SteveZilla

Re: Did the palindromedary eat the title?

- Average EB does 12 BOD' date=' 42 Stun. Thug is KO'd and dying (-2 BOD), but not dead.[/quote']

 

I think your math is off. He'd be at zero body (12 BOD - 2 PD or ED = 10 Bod gets though).

 

Which means he isn't bleeding to death. The other guy (at -6 Body) has only 4 Turns to live -- a whole 48 Seconds.

 

--------------------

Edit: Oops. My mistake. A character starts to bleed at zero, not -1 Body. So the recipient of the EB has 10 Turns to live -- 120 Seconds or two minutes.

Re: Did the palindromedary eat the title?

Bear in mind that these figures represent damage generated' date=' not damage inflicted. Against most meaningful targets, these values will not be equal.[/quote']

 

True, but to try to include all the possible variances of targets would excessively complicate the comparison. Also, I was comparing those things that the player has control over -- the building of his character. He has no control over how all the targets he might shoot at will be built.

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

Yes, it does mean that. Xd6 and Xd6+Y have equal predictability because they have the same number of randomly determined DC. I don't think anyone has disputed this.

 

Here is the point that we are trying to make. Take a 10 DC attack. Assume two options 10d6 or 2d6+28. 2d6+28 is more predictable than 10d6 because you have predetermined 8DC out of the 10DC.

 

However if you compare a 2 DC attack to a 10DC attack, the 10DC attack will give you a more predictable result.

 

The concept that 2d6+28 is rolling fewer dice ignores the fact that you have, as Phil put it, set 4 dice to 1 and 4 dice to 6. 10 dice were still used. So 2d6+28 must still be consider rolling 10 dice.

I think we can leave DC calculations out of this discussion. Nobody is (AFAIK) taking the stance of 2d6+(8 * 3.5) ≠ 10d6 in terms of Damage Classes (all other things being equal). Damage Classes don't equally translate to numbers of dice in all instances. A 12 DC attack could be 20, 12, 6, or 4 dice, just to use Base Costs for certain powers.

Now, if 2d6 and 2d6+28 are equally predictable, that means that in terms of predictability, the +28 is meaningless. And if 2d6+28 is more predictable than 10d6, that means that 2d6 is also more predictable than 10d6.

My conclusions, drawn from only the information above:

1. If we predetermine some of the dice being used, we are not rolling them any more -- they have become a static (fixed) element.
   
2. Adding a static (fixed) number to a group of dice doesn’t change the predictability of that group of dice.
   
3. Fewer dice used, regardless of a fixed number added to them, is more predictable than a greater number of dice.
   

Thus, saying that “it’s more predictable because some dice are predetermined†seems to be just a roundabout way of saying "it’s more predictable because fewer dice are being used in the roll".

Re: Good-by Speedster

Drain END strikes me as a fun idea. high SPD means high END use' date=' unless they've bought everything with zero END cost - and even then, at zero END you suffer sertain effects.[/quote']

 

What "certain effects" are those?

Re: Good-by Speedster

That's up to the GM, though you are assuming a form with no turn mode.

 

Runners, teleport them up. Flyers, teleport them in front of a wall.

 

Problems solved.

 

Though as I said, up to the GM if it'd work. I don't care if you've got a turn mode or not, if you're teleported 2 (real, not game) inches in front of a brick wall, you're not gonna turn in time at Speedster speeds.

I think that anything more than "he winds up in *that* hex over there" is both getting more than what was paid for, and is unfairly effective. Otherwise, why not say you 'port the speedster in front of a wall -- one nanometer from it.

Y'know, I don't think there are many tunneling speedsters. Do that whole "buried alive" trick with Tunneling + UAA on them. Do a mulitple-power attack with a Drain Desolidification + Zero END, Persistent, Uncontrolled to it for good measure.

Re: RKane_!'s heretical and Audacious Block variant

Part of Rkane's perceived unreality is the ability of a low STR character to block a much higher STR character and take no damage. I suppose one could alter this and still maintain Block as equally powerfulif we made it better able to deal with lower power attacks. The current model seems far more effective at reducing power than enhancing realism' date=' however.[/quote']

 

Though I am in the camp that thinks that Block is okay the way it is, I'd like to suggest an alternate way to take large STR differences into account:

 

Block (all varieties) work the same as before, except that there is now an OCV penalty based upon the different levels of STR (M/A DCs increase the Artist's effecive STR for this purpose)

 

For regular, untrained Block that everybody has, for every 5 points* of STR over 10 that the attacker has over the blocker, there is a -1 OCV penalty to successfully do the block. I.e. Joe Normal (10 STR) can block a 20 str guy without penalty, but has a -8 OCV to try to normal block Ogre's 60 STR punch.

 

For all Martial Arts maneuvers that have Block as an element, the "no penalty gap" rises to 20 points. So, for Seeker (STR 25) to Block Orge (STR 60), he'd have a -3 OCV penalty to his (Martial Variety) Block. Seeker could block someone up to a 45 STR with no penalty.

 

This all presumes that Seeker has no M/A DCs. IMO a Grand Master who can shater 3 feet of reinforced concrete as easily as the Brick should have no penalty to blocking the Brick. Both are generating the same force, after all. Thus the provision for Martial DCs to narrow the gap. I might go so far as to say that if the Martial Artist's effective blcoking STR is greater than the attackers, he should get a bonus to his OCV for Blocking. It's only fair, as that is the flip side of the coin.

 

I think this method might be preferable because:

1. It doesn't create new maneuvers that the players have to factor into their characters.

2. It keeps the mechanics of a Block the same while still making it harder for Skill to overcome Strength.

Re: RKane_!'s heretical and Audacious Block variant

I also realized that had Seeker just stood there and *not* blocked...

Ogre's OCV: 6

Seeker's DCV: 11(?)

11+6-11=6 or less to hit, and rolled 10.

...would have resulted in Seeker taking *no* damage, as Ogre would have missed.

Re: RKane_!'s heretical and Audacious Block variant

This action prevents a hand-to-hand opponent’s attack and sets the blocking character up to deliver the next blow.

Based upon the actual mechanics of this maneuver, "prevents" is not the best choice of words.

EXAMPLE: Ogre tries to punch Seeker. Seeker attempts to Block (a mistake).

Which Block maneuver is Seeker using in this example?

Ogre’s OCV is 6' date=' and Seeker’s OCV is 11. Ogre needs a 6+11-11=6 or less.[/quote']

 

Wait! What about Seeker's Roll to block. That normally gets rolled first. Presuming that 11 is his modified OCV for whatever Block is is using, he needs an 11+11-6=16 or less to 'block' Ogre. Then, if Seeker's roll fails does Ogre roll to hit.

 

Ogre rolls a 10 so Seeker’s Block was successful' date=' ::snip::[/quote']

 

Huh? Since when does the attacker's to hit roll also determine if the block was 'successful'?

 

...however' date=' Ogre can deadlift an aircraft carrier and Seeker has about 1/128th his Strength (60 STR vs. 25 STR).[/quote']

 

Actually, a 60 STR can lift only 100 tons, which is far less than an Aircraft Carrier... But I digress.

 

Ogre rolls his damage which is 12d6 and rolls 35 STUN/12 BDY (an average roll). Seeker’s PD is 15 ::snip::

 

Doesn't he get bonus PD from the 'successful block' he did?

 

...so he takes 20 STUN/0 BDY which is halved if not using the Hit Location rules for total of 10 STUN/0 BDY (Not bad for Blocking the force of a hurricane wind).

 

 

More like the force of a Mack Truck. But I digress again.

 

If using the Hit Location rules' date=' Seeker probably would have chosen to take the blow on his arm which has a STUN and BDY multiplier of x1/2. The same amount of damage would be taken. Seeker should have Dodged, but his Block would have been sufficient against a weaker opponent.[/quote']

 

If all the above remains the same except he was facing a 25 STR person, Seeker would *still* have taken 2 Stun form an *average* damage roll using this maneuver.

 

If using the Hit Location penalty a Blocker is at –4 OCV to Block any strike at the lower portion of his body (rolls from 14-18) with his arms or hands.

 

So he just uses his legs and neatly sidesteps this penalty.

 

The Blocker is also at a –4 OCV to Block any strike at the higher portion of his body (rolls 3-11) with their legs.

 

So he just uses his arms then and neatly sidesteps this penalty.

 

Martial Block

Martial Block is identical to Block above with the exception that some techniques add PD to the PD of the Blocker against whom the attack is being made. If the character is using a Shield or Weapon with resistant PD or the Blocker himself has resistant PD, then the +PD of the maneuver becomes resistant as well. This new Resistant PD adds to the total of resistant PD but only if the object with Resistant PD is being used to Block with.

 

So Joe 'Martial Artist' Normal has a kevlar suit (resistant defenses), but is also blocking with an object with non-resistant defense, the pd the maneuver grants is suddenly not the same as his own PD? Thank goodness that object's DEF is always Resistant!

 

Okay, now how would this maneuver combine with the following situations:

 

1. The Attacker has Stretching. Does Stretching velocity make an attack harder to block?

 

2. The Attacker has Shrinking. Does The Growth Momentum "maneuver" from turning off the Shrinking make an attack harder to block?

 

3. The Defender has Damage Reduction & uses one of the Block maneuvers. How does the halving of damage from a successful block combine with the Damage Reduction?

 

4. Does the PD that the maneuver grants gain any and all Advantages & Limitations that the defender's own PD has (like Hardened)?

 

5. The Attacker is using an attack that goes against ED. Does the Block maneuver provide an identical amount of ED?

 

6. The Attacker has Find Weakness, and has achieved at least one level of success against the defending martial artist. Is the PD from the block maneuver reduced by Find Weakness at the same raito?

 

7. Can a Martial Artist purchase sectional Armor/FF/PD/ED for just his arms/legs to protect against the beating they will now get?

 

8. Does the Martial Artist who 'successfully' blocks still take the usual knockback from the 'blocked' attack?

Re: Good-by Speedster

Is it possible to target a drain to an adder?

 

I should think an AID to Running combined with a DRAIN to Turn Mode could be effective...

There is no such thing as Drain Turn Mode.

Re: Modeling, er, "sexual prowess"

There's gotta be a Streching joke in there' date=' but I'm just to lazy to make it right now...[/quote']

 

That, or Extra Limbs...

Steve, I think there is something contradictory to 5re in the FAQ. In the FAQ for powers (Desolification), it states:

Q: If a character has Desolidification with the Limitation Cannot Pass Through Solid Objects, and while Desolidified runs into a solid object, what happens?

 

A: The character stops dead, but he takes no damage. The rules for that Limitation specifically state that a character with it remains immune from damage as per standard Desolidification. Therefore, he can’t take damage from hitting a solid object, but he can’t move through it, either, so he stops moving.

If that offends your sense of “realism†or you think it would cause game balance problems (both of which are possible), then the character should take damage — but perhaps less than he’d normally take. Maybe he only takes STUN damage, for example.

But in 5re, p 148, under "The Drawbacks of Intangibility", it gives two options for a Desolid character who is falling. Either pass into the ground, or exercise 'force of will' and stop and take falling damage. Since this is talking about "standard Desolidification", it seems the two contradict each other.

Will a "Cannot Pass Through Solid Objects" Desolidified character take falling damage or not?

!!

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

No you're not rolling fewer dice. You "rolled" two of them by setting them to 1 and 6 so your are still rolling 10 dice. This is the crux of our argument. You are not getting more predictabilty by reducing the number of dice rolled. Instead you are increasing predictability by setting a portion of the dice rolled to a predetermined result.

I don't understand why there would be a difference in predictability between Xd6 and Xd6+Y. While the end result numbers are different (rolling a 5, 3, 6 vs rolling 5, 3, 6, and adding 14), the shape of the bell curve remains the same. Doesn't that mean that the two are equally predictable because the distribution of probabilities (the shape of the curve) is the same?

Re: RKane_!'s heretical and Audacious Block variant

What happened to the roll that Seeker makes to attempt the block? He's not just standing there.

Re: Good-by Speedster

AID!

 

Extra speed to Speedster... With Turn Mode!

 

Supercharged to Mach V... Right into a wall... and another... and another... and another... You get the idea.

You can't induce a Limitation (Turn Mode) on another character's power without using Tranformation Attack.

What you seem to be describing is a movement power bought with Useable As Attack.

Re: Good-by Speedster

Teleport' date=' as an attack, based on ECV[/quote']

 

Teleporting a character that is using a mode of movement that has no turn mode is not very effective. On their next Phase, they just turn around and continue on their merry way. Even if done *during* their move (if that is even possible), they can still turn around. The only exception is if they are in the middle of a Move-Through or Move-By.

You recently answered a question by directing the asker to the sidebar on p110 of 5re. After reading that sidebar, I had two questions:

1. While the points given to the "to" power (PD in the sidebar example) are halved, does the transfer still remove the full value from the "from" power (STR in same example), and still have the full max limit on that power?

2. If transferring both from and to a defensive power, is the effect halved once, or twice?

Re: Jokes

An Engineer's evaluation of Santa Clause

----------------------------------------

There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378 million (according to the Population Reference Bureau).

At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million homes, presuming that there is at least one good child in each.

Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.

This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get on to the next house.

Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks.

This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second--3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a Poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.

The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousand tons, not counting Santa himself.

On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer could pull ten times the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of them, Santa would need 360,000 of them.

This increases the payload, not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch).

600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance-this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere.

The lead pair of reindeer would absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each. In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake.

The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.

Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,500 g's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs.

Merry Christmas.

Re: Jokes

A punny thing happend on the way home today...

1. Two vultures board an airplane, each carrying two dead raccoons. The stewardess looks at them and says, "I'm sorry, gentlemen, only one carrion allowed per passenger,"

2. Two boll weevils grew up in South Carolina. One went to Hollywood and became a famous actor. The other stayed behind in the cotton fields and never amounted to much. The second one, naturally, became known as the lesser of two weevils.

3. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly, but when they lit a fire in the craft, it sank, proving once again that you can't have your kayak and heat it, too.

4. A three-legged dog walks into a saloon in the Old West. He slides up to the bar and announces: "I'm looking for the man who shot my paw."

5. Did you hear about the Buddhist who refused Novocain during a root canal? He wanted to transcend dental medication.

6. A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories. After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse. "But why?" they asked, as they moved off. "Because," he said, "I can't stand chess nuts boasting in an open foyer."

7. A woman has twins and gives them up for adoption. One of them goes to a family in Egypt and is named "Ahmal." The other goes to a family in Spain; they name him "Juan." Years later, Juan sends a picture of himself to his birth mother. Upon receiving the picture, she tells her husband she wishes she also had a picture of Ahmal. Her husband responds, "They're twins! If you've seen Juan, you've seen Ahmal."

8. These friars were behind on their belfry payments, so they opened up a small florist shop to raise funds. Since everyone liked to buy flowers from the men of God, a rival florist across town thought the competition was unfair. He asked the good fathers to close down, but they would not. He went back and begged the friars to close. They ignored him. So, the rival florist hired Hugh MacTaggart, the roughest and most vicious thug in town to "persuade" them to close. Hugh beat up the friars and trashed their store, saying he'd be back if they didn't close up shop. Terrified, they did so, thereby proving that Hugh, only Hugh, can prevent florist friars.

9. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad breath. This made him a super callused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis.

Re: Defense against Entangle

A couple of the heroes in my campaign have an Entangle attack that is causing a lot of headaches. Besides not getting hit or hiding behind a Force Wall, is there any defense out there that you have used against Entangle attacks? (For the curious, one of the special effects is a cable gun, one is an ice attack, and another is a focused paralysis beam.)

I'm presuming that the focused paralysis beam is a Mental Entangle? I really can't see it being done any other way.

But for breakouts, it is possible to both push and haymaker -- giving 30 extra active points to whatever is being used to escape. Yeah, it costs the power's END + 10, and takes an extra segment. But where's he going in such a hurry, anyway? ;-)

IIRC, you can do the pushed haymaker on phase 12 (which is when you pay the END), then get your PP12 Recovery, and the haymaker goes off at the bottom of phase 1. The character should be out and ready to go at the start of Phase 2.

If I'm mis-remembering the (new) haymaker rules, somebody please correct me -- I don't have my book handy right now.

Re: Storn's Art & Characters thread.

"Curse Of The Azure Bonds" if I remember correctly... I loved that story.

Hey! That reminds me. I still have that old DOS game lying around somewhere.

Re: Good-by Speedster

Who's the Speedster Now?: Transfer Speed Damage Shield

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

Well, if you're really interested in doing it without really harming them, how about:

Drain: 2d6 Running and Leaping;

[20 Base]

Variable Effect: 2 powers simulaneously (+1/2);

Delayed Return Rate: 5 AP/6 hours (+5/4);

Area of Effect: One Hex, 2D (+1/4);

Reduced End Cost: 0 End (+1/2);

Uncontrolled: turned off by being swept or washed away (+1/2);

AVLD: Resistant PD (+3/4);

[95 Active]

Focus: IAF, expendable and easy to replace (-1/2);

Can be healed with Body Healing (-1/4);

Only on hard ground (-1/2);

[42 Real]

(I dropped the Charges because you seemed uncomfortable with the, "legality," of them, which actually goes further than the Fuel Charge bit: I don't think you can put Uncontrolled on a power with Charges; you have to use Continuing Charges, and it is really expensive to make them virtually indefinite.)

Actually, the writeup for Caltrops in TUMa has charges and uncontrolled as well. It also has Continuous, which AFAIK isn't needed because of the Uncontrolled Advantage,

I didn't concern myself with Leaping for two reasons:

1. It reduced the cost of the whole build.

2. 2D6 Drain will average 7 pts = 3.5" of running, and 7" of leaping! A dichotomy I can't explain.

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

In Karate' date=' they use blocks which impose limbs or position your body to deflect the brunt of the force[/quote']

 

While Karate is definately a "hard" art (which counters power with power), the statement above makes it sound (to me) like the Martial Artist is using their limb as Ablative Armor -- simply placing the limb in the path of the approaching strike, and the strike *runs into* it. While I am not an expert on real-world martial arts, I would be dumbfounded if there was an art where this was the case -- *allowing* an opponent to strike you.

 

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_arts:

 

Another category is the notion of "hard" versus "soft", which asks whether a system relies on using force and power to defeat the opponent or, instead, on avoiding attacks and applying leverage: the Shotokan school of karate may be perceived as using a "harder" approach than Judo does.

 

In Karate, the most common Block is effectively a hard strike against the approaching fist/foot (and attendant limb) to deflect it. That it uses the entire forearm in this process doesn't change that fact. It (IMO) just makes it easier for a beginner to execute -- they're using a much bigger "weapon".

 

From what I can tell, the "more realistic block" you seek comes from the thought that Strength (Power) *should* win out over Skill. Or to put it another way, that in a (pure) contest of Strength vs Skill, Skill looses. I'm not saying that I know what you're thinking -- this is just my interpretation based upon the discussion that has happend so far.

 

 

From http://www.whk.fi/arts/wingchun.html:

 

Wing Chun is a Chinese system of Kung Fu that specializes in developing dynamic, explosive and street oriented practical self-defense. Originally developed by a woman, it relies on developing leverage and sensitivity rather than muscular strength to overcome an opponent. Training develops reflex, speed, coordination and power to enable someone to quickly and effortlessly dispatch a larger and stronger attacker without relying on size or strength.

 

In Wing Chun Kung Fu, some of the blocks (like the Pak Sao) start out with the whole open hand, and can progress to eventually using just the index and middle finger in very skilled Artists. This, I have seen and experienced. The person who trained me could deflect my fists with just his index finger. An index finger vs a whole arm & body -- there's a really big STR difference, yet he had no problem blocking me.

 

And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pak_Sao:

 

With Pak Sao, the hand comes directly out of the center of the body to slap away an attacker's strike to one's head. Effective application of Pak Sao involves creating an angle of deflection through which the opponent's blow can be slapped away with minimal effort.

 

My point with all this is that there are *real world* examples of martial arts that do what you seem to believe isn't possible ('realistic' is the word you used, IIRC). That a Block can succeede despite a large difference in Strengths between the attacker and blocker. Wing Chun Kung Fu is an art *designed* for just that purpose -- a weaker artist vs a stronger opponent.

 

Also, I took a quick glance in my TUM eariler today but couldn't find a Block where the blocker still takes damage. If I am missing it, please provide a specific page/book reference for me.

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

Not quite...this will take a little explaining' date=' and the use of fudge dice.[/quote']

 

I like fudge -- the edible kind. Don't like it as dice. It gets brown stains on stuff, and the dice have a tendency to disappear during the game.

 

Fudge dice are effectively d3-2 each (d6s with 2 sides -' date=' two sides blank, and two sides +). They were invented for an RPG system for numerophobes, but they're useful for adding zero-centered variance to rolls, very very simply.[/quote']

 

However, the range of values achievable is very narrow (compared to regular dice).

 

Yes' date=' you lose a little granularity, [/quote']

 

A little? Try a whole lot!

 

ok...I'd write more' date=' but my girlfriend is absconding with me now. Later![/quote']

 

You have a girlfriend? You're not a True Gamer! Turn in your secret decoder ring at the counter when you leave!

Re: What fundamental thing would you change about the Hero system?

Essentially, one needs to rewrite the entire game system to "Non-Cinematic Hero Variant", not just change the Block rule. The other examples are all part of that issue.

 

What you really want for this isn't a Block variant, but a full book of options on how to make "Realistic Hero" instead of "Cinematic Hero".

 

------

 

Then let's put the rules variant in a genre sourcebook,

 

------

 

Then let's stick the discussion on a thread suggesting a variant rule, rather than a claim that its absense constitutes a fundamental flaw in the Hero System by posting it here. And, with all those existing variants in an OPTIONAL sourcebook intended to provide OPTIONS OUTSIDE THE MAIN RULES, what further option do you need? I'd rather not have hundreds of optional rules, each slightly varied from the last, for each facet of the game. Changing Block for each genre, to me, is overkill. Providing a few options (as UMA does) for greater and lesser "realism", and identifying the one(s) most appropriate to the genre (or subgenre) in genre books is preferable. I don't want to be playing "one of those games" where every book contains variant/optional rules with no real consideration for the morass of options, many only marginally different from options which have gone before, created by the hundreds, with little thought given to how each option meshes with the game rules surrounding it (and all the other optional rules which have gone before).

New Gamer: "Gee! In the New Hero System, even the Options have Options!"

Rather than a Block Tweak' date=' I'd much rather see a book on "enhanced realism".[/quote']

 

Fresh from the Hero Presses! The new book for running realistic simulations instead of fantastic roleplaying! It's "Heroes in the Modern Era". Or H.i.t.M.E. for short.