prestidigitator

Re: CON: Over-Nerfed?

That's like "why do we park in driveways and drive on parkways?"

DAMN! I knew there was something I'd been doing wrong all this time!

Re: Normal Damage Weapons used at Range

I would just write "6 DC KA" and "8 DC Blast" (since you basically buy them DC per DC).

Good point, and I agree. Many times I have done just that myself.

Re: Normal Damage Weapons used at Range

Dunno, but in 5E and 5ER is exactly the same rule

and the "very complex rules for adding damage" is pretty similar: only that in 5E you add to do some math (like addiction and subtraction) while in 6E there is an easy-to-read table

Yes, they had the same rule. And I believe this is a holdover from then, see? I disagree that the rules for adding damage were so similar. 5E® attempted to define the notion of "Base Damage", and various things added to it, or circumvented the rules for doubling Base Damage, or were subject to doubling rules if this but not that, or.... No, 6E simplified things enormously. Now you choose what Advantages you believe affect damage, and apply them to the Base Points, and every 5 Active Points from that is a DC (or do exactly the reverse to see how many dice of damage more DCs add). There are vague suggestions about how much damage you might allow to be added to an attack, but no real attempt to differentiate between damage added by Martial Arts, Movement, Maneuvers, Strength, adding to Killing Attacks vs. Normal Attacks vs. "weapons", etc.

Before there were loads of rules and definitions and corner cases. Now there is one mechanic, and a suggestion or two applied generically that you are expected to use as you see fit. I see that as a huge improvement that can cut back drastically on the number of exceptions that have to cascade through all the mechanics of the system to try to mop up after the cumbersome quirks.

Re: Normal Damage Weapons used at Range

I have the suspicion that this rule for the difference between HKA and HA mainly stems from the old (5E), very complex rules for adding damage with different types of attack. If you've carefully considered what Advantages to consider when figuring DCs, what kind of maximums you might want to place on damage adding, and all of that, IMO it would be appropriate to add consideration of whether or not to allow forms of the Ranged Advantage on HA and HKA to the same bundle of construction and play guidelines.

Re: What 6ED books should I buy?

HERO System 6th Edition: Character Creation and HERO System 6th Edition: Combat and Adventuring

Here is a link to a PDF bundle containing both. There are also items in the store for a damaged copy of Character Creation (with or without a bundled PDF), a hard copy of Combat and Adventuring (with or without a bundled PDF), or PDF versions of either.

It's very odd, but there don't seem to be any (non-damaged) hardcopies of Character Creation available any more.

Re: CON: Over-Nerfed?

Front line fighters ("Bricks") typically will have a high Con as well as decent defenses and quite a bit of damage potential. Range-based characters ("Energy Blasters") and sometimes "Martial Artists" with high CV may not, and will probably spend the points on DCV, unusual attacks and defenses, movement, etc. Not every character need have an ultra-high Con, but it pays to think about the role you will play in a fight. I too like making it count in other contexts, like when a character is exerting himself over long periods of time or subject to strange conditions/substances.

Re: Pay for 2, get 4.000

My interpretation of getting "double" the Framework Foci for +5 points is that you don't really get two instances of the power/framework to use independently; you simply get back-up devices that'll work if you lose your primary one. I would be pretty quick to require that be an Inaccessible Focus if you bought too many and carried them around with you (as opposed to keeping the spare back in your base, vehicle, home, or whatever). I'd probably think long and hard before I let the whole team have a fleet of uber-expensive vehicles for the price of yours plus a few 5-point Adders as well, so I'd be thinking about who can use the vehicles and when and what "ownership" means.

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

Why dubious' date=' Lucius? How else do you write up artifacts that feed people energy or abilities? If have magical abilities that are embued to me by a eldritch ritual I performed at Stonehenge, isn't Stonehenge a potential Focus for my character? Certainly not Accessible unless it's Spinal Tap's Stonehenge, travel-size for my convenience. If it glows when I draw on its power, Obvious. If it just sits there all plinthy and quiet, Inobvious.[/quote']

Even Inaccessible Foci should be removable pretty easily outside of a combat situation. I'd call the Stonehenge thing more of a Restrainable Limitation instead (like the way cybernetics are often built, but with the shift to some kind of field or mystical ability being able to sever or suppress the connection), or a custom one. If a power is limited to Only in Moonlight, should that instead be written up using the Moon as a Focus?

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

I didn't really think your post felt like a rant' date=' personally. Everything you said was perfectly reasonable.[/quote']

Ha! And thus you have found the Hero Games Board's version of a rant. Rather docile, isn't it? This is a pretty friendly place. Welcome!

 

(Okay. Every once in a while we have true rants, but I think more often than not you'll find people to "strike out" with something more akin dry wit and muted sarcasm. People know each other pretty well, and generally appreciate each other even when they might approach things from "violently" different viewpoints. It's a strength of the system that it is ambiguous and tolerates many solutions to the same problem; it's a strength of the community that we recognize this fact, appreciate it, and tolerate each other in a similar fashion.)

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

Okay, the phylactery as a Lich Summoner gave me an idea for character immortality. I'm curious what people think about this one.

 

Character A is able to Summon a soul preservation object of some kind, like the One Ring or whatever. That Summoned object has the ability to Summon Character A if it dies. As long as one of them is around, the other will be summoned back to life.

Hmm. Well, what I was thinking for the lich is that Mind Link included with the phylactery could give you enough continuity in the story and the monster's "memory" to hold things together, but since the lich is probably more of an NPC obstacle than a character that is really expected to be unique and interesting in terms of personality, it probably wouldn't matter if you're using Summon to generate a, "new lich," each time. I guess you'd have to judge whether that is really sufficient or whether you're going to have to include the Specific Being Advantage to the Summon and a (linked?) Resurrection Healing. At what point do you consider it, "cheating?"

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

Are you planning this for publication? If not' date=' then anything, you as the GM decide, is legal. People get caught up in whether it is book legal and often forget that it is fun.[/quote']

Oh, quite true. Building it can help define how other powers interact with the whole thing. That can be good, but if it just gives you a headache and starts to get in the way, forget it! IMO the rules are there to be a useful, ambiguous (that's right!), helpful language rather than a hindrance.

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

That would mean his body could be affected by a Dispel Summon or Drain Summon.

I suppose. That could simply be a particular weakness (for temporarily dismissing the threat. Or, if you're worried about it, make the Summon Difficult to Dispel or give the phylactery some Power Defense or something. There are going to be little quirks no matter what way you go. No need to use the idea; it's just another possible implementation.

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

What about storing 1 point of BODY in a Focus and hiding it under your bed? Would that be cheesy?

That wouldn't keep you from losing the Body; in fact it would mean you lose it when it's under your bed instead of being carried around by you.

Re: Black Powder Arms in the Hero System. Gun Nuts and reenactors welcome!

Side Effects! Big, nasty, fun Side Effects! Oh, what an opportunity!

Re: The Force

Even Luke' date=' the most inexperienced Jedi of all shown in film, [u']never[/u] misses with a lightsaber vs. a physical object.

My approach has no effect on a Block/Deflection attempt since they target an attack's OCV which arguably isn't being reduced by the AEO 1 Hex Accurate.

I believe he might have missed a time or two in Empire Strikes Back when Vader was hurling object after object at him in the bowels of Cloud City....

Re: A Lich's Phylactery

Another idea is to build the phylactery itself as a "character". Give it a Summon Lich (Slavishly Loyal) ability and a Mind Link to the lich it summons.

Re: Poisons

Yes, quite true. That's one that's built into certain Powers in the system. On the other end of the spectrum would be Transform, which was initially designed around the idea that if it's just as easy to kill someone, you might as well have a more or less "permanent" effect on them. It's interesting to contemplate being able to start with one of those approaches and nudge it incrementally toward the other. Maybe for 7e a more consistent basis could be derived.

Re: Power Use for Entangle/Barrier between 5E and 6E

I'd still call it a single instance of the Power Skill personally. It might also be appropriate to put the Barrier and Entangle powers in a Multipower or use the Unified Power Limitation, of course.

Re: Poisons

Oh. Here is a write-up I did a long time ago on a "Saving Throw" Limitation. Might be appropriate for some games where you want to allow a common roll to avoid certain effects (like this Con roll suggestion for poisons).

Re: mobile Destructive barrier with other conditions

Also take a look at the No Conscious Control and Side Effects Limitations. They might be fun to play with in the setting you describe.

Re: mobile Destructive barrier with other conditions

You may be interested in a Power other than Barrier. Remember that just because something looks like a "barrier", the important thing in Hero is how it behaves; the effect it has. This may be something as simple as extra DCV, Resistant Defense with the right Special Effects, etc. You might even apply something like Area of Effect to a Defense Power. If the defense can be worn away, the Ablative Limitation is often appropriate, or some form of Requires a Roll Limitation....

(If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it might just be a duck-flavored Killing Attack )

Re: The Force

Quite true.

 

Ultimately, though, it's about how Whitekeys wants them to work in his game, not about how they would work in your game, mine or George Lucas'. And Whitekeys seems to want Real Weapon.

Oh, quite true. That's actually why I suggested a compromise solution: include the Limitation, but reduce its value because many of the normal interpretations of, "Real Weapon," may not apply to a lightsaber, such as not being able to chop down doors with it or block unusual attacks.

Re: The Force

Why not just use Nonpersistent (-1/4) (6E1CC p. 373) if the type of Requires a Roll Limitation you have used does not do a good enough job?

Re: Poisons

I think you'd need to use a different construct for the first one. A Characteristic, whether it is bought straight or, "as a Power," is a Characteristic, not an effect. There's no effect roll to make cumulative, so the Cumulative Advantage doesn't apply. I think instead you are going to want to buy something like +16 Con or 3d6 Aid to Con and apply Limitations if you want it to take effect slower than normal. Also, I wouldn't assume poisons will allow some kind of Con check; this is the kind of thing you'll want to check with your GM on (or think about carefully if you are creating the game and/or setting yourself).

The second one looks fine to me.

Re: Searching PDFs

I believe you might be looking for the prefix "HH". For example, if you search the 6E1CC PDF for "HHBUGGING" it will take you to p. 67 where the "Bugging" Skill is described. I believe this is a particular quirk that has to do with how they did the little logos in the headings of the 6E books; I don't think it will apply to PDFs in general. By the way, if you don't want to remember this, you should be able to copy/paste a whole heading (including the logo part) into your search box. You should get the equivalent ASCII text with prefix so that you can see the general pattern to use.