Hugh Neilson

The start to the Northlands campaign (basically, all characters are young members of the Viking Jarl's household, starting out eager to prove their worth). We are summoned before the Jarl, and assigned the task of watching over his three young daughters as they go out this early Spring day to pick wildflowers for the festival. The daughters range in age from about 9 or 10 to 16. There is an almost apologetic "I know this isn't exactly the assignment a young, eager Viking is hoping for, but there's no one to bash and pillage at the moment" aspect to the speech.
 
When we note that our four PC's consist of a young Elven druid (who's pretty OK with going out to pick wildflowers), a 17 year old warrior (who's OK with it since nothing better's out there) and two...sixteen year old twin sisters, one of whom is likely hard to distinguish from the Jarl's daughters.
 
Now, on the way out, we meet a band of hardy warriors headed back from a (failed) assignment to find a couple of criminals (clearly very nuanced foreshadowing of the foes we will face later in the scenario). One of whom chooses to be insulting, and mock the PC's with their "job of shepherding young girls". 16 YO female PC responds, loudly as they depart, "Of course [Warrior's Name] would think little of such a task. EVERYONE knows he doesn't like girls."

The start to the Northlands campaign (basically, all characters are young members of the Viking Jarl's household, starting out eager to prove their worth). We are summoned before the Jarl, and assigned the task of watching over his three young daughters as they go out this early Spring day to pick wildflowers for the festival. The daughters range in age from about 9 or 10 to 16. There is an almost apologetic "I know this isn't exactly the assignment a young, eager Viking is hoping for, but there's no one to bash and pillage at the moment" aspect to the speech.
 
When we note that our four PC's consist of a young Elven druid (who's pretty OK with going out to pick wildflowers), a 17 year old warrior (who's OK with it since nothing better's out there) and two...sixteen year old twin sisters, one of whom is likely hard to distinguish from the Jarl's daughters.
 
Now, on the way out, we meet a band of hardy warriors headed back from a (failed) assignment to find a couple of criminals (clearly very nuanced foreshadowing of the foes we will face later in the scenario). One of whom chooses to be insulting, and mock the PC's with their "job of shepherding young girls". 16 YO female PC responds, loudly as they depart, "Of course [Warrior's Name] would think little of such a task. EVERYONE knows he doesn't like girls."

The start to the Northlands campaign (basically, all characters are young members of the Viking Jarl's household, starting out eager to prove their worth). We are summoned before the Jarl, and assigned the task of watching over his three young daughters as they go out this early Spring day to pick wildflowers for the festival. The daughters range in age from about 9 or 10 to 16. There is an almost apologetic "I know this isn't exactly the assignment a young, eager Viking is hoping for, but there's no one to bash and pillage at the moment" aspect to the speech.
 
When we note that our four PC's consist of a young Elven druid (who's pretty OK with going out to pick wildflowers), a 17 year old warrior (who's OK with it since nothing better's out there) and two...sixteen year old twin sisters, one of whom is likely hard to distinguish from the Jarl's daughters.
 
Now, on the way out, we meet a band of hardy warriors headed back from a (failed) assignment to find a couple of criminals (clearly very nuanced foreshadowing of the foes we will face later in the scenario). One of whom chooses to be insulting, and mock the PC's with their "job of shepherding young girls". 16 YO female PC responds, loudly as they depart, "Of course [Warrior's Name] would think little of such a task. EVERYONE knows he doesn't like girls."

TV writers are the problem? What has prevented speedsters in the comics killing off massive numbers of people in the same manner. The Reverse Flash in the comics comes from the future, so should be able to achieve this. He knows Flash was Barry Allen.
 
For that matter, why doesn't Reverse Flash keep retreating to his own time, resting, recovering and then coming back 1 second later in the Flash timeline to try again. Why doesn't Kang do this to the Avengers, or the DC time travellers in Justice League? Why do they ever come in themselves? Because, as you say, power gaming makes for boring reading, watching or gaming. Why did Zoom send one minion at a time? He has plenty. Why didn't he send them at Barry one after the other, or all at once, and take him out from exhaustion, if nothing else? Why not just take an Earth Two nuke and lob it through a breach? No more Barry Allen - no more Central City!
 
Mighty short Season 2, though.

"I wanted to be a hero" sounds to me a lot like "I wanted to be perceived as a hero". "Wally`s life was more important than my powers" sounds a lot more like a hero.
 
 

Spoken like a gamer. After all, the emotional impact of actually having the opportunity to completely reverse a horrific childhood event that reverberated throughout one`s entire life, only to realize that taking that opportunity would have unacceptable consequences, so the possibility must be abandoned, would not prevent one from clearly thinking through an array of other possibilities in a minute or two. Especially when we`ve seen no evidence Barry`s speed extends to mental processing speed.

Well, you know, hope springs eternal, until it doesn't anymore. Eternal just isn't what it used to be.
 
I liked Arrow until last season when it began to disappoint me. I decided to see if this season could bring it back to form, so I gave it another chance. I was on the fence for quite a while, but now I've reached the point where I see little reason to continue. However, I sort of feel that after having seen this much of the current season, I might as well ride it out to the end of the season.
 
The Flash started out fun, but just kept getting dumber and dumber and I'm at the same point with that show now.
 
Next season, these two shows will have one fewer viewer to torture with their atrocious writing. And if advertisers think they are reaching me just because I am "tuning in," they are sadly mistaken (and apparently unaware of how DVRs work).

Have to admit I was flashing back to Supergirl draining herself in that previous huge use of Heat Vision, and the followup that noted it had happened to Clark before. Tricking Non into draining himself out would have been an interesting tactic.

Emphasis added.
 
How many complaints have I read about pre-MCU/CW superhero shows/movies in other media not having that comic book feel? But when the characters do behave like they are in a comic book, the writers are criticized because the SuperHeroes act like their comic book counterparts, and events play out like they do in the comics. Now, we want them to instead portray the "superheroes" like those players who don't get into the genre that we gripe about on the Champions boards.
 
"Why don't they have a series of contingency plans like paranoid RPG players would? Why do they take risks like that without considering the possible responses out twenty more moves on the chessboard? How can they just leave their responsibilities aside to save one innocent person - acceptable losses, people!"

When I watch movies, I see someone wave his hand in the air and 2 seconds later, there is a cab. What "real world" are you referring to?

Why is that crazy or evil?  That's where Wall Street is, isn't it?

Let's not forget that the only use of nuclear weapons in wartime in the real world, was in no small part based on a similar assessment of the balance of lives lost in the short time, versus lives saved in the long term.

While the law requires that, acts of conscience contrary to orders will, in most cases, be career stalling if not court-martial launching. Further, you are insisting on an narrow and inflexible interpretation of events that others who viewed the movie clearly don't share. That the pilot didn't know about the tessaract doesn't alter the fact that the shot-callers were taking it into account.
 
A small tac-nuke would destroy a square kilometer of Manhattan, which is less area than the Avengers and Aliens had already trashed. As a result, it might well have been not only lawful under the rules of war, but arguably a road to fewer deaths in the final balance sheet. Destroy a kilometer of New York to end an alien invasion and turn the tide in a battle that was already taking down large buildings and killing thousands? A chunk of Manhattan vs. Planet Earth?
 
There are those who would consider not giving or following that order immoral. Its quite likely no one would give a damn about the pilot's man-in-a-foxhole moral quandaries - and prosecute him right into Leavenworth. Could it have been a non-nuke? Sure. But one that would take down Stark Tower would require a bomber and take longer to deploy. I'm not saying your are wrong, per se, but I am saying you don't have an interpretive monopoly on what to take away from that sequence.
 
And, in the end, we're arguing whether its realistic when Thor is fricking using his hammer like a helicopter blade?

Emphasis added. How does one apply rigorous intellectual scrutiny to time travel? We have accepted the impossible when we accept that time travel occurs at all. BTW, people travelling faster than the speed of sound under their own power, talking gorillas, cold guns, controlling the weather, etc. do not hold up any better under rigorous intellectual scrutiny.
 

  Which character? I'd say time travel is an essential element of Reverse Flash/Thawne (Abra Kadabra is another Flash character reliant on it). Had they chosen to do so, the Flash show could have written out those characters and still worked fine, although the megaplot in Season 1 would have had to be changed.
 

Yup.
 

Again, when we accept one impossibility, it becomes necessary to accept further possibilities or impossibilities in respect of the first. We can't apply the scientific method to superspeed because neither your nor the writer's hypothesis is capable of being tested.

I'd venture to say that a vast majority of the superhuman stuff in a typical comic book universe won't hold up to any sort of rigorous intellectual scrutiny.
 
I'm reminded of an argument between the GM and a player in a Champions game.  The player had tripped a foe running super-fast, and was using physics to argue that the foe should have slammed face first into the ground at effectively terminal velocity.  Eventually the GM pointed out, "Your character creates wind blasts out of a wooden staff.  Please, use physics to explain to me how that works."

As a point of order, why did E1 Wells vanish when Eddie killed himself?  Eddie was Thawne's ancestor.  If Thawne never existed, he would not have offed E1 Wells, who would have proceeded onwards.  Of course, if Thawne did not take over E1 Wells, Flash should not exist yet anyway.  Time Travel tends to fall apart when looked at too closely.

As a point of order, why did E1 Wells vanish when Eddie killed himself?  Eddie was Thawne's ancestor.  If Thawne never existed, he would not have offed E1 Wells, who would have proceeded onwards.  Of course, if Thawne did not take over E1 Wells, Flash should not exist yet anyway.  Time Travel tends to fall apart when looked at too closely.

As we wait patiently for #1,000, I'll share a brief epiphany I had discussing Paladins associating with evil and neutral characters on another web site.

Let's talk about this issue. Like lying, it seems a broad issue. Paladins have been barred from having evil associates. "We are judged by the company we keep", and he certainly should not condone evil or chaotic activity.

But is this another example of simplistic morality? What is more noble, to shun those who turn away from the path of righteousness, or to stand as a shining example of righteousness, showing the unenlightened the error of their ways, and working to redeem them? "Love the sinner, hate the sin".

Somewhat tangentially, as I consider this and similar threads, I am amazed how much a comic strip about stick figures can add to my thinking on this. Order of the Stick (pushing 1,000 posts) has some pretty amazing bits. This may be the best description I have ever seen of alignment change, and he just slipped it in under the radar. The whole Belkar story arc is a pretty solid example of an Evil character associating with Good characters, and having that example rub off, not really consciously and despite the Evil character's best efforts. Way back in its history, it has some of the best Intolerant Paladin examples as well.

Not bad for half a dozen stick figures who started out poking gentle fun at our little hobby. I aspire to imparting the depth of these stick figures to my characters.

And let's not forget that Tahiti is a magical place!
 
What?

I liked that storyline quite a bit, actually.  Its just when they turned him into a supervillain evil Spider-Man that it got lame.

I guess when the character's history goes back twenty-five years before that. The majority of villains identified with Spidey's "rogues gallery" debuted during the first decade of his title: Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Kraven the Hunter, Sandman, the Lizard, Mysterio, the Scorpion, Electro, the Vulture, the Rhino... I'm sure I'm forgetting someone.
 
Even in 1988 when Venom debuted, his style foreshadowed the "Iron Age" of comics, which lots of longer-term fans view as "post-classic." (Personally I despise the character, but that's irrelevant to this discussion.)

Be reasonable, now. It's blocking my view of Venus.
 
Won't make it any easier to get those Raise Dead/Resurrection spells we need, either!

The 6e rules are quite clear that a power is, by default, visible to TWO sense groups, not three. Many are visible to other sense groups by virtue of SFX, but this is not a requirement. This is a specific change from older editions, where three sense groups were the default, but there were no specifics on WHICH three were the default. Now, sight is required absent GM permission, and hearing is the default second sense group.
 

The rules indicate that, by default, the path of the power is perceivable. They also state that a gunshot is visible. Can you see the path on which the bullet is travelling? This seems like an inconsistency in the rules, before we consider that TK has an element of Indirect, an advantage which "allows a character to alter the Source and/or Path of an attack".
 
As many others have noted, it is possible to use Stealth while using a Power, so Visible powers in no way require the character be made inherently obvious by power use if they are otherwise concealed.
 

Especially for such a stickler on visibility, you're very lenient on point of origin. A power is not restrainable or a focus because its point of origin can be used against the character. No, read the "Point of Origin" rules on page 126 of Hero 6e Vol 1. Wolverine can still use his claws, but he needs to attack someone or something in close proximity behind him if his arms are tied behind his back. His claws, unlike Telekinesis, are not Indirect, so they can't strike anything his hands can't strike.
 


So, by your requirements for obvious, visible powers, there is no way that eagle can swoop in and catch the rabbit off guard unless he has IPE on his flight. His path of movement is Obvious, just like the path taken by an attack power to reach its target.
 
The Power rules are applicable to Heroic games, not just Superheroic games. But in any game "The GM has the final say on how perceivable a Power is, and what characters can perceive about
it, based on common sense, dramatic sense, game balance, and other factors." That it is clear and obvious to a viewer who is using that Force TK seems, based on these factors, to support concluding that the power is Visible. The fact that Greedo did not see Han's Blaster under the table does not require he pay for IPE either, by the way.

Don't confuse a specific instance with RAW. Your interpretation makes it impossible to attack from stealth without everyone present automatically seeing the attacker. Since RAW contains rules for unseen attackers that don't assume invisible powers or characters, i have to disagree with your interpretation. 
 
 
There is something that is clear to anyone watching the security panel. The buttons are pressing on their own and the door opens. You get a perception roll opposed by the hidden character's stealth to see something else. In fact you'd get that perception roll even if the power was invisible because the TK'er didn't make himself invisible, he just hiding. 

First of all you generally can't put Restrainable and Focus on the same Power without GM permission and a dang good reason.  Second of all, Wolverines claws are not removable and thus are not Foci, period.  Thirdly, not being able to use a Power that shoots out of your hand effectively when handcuffed does not make that Power Restrainable, That is simply part of choosing the Point of Origin for the Power.
6E1, pg 126:
Wolverine could use his claws against some forms of restraint and not against others.  Just like every other character with powers that come from their hands.

I never said the attack had the Gestures limitation. "Touching hands to temples" is no more restrictive than any other "point of origin" power. The gestures are not going to be impaired by encumbrance or confined spaces, and are not subject to disruption by being attacked. And, of course, we are not necessarily discussing the Heroic Campaign to which they are most appropriate. However, it does seem like gestures "that are obviously out of the ordinary" renders an IPE ability less than invisible.
 
The rules require an attack power meet the following requirements:
 
- perceived by a minimum of two sense groups, one of which is sight (absent GM permission - we have sight here) and the other typically hearing (this one may be inaudible, but is perceivable by mental senses, one assumes).
 
- activity is perceivable (check - we can tell a power is being used)
- source is obvious (check)
- target is obvious (check - the person glared at)
- path (good question - I suggest this example is at least as obvious as a bullet from a gun - the TK shove path can be extrapolated from the direction the target flies back in, so more obvious than the gun, really)
- special effect (a blast of force which knocks its target back seems obvious - it's certainly clear watched on the screen)
- intensity (I wonder how many of us actually describe the level of power of attacks - seems no more or less than any other TK power)
- effect on the target (there he goes, sailing backwards)
- effect on the user (again, I wonder how many of us describe the visible tiring of the character when he uses an END using power)
 
If the character is hiding in a closet, then he has to make the same Stealth roll, with the same penalties, as anyone else to remain undetected when using his visible power. The mechanics do not say use of the power must immediately disclose the presence of the character, but that use of the power imposes a penalty on Stealth rolls. If you can't use stealth at all, perhaps this power has a Perceivable limitation.
 
Now, if the player wanted IPE Force Powers, that's fine too. Pay the extra points, get the mechanical advantage and you are less obvious using the power. Presuming our sample Jedi Power is visible to Force Senses and Sight, making the Sight Inobvious for a +1/4 advantage seems like a possible approach. Now, a PER roll will often be required to ID the Jedi as the source of the Force Shove. But it seldom seems difficult in the source material, and the few occurrences (C-3P0, for example) seem like they are as easily explained by Power Skill, Stealth rolls, a variation on Pushing, use of a Hero Point or simple artistic license. Or, I suppose, IPE on only a minor portion of the power - 10 STR is enough to move a normal weight being.