Hugh Neilson

I'm pretty sure 1e was +4 OCV and you hit again for every 2 you succeeded by, with 10 shots fired.

I would leave the builds without STR MIN. The damage cap linked to the weapon takes his STR MIN for the correct weapon into account.

While the weapon of opportunity would have an STR min, if used as a weapon in its own right, under the builds presented above, it is a Focus for an attack purchased entirely with points. The build for those attacks has no limitation for an STR min, and therefore should not have any STR min. Let's look at one of the builds as an example The character wields a Greatsword. Let's give him a 22 STR, and a Martial Arts maneuver that adds +2 DCs. If he uses the Greatsword normally, he can attack at +1 OCV for 3d6 KA damage (2d6 from the sword, +1 DC from STR, +2 MA DCs) at a cost of 2 END for STR. If he applies the maneuver above, he is capped at 3d6 KA, as that is the damage of the weapon being used. He has a 2 1/2d6 HKA, and 22 STR would normally allow him to add 4 DCs (even before the martial maneuver) for 4d6, but the limitation on the weapon precludes exceeding than 3d6 HKA. Using that Whirlwind costs him 5 END (45 AP for 2 1/2d6 AoE) + 1 END (15 STR to add 3DCs, pro rated down to increase 2 1/2 d6 to 3d6). Note that he no longer gets that +1 OCV< since the power build above does not have that bonus included. Now, let's assume he is under the influence of a powerful spell enhancing his STR to 50. He could do 4d6 KA with that Greatsword with 47 STR, for 40 END. But he can't exceed 3d6+1 if he uses Whirlwind Attack - he can add 2 DCs with 30 STR, but that's as high as he can go. If all he had was a dagger, which would cap out at 1d6+1 applying 16 STR, he could simply use 1d6+1 HKA, AoE for 3 END. If he prefers, he could use 1d6-1 for 1 END (15 AP) and tack on 15 STR for 1 END. But the "weapon max applies" precludes more than 1d6+1 assuming the doubling rule is in effect. If he had used the more typical "Naked advantage" approach, I would agree that the STR min is still relevant when the naked advantage is applied to his Greatsword, but here he is paying for the base KA, not just a +1/2 advantage to add on to the weapon he paid no points for. Of course, a naked advantage would not normally be allowed in a MP.

I'd say by RAW, his STR and MA would be pro rated for each of the attacks. The MP pays for 2 1/2d6 HKA, so 6 DCs added through STR and MA would get him to 3d6+1, and none of the MP slots have applied a STR min, so I would say as long as his Greatsword (with STR min, bonus DCs from STR and MA) can do 3d6+1, and he has 6 extra DCs to add from STR and MA (with no STR min), he can do 3d6+1 KA,

The solution starts on page 447, 6e v1, where the builds for the talents are spelled out. These are also pretty useful if you find the costs inappropriate - that may be because you would charge more for an advantage, or allow a higher limitation. I'm assuming the builds for the FH talents are similarly spelled out somewhere, though, and page count may have been at a premium.

I'd be more inclined to reject the naked advantage in a framework if the casters were not allowed to buy spells in a framework. I think a Martial with a Weapons Tricks multipower is a fair comparison to a Spells multipower, and the Weapon Tricks will often need naked advantages. Alternatively, I suppose you could build a slot of "2d6 HkA, Advantage, OIF Weapon of Opportunity, Damage cannot exceed normal damage for weapon used". That would force the weapon user to account for the full AP of the advantaged attack, like the spellcaster does. I'd want to see both in play and compare them, so I'd probably do a couple of builds under both approaches, pick the one that seems most appropriate and introduce it as a playtest to be assessed and, if it works poorly in play, we'll shift over. If my game included a lot of "metamagic" as well - spellcasters buying naked advantages outside the frameworks, used on spells within the frameworks, then I'd be even more inclined to give the warriors naked advantages in a framework. I like the "learned over time" approach a lot. In one game, I wanted to buy +1 SPD. Initially, I invested 3 points (+1 SPD, 8- Activation). Roll PS 12. If it succeeds, he gets the extra SPD next turn. I bought it up one activation roll at a time (even where the point cost did not change, and spending xp on other things in the meantime) until it hit 15-. Then I shelled out the 2 xp to get rid of the activation roll.

Because he is the only one close enough - or because his teammates can't hear him yell over the noise of the machinery. The one whose main purpose in life is to kick the kryptonite out of the way provide ongoing descriptions so Man-Bat is never disadvantaged due to his blindness.

Well, he DID make it to Spider-Man #39 before the Green Goblin hit him with a gas that dulled his Spidey-Sense. It's failed more than once over the years. That's not the player's job, although better players play their characters' weaknesses, not just their strengths. I have rarely seen a disadvantage which would not naturally come up in play - if it would not come up, it would not belong on the sheet. The GM gets to do a bit more work to involve Hunteds or DNPCs (but that is as simple as designing the story arcs, and watching for places where that DNPC could logically be during the various scenarios). A GM would have to include Chartreuse Copywritonite Meteors - if you take a Susceptibility to those, expect them to exist in the game world. If you take a Vulnerability to Solar-Powered Cold Beams fired by Green and Purple Froglike Martians at "Very Common", expect the campaign to have a title like "Invasion of the Green and Purple Froglike Martians wielding Solar-Powered Cold Weapons". If,, as a GM, I expect something is never going to come up, then it is not worth points. That goes for complications and disadvantages, but also for skills - KS: Jane Austen may well be free if I can't see it having any game relevance, just like you don't have to pay for being a redhead or having green eyes.

I'm pretty sure that a home run hitter major leaguer would stand a fair chance of taking my head off with one swing (of course, that is a head hit, so he gets extra damage). A 10 STR normal can certainly beat someone to death with a baseball bat. Is the current weightlifting champion (or the gold medal boxer) Legendary? Probably not - I don't think we get a Legendary any more often than one per generation, and likely not even that, so not one per Olympics. But a cinematic reality fantasy party could include several Legendary characters.

Talents are often built with a lot of limitations. If I were to place them in an MP, I'd probably want to break out the build for purposes of costing the MP pool and slots. If casters can use multipowers, I'd let non-casters have combat trick MPs, although a lot of those combat tricks are built with Naked Advantages, so consider whether you want to override the usual rule that a naked advantage can't be a framework slot.

To Nija-Bear's point, our modern world is largely designed around the expectation of bipedal, two armed organisms with decent hearing who navigate by sight.

The lift chart has always been a challenge, which is why many modify it for Heroic games. I would expect someone twice as strong as the current world record weightlifter to be quite Legendary, and to hit a lot harder than a typical person. That does not mean I think he would crush brass knuckles if he hit someone, or that he would hit harder without them than with them. If that "twice as strong" fellow was a baseball player, would you expect him to be a better hitter without a bat than with one?

Blatant? Man-Bat has sonar. Is that a blatant attempt to circumvent an opponent with a sight-based Flash or Darkness Field, or is it an ability consistent with his character concept? In that undercover situation, when the fellow previously seen only on video or in photographs, walks through the door, does the sighted character say "Hey, that's the guy we saw in the files we broke in and looked over last week?" Even making perfect accommodations for blindness creates a form of distinctive features. Hmmm...there's a blind Super in the team making life difficult for our organization, and suddenly we have this blind guy showing up with...the same number of friends/colleagues that blind Super has as teammates. But that could only be a coincidence, right? He can delay. That is a disadvantage if his opponents now get to attack before him, instead of after him. Who says he should attack the same guy the teammate attacks? Now that Teammate pointed at one opponent, that opponent can abort to a defensive action while his teammate uses his held action. I will bet that Man-Bat does not have workplace accommodations that assist with his superheroics. Does he have a secret ID? All the characters have personal lives - do the bad guys and other events all wait quietly while the team gets together so a teammate can be there to act as Man-Bat's eyes? For that matter, does he never fly around a corner ahead of his teammates? It's the GM's job to work disadvantages/complications into a story. I view a character with Life Support (or Sonar) as paying points to say "I want to see situations in-game where my immunity to this environmental condition (unique sense) is advantageous, and makes my character shine". By the same token, by taking points for a vulnerability to fire (or Blindness), he is saying "I want to see situations in-game where my character must deal with the extra challenges posed by his weakness to fire attacks (lack of sight)". 6e reduced required Complication points, and I think it was pretty clearly said that this was to allow only those items that were central to the character to be required to fill that quota of complications. It is a hallmark of the rules, from 1e to present day, that a Disadvantage (Complication) which does not disadvantage the character (complicate his life) is not worth any points. Or toss in a character who makes it tougher for that communication to happen? A Silence field? Loud noises (make a PER roll to hear what Teammate said)? Ventriloquism? Images/Illusions to take advantage of the fact that Man-Bat is a trained attack pet for the character who guides him? I don't know that I have ever designed a situation specifically around a disadvantage/complication, but I do keep my eyes open for situations where they could reasonably crop up. And they typically do crop up. Maybe not as often as die rolls would dictate (no, that 8- Hunted does not attack every fourth game session), but they definitely crop up. If there were not situations where they would crop up, they would not be worth points.

A Silence field works pretty well. There are social situations where one character cannot reasonably provide "described video" for another. Which opponent should Man-Bat attack? His sighted teammates do not know what features are perceived through echolocation, and probably fall into "the red costume" pretty easily. Spectra fires different-coloured energy blasts. By the time Man-Bat's seeing eye teammate tells him what blast she is using, it's probably too late for him to react. Do his teammates not have work or family commitments? They stay with Man-Bat 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Man-bat is starting to seem less a teammate and more a DNPC. Or, if it is no hindrance, then it is not complicating his life, so it is not worth points as a Complication, is it?

Legendary caps out at 30, which falls short of super-human.

Seems like the above both suggest the same thing, basically.

Seems like it. He'd have to be slightly into the legendary STR category (22 STR IIRC). That's not out of line for most Fantasy games. The axe and mace are larger. Are they more structurally sound? The brass knuckles are a lump of metal wrapped around the hand. They're metal, so that's a decent defense. How do they break? An axe can be blunted, and typically has a wooden haft. The mace also has a haft thinner than the business end. That HA could easily come from an armoured gauntlet. I'm supposed to expect that will break if its wearer hits someone hard? That's the quality of armour? Or I am supposed to believe that being hit with that metal around the fist will hurt the same, or less, than being hit with the flesh and bone underneath?

Yes, brass knuckles that buckle after one or two hard punches are much more immersive, realistic and consistent with cinematic reality...🙄

Two words: Brass knuckles. You feel it is more immersive if Throg stops to removes his brass knuckles, or iron gauntlets, because he's strong, so his bare fists will do more damage?

That special ability is often defined as the exceptional skill that makes the warrior stand apart from others. When their back is against the wall, that is the time when they dig deep, and access that deeper skill.

Blind is no longer a complication. It is a sellback, like -2 meters of running or -3 INT. You do not get a discount to Radar Sense because you already have targeting sight and can perceive a lot with other senses. Why should you have a reduced sellback for losing Sight?

Cheesy player construct, meet cheesy GM ruling: "Grond strikes you with his mighty fists. Immediately before taking the damage, you Teleport 2 meters away. On materializing, [clatter of dice] you take 65 STUN, 19 BOD and 24 meters of knockback from Grond's attack." Hey, if you don't take the damage, then the Teleport isn't triggered - it's triggered immediately before taking damage, remember?

By the way, Tywyll, it occurs to me that we (myself included, if not especially) have been providing no shortage of unsolicited advice on your Casters rules, and occasionally mentioned the non-caster question you actually asked. You've been very gracious in filling us in on the desired game style and the background to the caster rules. Thanks for that! STUN instead of END could certainly be workable. When out of END, a character in RAW can exert himself at a cost of 1d6 STUN/2 END already. However, given it will likely be Martial-types using this, I wonder how well that will play out. When we are at our most desperate, and I really need to use that extra boost, can I afford the STUN loss? Clearly it will not be used in a last-ditch effort by a barely conscious (or just-recovered-to-positive-stun) character. But I may open every combat with it, since I will get a PS 12 recovery and get the few STUN expended back. You mentioned tracking END when characters do something extreme, just not for routine (well, routine for adventurers) activity. One possibility would be ruling that the default rule of "nothing costs END" is really "if you have enough END and REC that going full-out in combat is no big deal, then you do not have to track END". What END would they spend in a typical phase? Maybe 1 for movement, a couple for STR, so 3 END per phase. A 4 SPD character would use 12 END and recover what, 6 or 8? So he'd start with 20 END, act on Ph 12, recover his END, take 4 actions, recover 6 END and start next turn with 14 END. He can go two turns and a bit before worrying about END. We give him a break when he recovers from being KO'd, but that's about it. Perhaps, just like casting means buying in to some extra tracking and resource management, so does an ability that "costs END". It may be a means of introducing the overall END concept to the group. Or those "costs END superskills" also feed off an END Reserve (perhaps with a different name) to place a resource management constraint on those characters' unusual abilities (the Monk has a "Chi Reserve", the Swashbuckler has "Panache", etc.). Different abilities could also have different "side effects". The Barbarian can fly into a rage (maybe he gets +5 STR for a turn or so), but when it ends, he takes a STR Drain from fatigue. You mentioned it won't come up much, so perhaps that suggests an option to create a very customized consequence for the specific over-exertion in question.

I take this from: Neither of the items I have emphasized are CP costs. The discussion of characteristic rolls and END costs both refer to "standard rounding rules", as does Stretching (p 284), damage from heat (6e v2 p 150). Oddly, it's not mentioned in halving DCV, but with no other guidance, it seems reasonable that "standard rounding" would apply.

In early editions, you bought KAs in 1d6 increments, until someone came up with the +1's and half dice. Here, I'd just divide by three and probably round up for the middle steps, as applicable. As you note, I consider loss of both OCV and DCV pretty significant, so I picked -1 1/2. It aligned perfectly with a Martial Arts DC, which I was not expecting, but which suggests an underlying consistency.