badger3k

Question - by multipower pool, you're referring to the reserve? Gotta be - OK- The 0-phase action is part of the standard multipower (just MP). Since that is the time it takes to reallocate the points in the multipower slots. If you want to put a limit on the switching in the multipowers, you can use extra time, just put the duration to fit between the limits (I should have thought of this earlier) - the current Extra Time limitations are: Delayed phase -1/4 Extra segment -1/2 Full phase -1/2 To have a 0-phase action take a half-phase but still in the same segment, and be at his normal dex, it would be -1/4. It would be that for all powers, since a -1/2 would be a full phase. Basically, it fits in: 0-phase action: -0 delayed phase: -1/4 half-phase: -1/4 Extra segment: -1/2 Full phase: -1/2 That way, you can still act on your dex, but you can only move or attack the same phase you reallocate your points/slots. You still threw me with the "pool" - the only pool in the game is the variable power pool (it didn't hit me until I thought about the reserve, which has been/still is called a pool sometimes - I used to use it myself, a while back). No offense meant, it helps to use the proper (book) term/abbreviation, so people understand exactly what you mean. Hope that helps a little better.

cost? Given the GM blessing, you can probably buy the EDM as 20 points, with the single location being where the other party is. Or add +5 for any point in the dimension. Shouldn't be that expensive, since nobody else moves. Limit it to CapMs, you have focus (OIF) - or restrainable/gestures, only to swap places with other party - hmm, that might not be a limitation or an advantage, since it may or may not be either, depending on the situation. Still, shouldn't cost too much. Or am I missing something?

I don't know if that would be legal - summoning something inside something else sounds a little to iffy. If you can't use transform as an attack, why can summon do it? Even at 200 points for the creature (making 100 active points), giving an automatic attack/hit and damage is a little powerful. Maybe if it were linked to an attack (RSR - attack roll), something like that. I'd go as an uncontrolled/continuous NND does body (or something similar) attack (for the parasite, def is not having internal organs/stomach) with a linked summons (alien) with trigger: after character takes x body or dies (to simulate the alien popping out).

Do you mean Variable Power Pool (VPP) or Multipower (MP)? The answer depends on which one. If its a VPP, to change normally is a full-phase action. To switch in a half-phase is a +1/2 advantage (Fred p 209-210). For multipowers, I'd just use the delayed phase (-1/4) - the change occurs on the same phase at half-dex, or extra segment (-1/2) - if you act in phase 3, you'd get a haf-move, then power activates at end of phase 4 - the extra time limitation (p186) explains those. At most, to use a half-phase (as a limited power perhaps), I wouldn't go above the -1/4 for either (since a full phase is -1/2). Just my thoughts, hope they help.

On the strength side note, I'd go about 30-40, depending on what you mean by a "medium tree" - anyone strong enough to pick a bus can probably uproot a tree (maybe with effort, though - even roots on weeds can be tough!) The other stuff, though, I'll have to reread and think on that. Why does the character slow down light outside the field (and presumably slow down him as well), while actually speed him up? Its an interesting concept - just curious about the idea behind it.

I don't see a need to use duplication. The character isn't duplicated either - since they're two separate beings they should start that way. I'd use the EDM and Mind Link (ExDim only) that both can buy. Give one to control the edxim movement (the rick jones character, with focus if you want), and the other has it as no conscious control. You can add side effect that EDM swaps places, or limit EDM as "only to swap with X". Just GM the point bases of the two characters as appropriate. I'd have the characters earn xp separately too. If you do use the duplication, the original character in game terms does not mean the original character in the story. Mar-Vell would be the base/original character, even though Rick should be. To balance things for other players, though, you might have to limit the changes/have uncontrolled (time duration), or something similar. Multiform doesn't do it right either, IMO.

That and they tend to have penetrating on their voice Fast Line: Whatever line you're in moves faster than others. People have everything handy and no questions arise. point cost: 10, just because the real effect would probably be too expensive for a talent (I'm thinking Transform, area of effect (line). That or Aid to Spd, UBO.

I usually give the same amount, then add extras for various things, if needed. The ones that I do most give are (in Hero) a 1-point bonus for the best-roleplayer (voted by group, can't vote for self) and a 1-point bonus for VIP of the session, same rules. I might give other bonuses for other things (such a being pivotal in encounter, solving puzzle, had us on floor laughing, etc), but the two that the players vote for seems fair. It's always worked for us, and IMO rewards players as part of the group.

Re: reply Same to you. It's nice to do this sometimes to get other viewpoints. I find it broadens the horizons. Thanks for the response.

Sorry I haven't noticed this before - I mainly looked at what I was subscribed to for the last few days. Note - the following is opinion (mine, actually) Interesting ideas, I'll give you that. The point that I was trying to make is that making characters that have more disadvantages than abilities is not the norm. My own way is to take the character concept and go with abilities, then work up logical disadvantages (on that side note, I often have troubles with a full champs 150 - how many hunteds or lims can you have before the characters a bowl of jello?). Most of the people I know are similar - the focus of the "fun to play" part is the abilities, with any disads second. When people think of wolverine, they think of his abilities first, then the berserker/loner bit later (if they can get past the claws). I think that by pulling the focus of creation to disads you do increase the storytelling aspect (potential lets say), but take away from it too. If I was designing a Conan-type character, I wouldn't start with his weaknesses, I'd start with his strengths. I do know we disagree on the "concept" idea. I think you have probably a better view of that from an (ethical? moral? story?) standpoint, but I think mine is more practical - very few people would play a 75 point character with 150 points of disads (you may not either, or may see it as a challenge). To me that's a waste of time. While the role potential is high, I think the role-playing potential is not. Part of my view is that I am the GM - I have to keep game balance and flow and story and all that in mind at all times. I can make adventures to fit such a character, but to try to keep it challenging for all I have to challenge all. As I put it before, I can't keep one player involved while the others just sit on their hands (on the chance they do split up, I split the action, usually keeping it for no more than 15 minutes/group at a stretch). I also know my strengths and weaknesses, and have to play with them too. I digressed, sorry. You're view seems to be that the concept should be pure, with the game stats reflecting that. My view is that the concept is the start, how the character works in the game is the key. Probably because I like to tinker and play with the mechanics of the game (for background, I used to buy RPGs to learn the systems, some of which I only played once or twice). So I have no real problem adjusting the concept if I need to. Like I said, if the champs character concept works out to 312, I have no problem ading a few points to a characteristic (or whatever), to get to 315 (or probably 350, since most concept have trouble fitting in to the standard game, but that's what I'm using now so I abide by my own campaign limits). Even with a 150 point max start, I usually can't do the concept in the points to my satisfaction, but thats what experience is for. I don't think that any character can sail his way smoothly through all actions, unless the GM isn't challenging them. Whether a character has one disad or 100, they should all play a part in the game somewhere (though not necessarily all at once). Some people try to load down one aspect of the game over the other - I've seen the "story" mode where no one rolled all night, to dice heavy "combatathons". Neither is better or worse, just different. It all depends on the group you've got - the group I have currently likes to have a story (and I prefer to have one), but the "total immersion" style of roleplay is not a big deal. If I say they see a guard at the city gate, they'll usually tell me something like "I go up to him and tell him why we're here" rather than act it out. We roleplay to keep friends in contact (as I posted elsewhere, 2 in Ky, 3 in Tx, 1 in Korea, and 1 was In but soon to be Iraq), and to relax after a long week. To us, and me in particular, a story is a series of related events with various threads running through it. I try to keep conventions with "story arcs" (multiple sessions for a storyline/quest/etc), but as I said, there isn't a lot of getting in character (we have Ren-faires for that, I guess). Now that doesn't mean that there is no character or story. Unless you're meaning/usage of the terms are different than mine, which is possible. As I said, different people have different opinions. While I do like to debate (or argue as some might say), I don't try to convert anybody - I'll try to explain my position, give my reasons, and if you feel the same, cool. If you don't - cool. It's not going to make my game any different or less fun. Besides, trying to convert people implies that one method of gaming is superior - I see all sides as valid (if maybe weird or odd ), but if it works for you, who cares? As for the shooters, meh - prefer the psuedo-rpgs like dungeon siege, "tactical/strategy" games like masters of orion 3, or fighters (VF4:E)/"rpg-types" like GTA:VC, FF versions, etc for PS2. Now, ALiens vs Predator 2 is fun to play. Although I think you would have been more accurate to relate what you were saying to games like Everquest, which are basically quest/combat with some role-playing elements, rather than first person shooters. IMO its a closer comparison with the encounter/power-skill example. At least those have some form of multiplayer involvement. Hmm - tried to make sure that my wording was not inflammatory or sounded insulting. These kind of posts can sometimes go that way. If it does sound that way, it is unintentional.

Not surprised - there's little we know about a whole range of organisms - the so called "extremophiles" (extremophils, something like that) - the ones that live and thrive under extreme conditions like that. I'd heard of other organisms that hibernated in similar ways, some that involved actually surviving their body/cell/whatever it was freezing solid (IIRC, the water in the cells froze, but had something that limited crystal formation or something so they didn't rupture). Can't remember anything else about it, though - it's been a while. Given the appearance of some microscopic creatures, you may not need to throw in the kodiak bear - some of them (especially the worm-like creatures), are hideous to our eyes (but I'm sure some like them). Some 80's-era Dragons had some game info (for D&D or GW I think, maybe both), along with some pictures. [edit - oops, misread the post - that's what you intend. Hey, any pics online of this thing - scanning electron microscpes are kewl - IIR the scope C)

No - my real nickname is badger, but it was taken already at yahoo, so I combined my name with mst3k, so I keep badger3k as my username for everything I can - makes it simple for those who know me. Whether he took his name from the comic character I don't know. It just fit me, though. Hope that helps.

With the exception of paranoia and cthulhu, I've never had a no-survive game (well, one that is designed for pcs not to survive - there's a difference). I've never really had one where the players couldn't win (in the long run - some losses are part of the campaign/storyline). In most situations, the players can win if they play smart. It's just that sometimes winning calls for a tactical withdrawl

What is it? Animal, plant, fungi, bacterium, etc? Being microscopic could mean it's one of those that aren't plant or animal (thus the bacterium above - I just can't remember the name off-hand). A lot of its survivability can come from what it is. Did the "hibernating" waterbears form a shell/spore/whatever? Ditto for the other extremes? Was it hibernating there (at -272 c for example), or was it just as active? If you know what it is, you can "reverse-engineer" some powers that way. If the waterbear is part plant, you can add some plant-type powers). The micro-org neither could include something like duplication/regeneration/other esoteric powers. You could even have his cellular system replaced with these organisms - you could disperse them as a form of shapeshift/desolid/stretching maybe. Or you could build a transform to allow his alien-type cellualr structure to infest other people (sorry, thinking Greg Bear's Blood Music now).

Ditto. Telepathy would give you events colored by their perception. So they may see a murder as self-defense. The no conscious control lets the GM run with it. Add always on and limit it to "really bad crimes" (or whatever phrase works) to prevent every little sin/crime they've done would show up. For sfx, you can have the scene show up as being outside (like watching it happen on tv), or it can be seen through their eyes (but not include their thoughts). I added this in not having seen Unbreakable yet (have the DVD, but just haven't sat down and watched it). The dead zone also comes to mind, although IIRC it worked into the future.

Sounds good, and easier than some of the ways thought up.

OK - heres the problem. I'm trying to work up a music magic - where the spell lasts as long as the caster plays, and lingers afterwards. The caster will be at 1/2 or 0 DCV throughout the casting (I haven't decided), and can basically play as long as he wants (and pays for it, if I use END cost). The gestures part works for the "must play instrument" part. Does the lingering suffice for the rest? Reading it, the literal interpretation seems to be no - the advantage seems to keep a power ready for use for a set duration. Maybe raise the advantage to reflect the variable nature - since it only goes into effect after he stops playing. Or is the uncontrolled/continuous path better? Since the power is active every phase, maybe that way is better. Just give it enough END to run the expected time length and handwave the first part so long as the character feeds END? What about using charges. Uncontrolled doesn't work there, but the continuing charges does. I could see dropping the continuing charges by one level for the extra time spent playing. I suppose I could buy the variant form of uncontrolled given in FH (p 258) in which a time limit is used instead of the END pool. That would simulate a spell that has playing + but isn't exactly what I need. It just sets a maximum duration (kind of like the Concentration (1 rd/lvl) used elsewhere. Hmm - Put the uncontrolled advantage under a limitation that it doesn't start until after the music stops? Or give it lingering? Aargh - my head hurts. Anybody ever try anything like this?

Urk - as I put in another board, just because the power can be abused, doesn't mean that there's a problem with it, either. (Nothing against you, Kolava, you just happened to post that saying, which I recently heard parroted over and over by a munchkin on another board, so I felt I should reply). My first question, based on my experience, is: What's so unbalanced about it? I have used damage shields in the past, and currently I use very few - I tend not to use them for several reasons: a) They tend to be limited for the character conceptions I've developed so far. Most players prefer active offenses rather than an offensive defense. c) The ones I have used tend to be in FH, and since the characters just need to stay away, they can be countered pretty easy. If my games were mostly melee or hth, than my opinion might change. For the point costs, they seem ok so far- not too powerful and not too weak, although I do feel they could lower the cost if they wanted, but that feeling isn't strong enough to make me change it myself - (even I sometimes would like a large KA DS to incinerate people ala a fire elemental without spending a fortune in points). Oh well. As for all the NND etc, I normally wouldn't allow anything that seemed abusive - I haven't run into any that are overpowering, nor any that can't be beaten in other ways. The whole point of the game is to be challenging - to player and GM alike. That said, I have had abusive constructs (some of them my own creations - oops), and if they prove overpowering they get modified, pure and simple. If the game ceases to be fun, then why play? I do like the defensive only limitation for the damage shield, though - that can work for a variety of powers/situations. Thanks Phil!

Looking at the last question, and page 117 5e, the wall of fire spell in the FHG is probably correct in not needing the range advantage. However, if the force wall has limited range, does the linked damage shield then also have to have the same limitation, or does it get the same range as the force wall as a default (the same way t would get the range advantage)?

I'm trying to build a Fire Control Staff for FH. The staff has 50 charges which never recover, and each ability (slot) uses 1 charge(for simplicity). The reserve will have a limitation of +1/2 - 2 = -1 1/2 limitation. If one slot has continuing charges (say for a force wall), does the whole reserve limitation go to the continuing charges modifier, or just the slot? If just the slot, how is that done - do I figure the cost based on the full # of charges (say 50 non-recoverable charges that last 1 turn (-1 limit))?

The faq states: Q:_ If a character wants to create a Damage Shield-based power, using a Power such as Energy Blast which is normally Ranged, and wants to be able to apply the power to other characters at Range, must he pay for the Range Advantage? _ A:_ Yes. OK - does this change for a linked power? In the FHG p 97, the wall of fire spell has 2 linked powers, a force wall with limited range (-1/4) and a linked RKA damage shield with the limited range limitation (-1/4). Hero designer seems to be correct in requiring the limited range advantage (+1/4) on the damage shield. Which is correct?

OK - thanks for the info.

Finally got a chance to look through them. Quick question - what the heck is Sortilege and where is it in the book - the source says PHB3e, but its new on me, both in 3 and 3.5. Is there some other version or printing out there? I'm lost completely on that, and can't find reference elsewere on the site (although you have so much I might have missed it). Other than that it looks good so far as I can tell with the skimming I did. Thanks to you and everyone whose taken time to do that.

For move throughs and bys? I figured them for the difficulty of attacking and moving full speed (or whatever speed). How can they be range since you are making the attack at no range? (or are you counting the distance moved as the range?) Maybe I misunderstood which is why I'm asking. I follow the faq on these - and if you look, FH does too: FH p 107 - "At the GMs option, characters can buy this Talent for other ranged attacks, such as knife-throwing, by changing the name and what the Combat Skill Levels apply to." So they did use the 2 point CSLs for the ocv penalty for the maneuver. I didn't think the .5 point difference between the lowest PSL level and CSL level was big enough to bother with (so far I haven't used them to very high bonuses where the half point may matter).

I just wanted to add my opinion to a few things touched here: However, you don't need a battlemat to play (although if you play hackmaster you may have one already) (not a slam at hackmaster - I love the game - just the level of detail to me says "you must have one" - that and I've read too much Knights of the Dinner Table (as if thats possible)). I've done the game without a board for most of my gaming history. A mat does make it easier unless you have a group spread out over the US and Korea. Which is a point. If you can't find people near you, check out going online - we use yahoo chat (one player in Korea, 2 in Kentucky, 3 here in texas in my house). Not the best way, and not easy, but it keeps our group together. If you can, get the Grimoire - it features a lot of ready made spells and options to help you. Killer shrike and others have ready-made (and thanks to their hard work - don't think I said it yet) magic to use. I like the versatility of making whatever I want, although designing powers rather than just making an effect and giving it a level is a bit different. Its easy to make spells in D&D, but you design them in Hero, which can be harder and more time consuming, but can definitely be fun. Just wanted to add emphasis to that - I tend to end up winging it a lot in my 3e game, and the books help for Hero - that and once you know the system, you can wing it pretty easily too. I might disagree that D&D is really balanced, but the point is good - Hero does ask the GM more in terms of judging balance, but I (and others) think the trade is worth it - the system allows you to run Your game, not someone elses. Ditto - there are no intrinsic saving throws like in 3e, but the various defenses sorta work like the more limited saves in AD&D/HM. It is a big change and makes it hard for direct conversion between the systems, but FH gives options, and you can design the magic system to simulate most of the features you're used to reasonably well. Other than that, I'd just repeat that the boards here are better than other ones I've been to - the people are helpful and the response from Steve is fantastic - questions are usually answered promptly or directed to the boards for people to put their input in. Like the others I'd just say good luck and welcome aboard.