prestidigitator

Re: Dr. Terror's not so terrifying PRE Change Environment usually affects Characteristic ROLLS, not the Characteristic itself. -4 to Pre ROLLS would be the equivalent of -20 Presence. Reduction in a Characteristic Roll normally shouldn't equate to reducing the actually Characteristic, but in the case of Presence Attacks which conceivably could be handled by a Characteristic Roll but for some reason aren't....

Re: Champions Powers book issues... As far as I know that's not a general policy but one for the Rules Questions Board. There are other places he seems more willing to go more into design philosophy, like in several sections of the books themselves. Discussion of meta-rules for example, which may come into play in this situation.

Re: ARI from Heavy Rain [6th Edition]

Re: ARI from Heavy Rain [6th Edition] Probably (from the description linked to) limited Eidetic Memory, a bonus to Sight Perception Rolls, some Knowledge Skills (e.g. for identifying impressions), and Enhanced Senses such as Detects (for things like blood type). Probably also something like limited HRRP with built-in Cryptography for the network+database access. The Computer Link Perk would IMO belong to the character, and the communication equipment provided by the system would be one way of accessing the database that the Perk grants the character the privilege of using. I'm not fond of Perks being bought through Foci.

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack" That's an interesting observation. Defense Maneuver I specifically eliminates attacks "from behind", but no level of Defense Maneuver is supposed to protect a character from being Surprised:

Re: Throwing A Bottle of Puke! I'd go with the Images or whatever, but leave out the Mind Control. Instead make it a Psychological Complication or an Enraged/Berserk or something on the creatures in question.

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack" Oh. One more thing. If you're going to allow the target to drop his DCV to 0 but require that it be against all attacks instead of just the friendly one, I would still allow an Abort to bring back full DCV and even perform a fully defensive maneuver between the friendly attack and an unfriendly one. Unless, of course, the target has already Aborted or something. Hmm. Another interesting thought. If the defender is Stunned, would anything be different? I might require a Perception for for a Stunned character to be aware enough to tell that an incoming "attack" is well-intentioned. Of course, they'll be at 1/2 DCV anyway, but if they wanted to drop it even further....

Re: Teamwork, Multiple Attackers, and Coordinating Hmm. I guess I like to work in worlds where "hero" and "villain" are somewhat less clearly defined (yes, the PCs are supposed to be heroes, or at least to try their darned best to be, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they always succeed, and it doesn't necessarily mean that all of their NPC opponents are villains either). This is one of those cases where I feel that, "If the PCs can do it, the NPCs can too." So, I build appropriate NPCs (teams and creatures/races that naturally work in packs) with Teamwork, and simply encourage PCs to purchase it as one common and pretty darn cheap tool for their belts.

Re: Champions Powers book issues...

Re: Champions Powers book issues... I agree that most NNDs on Drain should be +0, as most NND conditions (including most forms of Life Support, I'm sure) are considered Rare.

Re: Champions Powers book issues... I like the suggestions under "Low Pressure" on 6E2 p. 144: use Change Environment to cause End expenditure, and add Drain Rec (I'd probably make it Constant, NND, Area of Effect) to prevent Recoveries. As far as fire goes, I'd personally rather simulate the SFX problems on the fire powers instead of the vacuum power. Note that although outer space also presents pretty dramatic radiation and temperature hazards (depending on where you are), a vacuum by itself really does not--unless maybe you count the fact that in the long run it is difficult to get rid of body heat unless you have a cold dark sink to radiate heat toward. (The Darkness to hearing certainly does make sense though.)

Re: 5E To 6E Character Conversion Summary I'm guessing that was meant to be humorous, but those with less than a year of programming experience and/or with a post count greater than 1000 on these boards might have difficulty with it. In any case, welcome!

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack" Well, there are precedents, such as: Unfortunately these explanations aren't incredibly consistent. What I've typically done is allow the friendly character's attack roll to automatically succeed in most circumstances IF the target is aware of the attack and definitely wants to allow it to succeed. If the target isn't aware of the attack, the friendly attacker must make the attack roll, though it'll typically be against a reduced DCV because of surprise or coming from behind. There are cases where I might make an exception, though. If the target is being attacked by multiple enemies, I might decide that giving that momentary opening to even a friendly attacker by allowing them to automatically hit might reduce overall DCV to 1/2 or 0 for a Phase (or maybe just a Segment, so the target had better hope none of his enemies have held Phases or something)--at least against HTH opponents. Also, against an especially clever main antagonist, I might warn that the enemy could take advantage of the momentary opening if the target wishes to reduce his DCV below half for his friend (I figure plenty of combat situations reduce DCV to half, and often against single attacks or attackers, so allowing reduction to 1/2 DCV for a friendly attacker without creating openings for unfriendly ones is pretty reasonable in most circumstances), and allow the antagonist to do so if he takes advantage of timing (held Phase or Trigger or whatever) and makes a Tactics roll. I'm not sure how Dive for Cover applies to the scenario in question (just a straight Dex roll to allow an automatic hit and go prone either way, or only roll the DFC if the friendly attacker misses, determine scatter, and require the DFC to end there?), but I suppose I might allow some sort of Block type maneuver. Perhaps an attack roll vs. DCV 3 or 0 that acts as a complimentary roll to the friendly attacker's attack roll? It's sort of an odd idea because Block goes against another character's OCV, whereas this maneuver tries to aid the attacker's OCV, so you wouldn't want to make the "Block-esque" roll more difficult for a higher attacker OCV....

Re: Genetically engineered leaders? Hey, Asimov started with robotic brain decision makers for the world economy, evolved into secret humaniform robots that led the Empire (for a time), and then finally did away with them for a social solution of (IIRC) electing reluctant scientific leaders for the Foundation(s). I suppose genetic engineering is another possible solution, but AIs are definitely proven out on the literary playing field. Heinlein did something more along the lines of genetic engineering. He explored a eugenic breeding scheme, then eventually developed it into gene-therapy and cloning. That was more aimed at longevity than psychological characteristics, I believe, but it's somewhat related.

Re: Vulcan Racial Template You forgot the Vulcan nerve pinch. Probably a NND Martial Arts maneuver, though you might have to create a whole Vulcan martial arts form so characters can actually buy it without having to figure out 10 points worth of maneuvers. Perhaps maneuvers that are relatively non-violent and take advantage of their strength (perhaps even tending to propagate a reputation of even greater strength than they have), like Martial Grab, Martial Disarm, and Nerve Strike? (Remember that being surprised out of combat doubles Stun damage, so your regular 2d6 NND Nerve Strike can serve as a pretty nasty nerve pinch when you catch someone unaware; at least enough to Stun most people, and if continued the next Phase a pretty quick drop without any time to react. Add a few CSLs or Extra DCs in there, and....) (I think a martial arts package would be appropriate for what you've put together, anyway. Though you dubbed it a "racial package" it definitely contains cultural aspects such as mental training and discipline.)

Re: The Future of Food Technology Asimov went into this from time to time. His vision was that eventually we'd be eating mostly yeast. He had giant yeast vats with thousands of strains of edible yeast for all the nutrients we might need, and additives mixed in for flavor and texture and such until traditional foods were synthesized to the point of being almost indistinguishable. Care for a barbeque-flavored yeast-chicken drumstick?

Re: When, Exactly, Is The Future? I like to play at least a couple hundred years out for the near future; far enough that significant changes may have taken place but the "landscape" is still pretty recognizable (conveniently also enough time that technological development and general historical ideas aren't likely to be "proven wrong" anytime soon). For the far future, I like to think on the order of tens of thousands of years, much like Asimov's Empire and Foundation storylines. I'm not against playing around in between, but that's my general viewpoint on timescales.

Re: Kingdom character sheets

Re: Top 10 most powerful scrolls This may or may not be appropriate in a particular game. It serves as much as a fantasy type "radiation accident" as anything, allowing a character to be completely redefined using whatever character points are available. If desired, the maximum number of Character Points for the new form can be limited roughly by using the average roll of the 2d6 Transform (7 effect) and assuming the scroll acts with a 2 Speed for the full 5 minutes it's charge lasts: (7/Phase)(2 Phases/Turn)(5 Turns/min)(5 min)=350, which is enough to transform 175 Body, or about 875 Character Points in the end (using the rules for adding abilities, though only very approximately). More potent versions of this scroll could be created for truly epic/godly transformations. Note that the temptation of overstepping one's own power comes at a price: if you don't have the Character Points to fully invest in the new form, you revert completely after 24 hours, with no lasting value except what you might have been able to accomplish in that time. Complete Metamorphosis Transform: 2d6, Severe, Physical (reverts after 1 day unless character has enough points to make new form permanent); Improved Results: any living being (+1); No Range (-1/2); Self Only (-1/2); Charges: 1, 5 minute Continuing, Never Recovers (-11/4) [ 60 active; 13 real ] plus Transform: 2d6, Severe, Mental (reverts after 1 day unless character has enough points to make new form permanent); Improved Results: any living being (+1); No Range (-1/2); Self Only (-1/2); Charges: 1, 5 minute Continuing, Never Recovers (-11/4); Linked (-1/2); [ 60 active; 11 real ] plus Transform: 2d6, Severe, Spiritual (reverts after 1 day unless character has enough points to make new form permanent); Improved Results: any living being (+1); No Range (-1/2); Self Only (-1/2); Charges: 1, 5 minute Continuing, Never Recovers (-11/4); Linked (-1/2); [ 60 active; 11 real ] [ total: 35 real ] Add Limitations for being scroll-based as desired and as appropriate for your campaign: Focus, Incantations, Concentration, etc. (EDIT: Fixed duration and power level because I mixed up number of Turns/min the first time)

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Almost correct. You actually want a hit to occur if 3d6+OCV is greater than or equal to 10+DCV. If you consider equal CVs, that means rolling 10 or higher on 3d6, which has the same probability as rolling 11 or lower in a roll-under scheme such as the standard 11+OCV-DCV. I use this roll-high method for most of my games.

Re: END Reserves in 6e - why bother? Very minor point: I believe normal End can now power abilities when you are Stunned, since you can now have Persistent powers that cost End.

Re: Reflection - Active Points or DC Seems like a decent idea for Reflection, but I wouldn't use it for Adjustment Powers except maybe for PURELY defensive applications (like that defensive option for Dispel).

Re: Teamwork, Multiple Attackers, and Coordinating Well, I'm glad there's a very active, simple, and clear requirement for getting the multiple attacker bonus with options for the defender as opposed to, say, D&D 3E's "flanking bonus" where they, as always, have to visit all kinds of exceptions and corner cases ("Can I still flank him if I'm hanging upside down from my camel, using its reins as a weapon? I'm being very threatening with those reins!" ). Still, I do think it would be nice to introduce some more middle ground. For example, the defender has the option of focusing on only ONE opponent to gain his full DCV, but (if there are more than two coordinating attackers) there's no option for ignoring one of them (like the guy with the camel reins) and focusing on the others. I think what I'd do is allow the defender to pick any number of the coordinating attackers to ignore. The defender is 1/2 DCV against those attackers. The DCV penalty against the other coordinating attackers is as if only they were coordinating. For example, if five attackers were coordinating to attack me, I could choose to ignore (be at 1/2 DCV against) attackers #1 and #4. Against the others, I'd be at -2 DCV as if only the three of them were coordinating. It might also be good to introduce some kind of roll with the punches type option where you take double Stun from some of the attacks in order to keep them from adding to the Stun of the other attacks for purposes of Stunning. As to whether one roll should give you both the Multiple Attacker CV modifier and the Stun pooling, I'm somewhat ambivalent. It does seem difficult enough already to coordinate, and imposing another roll or something might make it ridiculously difficult. Note that the rules do suggest alternative rolls for the whole thing, such as Dex or Tactics rolls at a penalty. Maybe you could allow that, but only add together Stun damage from those who used the actual Teamwork skill to enter the attacker pool.

Re: How to balance encounters Hmm. I could see assuming a basic campaign average of CVs, DCs, Speed, etc., and then doing something like adding +10 ER for each +3 CV (one standard deviation on the 3d6 distribution), +3 DCs (or whatever), x2 Speed, etc. Roughly whatever will (VERY approximately) "double" the amount of damage done each Turn. That way adding +10 ER for one creature and doubling the number of creatures should do approximately the same thing.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge There are plenty of Desolidification builds for which every Affects Desolidified power affecting them would be stupid. I don't like getting held back by that. I also rarely build an Affects Desolidified power without somehow limiting the SFX of Desolidification it will counter. To each his own.