a backup weapon sidearm. It was a Brick Destructor. OCV 18 vs DCV 3 for Huge Brick w/ Growth al on meant 5 hits on a 17 - just stay out of his reach and he'll be dead in a few phases (if the charges hold out). There's a power that got modified FAST - Penetrating had just been added to the rules, and we didn't realize its impact until too late...

But, oddly, some people do durvive falling a great distance. If we want to address realism, people also die from falling on the sidewalk - 1d6 at most under the Hero system. And how realistic are weapons' damage? The biggest weapons on the table on p 329 inflicts 2d6+1 KA - average of 8 BOD. If we assume the wielder has STR of 31 (well above "human"), he gets 3d6+1 (2 handed weapon for 16 STR min), so average of 11.5 - enough to disable a human, but he can't kill a 10 BOD human with a chest or stomach hit. A stiletto, with maximum STR adds, can only inflict 7 BOD, so can't instantly kill a man stabbed in the throat, eye or heart.Bows are similarly limited. Nothing under a heavy weapon can kill instantly without a head/vitals shot and a good BOD roll, and many can get both and still leave a living victim. Can a 20 BOD man be killed instantly by a Luger P-08? I suggest he can - but not in Hero! Would it be unreasonable of me to suggest that, perhaps, realism should be sacrificed in the interests of playability? It's not a lot of fun spending 95% of your game time creating new characters to replace the deceased.

Hmmm...what about a Transform that transforms the target into your possessed slave, and linked EDM that moves you to another dimension when Transform completes the transformation. Make the Transform non-cumulative and fixed effect - sufficient Power Defense or BOD renders the target immune. Not everyone could be possessed by these guys, after all. I'd let you switch the defense to Mental Defense (or maybe some other esoteric defense about equally common) depending on special effects. Anyone out there generous enough to give me the EDM as a side effect?

Hmmm...Summon, Specific Being (+1); Only that one specific person (-2); Side Effect (you go where summoned being was; always happens; Extreme; -2); Cannot control summoned being (-2 based on Antagonistic + strong willed being 1 1/4); you can castle with a 350 point character for 10 points. So why did you want charges? Yes it's cheesy. Would I allow it in my campaign? Depends - if I think the effect they're trying to achieve is of limited value, I probably would. Especially if the transferee is a friend (can't use it to get out of danger without exposing the other to danger). I'm reminded of a villain who could castle. He was pretty unhappy when he tried it on Vanadium Man (never thought a +5/+5 fully invisible hardened force field usable against others would turn out to be so much fun...)

Nothing sells like success. If the retailer orders it, and it sits on the shelf, why would he order more of it? Get your friends, your co-gamers, etc. to ask for the product. Then buy it when it comes in. Hero is at a disadvantage here, in my opinion. They produce HUGE books, which is great for you and me because we get lots of material. It's not great for the store owner because it means higher cost, which means a bigger risk if it sits on the shelf. The store I patronize stocks comics and games, and RPG's are not their main line of business. I go on the Hero web site, and give the owner a list of the product I'd like when it comes out. He knows I'll buy it, so he brings it in. And he gives me a pretty fair discount, since he knows whatever he orders on my behalf will be cash in his hand within a week of receipt. I could order it off the website, but that doesn't give my game store much reason to stock the product, does it?

No offense intended, CA - I went to your links myself, and they are the obvious answers but, as one poster notes, very expensive for their effects. In any case, I'm sorry if you took my opener as a shot - it wasn't intended as one!

After posting the question, I vistied the FAQ, which overs off some areas (esp. duplicates with less points than the base character) and opens up others (like why the FAQ suggests the duplicates have points tied up in Duplication they don't actually possess when FRED says only the base character pays for duplication). As a GM, I would likely not allow a player to use these approaches to effectively buy himself a higher point character. If a GM did, I would expect a bit of hard time with the other players, who stuck to the campaign limits. Especially if you follow the FAQ guidance that the higher point duplicate need not cover the excess with disadvantages since the base character paid for him to be that powerful.

So what if it's been discussed before? There's no original concepts left anyway... Hmmm...can we use a Transform on the target to make him an Unwilling Slave, then use Despolid only to hide in a transformed slave? What about Extra Dimensional Movement Usable on Others (target just "goes away" until "vacated") and a VPP only for Multiforms, only to take on the form of the person you possessed. Maybe some limits to cover off characters who just cannot be possessed. This is one of those concepts that works great in the comics (where the writers decide who you can and can't possess) but can be dicy at the gaming table.

Hmmm...how bad could we point whore this concept? The Focus is immobile anyway - why not build it as part of a base? This could be a pretty high-powered base since the "base character" gets left behind in the base for the duration anyway and need not spend a lot of extra points. As for the 'bot itself, while I agree with the comments on multiform versus duplication, the fact is that the "base character" is still there, albeit inactive. A classic scenario for a character of this nature will be the "villains rob bank/attack world peace conference/just mindlessly ra,page and heroes rush out to stop them" variety. In the middle of the battle, ROBOT stops moving. Why? The mastermind who hired the villains to cause a distraction has broken into "Home Base" and removed the base character from the control device. Whether he now supplants the robot's controller, kidnaps the base character to build more, or what have you, you just know this is a scenario that's going to happen. And it wouldn't happen if this were a multiform since the base character would be inside the robot somewhere. So I'd say Multiform if you control the robot from on board, but duplication when the "pilot" is left behind in a separate location. Since only one can be active at a time, the base character should have a pretty good limit on his duplication. hmmm...as another possibility, what if the machine is a Summon for a slavishly loyal robot...

OK, nit picks first: Shouldn't it weigh 800 kg (which is still a lot)? [And how come 5e says don't buy growth and shrinking always on, but density increase is OK?] Back to the issues: I like the concept (like other posters). So much for your "cheese" theory, huh? Rather than buy +3 DCV, why not a level or two of shrinking (the sword might be 6' long, but it's not really man-sized, is it?) That would offset the density increase weight gain, and give you bonus DCV. Your background shows the sword being weilded by someone, which seems unlikely - what's the STR min for a 6,400 kg weapon I think you may have meant to buy more automaton powers. With no Stun, and absent certain automoton powers, you're unconscious (not to mention stunned on any hit that gets through as you have no CON). I assume you intended to buy "takes no STUN" (with or without loss of powers) and "Cannot be Stunned" as automoton powers. [i keep meaning to work on an automoton PC...] I guess one might question whether an effective 80 STR to escape grabs really leaves your flight "restrainable", but that's pretty minor. As I recall, the "healing" mod for extra time to once per turn is -1 (I can't work the math on your regeneration anyway). The point whore in me says there's got to be a way to get an Elemental Control: "It's a SWORD!" in there somehow. Seems odd to have a sword with no killing attack powers. As I look at the overall damage, I can tell you it wouldn't be in my campaign - 18 to 21d6 seems a bit largish (7d6 STR + 4d6 HA + 7-10 MA). [Mind you, if you were to agree not to change the STUN, we could call it even, since the character will always be asleep anyway.] But that's just a matter of campaign power levels. Hugh

Ohhhkayyy...I'll take a run at it! "Swallowing whole" isn't a concept I've seen a lot in Hero. I'm not certain Entangle is the way to go. The "breaks the entangle" thing would seem a bit painful. What about a Grab? You could then have other powers that only work on a Grabbed target (such as Darkness so he can't see out - bit kludgy but it works). PROBLEM: Are your hands now full? SOLUTION: Extra Limbs (perhaps inherent) which can only be used to hold an already Grabbed target. Make them fully Invisible. [i realize he has no actual "limbs", but doesn't the Beast have extra limbs in that his feet can be used as effectively as his hands?] It's an unusual concept, so you probably have to do some creative rules interpretations, but it should work. You mentiooned "villain", so I assume you don't have to clear this with the GM anyway. [As a GM, I'd be less concerned with the ability itself than with its consistency with the genre. And that really depends on the character itself more than the fact it swallows opponents whole.]

Getting beyond the CVK itself, there are really two issues here. First, were the player and the GM on the same page about what this disad means? I find some players, most commonly inexperienced players or players not looking to role play, pick disad's frim the sidebar. "Code vs Killing - 20 points - OK, 130 points to go" I always try to sit players down and say, "OK, based on this disad, here's where I think the character is coming from" A 20 point C vs K is Superman/Batman - "no way; killing is always wrong; even if he's killed millions, it would be wrong for him to die for it" The player may say "OK, I don;t see it that strong, here's what I see" and we re-tally the points accordingly. Maybe the charcater really has "Believes criminals deserve to die". He won't pull the trigger himself, but would lobby for the death penalty in many cases. Maybe he would pull the trigger himself. When it turns out we weren't on the same page, I attribute that to failure to communicate - at least as much my fault as the player's. So we discuss it, and the player should probably revise the character to reduce or remove the C vs K and add a more appropriate disadvantage. Second, is it a player who just doesn't care? Disad's are only there to build up the character. "I'd never have taken a flaw if I thought the GM was going to EXPLOIT it!". Some care about the game, just not the RP. Just wants as much power as he can grab and sees the game as an exercise in tactics, for example. ANSER: See p 346 f 5e - the character roleplays poorly (never remembers his disad's, for example) so -1 xp. Note that he's not growing as fast as his teammates (assuming they role play better) so, to meet his goal of upping his power, he'll probably try to play his disad's. If he just doesn't care about the game, maybe he should be asked to leave, but that's extreme. How many people build a Champions character if they don't actually care to play the game? BACK TO THE SPECIFICS My first thought here is "some hero!". Maybe when the whole group is Hunted by law enforcement for numerous legitimate reasons, we're not "Champions" any more. Sounds like the two players noted are up for membership in the Knights of the Dinner Table. In game consequences such as disad mutation has been discussed by lots of other posters. One thing hasn't, however. What about the other players? Have they had anything to say about their teammates' actions? Do any of them have codes vs killing (likely yes if this is a 4 colour game!). Are they just standing idly by? Too often, players, even good players, will say "well, he's a PC so we have to put up with his behaviour". 25 points of "Believes PC's can do whatever they feel like"? Paid for "Detect Player Characters"? "DIstinctive Features - "PC" tattooed on forehead? The characters don't know who a PC is - would they but up with that behaviour from an NPC, or would they bring him in? Maybe you've just found a new nemesis for your other player characters, and a nice new Hunted for the Killers.

"Def is a lot better than Body for entangles. Def applies to attack after attack. Body is essentially Def with 1 use." In general, I would agree. It is also advantageous to have more BOD in a smaller entangle (that will likely be escaped in 1 shot) since it makes it harder to double the body and get a full phase, but in general DEF is more useful. But all this does is turn the secondary question around to "why does +1 DEF cost the same as +1d6 BOD?" instead of "Why does "entangle with no DEF carry a greater limit than Entangle with 1 BOD?". The reasoning behind limiting extra DEF or extra dice to double the other item is the real question. Neither limitation would be needed if that restriction were lifted. Extrapolating from the limits, perhaps the cost for extra DEF should be 6 2/3 (10/1.5; 3 DEF for 20 points), and the cost of an extra d6 BOD should be 4 (10/2.5). The aggregate is slightly more than the 10 points per d6 cost, but sometimes customization is a bit more expensive.

Last one for tonight - what is the rationale behind prohibiting dice being more than double DEF and vice versa? A character can have an entangle with only 1 DOD, or one with no defense, which would just as easily be accomplished by eliminating this restriction. Plus, entangle with no defense costs 4 points per die, when an extra d6 of entangle costs 5 points. Ent w/ 1 BOD is only -1/2, meaning I'm paying 6 2/3 points for +1 DEF instead of 5. Is there any logical reason for these costs to vary? I suspect a lot of these answers are derived from playtesting in the design process, and look forward to your insights. Thanks Hugh

Yes, I'm getting all my 5e Q's out now that I've registered... In general, I think Adjustment powers got slapped down in 5e as a reaction (or overreaction) to perceived abuses. Looking at some of the issues: 1. I could buy Absorbtion (or Aid) applying half to the stat I wish to raise, and half to Absorption to increase the maximum. This simulates unlimited absorbtion/aid. Why not just allow this as a +1 advantage? 2. Transfer now cannot be used as a drain if max points have been transferred. Why would someone not buy a Drain and a linked Aid? The Aid would also be self only, and limited to points drained. Seems to me that's much cheaper than a Transfer, PLUS you get to use the drain if your aid is maxed out. 3. Regeneration essentially permits unlimited Healing at a cost. If I apply the listed advantages and limitations, I should pay 8 points per die. Instead, I really pay 12 points per die (3 points standard effect instead of 2). That implies, working the math backwards, that "no maximum" is a +1 advantage. Consistent wth Q1, oddly - perhaps this is the same logic used in the design? 4. Seems to me that healing is just a modified form of Aid. Healing allows a permanent recovery of lost points, with the cost of being unable to raise the ability above its starting figure. This implies "permanent recovery" could be an advantage equal to the limitation on "only to starting stat level". A +1 would seem logical (how often are stats drained anyway, such that "only to starting" is useful?) The real problem is persistent aid (or healing) to Stun and/or End. These should be carefully examined in any case, but I question the need to remove the posssibility from the rules (especially given the impact on long-term drains and similar stat removers, which essentially take away a character's character points).

OK, I've been playing since FIRST edition, and generally can work out the rules for myself. However, this one has sat wrong with me since 5e came out. What am I missing? A 350 point character spends 150 points on Duplication. He gets Telkekinetic Sidekicks as listed on page 101. These duplicates should have 250 points and be identical to the originating character as they are not altered duplicates. But the base character has 350 points, not 250, so they can't be identical. More to the point, only the base character pays points for duplication. The duplicates, therefore, should only be 200 point characters - they have all of Base Character's points, less 150 for duplication. What happens to the extra 50 points provided to the duplicates? Moving right along, if one follows the rules to the letter for Duplication, Summon and Multiform, do they not enable the point limits to be circumvented? Duplicates can have more points than the base if altered, and paid for point for point. A 350 point character could have a 455 point duplicate (70 points for Duplication to 350 + 105 points to add 105, x2 for the 100% altered advantage. Now have the duplicate buy duplication... Of course, the base character(s) in this example are basket cases. Used with some restraint, this can create a fairly weak base character and a reasonable character (eg a 350 point super) who could otherwise be the base character and take his "base character" as a DNPC. This is a concept I'm considering, actually. Mutiform and Summon are worse in that they don't require one to spend point for point to exceed the base character's point level (the Multiform example even includes a 400 point form of a 350 point character as an example). Say I spend 200 points of my 350 on a 500 point totally loyal Summon (hmmm...why not spend 250 and summon 32 of them?). I guess it's not unprecedented - look at Johnny Thunder and Thunderbolt (call it duplication or call it Summon, the result is the same). But is this the intent? It's easy to say "GM Override", but I dislike the idea that the rules should generally be overridden. Thanks Hugh