badger3k

Another one sent to me - short and amusing.http://www.geocities.com/teo592/quiz/dragon.html A SILVER Dragon Lies Beneath! My inner dragon is to dragons what the Ranger is to humans. I possess considerable intelligence and self-confidence. I live by my own code of ethics and I stick to it at all times. Click the image to try the Inner Dragon Online Quiz for yourself. Hope that last takes - I'll try it and see. - Kewl - it did.Anybody else bored and interested?

Here's some items for my campaign: Necklace of Beauty: (Total: 67 Active Cost, 14 Real Cost) +10 COM (5 Active Points); Independent (-2), IIF (-1/4) (Real Cost: 1) plus +4 with Persuasion and Seduction (12 Active Points); Independent (-2), IIF (-1/4) (Real Cost: 4) plus Mind Control 10d6 ( Human class of minds) (50 Active Points); Independent (-2), 1 Charge (-2), No Range (-1/2), IIF (-1/4) (Real Cost: 9) Ring of Crushing Blows: Hand-To-Hand Attack +4d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (30 Active Points); Independent (-2), Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2), OIF (ring glows when blows are struck; -1/2) Hauberk of Ogre's Strength: (Total: 45 Active Cost, 10 Real Cost) Armor (8 PD/4 ED) (18 Active Points); Independent (-2), OIF (-1/2), Half Mass (-1/2) (Real Cost: 4) plus +5 STR, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points); Independent (-2), OIF (-1/2), No Figured Characteristics (-1/2) (Real Cost: 2) plus +20 STR (20 Active Points); Independent (-2), 3 Charges (-1 1/4), OIF (-1/2) (Real Cost: 4) Just started on some items - had to put in all the weapons and armor in FH, and translate the FHG spells.

About the only odd one that comes to mind now is the theme music spell. It was part of an idea for a "Hero" (capital H). Being a Hero had several benefits, one of which made it into spell form - the spell caused the caster to hear a soundtrack. For the cost of, I think -2 to hearing Per, the caster gained danger sense (he could hear the music pick up with the monster theme, or the BBEG theme) and limited prescience (he'd hear a love theme [or 70s style porn track] when the woman of his dreams [or night] came by; or else he'd hear travelling music if he had to travel, or he might get an idea that the bad guys plot was moving forward - he'd hear the bad guys music faintly). I may have to do that for 5th edition, now that I think about it. Never used it, but I liked the idea.

Not really. No game mechanic changes, IF I understand correctly. The easiest way is when you look at the map, 1" there is the equivalent of 1/2" in Hero terms. A man who is 7" distant on the board will be 3.5 (or 4") away in game terms. That way doesn't use any changes in game mechanics at all. A figure with 6" (Hero) running would move 12" on the half-scale map. I think 1m is closer to 3.3' or something like it (slightly smaller than 3.5). If you dont want to use that for some reason, if you change the scale you have two options that I can see: 1) The entire game scales down, thus nothing changes, but everything covers half the distance/etc that it would do in a normal game (ie a power with a range of active x 5 and 10 active points is still 50", it's just that reduced scale makes that 150m instead of 300". Since everything is scaled down I don't know if anything would be off (although you may need to buy more movement to keep the mph/kph definition). Falling damage would also need to be reconfigured, with max velocity something like 60" instead of 30". That isn't too hard if you don't want exacts. 2) The game scales down, but the abilities don't - to keep the same definition of inches within the game for abilities you could just adjust range/dia/etc by a factor of two - range for a power is active x 10". That's kinda the reverse of just reading the map scale differently, if I got the idea right. That's about all the help I can give. The only things that I can see changing are the speed equations (mph, velocity, falling damage). Whether a simple x2 conversion would work there, I am not sure - I haven't sat down to see if they come to the same result in the end. Turning radii would probably change to, but that I'm really not sure of - maybe require 2" to be moved for each original 1" (2m) in the original movement.

Probably yes. But if they were inundated with millions of letters from children around the world, walking down the street looking into their faces, then they probably would. There's more kids that believe in him than just Christians (especially since most adults wouldn't buy it, especially in a world where anyone can fly and sneak into houses. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he's been busted by well-meaning supers going after that "bad guy dressed in the Santa suit". edit - how would he prove that he's more than a super-powered psycho?

I use the martial arts for some particular styles, but its not required - the normal rules for combat can work as easy without it. edit - the normal rules for combat work for most people. The experts tend to get a weapon style that helps them out, though. (that's what I meant) I'd recommend buying the Hero Designer software (v2): you can use the basic martial arts material found in Fred to make a home-made martial art in minutes. That's the easiest way I found to do something like that. You can pick maneuvers and such, rename them, and there you have a style. It's made my game prep so much faster (days instead of weeks).

Re: From the ARGENT public relations Dept That can't be right! KISS saved Santa!

The Fantasy Hero Grimoire has an item that uses charges and continuous - the example is the demon head staff (p 128) - the staff has 60 charges total. One power, the Writhing Hellfire, is an RKA 1d6 Continuous with the "Requires 3 charges per use" limitation on the overall charges limitation to the staff (the mp). My questions are: 1) is this a legal construct? 2) if not, is continuing charges required instead (or in addition to)? and then the followup: 3) if it is legal, is the correct way to handle the situation: a) the power uses three charges per phase that it is in effect the power uses three charges to activate, but it takes a half-phase action from the player to keep it going. If he switches the multipower the continuous effect stops. then also: 4) A related question - another power has 3 charges per use on an ultra slot of 3d6 RKA. Am I correct in assuming that the user pays three charges even if he uses only 1d6?

I've done work on the FH weapons for hero designer v2. So have other people. I don't know what the policy is on spreading them around, though, since they are a licensed product and may be put up for sale at some point. So I'm extremely hesitant about posting or emailing such. Maybe someone can give an official word on that? It took me, maybe 20 minutes of work for the missile weapons in v2. Just make one weapon, copy it, paste it, then edit it to reflect the changes. A lot easier than inputting each one manually. All the limitations are given with the weapons. edit - so far as I know there aren't any published/for sale. Forgot to put that in.

May not be fantasy But then again, maybe it is: The legend of Bilbo Baggins, sung by Leonard Nimoy Rocketman, sung? by William Shatner If that doesn't kill, er set, the mood, I don't know what will.

Got all their stuff (well, except for Mark's solo cd (the soul of the harper)). Met them a few years back, and they go to the same fairs, and come to where I live and perform. They're cool and good guys - lots of fun. You should see them do the unicorn song - Andrew can get real mean (in a fun way) about the unicorns dying. Hilarious stuff. If you're interested go to thebards.net, it's their home page. They also have links to a lot of celtic music you can get online. As for the sound effects, yeah, it's been a hassle, but sometimes I can use it to add a little flavor to the game. There's also a program that I found on another site: http://www.rpgsoundmixer.com/. It's a german site that has english, and its a sound program that has theme stuff (tavern brawl, etc). It doesn't seem too bad, but then again I haven't tried the program, just looked at the site. Doh - can't believe I forgot "The Planets" - Holst is great for atmosphere!

I'd use the ones that are active in tha campaign as a 1 pt special literacy type thing. It can be used in whatever languages you know. The ones that have to be deciphered, or have no current speakers/users, like the mayan script, should be KS. that way, there is a mechanic to see if you get it right (well, one that's more than an Int-roll, anyway). Unless its a very special code, I thing cryptography would cover most codes and ciphers. The ubiquitous Thieves Cant would be a language or KS, rather than a cryptography roll, since it is pretty unique and encompassing.

I've got two music styles for gaming: 80s for nostalgia, since that's when the best games came out Celtic/Ren-faire: Brobdingnagian Bards (free plug for friends!) Clannad Owain Phyfe Heather Dale Loreena McKinnet Laura Powers Lee Holdridge (Mists of Avalon soundtrack) Blackmore's Night The Bilge Pumps and the Corsairs for pirate shantys South Park for a laugh (the BBEG singing "I can change") Also Jethro Tull (Songs from the wood is appropriate), ELP, classical (the rhinegold and others), fantasia soundtrack (night on bald mountain). Midnight syndicate (the ones who did the D&D soundtrack) have some good music. I've got them all on a hard drive, along with 400+ sound effects (unfortunately, they're all cheesy and not too many are appropriate for fantasy games). That way I can insert sound effects if I want too (hey, it works, sorta .

Re: Superhero Showdown #6: Deathstroke v. Wolverine Go Deathstroke! Logans been overused, and I always liked Slade. But when did they make him immortal? And give him a cybernetic eye? I read a recent bio that says he's possessed or some drek like that. Slade was a cool character, but I think they've reduced him (as they did wolverine through overuse and overhype). I'll vote for Slade, even though as the bad guy he'd be destined to lose (although I thought he did tag wolverine in that crossover, so I don't think it was completely one-sided). The 95% of the brain thing can also be read that he uses 95% at once, since most people only use a fraction at one time. Perhaps using more of his brain at once gives him better abilities (ie, higher PER rolls, etc). Whether that makes any more sense than having people regenerate or have metal claws.... (shrug). For comic books I'm more lenient in my judgements than my own campaigns. All the comics require a suspension of disbelief (and, more importantly, the "cool" factor - if a power is cool, why worry about the reason). Look back at the golden and silver age comics for some really hokey "reasons" for powers.

I agree it is kinda odd to pay more for an ability that can only be used after you're dead. What if the death trigger was a limitation instead of a disadvantage (sort of like the difference between an uncontrolled duration and a reduced duration in the FHG). Say -1/2 for an offensive power. Of course, another power, such as a linked teleport and resurrection, would still have the +1/2 trigger. It would all depend on whether or not the trigger was an advantage (true, the healing is still more limited, but it is a big advantage to be able to get to safety and heal up instead of getting eaten, IMO.

I know we're looking at it from two seperate ways. I don't know what's so hard to realize in the difference between a rule written by the author of the current version of the game and a players opinion. You can swear up and down that a rule is wrong, and use whatever logic you want, but until it gets changed by the designer, it's still an official ruling. You or I or anyone else can cry "foul" all we want and it doesn't make the rule wrong. It may be wrong in your opinion, but it's still a rule, so its still perfectly by-the-book legal to do it the suggested way. Therefore it is only wrong in your opinion. If your logic can sway the powers that be and get that advice out of the faq, then it would be "official". Even then, Steve puts it with GM approval. So where is the harm in playing that way? Is someone playing that way wrong, then, and should be stopped before they hurt someone? It's the use of the term "wrong" that caused my confusion. That's been cleared up sufficiently for my sake. I really just skimmed your post, but I'm not really going to read it. Nothing in my ideas will change. I tried to end the the argument because it's going nowhere for me, and since I believe it was you who mentioned other previous threads, I didn't want this one to get into a pointless debate (which probably is how the others went). Your whole argument stems from the belief that I view the situation the same as you do (why should I agree that 'a' follows 'b' because you showed it? If I don't buy into one premise, your whole argument means nothing to me.) Your claim about the hard-to-switch multipower means squat to me, since I don't agree that it should cost different than it does now. The limited slots still costs less than the limited reserve. That's enough for me. Unless I agree with everything you said on that point, your argument breaks down and means nothing to me, since when you argue about that, I see that you're wrong there: 'a' does not follow 'b', so to speak. Without common ground, the differences won't meet, so the whole exercise is futile. If you want to put you're ideas out and try to convince other people, then you can, just don't expect me to post. I got my misunderstanding cleared up, so I see no reason to continue. The most I can say is that I did find one argument that may be like yours - changing the slots with extra time could be the same as taking the "only to activate" mod on the limitation, cutting its value in half. Like I said, I appreciate you going through the trouble to post, but at least from my end I see no reason to go on. About all I can say. Sometimes I do like to argue, but when we differ on such a basic premise, there's just no reason to it. Thanks anyway.

That's the key for me. See, I'm giving the advice based on the rules, not the way you, I, or anyone else think the rules should be. If you posted stating that you'd do it differently than I probably wouldn't have responded. The poster wanted help on how to do it within the rules. I gave a ruling that works for me, Simon posted the faq info on how to do it. If you think that's wrong, thats all well and good for you, but from reading your post you still say the official ruling is wrong (ie an error/typo/etc). However, the basis you give is only your opinion. Completely different. The difference is between : a) the rule is wrong because there is another ruling that says different; or the rule is bad IMO because my thoughts are... Big difference to me. I responded because I thought you were saying (a), when you're saying (. That's the only reason I posted a reply, since I found nothing to support (a). Everybody has some ( on a rule or another, but most say the rulings stupid, or ill-thought, or munchkin, or nerfed, or (insert favorite word). To me "wrong" implies a specific thing that has nothing to do with opinions. That said, your way of doing it: works for you, but I see no reason for it. Why change the limitation because its not on the slot? I just see no reason that ( should be less than (a). They're both limited, and with (a) you save on the slots, ( you don't. To me that's enough. I just don't see any reason to do more. I appreciate you trying to show how/why you do it, but I think we look at it too differently to get anything productive out of it. Maybe when the flu and associated meds are gone, my head may be clear enough to try to get your reasoning, but I can't do it now. Hopefully no hard feelings, cause I'm not to sure I'm writing things the way I mean, and I can't tell if I'm sounding belligerent or just confused.

Does an ego attack have to be set with a certain class of mind that it affects (such as human, animal, etc). The book and FAQ have no mention on this being needed. To me it makes sense that it would, but what's the official ruling?

Ok, but the same thing can be said of extra segment and full phase. Depending on your speed, they can be very different (say SPD 2, extra segment on 6 means it goes off on 7, full phase means it goes off on 12. A big difference to me, but they are both -1/2. Problem? First, I think comparing the multipower with the staright power is useless, since its not even part of the issue. Any multipower or other framework will save points compared to a straight buy - its completely irrelevant. Second, the limitation on the reserve does not affect the slot, unless you set it up to apply for all slots. Using the example the player wants, he only wants to be able to change the slots in a longer time, not limit the time it takes each slot to be used. Not to jump back to it, but its the same thing - an overall limit on using the power framework, not on each slot. He's trying to get something that takes time to switch the powers around, not use the power. If you limit the slot with extra time as well, then every time he wants to use the HKA, he'd have to take an extra phase (or whatever). Too limited for what he wants to do, and definitely not in the concept. Now I know this has got to be the meds I'm on, but that makes no sense to me. The limitation is NOT on the slots. The focus is only needed to change. Putting it on the slots means that, in addition to needing the focus to change, its needed to fire as well. Lose that and the whole gun is useless, whereas if you lose the key to change slots, the gun can only stay the last way it was set up. As for points, you do know that if you bought the focus on all the slots, it applies to the reserve as well, so a pistol that was oaf for slots as well would be 36 points total, half the cost of the gun that doesn't need the key at all. Using the last example, if the character loses the focus, then he loses the killing attack, but not the normal one. So you don't think that's limited enough. So if I understand correctly, Steve is wrong because you feel that limiting the reserve only gives you too many points. There's nothing in the rules that prevents his ruling, just that you don't like it. Do I have it right?

Isn't the FAQ from Steve Long? I thought that's why the FAQ rulings were considered official. The construct he wants to use is SWITCHING the slots, not ACTIVATING the powers. Two seperate concepts. The last example: 48 Multipower, 60 points, extra phase on all powers (-1/4) 5u 4D6 HKA, extra phase 5u 20" Flight, x8 NCM, extra phase means that if he wants to attack, he can switch his powers as a free action, then activate his HKA, and then take an extra phase there. Or say he suddenly is falling - take that extra phase to activate the flight. Hope you're not falling too fast. That's what the extra time means - grow the claws (instant basically), then wait one phase before you can attack. Or grow wings, then wait one phase before you can use them too. That's not what the limitation is. He wants to switch the powers slower than normal, but still fast enough to use them in combat. If you apply the limitation to all slots, you're saving more points than not limiting them (ie just limiting the reserve), but it destroys the concept. The one MP you build is wrong too - 30 MP, 60 points, extra year (or whatever) to switch slots (-1) 3u 4D6 HKA 3u 20" Flight, x8 NCM IF you are using the same limitation. The change slots is only the reserve, so its -1. The slots don't have it, so they are still 5u. Total 40 points. It doesn't affect using the powers, but just limits using the multipower. What about putting charges on the multipower - you can only use it 3 times per day. Not 3 uses for each ability, 3 uses for the whole multipower. The only way to do that is limit the reserve, not the slots. Is this stupid? Illegal? Judge Dredd has his lawgiver that has 20 or so shots. They can be different types (AP, Sabot, etc). You can build it with a multipower, then give the reserve a limitation on charges. The slots aren't limited in uses, since you can put any of the shells in the gun. The pistol itself has the limitation since it can only fire so many shells. Sure you could limit the slots as well with the charges concept (20 or each type), but its redundant and shouldn't be done since it only repeats the main weapon limitation. Sorry. Obviously I'm missing something. To me getting the concept right is more correct than stretching it to save more points (which I believe is the idea, even though when I read it, it sounded like people were saying that the points saved were too much).

The hands of stone spell (p 75 FHG), is an 8d6, 5 def entangle for 65 active (normally 80) points. The write up has no explanation for the difference from a normal entangle, and I can't find anything to help me out anywhere on how this was done. Can you help?

Sounds like some martial arts movies - the master (or samurai) would kill the man who cut his head off, something like that - definitely cool.

True, but it can be very useful for bad guys. The power would probably be built with a trigger instead of the limitation, IMO, and definitely have 1 , non-recoverable charge. O END too, area effect is also good. Another variant of this is the creature that explodes upon death (ala dragonlance) - didn't someone here post something like this construct? I can't remember now, but I thought somebody was talking about this type of thing.

???? Actually, the only rule is that a limitation on the reserve must apply to all slots as well. You can and should limit the reserve - the points saved is part of "getting what you paid for" part of the multipower. Looking through the faq I can't find anything saying this should be illegal or limited.

No problem - glad I understood what you wanted and remembered how to do it. Good gaming.