Sketchpad

What about density-based powers affecting it? 

I don't mind not having figured characteristics. I'm sure for some new players entering the game, it's a bit more attractive without them. 

On 8/1/2023 at 4:48 PM, Christopher R Taylor said:

INT gives you perception rolls.

Honestly, I've given thought to just making Perception an INT-based skill. 

On 7/18/2023 at 10:17 AM, Tech said:

I use it for all the superhero groups in the campaign. No, I never found it gamebreaking, nor have the players.

How does it hold up in more recent editions?

16 hours ago, Jason Reid said:

I wager that lot of us have had, "If it doesn't limit you, it's not worth any points" drilled pretty deep into our core at this point. You can of course use limits as a storytelling vehicle, but for a lot of folks, they are limits first and vehicles second.

 

So the notion that we would tack on extra limits to a character without some sort of compensation is at odds with our approach to the system.

 

Extra story hooks? Sure, tacking something like that onto a Package would work fine. I just probably wouldn't treat them the same as I treated actual stereotypical complications.

Coming from older editions, I completely agree. And while I cut my teeth on Champions/Hero back in the early '80s, I started viewing Disads differently in 4th, which has educated my opinions in 6th. I guess a big question I have is where is the compensation in 6th ed Complications? What do players get beyond story for them? Yes, they're "required," but the points no longer reflect spending points anymore. I think this is where I have some disconnect. 

16 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Right and no one I think is arguing against that. The point that is though is there becomes a practical amount that a group can have and still be feasible for what you want to do. So I think you should have a total amount of Complications. Let the player decide if they want to swap out or modify  Template Complications. Going back to Subject to Orders, perhaps the plater really doesn’t like this Complication but agrees to maybe a 5 pt version. That I think is acceptable..

Sure, I get that. This goes to concept and how it interacts with the Template chosen. In some cases, that 5 pt. version may not be feasible depending on campaign, organization, or even the character itself.  

14 hours ago, dmjalund said:

i could see it as weighing balance between complications. a low cost complication only occasionally gets highlighted. a high cost complication gets highlighted more often.

Exactly. I've always seen the intentions of Complications/Disads in this light. Hunteds are a great example of this, particularly when looking at frequency. The higher pt. values typically indicated that the Hunted showed up more often. The same could be said about someone with a Psych Lim at Total, or a DNPC that showed up very frequently and was less than competent. 

15 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

That is why both the GM and players need to be on the same page, and there needs to be trust between them.

 

Sounds like Sketchpad's group are on that page, the players trust him to use the complications to tell a better story and not to screw them over.  It might not work in my group, or yours, but there is no BadWrongFun here.  If players see their character gets more love through having more complications, the player gets a fraction more spotlight, then there is no need for a point balancing exercise.

Absolutely, Doc. In my case, I'm upfront with my players and often type up a small 6-8 page booklet that gives the house rules, packages, standard gear, etc. I always try and find a way to spotlight characters from session to session, and Complications work as a great vehicle for that. 

On the BadWrongFun part, I really wish that others would understand that at times. 

1 hour ago, Doc Democracy said:

Sounds to me that @Sketchpad is saying that taking the template complications drives story and the player gets a bit extra GM-love/spotlight time, which is decent recompense for the complications.

 

If complications at a table are seen as story hooks rather than "disadvantages" then I can see it working.

Thank you, Doc D. That's exactly what I'm trying to say. Even back in the older days of Hero, I've always seen Disads/Complications as ways to tell a story with your character. Have a Code vs. Killing? Let's explore that by confronting a character like The Punisher. Have a Hunted by Viper? Okay, so you find an old Viper lab that has some info on you. Should they be a problem at times? Of course. When you have a x2 Vulnerability to Corgis, expect an occasional Corgi to show up and slobber on you. But having something like Subject to Orders? There should be other, more defining things for a character to take in their Complications. This is why I'm also using Quirks, so characters can be defined better. 

I was looking through some older Champions books and came across the Mastermind option in Champions II (p. 21-22). Anyone ever try and bring this forward into newer editions? I often wonder why it wasn't included going forward. Was it just too game breaking? Anyone know?

That's pretty awesome, Bunch. Thanks for sharing.

13 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

On page 37 of the 6e v1 pg 37 it states that the Complications of a Template do count against the Total Matching Complications.

Hence the quote in the first post of this topic.  I'm looking for info from folks that don't use that guideline.

4 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

My questions is probably, would you actively stop someone else, who bought all the same powers and did not take the complications (and did not say they were a skrull infiltrator) from playing that character? 

Possibly. Templates exist for a reason. I see them as guidelines for a making a character in a campaign setting, but there are exceptions especially when presented with a solid concept. If someone made a shapeshifter and took everything but the Complications in order to make a Skrull Infiltrator, I would question why and expect a great concept in return. Just because they didn't want the Complications? Then why play a Skrull Infiltrator in the first place? There's a difference between Bill Changer Of Shapes and our alien spy. Did they have a great idea that they're hunted by the Skrull Empire after having a fling with the Queen? Okay... I'm intrigued, tell me more. I may swap out Complications that are "Template Oriented" with different ones, and still not count them toward the Matching Complications, as it's now a Skrull Expatriate kind of character now. 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

How many Champions characters had less than 2 Hunteds?  Now, characters can take a Hunted if it's really important to the character.  The other intended change is reflected in the nomenclature change from "disadvantages" to "complications".  As I recall, Steve's goal was to move the needle from "these are bad things your GM can hit you over the head with, and you should work to minimize their impact" to "these are a tool for player agency - they should guide the GM to the kind of challenges you want your character to face".  Disadvantages being a purely negative term, Complications being more neutral in tone.

 

 

If it was unclear, all I was musing on was making this more consistent in presentation with "skills as powers" and "characteristics as powers".  Practically, the option is not often taken as players want those 400 points, and 75 points of complications is not bad for fleshing out a Supers character anyway.

 

I'll flip that around.  Your "skrull infiltrator with no complications" has 20 less points to play around with than the Package Infiltrator, who reduced the cost of the package by 20 points.

 

Let's see how many templates I can take to get free extra abilities - if I would have paid for enough of the package to cover the net cost, and I can live with the added complications, maybe I want to bulk up.

 

In earlier editions, before there was a "maximum disadvantages" rule, we saw a lot of characters with well over 150 disadvantage points, held partially in check by the diminishing returns (first two of any category being full points, next two half, two after that only a quarter - as I recall, we relaxed that for unrelated psychological complications).

Except that Complications don't reduce anything. They exist only in a "Complication Zone" that have zero effect on points a character may have to use. Hence why I don't see an issue with extra Complications, as they do nothing than provide a character and campaign more flavor. That said, I do miss the old Package Deal days, as I used a ton back in the day. And don't get me started on Hunteds. Some day I'll have to tell everyone about the character that had 6 Hunteds with a 14- modifier... that was a crazy game! But we did what we did to gain points back then.

9 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

The issue I see with that is GoodBoy looks at your templates and picks 2, takes the 45 points of complications, and then chooses another 75 points of complications.

Looking over his shoulder GoodMan decides he wants all the abilities in the templates but not the complications and so he builds his character with no template and takes 75 points of complications.

 

Goodman gets all the same abilities and only 60% of the complications of GoodBoy.

 

Is it worth the complications to officially be a Skrull Infiltrator?

That is where I run things differently, I guess. When I see a Template there's the standard info for it (Skills/Powers/Complications/etc.), and then there are Options under that. Let's look at the Druid from FH6 (p.80). You have the Template with the listed info for stats, skills, powers and the like, followed by Complications, and finished with Options. If I want to play a standard Druid in Fantasy Hero, I have to take the info listed, including the Complications. If I want some of the Options, I can take them as well. All this for 79 points. The 25 point matching Complication is then also applied. If there's a Species Template, the player playing it should have everything on it, including the Complications. Anything optional is in the Options section. So one way or another, in the case of the Skrull Infiltrator, you're getting those 45 points in Complications. In my opinion, it shouldn't be added as part Matching Complications, but rather as additional due to the job/species/background/etc.

29 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

There is nothing that says a character cannot take more complications than what is required.  The book even encourages this.  The example they give is a vampire character taking all the traditional vampire weaknesses.  The idea of matching complications is so that the character has something that the GM can work with.   

 

 

Since template complications don’t reduce the cost of the template not counting them as part of the matching complications penalizes characters taking the template.  That is going to mean that no one will take a template if they do not have to.  The only reason to take a template is if the abilities can only be acquired from a template.   In a typical champion campaign, there will be no one taking a template.  If you are running a heroic campaign and limit what powers a character can purchase to racial templates, some characters may take those.  But any other template will be ignored.  What is going to happen is the player will simply buy what they want from the template and what complications they want. 

 

 

Ignoring templates can have a negative impact on the game especially for heroic campaigns.  Many templates have things in them that characters may not want to bother with, but that are something the concept should actually have.  This is especially true with knowledge and background skills. The GM could of course require you to take templates, but that seems to go against the spirit of the Hero System.   At that point your game is closer to D&D than Fantasy Hero.  

 

Templates should be considered guidelines on how to build a character, not something that is required or that penalizes the character.   Requiring a character to take more complication than another character but not gaining any benefit is unfair.    

We have different ideas of what role Templates serve it seems. For me, Templates are a way for players to interact and create characters within a campaign structure. GMs allow what they would like to see. Want to run a fantasy game that has Elves, Dwarves, and Goblins available to players? Bingo, here's the Templates. Don't want Halflings? No problem. Don't use the Template. Could you offer every Template in Fantasy Hero? Sure. Should you? Depends on the game you're running. Want to run a Conan/Sword-n-Sorcery game? Well there goes a healthy chunk of Templates. It's all in how people play the game. 

As for gaining benefit from Complications... what benefit is there to gain? The whole concept is to ground the character a bit, right? It's not like you're taking 35 points of Hunteds and gaining something beyond enemies at your gate, right? 

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

@Sketchpad, why not just make Template Complications optional? That way the player gets to choose which one he prefers?

57 minutes ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

A template is simply a bundle presented as a bunch of skills/perks/powers/complications that this kind of person would usually have.

 

There are no bonus points for taking a package, so really, if you do not want all the bits of a template then you can individually buy everything you want.  I do not see having the option of taking additional complications to be an advantage 🙂 and I am sure most GMs would be fine with a character taking additional complications - the resistance would come from expecting a character with an additional 15 points of complications getting an additional 15 points of powers/skills etc over other player characters.

 

Doc

Well, I guess where I'm going is that Template Complications would be considered part of the Template, but not part of the Matching Complications for the character. So in a standard 6e Champions character, for example, they need 75 Matching Complications. As per 6th ed, there are no points being gained through any Complications, just that a character should have the matching amount for the type chosen.

Say you take a Species Template and an Occupation Template... Skrull Infiltrator... They both come with Complications that total 45 points. That would mean someone would only have to take 30 points in Complications.

What I'm thinking is that the Template Complications don't count toward the 75, but rather are gained from grabbing the Templates. A character still has 75 points to take toward their Matching Complications. 

8 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I like the 6e decision to reduce complications so they can be more central to the character, and expected to come up a lot.  When every Super on the team has 2 or 3 Hunted to pad out those 150 points, how often do those Hunteds show up?  If on one had any Hunteds, would we have no adversary at this week's game?

I agree, which is why I was curious about this. I'm wondering if Template Complications should be included in the amount the player chooses. I think there's some customization lost if they count. For example:

Commander Star's player has taken a Government Template that has "Subject to Orders (15pt)" as a complication.

If it's added to their Matching Complications, they lose 15 points of customization, as they "have" to take this. What I'm thinking is that it's just an added Complication, and the player may customize further. Does that make sense? I should also note that I've opted to use something akin to GURPS Quirks as well, bumping Matching Complications totals up by 5. 

I'm working on some stuff for a game and was thinking about Templates a bit. Particularly the Complication end of things. According to the books (6E1 p. 36):

Quote

When you note a Template on your character sheet, put any points from Complications in the Complication section (they’re part of your character’s Matching Complication amount), and write down the Skills in the Skills section. You should also write down the name(s) of the Template(s) your character has.

I've always seen these as "In Addition" to Complications taken by a player. And from what I've seen over at Homebrewing a HERO System 2e, I'm not the only one in the past. Does anyone run it this way in 6th edition? Has anyone had success with it in 6th edition?

54 minutes ago, mattingly said:

If not, how would you build such a thing?

Isn't this basically the Speed Zone abilities as seen in The Ultimate Speedster (p. 251) for 5th ed? 

8 hours ago, Prof.Dogg said:

I finally purchased the Powers pack by Steven.  Where do I load these files to pull them into the available options in the Powers tab?

You should be able to load them via Prefab>Load Prefab. They'll appear on the appropriate tab with the Prefab subtab.

I used to in the pre-5th days. My 3rd and 4th ed campaigns almost exclusively used villains from the various supplements for more than a decade. 5th ed started changing that as I began using more and more of my own NPCs. Nowadays I pretty much use my own only... with some inspired by the old characters, and some that have been used in other systems for the past 30+ years.

6 hours ago, Tech said:

Okay Duke, sounds fun. (will use 5th ed version because that's easiest but feel free to use 6th ed to answer as I have the book)

 

1) Energy Blast

2) Energy Blast, AE (any)

3) Energy Blast, AE Cone

4) Drain

5) NND

6) AVLD

7) RKA

8 ) Another Drain

9) Duplicate

10) Transfer

11) Life Support

12) Flash

1) Solid Sound Punch: You focus your sound effects into a solid sound blast that takes the form of a punch. 

2) Solid Sound Seeker: You let loose with a barrage of solid sound spheres that seek out all enemies. For added bonus, add selective.

3) Sonic Scream: You emit a ear-popping scream that attacks all within the cone's area. For added bonus, add NND (Hearing Flash Def).

4) Vertigo-a-Go-Go: You use subsonics to mess with a target's vertigo, causing their DEX (and maybe DCV) to lower. 

5) Sonic Scrambler: You use a sonic beam to scramble someone's brain. The only defense is Hearing Flash Defense.

6) Thunder Cry: You have a booming cry that hits like a hammer. Defense is Hearing Flash Defense.

7) Solid Sound Needles: You let loose with a bevy of solid sound needles that shred your opponent. Add Autofire and Piercing for more fun.

8 ) Droning On: Using repetitive sounds, you cause the target to tire out via an END Drain. 

9) Solid Sound Squadron: You summon forth a squadron of solid sound decoys to confuse and attack enemies on the ground and in the sky.

10) Sound Off: You can drain sonic powers from others and add their power to your END temporarily.

11) Solid Sound Bubble: You can create a bubble from solid sound that has its own atmosphere in it. Buy Life Support with Usable by Others to make it really effective.

12) Blaring Sound: You deafen opponents with high-pitched noise.

I would imagine someone could abort to toss the grenade back. Maybe an OCV vs. OCV check might work? Alternatively, there could always be a time limit for the grenade. Maybe a delayed phase, or maybe an activation?

On 6/25/2023 at 7:25 PM, Mark Rand said:

One staffer is always in the entrance area, checking IDs.  If someone's under 21, they get a bracelet that says so.  If someone shows a false ID, the ID is confiscated and turned over to the police.

A bar that caters to lawbreakers checking IDs for younger beings seems a bit odd to me.

On 6/18/2023 at 8:03 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

I'm away from my books at the moment, but do Resource points work the same way as equipment meaning you'd be limited to the sorts of things anybody could reasonably buy in a setting? Because, if so, it might help to think about how you envision the setting, marcusxbaer. If it makes sense to you that a given thing from Gadgets and Gear would be available for anybody with the right access to buy then it would be valid for your Resource points. This way you can adapt the rules to different settings as needs be.

 

Hope I've understood the question correctly, and apologies if not!

This is the way I read the question as well. In my superhero campaign, certain things can be bought with RPs, and others can't. For example, if you want an unstable uniform, or a costume with a limited amount of armor, I typically allow players to buy them with RPs (which I've renamed Gear Points in my game). 

On 6/9/2023 at 11:26 PM, Lord Liaden said:

To represent the long-term problems caused by stress and sustained fear, many Horror Hero GMs come up with a new Figured Characteristic to represent a character’s capacity to withstand the effects of horror. For example, you might create a Sanity (SAN) Figured Characteristic, derived from EGO + (PRE/2) + (CON/2). Characters lose Sanity like they lose STUN, but only from effects that are particularly terrifying, gruesome, or disturbing — the GM assigns a “Sanity Damage” rating (in d6) to each such phenomena. If a character drops to 0 SAN, he snaps and becomes completely insane (and an NPC under the GM’s control) until he recovers his wits. Characters may regain lost SAN with REC, just like STUN, but do not get Post-Segment 12 Recoveries and can only make SAN Recoveries when they are in calming, non-stressful, non-frightening situations (i.e., rarely in the middle of a scenario, but only between adventures). Many other versions of SAN (or the like) are possible; each GM sets it up to represent the feelings of horror he most wants to simulate.

It's an interesting idea, LL. How would you bring that into a non-figured characteristic 6th ed? Would characters begin with XX SAN?

On 6/10/2023 at 7:46 PM, Doc Democracy said:

We do often leap to additional systems rather than adapting what we have.

On 6/11/2023 at 4:28 PM, steriaca said:

I believe the suplilment Horror Hero for 4ed had Sanity rules. It also was the first place to see Spirit rules.

That's why I was referencing Horror Hero in my initial post, Doc and Steriaca. I'm wondering if there is some validity to bringing the systems presented in that sourcebook forward to 6th ed, or should there be something new created?

Hmm... I would think creating a SAN stat that works a bit like Mental STUN would be more along the Call of Cthulhu lines. I believe I've seen a few other folks try that in HERO a few years (decades?) back. 

On 6/6/2023 at 11:00 PM, Duke Bushido said:

So let's explore a couple of other things:

 

Presence defends against shock as it does a Presence Attack.  Intelligence defends against Stress.

 

Shock "damage" affects EGO-  either you can directly "damage" EGO, or you can assign a damage stat that defaults to "equal to EGO" and then determine what happens when that stat gets to Zero or whatever levels you want effects to occur. 

 

Stress, at least basing it on job and child-rearing experience, damages Intelligence (determine how it recovers is up to you.)

 

I would let both of these factors (or just the one that you want to most play-up in the game) contribute to a "sanity" or "personality schism" or what-have-you akin to Long Term Enduranve or Fatigue or whatever it is that 6e is calling it.

I would think that EGO would be better to defend against Fear-Based PRE Attacks. 

EGO Damage is an interesting idea. Would you basically use it akin to BODY? 

Not sure if I agree on INT damage. 

I think in the long run, I was interpreting the rules less like CoC's SAN, and more like lasting Fear, particularly the section on situational PRE-Attacks.

Hello Herodom! For those that have used it, what is your opinion of the Shock & Stress system in Horror Hero? Do you think there's a better way of approaching such concepts in 6th ed? 

2 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I just heard on Dungeoncraft at someone wrote up a neat houserule cheap PDF called Luck Dice. Basically everytime you whiff you earn a luck die which you can cash in later to do something epic, if you live that long.

I've been playing with something similar. Rather than reflect missing, it rewards people for playing heroic, bringing snacks, etc. 

EDIT: I should also note that some villains get a variation of this as well. Makes things interesting. 

10 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

To that end, I offer a quick breakdown of how we do the ship-to-ship stuff where I use a similar idea:

That's an interesting idea, Duke. Does it slow things down?