SteveZilla

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

And have a cancelling out effect of Advantages - Limitations = Modifier then do the math.

The problem I see with using this method (which, incidentally, was the way I was first taught -- either due to very bad math skills, or very bad reading comprehension skills) is that if you don't track Active Points as well as Real Points, you can have deceptively cheap powers that are grossly powerful.

I've heard from a friend that someone (maybe here on these boards) designed a 1 Real Point Nuke. I've never bothered to find the build, but I honestly believe that it's possible in Hero System.

Re: Defense against Entangle

Entangles with Hardened also won't be affected.

So raise it to x4 Penetrating, and the Active Cost rises only 8 points (45 AP), and the Real Cost goes up just 4 points (22 RP).

Who's going to quadruple hardend an entangle?

Re: Defense against Entangle

Who the heck buys Hardened for their Entangle?

I would have said the same thing, but you beat me to it!

The 1 pip KA with Pen does seem a little abusive' date=' though (especially with the AF, etc.). [/quote']

 

I'm sorry! I'll never break the system again!

 

But wait, Steve Long says that it *does* work that way (the 1 pip KA + Pen). So... :eg:

 

Though I personally have argued that it shouldn't work that way. Its overly effective, and has no randomness to the effect of the power. If I'm in a game where it's allowed, I usually buy: Armor +1 PD/+1 ED - Hardened x24(+6).

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

1. no they aren't. The text states in a game where Hit Locations are used they automatically only target location 18. In a game where Hit Locations are not used called shots to hit locations are still allowed' date=' and common sense prevails in that spikes on the floor can't hit you in the head.[/quote']

 

That whole section where that is, is titled "Optional Effects Of Damage." If the GM isn't using them, shooting someone in the head has no more or less effect than shooting them in the foot.

 

2-3. How so? They do 1D6 Damage. In a game without Impairing rules they just hurt a lot. This build is not a build that slows the target down - it is a build that damages the target.

 

IMO Caltrops (of the "anti-personnel" kind) are primarily a deterrent & delaying factor to pursuit. Yes, technically they injure the person who steps on them, but the injury is to a non-vital area, and is a very small wound. Its primary benefit is that it's painful to now use that limb -- every step of the way.

 

And you kinda made my point about the optional rules. I want a build that functions equivalently, regardless of the use or not of the optional rules. Doing so gives my GM more latitude. He can have certain effects that could be done with those rules (like Impairing of movment), yet not have to have all of those rules in the game.

 

4. The special effect is you step on a lot of little spikes for an overall 1D6 of damage' date=' this is not 1D6 PER caltrop, this is 1D6 for AREA the caltrops occupy.[/quote']

 

True, but most people will stop in their tracks after stepping on the first foot-full of them, so it's only going to happen once. IMO that's not due to having a disabling wound, but because of having a painful one. But however it's defined (single vs multiple caltrops in one step, or many steps), I think that 1D6 is a bit high for something that small.

 

If the primary purpose you wish to use Caltrops for is to slow the target' date=' then this build may not be for you. Or you could rule that a character who sees the Caltrops ahead of time can move through the area at half speed to take no damage. That's your call.[/quote']

 

If the build (whichever one it is) doesn't do what I want, and other builds are legal and do what I want, I'll pick them. But i'm not the GM. I can only offer him a legal build -- it's up to him to allow it or not. I'm playing a pirate/thief type of character. Deterrents/delays to pursuit are very valuable to him!

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

How about something like:

RKA: 2d6;

[30 Base]

Continuous (+1);

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

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

Area of Effect: Any 9-hex Area, 2D (+3/4);

[112 Active]

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

Fuel Charges: 4, area-based (-3/4);

Only Affects Weight-Bearing Locations (e.g. the Feet; -1/2);

Not Against Targets with Metal or 2cm Thick Protection (-1/2);

[34 Real]

And use this as an excuse to use a particular Hit Location and Imparing rules even in a campaign where they usually aren't used. (The Fuel Charges are to represent that you can use parts of the AoE and save the remainder for later.)

That's an interesting idea, using a Fuel Charge. I'm not familiar with using them that way -- would it be considered legal? Also, wouldn't the Fuel Charge also need to be Recoverable? My character could sweep them up later on. And I'm not sure that Recoverable Charges would work with an Expendable Focus....

The problem I have with the Impairing rules is that it seems to be based upon the limb's action being physicallY impared via damage, as opposed to the target's desire to use the limb being impaired due to pain. To cause an imparement in the Thighs/Legs/Feet of a 10 Body target, one has to do *at least* half that (5 Body). Luckily, the rules say it can be either before or after the hit location adjustment, as Legs are x½ Body for KAs.

So to impare Mr. Ten Body's movement we have to do at least 5 Body (after Defenses), which fortunately for Mr. TB's longevity, is halved to 2 Body. But that's still 1/5 of his Body!

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

I'm not sure I'd call it a hand-wave' date=' per se, but I think that halving someone's movement is far too effective to give it away for free as a Special Effect.[/quote']

 

I generally agree. Which is why I would like to see a legal build that does that. I posted two versions (Change Environement vs Drain) a little while ago that I think are legally built. Neither one depends upon being made out of Handwavium, or that certain optional rules are used.

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

Change Environment also allows you to reduce movement if I remember correctly. I believe you could build it to do a pip of damange and reduce movement.

Yes, but without some fancy footwork (pun intended ), all those effects are confined to the area of the Change Environment. Leave the area, and your movement is fully resotred.

Although....

Caltrops: Change Environment, Multiple Combat Effects (-5" of Running, -2 to DEX Rolls) (23 AP) - Automatically Resetting Trigger(Activates: Anyone Enters the Hex; +3/4), Useable As Attack(Def: Regeneration, Not Using Running/Leaping with Feet, Resistant DEF on Bottom of Feet; +1) (63 Active Points); IAF(-½), Power Removes No More Than Half of Target's Inches Of Running(-¼), Activation Roll 15- (-¼), 1 Recoverable Charge(-1¼), Only Affects Targets Moving On The Ground (-¼), Only Affects Targets Using Unarmored Feet (-¼), Attached Power Ends if Character is Healed Or After 1 Day(-¼), Attached Power Stops Affecting the Area Around The Target(-0) (16 Real Points)

I wonder if that would work? It is a little bit more complicated than:

Caltrops: Drain Running 3D6 - Delayed Return Rate(1 Day; +1½), Area of Effect(One Hex;+½), Uncontrolled(removeable by spending a Full Phase to sweep them aside; +½) (105 Active Points); IAF(-½), Activation Roll 15- (-¼), 1 Recoverable Charge(-1¼), Only Affects Targets Moving On The Ground (-¼), Only Affects Targets Using Unarmored Feet (-¼), Only "Attacks" Target When Entering the Hex(-¼), Regeneration and Healing Restore Lost Points(-½) (25 Real Points)

Remember, this is for a Fantasy Hero game. Because these aren't magical, the character won't have to pay character points for them -- just money. But I will need to figure out the weight.

Comments are more than welcome on either of the above builds. I think I used the various Advantages and Limitations correctly to achieve the desired result. If someone thinks otherwise, please speak up (politely, please ).

Re: How do I build: Caltrops

See UMA 183' date=' under "Tetsubishi." Same info's in the HS Equipment Guide.[/quote']

 

Thanks for the reference! However, I'm reluctant to use that method (a 1d6 RKA), for various reasons:

 

1. It depends upon the GM using the optional rules for Hit Locations

2. It depends upon the GM using the optional rules for Imparing

3. The 1d6 attack must roll a 6 to impaire a target with 10 or 11 body, and it cannot impare anything with a body stat above 11. (So even if it activates on 14-, there is still a 83% chance it won't slow them down.

4. It's a 1D6 Killing Attack -- the same as a Short Sword!

 

And even using a 1 pip RKA (as the "base" to link a Drain to) seems to be more damange than caltrops should inflict IMO -- if Joe Average happens to step on 10 of them (he's really clumbsy and stupid), he's at zero body.

 

All the above is why I'm favoring a Drain Running with appropriate Advantages & Limitations. It does what Caltrops are (IMO) primarily meant to do -- slow the targets down -- without needing optional rules, and is more reliable than a standard RKA.

Re: Defense against Entangle

1 pip RKA - Penetrating(+½), Continuous(+1), Damage Shield(+½), Autofire(20 shots; +2½), Reduced Endurance(Zero END; +1), Invisible Power Effects (Fully Invisible; +1), Only Vs Entangles(-1)

37 Active Points, 18 Real Points (presuming the -1 value is correct).

For no apparent reason, entangles (of a non-mental nature) just don't affect the target (while he's awake). Or stop affecting him extremely quickly.

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

Well here is that latest update. Since I posted we have had a chance to play some more and she is coming around. She still does not like having all the dice' date=' but we have worked around that. Now she is starting to see the game in a better light. Her husband is loving the game and I know he will be playing more.[/quote']

 

Cool! I had a thought. If counting the dice twice using two different methods (Body & Stun) is difficult for her, here is a suggestion:

 

Use dice with pips instead of numbers, (like black dice with white pips), and color a single pip in with red on the 2, 3, 4, and 5 faces, and color two pips red on the 6 face. Now, there is a visible reminder of each way of counting the dice.

2. The effects of each application of the negative Adjustment Power would be halved. The halving takes place after defenses are applied. Since the halving rounds in the character’s favor' date=' that means 2 points each off the effects, thus for a total of 4 points of effect lost from each power.[/quote']

 

That would be 3 points off of each 5 point effect, to get a total of four afterwards.

 

That last sentence threw me. Did you mean each power and every power in the EC, or just each *defensive* power?

 

I.e., Elemental Lad has the following legal (IIRC) framework:

 

30 Elemental Control (60 point powers)

30 Energy Blast 12D6

30 Flight 30"

30 Force Field +30 PD/+30 ED

 

Given the 15 pt effect of a Drain, and his 10 points of Power Defense (5 gets though), which is correct:

 

1. Flight and Energy Blast loose 10 (5+5), and the Force Field looses 4 (2+2).

2. All three loose 4 (2+2).

3. Flight and Energy Blast loose 7 (5+2), and Force Field looses 4 (2+2).

 

Hope I'm not , Steve.

Steve, I was wondering if there is any problem with using Martial Throw against a vehicle? I don't want to conjure up images of a Wascally Wabbit sticking his foot out in front of a speeding car, and the car goes tumbling end over end. Though in a Toon game, that might be okay...

I was thinking along the lines of either using it against someone who bought their battlesuit as a vehicle instead of a focus/oihid, or between two large robotic vehicles slugging it out (like might be seen in anime).

I am not fully conversant with the vehicle rules -- would the damage from a Martial Throw be calculated/applied differently than what might be expected?

Thanks for your time!

Example: Elemental Lad has an Elemental Control with three slots' date=' each of which have a total of 60 Active Points’ worth of effect (30 points for the base cost, 30 points for each slot). He also has Power Defense (10 points). He’s hit with a Drain against that EC that rolls 15 points of effect. The Power Defense reduces the 15 to 5, so the base cost and each slot loses 5 Character Points worth of effect.[/quote']

 

And just to be clear on this, I have a follow-up question. In your example, Elemental Lad would lose Ten Active points from each power in the Elemental Control because of the 5 off of the base, and the 5 off of each slot, correct?

 

And if any of those powers were a Defensive Power, that 10 points of effect would be halved to 5, right?

 

For targets with Elemental Controls, Penetrating Negative Adjustment Powers would see to be quite effective!

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

It's no more blasphemous than the 3d6 + (N x 3.5) method. I'd even say it's less so.

Actually, that isn't blasphemous now. In 5re, p 104, doing a partial standard effect on a power is given as a GM's option.

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

You are always more likely to roll any specific number if you roll fewer dice because there are fewer numbers that are possible to roll.

I didn't say anything about a specific number. I picked the "top" of the bell curve in both examples. 'Top' being (possibly poorly) defined as that part of the curve where the lower dice method produces greater individual odds for those results. Outside of my selected range, the lower dice method had lesser chance for each result.

I also thought that was the crux of what PhilFleischmann was saying -- that more dice are more unpredictable (IMUO 'unpredictable' means it is easier/more likely to roll a larger distance from the 'peak' of the bell). Note: IMUO = In My Uneducated Opinion.

What some of us are saying Phil is wrong about is how he is calculating the probability (assuming that's what he's been trying to say' date=' I'm not sure now). The probability of rolling dice is not linear, so it can not be calculated that way.[/quote']

 

I'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence. Could you explain further, possibly by illustrating with an example?

I want to build caltrops for a Fantasy Hero game, yet cannot find a write-up for them anywhere.

Personally, I am thinking that it's probably just a Drain on Running and Leaping, with appropriate limitations (only vs ground targets, only targets using legs & feet, etc.). I would think that the damage & pain they cause can be just the F/X of the Drain.

If I went with the drain, I would add a limitation (Can be Healed), as a healing effect would get rid of some/all of the "wounds" caused by the caltrops.

But if someone has a better idea of what base power(s) to use, I'm all ears!

Also, "they" are IMO a recoverable focus, that affects an area, and "attack" anybody entering or moving through the area. But I'm not sure of the combination of advantages to get the "attacks people entering/moving", and having a duration only limited by when they get picked up/swept aside.

Takers, anybody? The first 100 I manufacture will be free to you, with only a small fee to cover S/H!

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

Need in a game system is non-existant. Since it is a form of entertainment' date=' it all amounts to what you PREFER in the game system as nothing is NEEDED in system thats meant for a pastime, not for survival. Some people PREFER the game system as is.....great.....have fun. Some people prefer talking about new ideas and contemplating game mechanics and theory. Why shouldn't we?[/quote']

 

But doesn't desire create a need? (Yes, I know, I'm mincing words. To tell the truth, I deliberately used the word 'need', and hoped nobody would call me on the distinction. Kudos for spotting the difference, Rkane! )

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

I have a problem with this line of thinking. (Not with you' date=' please. This is not a personal attack against you in any way, shape, or form. Just wanted to preface this statement as apparently there are some who can't take a joke.).....(Not that I am saying you are one of those people.....which I don't really know you so I could not surmise as to the general sense of humor or level of intelligence of you as a person though I am sure it is quite high......Not that I am insinuating that I know you on a personal level, as I don't.....there....is that enough cushion for everybody.....not that I think you need cushioning.....Its just...er.....just nevermind)[/quote']

 

 

I have a problem with this line of thinking. What if I want to make a street level game where the strength levels DO change drastically. Hero should be able to adapt to both.

 

So, are you saying that the core rulebook should have the block maneuver incorporate STR vs. STR in some way? Or that it should be an optional rule for the block maneuver that the GM can use or not for his game?

 

Hero' date=' God bless it, is MORE than JUST a super-hero game. It is a game that can adapt to multiple genres.[/quote']

 

(Just think, if you were a High Cleric of Steve Long, it could be a +1 game now! )

 

The thing is, the core rulebook is pertty good (my Texas accent is coming though again) in many genres -- it does a good job at balancing between power levels and "realisms" inherent in having different genres. But it's not perfect for any one genre -- except maybe superheroes. That's why we have all the various sourcebooks, campaign books, and the T.U._____ books. Don't they contain the rules to "tailor" the core system better to a particular genre and level of realism?

 

IMO almost any change one makes to favor a particular genre or level of realism (and makes it a non-optional rule) is tilting the core rulebook off "balance". Favoring street-level gritty realism games *disfavors* things like space-opera or 4-color comic book games. Not that you or anybody else favors or disfavors any of those...

 

And that kind of change, while still fundamental, is a different kind of change than how killing attacks are rolled or bought (to take a f'rinstance). One seeks to lean the game's core foundation in the direction of one or more genres/realisms, the other is pure mechanics. Not that we can't discuss both kinds of changes here -- I didn't start the thread. Just thought I'd make the distinction.

 

While the system has GREAT systems for realistic and for comic-book physics' date=' I think that (In my humble opinion. Hope no one is offended by it) the system needs to be able to acid test itself both to a "realistic" physics with unusual circumstances and "super-hero" physics as well. It does it NEAR FLAWLESSLY in several circumstances, but this is one thing that bothers me a bit in the system. Thats all. I think a Rules variant for Block for those who prefer it would be a good move. I don't think a Variant would ruin it for anyone.[/quote']

 

Ah, a variant. As in an optional rule, like hit locations? That's fine with me. But if it's an optional rule, is it really a fundamental change?

 

But I am wondering if such an optional rule would be better placed in a supplement. We can't include *every* possible optional rule in the core book.

 

(Please don't report me' date=' If I offended anyone.....not that I want to offend you by asking you not to be offended.......)[/quote']

 

What if my natural state of being is to be offended? Huh? Didja consider *that*? Huh? Didja? Betcha didn't.

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

How bout making it 11 + STAT?

That would eliminate the "breakpoints" issue that makes 3 and 8 "magic numbers." It would mean that every point in the characteristic counts for something. Why create greater granularity if you're not going to use it?

That makes for the most granularity possible! And would make for ungodly high rolls for some Supers (not that they can't already be really, really high). I believe a 1:1 ratio is not needed for better granularity, and would also make too great a difference to skill rolls (where IMO the point should be the skill).

Also, I've found that using a 2.5 divisor produces unequal "groupings" of roll values. stats of 9-11 produce a +4, but only 12-13 produces +5. Raising it to 3 would get rid of the unequal groups, and keep the emphasis on the skill, IMO.

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

The fact that many of the changes are not fundamental' date=' despite the thread title, suggests to me that radical change is not broadly desired.[/quote']

 

Perhaps because they aren't needed?

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

Control isn't the difference between Falling and a Move Through. There are existing rules for and uncontrolled Move Through' date=' with examples given for an attempted Move Through that hits something else, or putting up a FW directly in the path of a moving character that can't slow down or turn in time to avoid it. The only real difference is that there is a separate rule for Falling than running into walls.[/quote']

 

There are? I haven't seen any such rules in 5re (though I may have missed them). Can you give me a book & page reference, please?

 

And AFAIK, in the case of a missed Move-Though (and has movement inches left), the character is still in control, just comitted. While the character has to continue in a straight line past the target, they *can* slow down. Not allowing them to turn is IMO as much a function of game balance as comic-book physics.

 

But by "uncontrolled", I meant that literally. Take a character that can't fly or glide and drop from a great height. As they fall, they have no controll over their movement. They *will* be moving towards the ground, and *will* be accelerating (up to terminal V). And will almost never have controll over their orientation -- meaning they could just as easily land on their head as anywhere else.

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

Using leverage is great but if there is just no logical way an 80 lbs little Chinese Guy is going to Block a punsh by Ogre unless the guy is using Super-martial Arts or Chi Powers or some such. Dodge' date=' I can see. Now lets take into effect that it doesn't even take a Martial Arts Genius to Buy Block and any schmoe who goes to the Martial Arts Academy when he's not working at Denny's has a chance of Blocking the Hulk? Hmmmm...logic is flawed.[/quote']

 

Where's the "logic" of someone being strong enough to thow cars around? Or of someone being made of Steel/Rock/Water/Lava/Gaseous-substance #7/Energy? It's comic book physics. In a more realistic (street level) setting, there aren't the vast differences in Strength, so the "problem" goes away there.

 

If you desire more 'realism' in the martial arts in your games, feel free to make a house rule. I don't think the fundamental martial arts system needs to be changed -- otherwise, you'd be spoiling it for the rest of us.

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

Here's a chart to illustrate my point (I'm using smaller numbers of dice to save space, and I'm also "folding" the chart in half since the bell curve is symmetrical.

 

[REDUNDANCY REDUCTION SNIPPAGE]

 

Do you see how the middling results are more likely with fewer dice?

Y'know, seeing the hard numbers is what convinced me. It seems counter-intuitive, but I can't argue with hard math.

As an exercise, I added up the chances for rolling somewhere within 4 points of the middle (resuslts 17-25). For the 6D6 method, you have a chance of rolling in there of 71.07%, using the 4D6+7 method, it rose to 80.57%.

Using 12D6 vs. 4D6+28 and the same spread (within 4 points of the middle -- results 38-46), the difference is even bigger! 54.87% vs. 80.56% -- an increase of 25.69 percentage points. Or another way to look at it is that one's roll is 46.82% more likely (80.56/54.87) to fall within this range using the lesser dice method.

NOTE: I am not professionally schooled in probability and statistics, but I think I can add pretty well.

Re: New Player Hates All The Dice

You could also reduce the number of dice by averaging the dice. I believe there are a number of suggestions about this in the rulebook too.

 

For normal attacks - don't calculate body. Assume it is the same as the number of dice rolled.

Only roll one to three dice for anything, just multiply the results to get large numbers (ie a 6D6 attack can be a 3D6 multiplied by 2) - you still get a bell curve with 3D6.

True, it's a bell curve, but it's not nearly as steep a curve as with more dice. The steeper the curve, less likely the results will be towards the extremes, and much more likely to be near to the average. How often does someone roll all 6's on 12 dice?

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

I have always personally thought the maneuver of Block is ridiculous in and of itself. If Ogre, who can uproot trees and toss cars is punching Seeker, how could Seeker, with his normal human Strength, impose a force that would change the course of -OR- halt altogether the force of his blow. Its not very logical (Yes, I know. Its a Super-hero game). I have often thought that a Block machanic that took into consideration Strength would be a better solution and to leave the Uber-Block (the Block Maneuver, as is) as something for Super-Powers where Shang-Chi COULD block the Hulkbecause of some Ancient Chinese secret Block that also left his whites whiter and removed stains.

These mods to Missile Defelction, I like. Though I would also like to see the recommendations for the cost of them.

Because when one is exerting themselves to cause damage (punching at someone), their muscles are working to accelerate their fist. Guiding one's fist to it's target always takes a balance/fluidity of one's muscles which is just about the opposite of using one's muscles to hold a limb rigid. That balance is actually quite easy to disrupt, given correct timing. It's also a matter of leverage. Blocks usually happen near to the target, giving him the benefit of leverage, and the attacker's limb is at almost full extension, giving it the disadvantage of leverage.

And "Block" could be the mechanic behind a form of dodging -- it doesn't have to mean the actual F/X. F/X are left to the player to define in Hero System. And it's Comic Book Physics to boot.

From Wikipedia on Wing Chun Kung Fu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_chun):

Wing Chun believes in using the least amount of required force in any fighting situation. It believes that small movements, properly timed and correctly positioned, can and should be used to defeat large movements. This is achieved through balance, body structure and relaxation. The Chinese saying "8 taels to move 1000 catties" (referring to an old Chinese measurement system) is appropriate here in describing how a small amount of force, precisely applied, can deflect large and powerful attacks.