prestidigitator

Re: Infrared Perception (Hearing Group)

Re: Infrared Perception (Hearing Group) The real world scenario? Bulls**t. You'd hear your own breathing and imagine phantom sounds far before you'd be able to hear variances due to temperature variation/brownian noise. Our built-in perceptive equipment's own noise is great enough; I'd be quite willing to place a wager that it is higher than that of the natural background noise. As for power builds and comic book/rubber physics? Sure, why not?

Re: Can you move backward? I wouldn't say it's irrelevant, but there's nothing that explicitly correlates it to heading (direction of travel). As Sean's video shows, there are more issues than just perception, at least for realistic humans (not that we necessarily have to restrict ourselves to that case, but it's usually a good point from which to start). We can run pretty quickly backwards (or sideways for that matter), but our bodies aren't mechanically built to be able to do it at full speed (sprinting). Our knee, ankle, and toe joints just aren't setup for it.

Re: Can you move backward? Hmm. However, we don't really want normal cars that drive sideways (though most ground vehicles have some form of reverse). Should that be worth an extra Limitation on their Running, or is it just a SFX wash?

Re: Cause vomit power... I've used is as the SFX of Drain Speed in the past, too.

Re: A level of confusion

On 6E1 p. 300 it says: Whereas on 6E2 p. 29 under "Teleporting Blind" it says: These statements seem to be contradictory. The former gives a penalty of -5 (a maximum, I assume, to the attack roll penalty due to missing a Targetting Sense Perception roll as described earlier in 6E1) to the attack roll. The latter implies there is no penalty at all to the attack roll. Which is correct, or am I missing some kind of context that makes the two descriptions apply to different situations? Thank you!

Re: A level of confusion Well, a GM could always decide to just keep things simple and make DCV DCV; don't worry about the type of the incoming attack.

Re: A level of confusion Touché! LOL.

Re: The Future of Food Technology

Re: A level of confusion Blue Suede Shoes: 5-point CSLs with all Elvis paraphernalia; OIF (-1/2) [real cost: 3 points each]

Re: A level of confusion

Re: Balancing Duplication Just consider the team to be that many characters bigger when considering challenges. It's not like Duplication can really give you anything that additional PCs wouldn't. In fact, it generally gives you more of the same, whereas more PCs would broaden the diversity of powers. So in a sense it's easier to deal with than more PCs would be (not to mention the fact that you don't have to actually put up with more snot-nosed players ).

Re: A level of confusion I wouldn't. If you wanted levels like that I'd allow you to take 8-point levels with HTH combat and Limit them to Only when using or defending against knives (-1) (or maybe -3/4).

Re: How are magic items (equipment) created in your setting? I generally base the actual creation on a Transform with Extra Time, and often it Requires a Skill Roll of some sort plus plenty of expensive expendable Foci. The actual monetary cost of creation is usually pretty high for permanent items. I do require Character Points to be spent on it, but usually apply Independent, or (and lately I'm swaying more and more to this approach) just divide the Real Cost by 5 in a manner similar to Followers, Vehicles, Bases, etc. One thing I do that's not very standard at all is allow special difficult-to-obtain objects or materials (e.g. the griffin feather mentioned in the OP) to contribute (some of) the "Character Points" toward the creation of a specific kind of magical item. So if you create something particularly appropriate to quests that you've undergone, you might have to spend few or no actual Character Points. Other aspects of the actual mechanics vary from game to game, and I haven't really settled on any kind of "standard system", though it's something I ponder frequently.

Re: Creatures disappearing after death of creator - how to make? For powers I'd call it a -0 Limitation (e.g. Mind Control or Mental Illusions) or simply part of the construct (e.g. part of the situation that can turn off an Uncontrolled Power/Continuing Charge or part of the reversion conditions for Transform). For creatures I'd either make it a -0 Limitation on Summon (though I'd probably only allow it to actually happen if the summoned creature is still under your control--i.e. owes you favors--when you die) or a fully impairing Physical Complication on the creature itself, depending both on how things are being modeled (e.g. Summon vs. Followers) and, honestly, on what seems to feel right.

Re: 6e Question Power on Conditional Power Modifier Hmm. Sure. I suppose you could also model it as a Susceptibility that does a Drain rather than causing damage, but it doesn't quite feel right to me as it applies pretty specifically to one power rather than the character as a whole.

Re: A level of confusion Technically you can only apply a CSL with a weapon on a Phase where you use that weapon, and if applied to DCV it applies to either HTH DCV (if it is a HTH weapon) or Ranged DCV (if it is a Ranged weapon). My own view on that is that you know how to use the weapon itself to defend. So with a knife you might be guarding and maybe even feinting with the knife to try to prevent a successful attack from landing. I can rationalize it less for a ranged weapon, which is why I guess there is the optional rule that says you cannot increase your Ranged DCV without Overall (Combat) Levels. When I don't use that optional rule (most of the time I don't), I just kinda skip over trying to rationalize why the weapon must be in your hand (!), though I do picture whether your defensive perception is focused on close attackers or incoming projectiles and such. So my own criterion for whether or not you can apply your weapon-based CSL to DCV is whether you have the weapon in your hand and can reasonably use it to defend yourself. It has little to do with what kind of weapon is in the opponent's hand except for the HTH/Ranged split. An interesting corner case arises for HTH weapons that can be thrown. A knife is a good example of such a weapon, actually. Personally I allow levels that can apply to knives (specifically, not something like "blades", or "common melee weapons" if such a CSL were allowed) to apply to HTH DCV if you are holding the knife, or Ranged DCV (in games where it is permitted) in a Phase where you throw (have thrown) a knife. I do not allow the CSL to apply against HTH DCV in a Phase where you throw a knife (use it as a Ranged weapon). I'll admit some of that is a little difficult to really justify in terms of common/dramatic sense. Sometimes strange situations just have to be judged on a situational basis, but most of the time I just close my eyes and pretend it's just the way things work because that's how the game was designed. It leaves a little bit of a scummy taste, but I can generally live with it.

Re: Handling social stuff in HERO Oh definitely. Can't disagree with any of that. Be honest and open about your expectations, and let people know the type of game you wish to run before hand.

Re: Handling social stuff in HERO Ouch. Yeah, I feel your pain.

Re: Defense Maneuver IV Yep. And I didn't really see anything to disagree with there (that being why I cut it out), though I'm still contemplating whether and how it supports the idea that attacks from behind should only be considered different if they catch an opponent by surprise. Knowing that someone has circled around behind you to attack doesn't help much unless you manage to very proactively change the situation so you are no longer at such a clear disadvantage. Pretending that you can just stand there and still fight with people behind you (that you are completely aware of and that you expect to attack you) just as effectively as you could if your back was to a wall and the opponents weren't behind you seems pretty silly to me, both conceptually and from personal experience.

Re: Handling social stuff in HERO Oh, absolutely. And there should be some challenge in there, too. Not all stories have a happy ending for that matter. But despite all that it should be friends, around a table, cooperating (in an out-of-character sense) to create a story in which everyone can participate and contribute. As an aside, that's why I got really, really disgusted when people at my local gaming store basically decided to make a wargame out of roleplaying. They just did round after round after round of player vs. player skirmishes with D&D 3E, with completely mechanical rules for what you could "buy" outside the arena and change on your character sheet between fights and such. It was all about power-gaming, competing, and there was zero actual "roleplaying" involved. It completely turned my stomach and made me fearful of any new "gamers" they turned out into the roleplaying community. (It also turned me off even more from the system, because I truly blame to some degree the "standardization" of magical item pricing/creation, level wealth guidelines, "challenge rating/encounter level" and all of that for encouraging that kind of crap. Taking the humanity out of adventuring and roleplaying and deciding how to put a game together is far from a good thing.)

Re: Defense Maneuver IV

Re: Defense Maneuver IV

Re: Handling social stuff in HERO