JeffreyWKramer

Re: How to: Reverse persistant? Buy Desolid, 0 END with the Limitation Requires An EGO Roll Each Phase to Become/Stay Solid While Conscious. The Desolidification would not be Persistent, meaning it shuts off when he is KOd, but otherwise his typical state would be Desolid, with the character having to will himself solid while conscious.

Re: No Frameworks? Well, more likely bricks, martial artists and guys with one or two weapons - heroic knights, gun-bunnies, ninja dudes - but yeah, pretty much.

Re: No Frameworks? To a certain extent, this is built into the 5E rules for ECs. As is, Adjustment Powers that affect one Power in an EC affect *all* the EC's Powers. Since many things that Powers are vulnerable would be - or at least could reasonably be bought as - Adjustment Powers (Supress, Drain, etc. - Suppress Fire Power - fire extinguisher), that partly covers the effect you want. Similarly, it is very common (at least in my experience) for all of the slots of an EC to have a similar or identical Limitation - for example, a group of Shadow Powers that do not work in sunlight or in light of intensity equal to sunlight.

Re: Character For review: Dryad Worldmaker, your game, your call. For my tastes, three of those Limitations seem to overlap way too much, and I think they'd likely be best served by just doing a Distinctive Features/Extreme Reaction. As is, I think the effect goes way beyond "complementary" into "getting more points for restating the same thing." To me, it seems like letting a person getfull points for both "Code vs. Killilng", and "Avoids Using Lethal Force" I'm also still not sure how being a world-class botanist is tangibly going to be a game disadvantage. I can't think of any botanists who are well-known to anyone other than maybe other botanists. I can see it for high-profile professions like Law, Ministry, Politics or Sports, but Botany? Nahhhhh. People seek out Johnny Cochrane or Billy Graham for help with problems, but how often does the world expert on toenail growth get a call? But again, your game, your call for your game.

Re: Character For review: Dryad So, you don't have a problem with this character getting points for three Disadvantages (two of the Social Lims and the Distinctive Features one) which are overlapping to a degree that essentially it's writing the same Disad on the sheet three times? And what is the rationale for the "Recognized Area of Expertise" Social Lim? I'm honestly curious about that one.

Re: No Frameworks? Let's go back to a point one of my players, Metaphysician, brought up. Without Power Frameworks, Witchcraft would be something like a 900 pt character. Does anyone really think Witchcraft is an unbalanced character for CHAMPIONS?

Re: No Frameworks? Well, we've found something we agree on. I've been playing and running Champions since '83, and I still find it by far the best choice for superhero gaming, beating out any of the versions of DC or Marvel games, VnV, GURPS Supers, etc. Part of what makes it work, IMHO, is the combination of flexibility with defined general rules mechanics, and the Power Framework concept is one important component of that. In all the time I've been playing Champions, I've never seen an example of a Power Framework in and of itself being broken or imbalancing to the game. If anything, I think EC in 4th and 5th Edition Champions has become a bit too restrictive, as many valid powers for some sorts of character conceptions (werewolves with Damage Reduction, not vs. silver, for example) cannot be applied in ECs by a straight reading of the rules (and thus, some character types don't get the same benefit some others qualify for). What I *have* seen is munchkiny players taking advantage of the Framework idea, but if you denied them Framworks, they'd just find another way to munch. That's a problem with certain players, which rules can't really fix or address.

Re: No Frameworks?

Re: How would you do this? Sounds to me like a MP or VPP of "hand-changing powers". It can be Lockpicking bought as a Power (costs END, etc.), an HKA, a bit of Tunneling (for a shovel), etc. A longer blade (like a spear) might have 1" of Stretching in addition to a RKA. Sharper blades might be an AP RKA. How powerful you want the blades to be would determine the size of the MP/VPP. In any case, the hand physically changing shape is just a special effect of the power.

Re: Possession There are rules for Mental Transform under "Transform" in FRED. Essentially, you do a BOECV Major Tranform (transform target into slavishly loyal individual, or something like that), with the Transform healing (ending) when the possessing character leaves the target's body. It's not cheap, either.

Re: No Frameworks?

Re: No Frameworks? Not really. I like a lot of different comics. There are also lots I don't like. I like Silver Age DC and Marvel. I also like PLANETARY and Ellis' AUTHORITY. I don't like IDENTITY CRISIS, even though it features the Silver Age DC characters, because I don't like the tone of the book. I don't think power frameworks are an issue in those likes/dislikes. Fact is, there are relatively few comics which feature characters who can do only one thing, with no variance on that one thing - which, without frameworks, is what one would end up with in Hero. Some characters are less versatile than others. Brick and martial-artist characters essentially do the same things over and over, though some are better at doing their things than others. A lot of characters, though, have a basic, broad power-set, and can do a lot of things within that set. Examples include characters with electrical, weather, super-speed, transmutation or magnetic powers. They always pull up funky ways to use those powers, and which are not well-represented by one or two powers using Hero terms. Finally, there is a subset of characters that can do virtually anything - Green Lantern, Silver Surfer, most comic magi. All of these character types are valid characters, and the HERO system, if it is to mimic the comics at all, should allow for all of them at relatively similar point costs. As is, this is hard to do. Try making a good representation of Power Man and a good representation of Green Lantern on the same 350 points. You'll likely find you get a lot closer to Power Man. Now try doing GL without any sort of power framework. You can't even do the Animated version. Let's take Storm, of the X-Men. Her basic ability is to control weather. We've seen her make it rain and snow, drop temperature precipitously within a discrete area, draw down thunderbolts, create areas of high or low air pressure, summon winds and create em fields that do things like fry out electronic equipment. Try doing that without a framework. HERO has three game mechanics which allow for versatility. First is special effect itself. As noted in FRED, a guy with flame powers can do things like start a small fire or keep his buddies warm if they're stuck in a cooler without having to buy these abilities with points. The Power skill is another game mechanic that allows for unusual, one-time uses of power. Finally, VPPs (and to a lesser extent, MPs) allow this degree of versatility. The first is GM fiat. The second is dependent on a die roll. The third is under the control of the player. I definitely favor the third, though the other two have their uses.

Re: No Frameworks? I'm not particularly worried about point balancing when I make or run villains. I'm interested in telling interesting stories and challenging the characters. Per his description in CKC, Menton is supposed to be capable of virtually anything - in fact, the write-up *suggested* reconfiguring him using a VPP. Your definition of lazy design seems to comd down to "you don't like it." And, you really think it's a good idea, play-wise/character-wise to force the characters to use XP to do something that is dramatically appropriate, reasonaly falls within character concept and isn't likely to come into play often? I don't think you and I are going to find much to agree on here. I also have to wonder why you bother with the HERO system rules, rather than something that is more rigidly defined.

Re: No Frameworks? Spider-Man has a fairly limited powerset. He's strong, agile, has spider-sense and webshooters. Over time his web shooters have become sort of a Multipower, and occasionally he pulls up some odd use for them that might qualify as either a small VPP or use of the Powers skill. In comparison, characters like Jean Grey, Magneto and Dr. Fate come up with new abilities virtually every time they show up. Then there are guys like Thor, Iron Man, the Human Torch and the Silver Surfer who ahve about a gazillion powers apiece, most of which are used about twice over several hundred stories. Compared to those guys, Spidey is pretty static. That doesn't make him a bad character at all, but he doesn't have the range of abilities of some others.

Re: No Frameworks? You know, I started to write out a response based on the numbers game, but I decided not to do that, because ultimately that isn't the issue with why I think Power Frameworks are fine. To me, it comes down to the fact that the current system does a good job of portraying how characters work in most superhero comics, and most particularly, in the sorts of comics the game was developed to represent. So, rather than get more into a numbers argument here, let's hear your ideas of how the rules could better represent what they're supposed to represent. Let's hear you actually make and support an argument of your own, rather than attacking.

Re: Possession I would start by making a character that is Invisible/Persistent/ Always On, Desolidification (not to magic/holy)/Persistent/Always on, Mind Control /Affects Physical World/No Range and Clinging (affects Physical World) only to cling to the target of Mind Control. You can fill in the rest from there, I expect. Is that ungodly expensive? Yeah. It's a powerful effect, it should be expensive. You can build Deadman the same way, essentially.

Re: No Frameworks?

Re: No Frameworks? I rebuilt Menton that way for my campaign. He's vastly more dangerous that way. Characters at a certain power level generally work better with a VPP than a Multipower, particularly if said characters are supposed to be masters of some wide-ranging effect such as "mental powers" or "matter transmutation." Gravitar might benefit from doing a VPP like that in place of her MP, but leaving her EC and her independent TK powers alone. Having her stuff spread out like that is a crucial part of her build, one that allows her to effectively fight many hero teams - namely, she is able to do devastating Multiple Power Attacks and to attack effectively while maintaining some powerful ongoing effects like the Area TK. Putting all her stuff in a VPP would probably make her substantially weaker. For purposes of representing the way characters work in comic books, a great many characters should have VPPs, actually - usually very small ones. This represents the number of odd things a super-stretcher like Plastic Man can do, or all the small, mundane uses a character like the Human Torch or Iceman might find for fire or cold. VPPs need not be large to be useful. A character with light/energy/quantum powers can benefit quite a bit in versatility and conceptual soundness by having a 20-30 pt vpp for things like Images, Change Environment, small/gradual Transform effects and the like.

Re: No Frameworks? There's the key. It works that way in the comics. The powers in HERO were designed to reflect comic books. Thus, they work that way. It's not physics.

Re: No Frameworks?

Re: No Frameworks? That's why when I play a VPP character, I try to have tons of all-purpose effects figured out ahead of time. As a GM, if someone not making reasonable efforts along that line ends up slowing the game on a regular basis, I dock XP. Really, as slow-moving as HERO combat tends to be, there's little excuse for waiting for one's own turn to allocate VPP points very often.

Re: No Frameworks? Games have arbitrary elements. Does that maneuver justify a +1 or a +2 bonus? What happens when someone rolls two 1s on Unluck? It's not entirely arbitrary, but it isn't chemistry, either. If someone put appropriate Limitations on the Mind Control - starting with "vs. CON, not EGO - that might work. The point is, it's not completely arbitrary there - gravity control doesn't fly, electricity might. With the appropriate Limitations, maybe. It's a case-by-case basis. That's always going to be the case in a game system that uses general effects. Some concepts are still more coherent than others, though.

Re: Possession

Re: No Frameworks? Oh, I'd let someone play that character, but I just wouldn't say the special effect is coherent enough to qualify for a framework. Similarly, if someone wanted to stick Mind Control in his Gravity Powers EC, I'd nix it. You can be the Psionic Knight if you want, but you're not going to get any cost savings for doing it. Similarly, the Martian Manhunter would be paying full cost for his powers - I don't buy "Martian Powers" as a valid EC rationalle. Judgment is always required to be a GM, but I don't have a problem with some aspects of that being specifically promoted in the rules.

Re: No Frameworks? While that's not the most imaginative justification on earth, I see nothing wrong with it. Gravity control is a reasonable special effect, and the powers noted go along with it okay. Beats the heck out of "I have Armor, Ego Attack and a big HKA sword with +3 STUN multiplier" because its' really a tough and cost-effective combo."