trechriron

I respectfully disagree with this outlook. Being creative, inventive, and improvising are all great hallmarks of a good GM. Being arbitrary will never be an appreciative quality of a GM. Deciding if a certain disad or even a combination of disads applies to your game is not being arbitrary. Leveraging consequences against a character for having a disad is not being arbitrary if the player knows ahead of time that taking these particular disads could result in them. A GM deciding to do whatever they want whenever they want regardless of established game conventions or agreed upon standards in the group is being arbitrary and this will create mistrust in the players. Having a characteristic or background makes no difference to the outcome of the arbitrary GM’s decision. It will simply be made at the whimsy of the GM. I have never played in a game with a GM utilizing this tactic that even remotely bordered on being considered “goodâ€. Yes, the GM is the master of his/her setting and story. The goal should be to create that story with the players. I think the sentiment of discussing it first, working it out, and adjusting it if necessary is the best way of providing your players with a sense of involvement and establishing trust with them. If you are too arbitrary, they could lose their desire to be creative for fear of reprisal or simply frustration at the realization nothing they do/say/feel matters in your game. In this case, the player may sincerely want to play a character both troubled by and with Orcs. It would be wrong to assume this was an abuse of point maximizing and leverage consequences disproportionate to the disads. If after all is said and done, your player insists on a course of action you have advised against, and you still will allow it, any responsibility for consequences falls squarely in the player’s lap. That is not being arbitrary. If you decide that running a game with this character would be too difficult or you simply don’t want to run a game of this nature, would not be arbitrary. Allowing this set of disads without batting an eyelash and then latter roasting the character over his proverbial fire while laughing maniacally and taunting him with his obvious lack of foresight could very well be considered arbitrary. This is not a problem with the disad system. It would boil down to a collaboration and communication issue. Just my two cents… (again). (Disclaimer: The last diatribe/paragraph was not inferring/assuming/accusing anyone of this behavior. It was simply an exaggerated string of examples I was using to illustrate my point. The word arbitrary has such varied application to the whole GMing thing that I was simply venting on my negative impressions on arbitrary GMing in the context I have seen it applied in the past.)

Despite the venom of this delivery , I do agree that arbitrariness will in fact derail a game in very short order. “Truth in Game Mastering†establishes trust with the players. I feel that some good mechanics help alleviate arbitrary decisions on the GM’s part. However I disagree that any changes need to be made to the system. Just because it can be done does not mean it applies or should even be allowed within the context of the setting/story the GM is trying to run. You should talk to your player and determine what story context these disadvantages were taken, then discuss some of the ways they could potentially come up in the game, and then adjust accordingly to BOTH the GM's and player's taste. I think this is a great solution, a bit more realistic and manageable. I also like the idea of potentially attaching this to a specific tribe or demographically limiting the object of the disadvantage. Just because the Orc/Goblin tribes of the Pertoth Wastelands are barbarian animals does not mean the Quintish Orc Clan that borders the Known Kingdoms have anywhere near as many bad habits. My favorite question: What’s your character concept? Decide from there if this is a justified story-based characterization or a desire to utilize the system to steer your plot in a desired direction, in this case a potential Orc killing spree. If you both decide a campaign centered around this theme would be fun, then certainly you should pursue it. Those disads will not hurt a bit under those circumstances. If you think that a maniacal Orc killer is not a good fit, have your player tone it down or re-think the concept. Just my two cents…

You are most certainly welcome!

Re: Entangles on other CHA No, you’re a smart GM. I will not allow “mechanics†based character constructs of any kind in a game without some story-based or description-based reason. If the player comes to me with this really great idea, and an INT based Entangle fits the bill, so be it. But to come to me with that cheesy-grin exclaiming at the top of your lungs that you have found the penultimate attack that NO ONE will beat, is a sure fire way to get "red-flagged" for the GMS audit. (Game Master Service). Ask an important question. Can I see your character concept? When the player starts to sputter and then tries to concoct an explanation on the spot. Veto it on a matter of principle and then make this person create a concept before you will allow them to crack a book. Just because the system will allow you to do anything you want does not mean you should, or that the GM will allow it. Don’t let experienced Hero Players dictate to you how you want your game to be ran. Just because they know six different ways to build the coolest power with very little points that can destroy the whole universe does not mean they are right. Smart perhaps, but not right. I am constantly impressed at the sheer genius some of my experienced Hero players come up with stuff. I still don’t allow it if it seems broken or unbalanced. If you don’t like it, don’t allow it, even if the rules say it is possible. It is your game after all. If you feel that is a bit heavy-handed, then ask them to justify it story-wise. At least you will have something to work with in the context of the game and not be victimized by the raw mechanics. Just my two cents...

Talon - that document is nothing less than brilliant. Well done, top notch, bob's your uncle, here here!! And otherwise generally super cool. Thanks!

Suggestions of creating an “objective†list for a subjective concept is just the kind of philosophical conundrum that could unwrap the fabric of space/time!! I am currently running a Star Wars Hero game (starts in January actually as the holidays and prep work are delaying the game) and I posted to the boards on creating a Dark Side convention in Hero. The responses were plentiful and I decided on a combination of ideas. It involves a Transform and accumulation of dark side “points†that directly translate into psychological and physiological disadvantages. The other side effect is the ability to be detected as tainted or corrupted by the dark side. The accumulated Dark Side “points†only fade with proper atonement and counter-balancing acts of extraordinary good. The most important concept here is not defining a subjective concept in game terms. The subjective concept of good and evil could complicate a game, especially if your setting is based on a more literary or fictional outlook. Unless your game revolves around intense subjective moral quandaries, it is unnecessary. The only hope of quantifying the subjective concept of evil in a game with no definable game mechanics is to simply reward roleplaying and creativity revolving around the supposedly evil act/situation/person. I think what most gamers want (and what Richard was looking for) is to define a quantifiable objective literary representation of the subjective concept. Is there a supernatural or esoteric yet definable/detectable aspect of good and evil in your setting? If the answer to that question is yes, you need to invent that tangible aspect in game terms, define the boundaries for it so the players can adopt the paradigm into their playing style, and then outline it’s effects. The Star Wars setting defines some particular behaviors that lead someone down the path of the Dark Side. By listing some of the more common behaviors and situations sure to crop up in a game, I help disclose these concepts with defined mechanical impact for the players. They know what to expect when they do something “wrong†as defined by the setting. This is a convention of the setting, not necessarily a representation of real world ethics or subjective definitions. If your setting includes definable concepts of good and evil, and people can be detected as having some sort of supernatural alliance towards it, then you should define a mechanical convention that represents that concept. Presence attacks represent fear and insanity in a numerical context, why not define good and evil under a similar paradigm? It could be argued that any emotion or mental outlook is a subjective concept yet the Presence convention is a good example of defining the effect objectively and applying a concrete game mechanic to quantify it. You could define a list of evil and good acts, outlooks, and behaviors for your setting. Then decide on what impact you want this good and evil aspect to have on the environment and people. Is it simply a detectable alliance or taint? Does it have temporary or lasting physical or psychological effects? Does it remove or bestow powers or abilities? I would suggest a Transform that accumulates a taint or corruption pertaining to evil acts and potentially for evil disadvantages. So far this concept is working well in the minds of my players, and it is derived from the strong objective paradigm of the Star Wars setting. You can also define objects and places with this evil supernatural taint, that could “attack†the characters and taint them with evil. You should also define a means for evil taint to be removed. The opposite situation can be defined for good. This essentially lets you rate the taint, good or evil, of a character, place, or object on a scale of 0 to infinity. Decide on “thresholds†or accumulations that represent certain benchmarks of evil and good Transformation. If a Presence attack of 45 has a particular impact on a character, then there is no reason an accumulation of 45 points of evil Transform could not have a definable impact/effect as well. At this point it is more than fair to allow a detect evil or good based on the accumulation of Transform of the target. Is this a concept that works across every game/setting of Hero? Nope. There is no need to establish a common implementation of this idea, as different GMs may wish to represent this concept in a myriad of different ways within different games. Hero is a toolkit. You need to know what you’re building before the tools will be of any real use to you (IMO). Hope my excessive diatribe conveyed at least something of my two cents,

You might want to have this moved to the Star Hero forum... Gates are mentioned/outlined in Star Hero, if you're running anything Hero Sci-Fi this is a must have. Also covers some time travel stuff (another subject of SG-1), Psionics, ships, aliens, worlds, atmospheres, and a plethora of simply useful tidbits. The templates are really useful and you will find they cover the gamut of many sci-fi settings. The Terran Empire has a parasitic race (benevolent) that could be utilized to help create those worm-parasite-god aliens. Fantasy Hero could help describe or create some of the elements found on the other worlds. Do you have the new d20 book for SG-1 (AEG makers of Spycraft)? This book could prove to be a valuable resource even though it is not in the Hero system. It is usually fairly easy to convert ideas from any system into the Hero system anyway, as long as you shoot for the "gist" of it and not insist on mimicking the exact GAME mechanic from the borrowed source. The challenge of mimicking game mechanics is not impossible, but my group and I have found that mimicking game mechanics instead of quantifying effects makes the implementation clunky, unnatural, and more difficult to play. Just something to consider when trying to emulate the setting. This might help break down the task of quantifying Hero for SG-1 if you can’t find the resources you are looking for. 1) Make a list of the elements you want represented for the setting. 2) Determine which ones will actually need to be quantified via game mechanics and which ones simply represent the flavor of the setting. 3) Determine if elements you want quantified mechanically are already represented in a published work (like Star Hero, The Terran Empire, Fantasy Hero, or the Spacer’s Toolkit) and “borrow†those descriptions/write-ups. 4) Determine which game elements are important to have detailed immediately and which ones can wait a little longer (if your list seems daunting…). Another quick question, why did you go with 250 points? Would a Heroic campaign (150 points) not cover the bulk of what we see on the show? Not detracting from it, simply curious. Hope something here helps…

Melanie Rawn's Exile series was spectacular. If she would just finish the third BOOK!!! Ahhhhhhhhh!!! I also like Drizzt (ducks quickly). R.A. Salvatore's Dark Elf Trilogy was fantastic. Elric is indeed a great dark hero and the Melniboneans were truly inspiring (for those of us who appreciate the dark nature of nature...). I liked the cleric in one of R.A Slavatore's series but I can't remember the character's name or the books. I really need to have my memory checked. Paul Atriedes (sp?) - Dune is as much Fantasy as it is Sci-Fi and that book was truly inspiring. I read it while in self-imposed exile in the deserts of Arizona/Nevada along the Colorado River. Truly life changing. Frank Herbert, hats off to ya, wherever you are...

Well analysed Farkling! Holy Cow, do you do private consultations? How much to fly you in? The whole point of a consistent point based rules set is to be able to ballpark what a "so-and-so" piont character is capable of. In Hero, that ballpark is generally closer to the effectiveness of the character than many point based systems. The Multi Pools can get abusive and you have to be careful what impact that is going to have on the overall power level of the game. You are essentially trying to give away stuff that is actually more effective than the cost. I would not allow this on the multiple powers in that fashion. I think you should make a seperate fourth power that encompasses the autofire shot with three different types of attacks. I imagine linking them to the same OAF or even real weapon could be appropriate. Just my two cents...

For Elves I have always liked "leaf eaters". Dwarves - "tunnel pudges", and Orcs .... umm... isn't Orc THE derogatory term?

I would concur on the CE aspect. Really you should only care what happens at that location. You could even go so far as saying the spell only has that effect only in an area it is cast (even a whole city or county) but does not change the actual moon or moon phases. I think that the nature of that particular spell is more about eliminating vulnerabilites and that should be taken into account when casting the spell. Who cares what happens to the moon. It is more paramount that the Werewolves are no longer vulnerable to silver. This is the funniest part of wrapping the brain around an effects based system. It is not as much about changing the phase of the moon as it is applying that effect for the purpose of eliminating a disadvantage. In this case I would say "who cares about the moon", it is a special effect of the spell. Just my two cents...

It's not there anymore, unless I'm really missing it somewhere.

Re: Cafe Press Question Hero Games Mug? Small, Large, Travel? ($10 - $15 - $20) Baseball Cap? ($20) Regular white or grey t-shirt? ($20) Wall Clock? ($30) Lunchbox? ($20) Calendar? ($25) Those are ballparks. I imagine if they are cool, I would pick up some stuff just because. I could put them on the gift list and the novelty is plain good natured fun. Keep us posted. I think you should do it, set the prices where you feel comfortable and see where it goes. Just my two cents.

Nothing. The biggest difference is the separation of mechanics from specific or descriptive effects. In most games a fear spell, an intimidation roll, a shocking moment of discovery, and even mental attacks and abilities could all have varying rules systems (I would almost argue that many of those systems are simply sub-systems having little consistency with the original in my experience). When you know what a presence attack does, it is simply a matter of flavor as to the origin of the effect. Fear spell? OK. Intimidation? Yep. "Seeing Aunt Matilda accidentally in the shower" scene. No problem. Different effects, same roll. Same idea. You are essentially accomplishing the same thing as other systems accomplish with varying sub-systems. With Hero I have faster familiarity. The concept of generating an effect roll is true across many powers. Reducing a characteristic for effect or obtaining a particular number of effect are also common mechanics in Hero. I simply need to remember what happens when Presence is reduced by an attack or exceeded by an effect roll. Other games still have fear effects, intimidation rolls, insanity, and even psionic mental effects. I think Hero is simply more consistent across these effects and maintains that consistency across the entire system. One game to rule them all! *Ahem* I mean, uh yeah this is cool.

You people RULE!! You people are geniuses!! You have seriously relieved two weeks worth of scratching my head. I like RadeFox and austenandrews ideas the best (a's idea being an extension of RadeFox's…). The transform to gradually increase mental disadvantages is great. Combining it with an Ego threshold to determine the level of corruption is splendid as well. Putting both together will be the ticket. The gradual accumulation of disads combined with the Ego threshold solves all my problems with both determining "how" dark side a character is becoming AND mechanically defining "what" is happening to them. You people rule!! :D Thanks!! BTW – if anyone wants to continue adding ideas, I’m all eyes. :-)

I am gearing up to run a Star Wars campaign. We have mapped out a PILE of the force powers utilizing a multi-pool, with some being separated for functionality (or define abilities better, applying all points to the character). The area I am having the hardest time is figuring out how the Dark Side impacts a character. Especially dealing with the idea of physical and psychological corruption of a supernatural nature that gradually accumulates for the character and gradually affects them. Short of simply tracking behavior and assigning disadvantages arbitrarily (something I want to avoid). There is the flip side to this relating to the “path of the Dark Side is intoxicating, faster, and more powerful in the short term†idea. D20 represents this by allotting extra dice when you call on the force spending a force point. Drawing on the force to increase your chances is Luck (that is no problem) and I could simply reduce the cost for greater effect when drawing on the Dark Side for Luck. But what does that do to a character? Here is how I think the Dark Side should work sans mechanics: 1) It affects the character gradually. 2) It has measurable physical and mental effects. 3) It begins to alter their perception and demeanor towards evil. 4) It “taints†them as detectable as a person corrupted by the dark side. 5) It can be healed/removed through meditation and atonement. 6) It is acquired through utilizing the Dark Side, committing acts out of anger or hatred, committing obviously evil acts, or utilizing any force power in an evil way. Maybe there is a limiter I could create simply stating that if powered by the Dark Side the power has a -1/4, -1/2, or even -1 modifier. That could define the quick power of the Dark Side but would apply all the time to Dark Side powers and not really represent the power of the light side in the more experienced. I thought of simply assigning character points with a specific allegiance (Light Side/Dark Side experience) and make on-the-spot rewards based on specific actions that qualified according to the moral paradigm of the setting. If someone commits an evil act, they get a Dark Side XP. But then what? Any suggestions as how I could simulate this or point me towards someone who did? Thanks,