badger3k

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

Batman should just take NCM' date=' a 20 DEX and a 4 SPD, then buy +36 DEX, +3 SPD with "must maintain training regimen, -0". Now they are a power instead of characteristics, so no doubling should apply. Just like Defender's OIF Armor lets him circumvent the cost of his characteristics despite his NCM disadvantage.[/quote']

 

You'd allow this? Seriously?

 

NCM is a bizarre and, in my view, inappropriate, disadvantage in that you don't take it to define your character, but to define how you spend your points. Should a Brick get points for "ranged attacks cost double", or "mental powers cost double", or "martial arts cost double"? There's no reason, to me, that a disadvantage should be available for how the character chooses to spend his points. You will never see a Brick or Martial Artist in a Supers game select the NCM disadvantage - only a character who doesn't lose more than 20 points from its effects would ever do so. The "disadvantage" can basically be rephrased "things I don't buy anyway would cost double if I did".

 

To be honest, I've rarely ever seen any superheroic character take NCM, since it doesn't fit the genre. For sidekicks and the rest, sure, but when dealing with supers, I always went by the idea that the campaign sets what is "normal human range" and what is superheroic/mutant/power/etc. Some characters were able to achieve superheroic levels of ability through intense effort (and good but non-mutant genes). As for Batman, I really haven't thought of it, but whatever way is used, he has so much experience that it is really pointless. Either way would work for him. Considering DCs use of the metagene, I'm surprised no one made the hypothesis that for non-super-supers (like Bats and Nightwing), maybe their metagenes are active at a very very low level (which would make the "best human" line a joke, but it already is) or else that even inactive, it gave them a higher potential than other humans. Whoever said that human potential had to be even across the board?

 

For heroic level games, where the normal human potential is preset as 20, then NCM works just fine. You can push beyond that, and many have done so, it just takes more effort.

Re: Yes, but what about the other guys?

It is a little different from the transporter thing because nothing else actually changes - even though the original JTK may have been annihillated and we are now interacting with an nth generation copy' date=' that's JTK's choice - he's not imposing his will on the universe by transporting - it does not annihillate and reform anyone else.[/quote']

 

But all the EDM-as-wish does is reverse the transporter effect - while JTK is the same, everything else changes. Same principal, just different definition of where the box is (ref the story of the crazy man who thought the world was insane, so he built a house to keep the crazy people in, and he was outside it in this incredibly small area...).

Doc Democracy also suggested we were collapsing the probability wavefront, but that really does imply that this particular character is very much the centre of the universe. Moreover, it also implies that there is only one 'active' timeline and so changes that are retrospective are impossible - the wavefront would already have been collapsed to a single point and that would then be immutable as there is no longer a wavefront of possibilty to collapse.

 

Not if the EDM can cause a change that renders the past different. If all that exists is the present, then the past exists only as a remainder (memories, physical effects, etc) - if you change the present, you can change the past. It's the same as the stereotype of last-Tuesday-ism, where we were created last Tuesday and everything before that is artificial memories - I think "Big O" made a bit of this, although it was a bit confusing at times. All you would be doing is expanding the wavefront further (ie - opening the possibilities further than normally possible, but this is magic or superpowers, so what the heck).

 

The idea that the character is central or unique is absurd, except for that moment. There is nothing to suggest that further wishes couldn't affect the previous wisher. It could completely return things the way they were, or worse. Likewise, the hypothesis that every action we do creates another possible universe where we did the other thing suggests that we all are gods, creating new universes all the time, yet we don't even know it.

I had an interesting epiphany the other day reading Iain M Banks' Excession where he was talking about a shuttle vehicle decellerating and the bodies inside it feeling a gravity-like effect. I wondered about why we are having so much difficulty with unified field theory and and specifically with tying gracvity intot eh equations. What if gravity is not a force but an apparent force that we percieve by its effects rather than its presence. What if, in fact (and this was the bit) we are FALLING through time, and gravity is what falling through time feels like? We are trying to unify the wrong thing.

 

I also had an interesting epiphany about the nature of the mind of God. Thursday was a really strange day. I'd been thinking about Marie Curie and how, if I could time travel back and speak to her I would go about explaining that her defining discovery would kill her.

 

Since Time seems to be defined as movement through space, we are falling through time the whole "time", so to speak. If we fell faster, we would move slower through time. I find the hypothesis that gravity is the effect of something in another universe that we are feeling the effects of an interesting idea, and one that could make for interesting game ideas. What if people were dying, being killed by something in another universe. How to stop it....

Re: Need some wierd alien illos for your next campaign?

Wayne Barlowe: http://www.umtoquedearte.com/diamond/gtoextwb1.htm

Re: Genre-crossover nightmares

Steven Seagal is Out For Justice because he’s Marked For Death' date=' On Deadly Ground[/i'], and Under Siege, but never fear, he’s The Glimmer Man, Hard To Kill, with a Fire Down Below, and Out For A Kill because no one is Above The Law.

I thought that Fire Down Below was either a porno or a sex-ed/health film.

Re: Incarnation Awareness

Here's a power from Marvel Superheroes...

 

Incarnation Awareness: You can remember the events of your past lives. Moreover, you can send messages to your past incarnations when they were actually living and receive them from future incarnations (though not vice versa). The ability to communicate with a character's former lives and incarnations, and ask them to perform deeds that will help him later on. You can recall and contact one past life (starting with the most recent and moving sequentially backwards) for every two points of Intensity.

 

one of the examples given is that: the Hero needs to break into a bad guy base, and so he tells his 1900s self to dig a tunnel from X to Z coordinates. and voila, when he gets to outskirts of said base in 2008, there's a tunnel that goes 97% of the way into the bottom floor of the villain HQ. Another example is setting up a trust fund that pays off to help the Hero do something that takes money (an instance, not necessarily a perm. Wealth score.)

 

Has anyone ever built this particular gem in Hero terms ?

For knowledge, I'd make that a VPP for knowledges and skills (the character remembers things, or in this case, is told something or how to do something). For others, I'd go with Luck, maybe with a skill roll (the communication with ancestors skill). Since Luck is a pretty subjective power, it can have any of the results you want (such as finding the hidden tunnel your great-great-great self had built).

Edit - maybe put a limitation on this that the power can be limited to his incarnations only, which can start out undefined, and would get narrowed down as the game progressed - "you can't dig a tunnel here, you have been travelling in South America those years, remember?"). It would require more paperwork, but if you wanted an outlet for creativity, this is one. I'd only suggest a -1/4 for this limitation, though.

Re: Yes, but what about the other guys?

OK, we need a 'Rant' prefix for these posts...

 

I just wanted to say why I really really do not like the EDM version of wish fulfillment. Someone may be able to correct my philosophy or physics and make me feel better about it.

 

First off it seems to me that Wish Fulfillment EDM can only work in a multiverse where there are an infinite number of different versions of reality to travel to. If the multiverse consists of Here, Valhalla and another place that always looks like Coventry Bus Station on a Wednesday afternoon, it just isn't going to work. Unless you come up with some pretty specific wishes.

 

Even given that, let's think about what is happening here.

 

So, WishMaster!! is in a room with his DNPC family and the walls are moving together to crush them. No worries - he has EDM so he shifts to another reality where he manages to do something heroic and save the day. His DNPC family is saved - or are they?

 

Sure He saved a DNPC family. They look and act like his, but in fact they are a perfect alternate reality iteration of his actual DNPC family. The real ones he abandoned to a grisly fate in another reality. Even if he bought enough UBO to bring them with him, what happened to the ones who were here, in the new reality, holding place for them until they arrived? Presumably they got shunted elsewhere. Let's hope it is nice there. And what happens if he wants to deflect that dinosaur killer asteroid - let's hope he bought enough EDM for everyone on the planet, eh?

 

How, in the name of Mungo, Mary and Midge, is that heroic? You're not WishMaster!!, you're the Incredible Running Away Man. EDM is a movement power. All your power does is prevent you from having to watch awful things happen to people you like, and cushions you against the harsh realities of your existence.

 

Let us look at it from another perspective - that of the DNPC family. They are trapped in a room with WishMaster!! and the walls are closing in, about to crush them. The self deluded idiot shouts, 'Don't worry, I'll save you!' and VANISHES. They spend the last moments of life cursing his name.

 

EDM as wish fulfilment has to be the most selfish, gutless power there is. I hate it, I do.

 

Having said that, I'm not keen on the alternatives. Sure you can build a stonking great cosmic VPP but who has got the time mid-combat to design a custom wish?

 

So, I'm looking for suggestions for a new power. Something quick and easy to administer. I'm thinking something like define your wish, GM sets a Wish Level (something like the way many mental powers work, but based on area and effect and stuff - cosmetic changes, minor, major and world changes and sets a 'Reality Inertia' level, that works like EGO does in mental powers. We'll probably need tables) and you roll some dice to see if you can manage it. All a bit woolly, but it has got to be better than what we've got right now.

 

You may have much better ideas. Let's hear 'em

The simplest solution is that while the character moves to an alternate reality, the old one disappears, written over by the new one. This of course, destroys the old, but since the new are the same to the Nth degree, there is no difference. It's the same as the Star Trek transporter, since the person is not sent. They are encoded and transmitted to somewhere else and reconstructed, so essentially they are killed and remade anew. If there was an original James T Kirk, he has been dead and gone a thousand times over. The same can be said of us, where our cells and molecules are replaced over the years - there might be very little of the you that was born all those years ago - you are essentially a new person in a similar configuration to the old person, enough for us to handle continuity.

Same thing. You are not so much "retreating" as you are "rewriting" the universe at a fundamental level. EDM can be viewed as the cosmic etch-a-sketch.

Now, the Noble Causes comic book used a similar EDM plot device in their story. A bit weird, since we're not used to looking at things like that, but it hasn't stopped them.

Re: Questions from a New Hero

For the bow, if you want to give it more "oomph", you can go with ranged HKA (so that you can add strength to the damage) - a 4d6 RKA costs 60 active, but:

Bow 1: HKA 2d6+1 (4d6 w/STR), Ranged (+1/2) (52 Active Points); OIF Unbreakable (-1/2), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4), No Knockback (-1/4) Active 52, real 21

is a bit cheaper. Of course, a 4d6 KA is real strong. I made the mistake of letting a character with high strength have this and in our practice run it was too much - he cut a norm in half (in his defense, he didn't know he had no powers, in going against him, he definitely had no code vs killing). I just present it for completeness. (is that a word?)

I am not sure I would use "Expendable" for an Unbreakable Personal Focus. Expendable is meant to refer to something that is used up each time the power is used. Using that would mean that she would have to find a new bow each time it is used (the meaning of "fire and forget"?).

(edit - whoops - I meant to say that I would not use the Expendable option for this. I'd roleplay that part of the limitation if it ever came up. There are a lot of options if she did lose the bow - developed powers that replace it, discovered a new magic bow, have a high-tech one built for her, take an opponents weapons of similar point costs...lots of replacement options if you didn't want to run an adventure to get a new bow).

Re: Questions from a New Hero

Heavy Longbow RKA 2d6 OIF Unbreakable Expendable (Extremely Difficult to obtain new Focus; Personal Focus, Required Hands Two Handed, Real Weapon, No Knockback)

 

Combat Prowess MultiPower 30 pt Reserve (all slots Ultra)

a. Jab: HA +1d6, HTH Attack, No Knockback

b. The Old One-Two: HA +2d6, HTH Attack, No Knockback

c. The Jaw Jacker: HA +3d6, HTH Attack

d. The Knockout: HA +4d6, HTH Attack

e. Foot Stomp: HA +3d6, Personal Immunity, Explosion, Selective Target, HTH Attack

f. Thunderclap: Flash Attack 4d6, AOE Non-selective (3" Cone), Gestures (Requires Both Hands), Does not work against Desolids.

 

Now could the Heavy Longbow also go into the Multipower (It has 30 Active Points)?

I didn't really look too closely at her, but I wanted to make a quick comment on this. I wouldn't put the weapon in the MP since it is not the same power (why would her bow become her foot stomp?). There isn't a connection, unless you buy the entire thing as her bow (using the weapon as a club, etc). Not that easy with the thunderclap and foot stomp.

The individual slots for extra +d6 for the HTH attack does not make a lot of sense. You can buy one slot, and you can just choose to limit your attacks to +1d6 or +2d6 instead of using all +4d6. If each were different, such as one that has "no knockback", one that does double, one that is AP, and one that is...penetrating maybe - give each slot something unique. Using 4 slots for what is really 2 attacks (one +2d6 HTH, no knockback; the other +4d6 HTH) is a bit of a waste. Make them stand out as really worth the extra slot and point cost.

Just a couple of thoughts. I haven't looked at the rest yet.

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

Might be worth looking at. Though I think a couple of the major shortfalls of tactics in Hero in my limited experience comes from the lack of positioning effects; you don't block space from your opponent's use (and if you did' date=' flight and teleport are darn cheap ways to bypass that anyways), the lack of flank (there are other things which serve the purpose, but they're generally not very position dependant), no opportunity attacks (so you have no real 'zone of control' type effect in general) and the fact that out-of-turn actions burn up your turn (so no immediate interrupts/reactions without using up your standard turns.. except maybe complex constructs with triggered and such?) [/quote']

 

You can give flanking bonuses (actually, "attacked from behind in combat" gives the defender 1/2 DCV, so flanking is an option), but D&D (specifically 4e) also lacks such tactics as: bouncing an attack, coordinated attacks, multiple attacker modifiers, spreading an attack, surprise move (more or less, this one can be DM option), targeting a hex, blocking, bracing, disarming (pretty much), dodge, grab bys, haymakers, move bys, move throughs, setting, diving for cover, hipshots, hurried attacks, pulling a punch, rolling with a punch, snap shots, suppression fire, and probably more - and thats just the basics and optional that I read into. There may be more). The Hero combat system is different enough that "zone of control" type attacks do not normally matter, but they can be built (look for the two threads I started on conversions. It's not hard to do, even if the 4e powers get repititious - they are basically the same thing just bumped up in power).

 

Could be a function of who I game with (but then again, most of them also play D&D. *shrug*) but my Hero games seem much less tactically oriented, as there's often little practical difference between being in one hex over another other than who you are in range to/how many range increments to your target. In D&D I find positioning a much more engaging element, as well as a lot more dynamic interractions between the PCs and such ("I marked him, so go ahead and provoke; if he dares take the swing, I get a free swing on him!"). I get other things out of my Hero games that keep me coming back week after week, but this part feels like it could be improved.

 

I would definitely not agree that adding this type of codswallop would not improve Hero, except as an option, of course. I grew up with real wargames, and don't want to make my RPG a tabletop war game. Real life isn't like that. There's a difference between a tactical game, and a tactical wargame. 4e has really gone more to being a tactical wargame, where such arbitrary things as position on a board matters more than actual (let's say "realistic" tactics - such as "move around that ridge and flank them"). It encourages more of "let's move to this square, where they will have to provoke an AoO if they try to move here" - to me, that is more artificial and less about real tactics. I grew up on real wargames before I got into RPGs, and I prefer to keep them separate (for fun, why not look up advanced Squad Leader for real wargame fun).

 

D&D's combat system is meant to reflect that the one strike you roll for represents the one that may hit out of the many swung in that time increment, yet you still can get in that one extra strike when your opponent could potentially be up to 10' away? This is because each square is 5' across, and both characters could be at opposite sides of their respective squares, giving a large distance between them. But, if you cross into that magical space, you can get attacked (unless you have a Controller who yells at you, then you can shift without getting attacked). Yeah. No thanks. Hero lets me have more options that are not limited by arbitrary lines on the table.

 

Edit - my 4e Ranger thread has my take on the Attack of Opportunity mechanic.

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

Maybe it is more about the general roleplaying culture out there. About 8 years ago I think, I was trying to encourage my old gaming groups to keep playing, and for the most part they were losing interest in the old around-the-table adventure style games and looking for new players to join, no matter the cost. So they wound up in gaming shops, with tons of new players (I suspect mostly CCG players since that's who hung out in the shops) clustered around them arguing about rules and character loyalties and who was winning, or some odd crap like that. It no longer seemed to be about a group of adventurers out to do crazy crap together, but about who had the bigger sword, most flashy magical item, who could do the most without even a spellbook, who won when the now-inevitable party conflict hit, or whatever. I lost touch a bit, playing here and there in the "back alley" (my living room) when I could scrape together a gaming group willing to do a little Hero or World of Darkness or even an old-fashioned game of D&D.

 

Then I walked into the local gaming shop one day and discovered a whole new level of horror. The players had gone beyond even the semi-roleplaying, d***-waving contests and were now actually dueling each other! With the D&D (3.x) system, not even something expected like Warhammer. They'd turned the whole darn thing into a player-vs.-player combat arena, complete with rules about what you could do (mechanically, no roleplaying involved) to your character with experience and money between fights, and a schedule of when each character could participate in a challenge and a chart of character ranking in the challenges. Yes, in a few of the challenges they had "NPCs" run by one player against a PC or two. I guess they had to pad the encounters to manipulate the gain of experience and money and such. Huh. Interesting, no? But, after all, there is a well-defined guideline for what you should have at each level of play and such, and it's so damn easy to put together an encounter for a character or group that, well, why put any effort into it at all when you can just run combat after combat after combat...and why compare characters indirectly like all the new players seemed to want to when you can just face them off against each other? I was so sick I almost puked.

One thing that I have noticed on the WOTC forums (other than the predominance of character optimization boards that were purposely put there so that people could "pimp their character" for the most possible power - and there are some idiotic builds there ) is the idea that a character is balanced if they are about the same as every other character. A character may excel in one area, but it can't be any more than any other character. This was usually argued through the player vs player mechanic, although there were the whole "cleric is the greatest, druid is the greatest, wizard is the greatest" threads as well (and the "fighters suck" threads). Most involved the same kind of cheese as the optimization boards.

I think that idea, that all characters have to do the same kind of damage (which is usually what it boiled down to, IMO) that lead to the changes in 4e. Every game needs some kind of balance so that everyone has fun. Despite (or because of) 30-odd years of gaming, I've never had any of the problems that people complained about. As in Hero, balance is a player/GM thing - even the best "balanced" game in the world can (and is going to be - I give it 6 months) abused. 4e takes the player v player idea, and the equal damage is balanced ideas and runs with it to the hilt, instead of giving options and letting the players make their own. It is easier for people to pick up - they don't have to do anything but plug in creatures. But it also takes away possibilities from the game. That's why I like Hero - we can set it up any way we like, and while it involves more work, I still follow the old adage that what you work for is better then what is given to you, since you earn it.

Granted, I won't turn down any millionaires giving away money....

For me, 4e is...bland. I have heard that the newer splat books will expand upon the basic game, with more feats, and I assume more classes and paragon paths (the new name for prestige classes, basically, although you have to take one or lose out on powers and abilities, so you better hope there is one you like). How the game will stay "balanced" when you go back to 600 classes....

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

Lol' date=' actually yes but it took a lot of time[/quote']

 

I had it figured out, then I slept.

You've got to love those easy-to-learn systems...

Re: Spectre of 6e

Did you mean the Hero Games forums' date=' or those for some other game company?[/quote']

 

When 4e was released, they locked down or moved (supposedly) all threads for older editions somewhere (but given that they have some 6 million forums, I am not sure where they are, and given the lack of support I am not sure how busy they might be). You also have both the detractors and "protectors" of 4e who are really rabid on attack just about anybody. It gets real old, real quick, and I took the drastic step (for me) of actually putting people on ignore. I don't want to see that here.

 

Heck, I know quite a few people who are still playing Fourth Edition, and lots of others who have ported 4E and earlier characters to the current ruleset. With the vast quantity of 5E material available, I expect lots of Fifth Edition campaigns to merrily roll along for years after Sixth is published.

 

I know people playing 2nd ed D&D, I've run old Pacesetter Chill campaigns, and I've actually thought of running a few "nostalgia" games, with Tunnels and Trolls, Runequest, and others.

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

D4 is a level based game. They always tend to funnel players and characters in a way that Hero doesn't. If you've been playing a ranger in D4 for a while and you decide you want to learn magic instead the opportunities tio head off int hat direction are scant even though it may be logical that the character whould want to. D3 was better at this but still discouraged most multiclassing.

 

Hero doesn't prevent you doing anything. It may not be the most 'efficient' way for the character to go, but you can do, and, in practice, teh punishment is likely to be minimal unless the game is set up to discourage this sort of thing - in which case you knew what you were getting into.

 

OK, that is more of a criticism of level based games, but D4 takes that to a whole new level, and so is a paragon, perhaps even an epic example of a game that limits your role playing choices.

I've never seen any problem in 3x that discourages multiclassing. From the Munchkin level dipping to my own players doing it to greater depth, there wasn't any problem with it. Of course, if about all you were concerned about is damage, then according to the boards if you multiclassed you made a useless character. But I've never personally seen it.

With 4e, you take a slight penalty in your own class, spend some feats, but gain just about the same ability from your single multiclass. Since you lose abilities and gain higher ones, all you do is lose (pulling it out of my tail) a 15th level power from your class and gain a 15th level power from your other one. Story wise, how you explain going from being able to light a candle to suddenly tossing fireballs that fry mountains...well, that's on you. Instead of working for higher power (at a cost), you really pay very little for full power.

Re: Spectre of 6e

My own impression of what Steve has implied he's actually considering -- versus what some fans have requested -- is that the changes may be comparable to when all the earlier distinct Hero games like Champions' date=' Fantasy Hero, Justice Inc., Danger Intl.[/i'] and so on, were unified into Fourth Edition HERO System. I.e. many specific Powers, Skills, Modifiers and so on were mechanically modified, costs changed, options redefined; but the core was still recognizably HERO. If 6E goes no farther than that I'm confident that anyone familiar with 5E will be able to adapt themselves and their earlier HERO materials without great pain.

And so long as my HD program doesn't suffer major trauma - I just bought the 2-year deal!

Re: Spectre of 6e

I'd say your concerns are justifiable...in general Hero today is the same system it has always been.

But some of the proposed changes for 6th look like they Could be large enough to make it a total change...so grab Sidekick and wait.....or grab 5th and look for "old schoolers" in case of massive change....

As long as there isn't a massive break like they did elsewhere, shunting the older version of the game's forums off somewhere, locking a lot of others, and making the new forum a sewer (although I admit I have some fascination with train wrecks). Hopefully the forums won't suffer major changes. If I see 6eVengers and garbage like that here....

Just my concerns for the forums, but to the OP: Welcome, learn it now - you won't regret it, because no matter what happens with 6e, you'll have learned a great system and way of looking at games (I admit to being a system junkie, but since Hero I have a habit of looking at other games and thinking of how I can do it better in Hero ).

Re: Mac compatible?

You could always run Windows via Boot Camp. Then it would be native. That's probably what I'll do (if I don't use Champions Online as an excuse to buy an XBox360... )

I meant native original system. I can run XP, Linux, and whatever else this thing can run, but it's not my main system. That's what I mean. I have to use Windows at work, and I have a few programs that need it at home, but I do not really like using it. Of course, I prefer consoles for games, I have better things for my computer (unless I could get the ps2-style gamepad to work).

The other problem I have is that I hate paying monthly fees; I share the internet, and hogging it for a game is not something I like; and I'm not very social online - unless I know you (except in forums like this), leave me alone. I almost tried the Everquest for PS2, but there was a problem putting in my card so I never did. If I could be a solo hero, that would be fine. If I have to rely on others...I'm not really interested.

But if the game helps bring people to Hero, I'm all for it.

Re: Mac compatible?

I talked to one of the guys at GenCon. His basic stance was "We don't have a Mac development team in place. So we'd rather not do a Mac version than do a bad Mac version."

 

Having played some half working extremely poor Mac ports of games in the past - I'll take that as more than acceptable.

Meaning, "we don't want to have to hire one".

Re: Mac compatible?

From the "About Champions" page at http://www.champions-online.com:

 

"Powered by the groundbreaking Cryptic Engine, Champions Online will be developed for both Xbox™ 360 and PC formats."

Oh well, I get to save money then. I have parallels, but if it ain't native, then I'll pass. Until they decide to give Mac (or PS3, my preferred game machine) a go, they'll just pass on my money (like they'll notice ).

I guess they don't want the Linux market either.

Now I'm curious about market demographics and online subscribers. Of course, if you never make games for a demographic, then they'll never show up. Catch-22.

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

Love, mostly. And the books were cheaper. It was a better world. Steve Jackson made games you could buy for pocket money and play in an afternoon. Traveller books were, what, $10/supplement? Remember when Mercenaries and High Guard came out? That excitement?

 

CCG ruined the industry. And as far as 3.5, don't knock what you ain't tried.

 

But honestly, a good GM can use any system, or none at all.

I still have a bunch of Metagaming's games - I was looking at WarpWar the other day, as well as Melee and Wizard. I just have to find my copy of Sticks & Stones. I've got to introduce my group to these games one night.

Re: Traveller Hero

Having the history was exactly why I came up with a system for converting existing characters; I love the backstories you could create that way. Shadowcat and Eodin took it and ran with it, and dramatically expanded the list of skills to convert. (I had used only Classic Traveller, as it's the only one I own; they added the later versions to it.)

 

If you do roll your characters in your Traveller system of choice, make sure you use the package deals anyway. Reason being, Hero has a lot more skills than Traveller, and a character that you just convert will tend to not have all the skills he really should. The package deals point you at all the skills someone in whatever the profession is should have. Adding skills from the appropriate package deal(s) will make your character much more rounded.

Good ideas. Thanks for the work and advice. (again)

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

After reading the PHB of DD4 i tought it was a very bad rpg system, one of the worst ever made.

..... but actually after playing it 8 days i think this is one of the most enjoyable game ever !

 

It's a lot more fun than any previous version of D&D.

As a DM, I disagree - it's far less fun for me, and it's been so-so with my group. There are issues of "balance" between monsters and players so far. Two-hit near kills from monsters, even with player HP jacked up, from level-appropriate encounters is not fun for the players. They've (the characters) actually rested more than in the last games we played in 3.5 (mainly because they could heal better in 3.5, and had no real powers that had to be recharged). Irony.

But there are 3 prerequisites :

- you must like tactical combat.

- you must like knowing the mechanisms of your character.

- you must have a coooooool state of mind. Repeat after me :"COOL"

If I get colors like that, I could get arrested and lose my job - I've seen the commercials.

We played it as we played twenty years ago, like when we were teenagers, 8 or 9 hours each day without any pause, without any tiredness, having fun in living adventures, crawling dungeons, collecting xp and improving our PCs.

 

You should see it as the most old-school RPG ever made. Actually D&D4 IS a rpg. It's as i remember my first games were, but with better rules.

It's an English-language thing, but it's not "you should see it", but "you could see it". I got into RPGs from board wargames and an interest in real tactical miniature wargames, and from that standpoint, I agree with your assessment - it's very much like Chainmail (in spirit, that is) (Damn, now I want to dig out my copy and play a bit with miniatures and rulers.)

I hate MMO. They are so boring and limited.

So i'm quite sure D&D4 is not a tabletop MMO or i would hate it.

It uses similar language and similar themes, but since D&D and computer/MMO games have been closely tied together, I'm not surprised.

It's better.

So, you admit it's not D&D?

Believe me, i'm 34, i play and played "serious" games with smart and/or heavy mechanisms like HERO, Hârnmaster, Rolemaster, Chivalry & Sorcery, and the like since the middle of the 80's* ... but despite that i think D&D4 is a very fun gaming experience. You can be an adult and experienced gamer and still enjoy this one.

 

* but started with lightest ones, of course.

 

PS: but the commercial policy of WotC sucks.

A bit older than you, been there, done that...now, did you understand the FGU Chivalry & Sorcery magic rules?

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

If I want to do that I can break out Munchkin.

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

(I also love that after playing 4e for a couple months' date=' 3.5 for 4 years, and HERO for over a year.. 4e is the one I need to spend the least time consulting rule books. Tell me that isn't an accomplishment on their part?)[/quote']

 

I'm the opposite. I've played Hero since the early 80's and don't need to crack a book very often (maybe for a maneuver that's rarely used). We've had 5 sessions so far and I (and my players) have to pass the books around the whole night trying to figure something out. For me, the books are incredibly hard to try to find information. I don't know - it took several sessions to figure out that casting a spell still causes an attack of opportunity (sorry, it's Opportunity Attack now), since I looked everywhere that casting was mentioned, until I found it by chance in that combat maneuvers section. For some reason, I thought that that would be in the description of the powers. I guess when they meant streamlined, they meant streamlined.

 

(I believe that the reason it never struck me is that there is no mention of spells per se, it's all "ranged power" or "area attack power" and what have you. Forgot the new system where everyone has magic. Although, this system might work for Dragonball Z games )

Re: Learning from the mistakes of others

On that note' date=' D&D 4E is not old time D&D. It is an attempt to merge the systems of the D&D MMO and paper games to make it possible for people to crossover between the markets seemlessly, and to make it feasible for a pen and paper game to be played in a virtual enviroment with support. These are interesting ideas. They are ideas geared towards pleasing the people who are going to be playing and putting down their money, thus allowing D&D to continue to exist.[/quote']

 

From what I read, it appears that many people (on the forums) are interested (maybe were interested is better) in the DDI and their virtual tabletop. I'm not, and could care less whether they have something online that I have to pay more money for each month (what does that sound like ?) Of course, since that is currently in a kind of limbo and so far is a flop, it sounds like they were reaching beyond their grasp on that one, but we'll see.

 

That said, there's everybody else across the states (and the world, I assume) who may not have access to a computer (I know quite a few, since I teach with computers currently), and may have no desire for such capability. If there is this big focus online, what does that do to those without?

Re: Fishy, Fishy, Fishy, Fish!

It always amused me that TSR and WOTC called their D&D setting "The Forgotten Realms" as if nobody who lived there had any idea where they were....

 

But a "forgotten magic" campaign has interesting possibilities. Perhaps PCs have access to low-level spells at best (no more than 15 active points in effect per spell) when they can use spells at all, but a previous age left whopping great magical effects behind that are starting to decay and cause problems. The PCs can't learn the new magic because it is destructive to human minds (just as in CoC, where learning spells reduces your SAN score and starts to drive you mad).

I like the Kane series (Karl Edward Wagner) for that type of Lovecraft/Howard setting with ancient magics in a Swords & Sorcery setting. Bloodstone is one that I really like.

This type of setting can have a lot to go for it - ancient golems gone amuck, magical diseases or transformative effects being released by unknowing people...lots of fun things.