Blackout

Well, you could always save a phase. Or you could buy an attack that's triggered when an enemy crosses into your "threatened" zone...

Mr. Cook, have you ever considered comic books? Just curious...

Re: Where do you go for Fantasy Artwork? As someone already pointed out, Google's image search function is an amazing tool... Be careful though, it can eat up hours of your time. And the pool of images it draws from is huge, so try to be as specific as possible to avoid having to sift through thousands of results.

Time to suck up... I've been playing Champions for, well, since 1984...and there was plenty of "obvious" stuff in FREd that I hadn't thought of. Same goes for USDB. Shameless plug time: I talked up the USDB to one of the customers - a HERO newbie - in my store (Lost Worlds), he bought it, took it home, and was able to finally make up the character he's been wanting to play. This made him VERY happy. Which makes ME very happy, 'cause I love HERO and now there's at least one more person happy with the game. One of the best things about USDB is that it makes life MUCH easier for those HERO GMs among us (me for one) who haven't mastered the mantra, "points are for players." I can slap together a fully "pointed-out" baddie in no time now, and that's a good thing! So, what I'm saying is, if those products can help me (an almost 20 year "vet") AND they can help someone who's been playing less than six months...well, I'd say they're doing what they're supposed to be doing. Back to FH... If this book can help me ween my regular gaming group off of D&D, it'll be worth "slogging" through as many pages as it takes.

That's so... Well, it's just brilliant!

Re: Any Interest in Spelljammer Hero? Ya know... This is one of those odd synchronicities that make me feel like I'm living in a Dickens' novel. I just started a once-a-month Spelljammer campaign with my current gaming group, and I thought it would be a great way to slowly introduce them to Hero for something other than Champions. So, if YOU wanna save me all the conversion trouble, I - for one - would be very happy to see it.

Um...yes and no. Height and weight play a HUGE part in what you can do with a massive STR (at least in the real world). I'm almost ashamed to admit it, but I get a huge kick outta watching World's Strongest Man competitions. In every one I've ever seen, the shorter, lighter guys are at a disadvantage in many events. Bending steel rods? The taller guys with longer arms get much better leverage. Let's use an example event from one of the competitions and apply it directly to our "halfling" character in question: holding a 60 pound weight straight out from your body at shoulder height. Oh, you can't have one leg in front of the other, either. The short character we're talking about wouldn't be able to do this for one second. Sure, he could lift the weight with no problem...but, as soon as he extends his arms, he's gonna fall forward because 60 pounds is almost three times his personal weight. He just doesn't have the mass to counteract the weight he's trying to deal with. The same thing applies to the sword... A two-handed/great sword/claymore is going to weigh nearly HALF of what the character does. The problem I have with this scenario (little-guy big-sword) is all about mass, rather than strength. Again, I'm not saying he shouldn't be able to use the sword, just that he'd have all sorts of penalties doing so. Even though he's strong enough, he just doesn't weigh enough.

I wasn't trying to cast aspersions on your PVC pipe idea:) And I realize there are some problems with the water-filled-bucket schtick (and it was mostly used as an attempt at humor - which, obviously, failed:mad: ) Arguing that the balance of a weapon makes no difference is foolish (and I try not to be that as often as possible:cool: ) The main point I was atually trying to make was that, no matter how well balanced a weapon is, and no matter how strong you are, if something weighs half as much as you do (or even 1/4), it's gonna cause you no end of problems when you try to wave it around at arms length.

Well, ya know, it's not so much the length of the sword... it's how you use it. Okay. Sorry. Couldn't resist. Seriously now. D-Man makes some good points about the vertically challenged character's arm length in relation to the weapon's balance point and what-not. I think the deciding factor for me, if I were in the GM's chair on this one, is the fact that the sword is going to weigh about half as much as the character. I can military press my weight, I can bench more than my weight, and I can curl half my weight... I sure as heck wouldn't want to try swinging around a 6' piece of really sharp steel that was half my weight, though! There's a little something called inertia that'll cause all sorts of problems with that scenario. Newton had something to say about that as well... something about a body in motion staying in motion, if memory serves. I'd let him do it, though, I'd just apply some serious penalties. Forget the PVC pipe experiment someone suggested. If you really wanna demonstrate how silly the notion is, take a 5 gallon pail, fill it with water, have the guy swing it and try to stop. And that won't even be close to the weight differential. I'd suggest doing this outside.

Oh, man, that'd be cool! I mean, I'd be in like Flint!

Right, then, you make some very good points. (As do most everyone who's posted in reply.) I think, when I get this thing going, I'll use hit locations, but only for important opponents. Which is to say, Disposable Thugs (TM and patent pending) won't use the hit location tables against the PCs, and the PCs won't use hit locations against them (though the PCs could go for called shots). In other words, when hit locations could serve to increase the dramatic tension, I'll use 'em. Okay. I gotta ask this... A "palindromedary"? That'd be a camel that looks the same frontwards and backwards? Eating seems easy enough, but, um, how does it defecate? (Something that, by the by, has always bugged me about the cartoon Cat/Dog.)

If the characters are both being played by the same person, I'd go with the previous suggestion of Duplication. If the characters are played by two different people, then I'd go with Mind Link with the Feedback limitation...

I think I'd go with Duplication on this one. One of the Dupes (no insult intended) would be the computer/AI, and the other would be the hologram. I'm not sure if I'd use the AI rules to build that part of the character, though... It might be better to just build a "normal" character and then slap on appropriate disads (can't walk, distinctive features, no hands, etc.). You've got plenty of possibilities for the hologram as well. If it's a hologram, it's going to have Desolidification, right? I'd imagine it would be Always On, and that would mean big points for buying powers with the advantage Affects Physical World. It sounds like a cool idea, and I'm sure you'll get some more help from the local (virtually speaking) Brain Trust.

Ouch Taking half the damage yourself is, I think, the major limiting factor here. Taking full damage yourself if you don't do knockback, is a huge limiting factor. I think some of that depends on the brick-in-question's defenses, too. 22d6 is going to do 77 Stun and 22 Body on average, and if the brick "only" has 30 PD that's gonna hurt if no KB is done. (And, hey, if it's a giant millipede, it's got Clinging, right? That's 1d6 less KB. Depending on how giant "giant" is, that could gut any chance of doing KB right there.) My gaming group finally started playing Champions again this past Saturday. One of the guys (playing a brick) wanted to get through a wall in a hurry, so he tried a move through on it. He didn't do enough Body to break the wall down and ended up Con stunning himself. It was very funny. Well, I laughed.

I think I might be more inclined to work that power up using Mental Illusions. It's already based on ECV, and you get some nifty limitations right off the bat - Self Only (-1), and a Set Effect - "You can't see me" (using Mind Control as a guideline - Set Effect, single emotion - I'd give this a -1 also). Of course, this only works on one target at a time... You could, however, give it No Range (-1/2), and then tack on an Area of Effect (Radius) (+1)... I haven't figured out comparative point costs or anything, so I don't know how the two options would stack up against each other THAT way. Still, the MI seems more appropriate to me.

My initial reaction was to suggest two VPPs. But that may be a bit more expensive than you wanna go. My second thought was that, maybe, a VPP for the "normal" magic, and a multipower for the "shadow" magic might work better. From the quick description you gave, it seems that the "normal" magic is going to be mostly for normal, everyday kinda stuff (as normal and everyday as magic gets); and that the "shadow" magic would be where your attacks and major powers come from. You might be able to put both styles of magic in the same VPP, but I imagine you'd wind up with some conflicting special effects, limitations, advantages and stuff. Not much help, huh? Sorry.

I'm pulling the pieces together to run a Fantasy Hero campaign (thus the posting in this particular forum - pretty swift of me, eh?)... One of the things I'm mulling over is whether or not to use hit locations. Or, perhaps, a modified version...using the to-hit roll to determine what location is hit (though I can see that causing a problem in increasing the chances of a successful hit smacking someone in the "vitals"). I'd appreciate hearing from the resident experts on the impact of using hit locations (length of combats, lethality, etc.), or doing away with them. Thanks.

Now then, in this instance (see my "Other People's Characters..." thread), OIHID makes perfect sense to me. See, I'm not totally opposed to that as a limitation!

Thanks! Just wanted to say thank you to everyone who replied and gave advice! And clear up a few things. I have no problem with people trying to get all the possible bang they can out of their character point dollar - as it were. What bothers me is when they cheese out limitations (and do bizarro power construction contortions) to get an extra 2d6 armor piercing, penetrating killing attack, and spend 3 points on a professional skill...and that's all they can do outside of comabt. It irks me. That's not a character, that's just an excercise in mathematics. Now, I like combat as much as the next guy. That's one of the reasons I like superheroes; the big fights can be great fun! And I like making characters who are effective in a fight. I can't stand to have a character who's only useful when the fists and EBs are flying, though. All that said, I know I'll have fun playing in this campaign. I also know that there will be things the other players do that get on my nerves, and I'm (mainly) engaging in a bit of pre-emptive venting. Again, thanks for "listening" and giving some solid tips on handling the situation. I really do appreciate it.

Right. As mentioned previously, I've finally managed to convince my gaming group to give the Hero System another go. This makes me ecstatic! A little background on this group. It's big (between 8 and 12 people). Though some of them WON'T play anything other than D&D. Go ahead, pity them. I do. The GM (not me) has been playing Champs since its 1st edition (on and off; though off for the past 6 years or so). He introduced me to the game in 1982-83; three of the other players were introduced to the game in the late 80's - early 90's. None of the other players have played much, and some of them not at all. I'm the official comic book "addict" in the group, the GM was an "addict" but went on a 12-Step program and hasn't read any new comics in more than a decade. Two of the players (who also know the system) read comics currently. Now comes my dilemma... I don't like the way most of these people make up characters. They approach character creation from a D&D-influenced Min/Max standpoint; combat, to them, is the be-all, end-all and character development/concept doesn't enter into mix much at all. Non-combat skills are an afterthought (if they're ever thought of). And the idea of teamwork doesn't seem to have an impact on them. I know that my opinion of other people's characters really doesn't matter... As long as they have fun playing them, who am I to say they're wrong. Right? Okay. At this point, really, all I'm doing is trying to vent a bit. More than anything else, I'm happy that we're playing Champions (and I'm hoping I can use that as a springboard to run a Fantasy Hero campaign of my own - and maybe ween them from D&D). But. I have one big problem. And that's the limitation Only In Heroic Identity. I've seen a few of the potential new characters that use this as an across the board limitation on their characters with next to NO justification for it. They seem to view it as a limitation that won't limit them, and an easy way to shave points off the character. Again, this really isn't my concern. I'm not the GM. If he feels their characters are fine, then I've no right to squawk. Yes? I guess what bothers me is that, while the character's I've seen are within the "letter" of the rules, they violate the "spirit" of those rules (and the genre). So. I'd appreciate if youse guys (and gals) might tell me to either "lighten up", or give me some suggestions on how I might straighten out my friends' thinking. Thanks.

If you make the power Uncontrolled and 0 END you "must have a reasonably common and obvious set of circumstances that will turn it off." (FREd pg. 175). A time limit would seem to fall under that heading - combined with Dispell or Suppress or somesuch - and there are others that might apply as well depending on the special effect of the spell (e.g., a Darkness spell could douse the Torchlight spell you outlined). Just a thought.

Well, the key to doing something "because I want it to" is to not let the players KNOW that's what you're doing. If they know that you didn't really build the power/item/effect, then they will fell cheated. And rightly so. It's easy to abuse, and you're right in "condemning" using it gratuitously. Also, I'm not suggesting it for just any item (or spell). I only think it's appropriate for things that are, more or less, plot devices. I would never advocate this "method" for something that's common or could be around for any real length of time (that will only end up causing MANY more problems than working out the points ever could). And I think you need to have some idea of how it works. I just don't think you need to stat it out completely down to the last point... A general idea of what powers it involves (and their approximate strength) so you can describe it when they try their analyze magic skill. Another advantage to NOT fully stating something that powerful is that it leaves you an out if the players come up with something really clever that you'd actually like to have work...but won't based on how you've built it. One of the things that makes the Hero System my all-time favorite is the amount of flexibility it offers; there are an almost infinite number of ways the same effect can be built (sorry if that borders on the hyperbolic). I think, though, that sometimes those of us who love the game (myself included) can get just a bit too bogged down in points and mechanics and lose sight of the intent.

Go right ahead! It's "just" an idea...I've got plenty of them.

In my reply to the hypothetical situation under discussion, I wasn't talking about other nations getting involved (or, at least, not directly), nor was I talking about nationally sponsored heroes (or teams). I'm not going to even try to say that the justification for actual nations NOT getting involved is flawed - because it's not. What I'm talking about are individual heroes (or hero teams). If, say, Oculon went out and tried to take over Albania...there's gonna be some hero who has a problem with that. And they aren't going to be bothered by the potential for an ugly international incident. My argument for superheroic intervention to stop a villain-led coup also presupposes something else. Namely, that the villain is an established, known criminal. If no one knows that the villain is a villain, the heroes of the world probably wouldn't get involved. Don't get me wrong, I think the idea would be seriously fun to play, and it could be handled (and realistically so - if that matters to you) in MANY different ways. And, as far as the villain-who-would-be-king being of Superman-esque power goes - and this applies to player characters also... No matter how powerful you are, there's always someone who can kick your butt. One other thing. If you were to run a scenario like that in your game, no matter how it's handled, it's going to have some VERY wide reaching side effects. Just imagine how heroes who have no governmental ties would be treated if they DID get involved (and the repercussions for ALL heroes). Or, if the heroes DO have governmental ties, what kinda reaction is that going to cause if they decide to get involved anyway? And, hey, just because some heroes TRY to stop the bad guy it doesn't mean they'll succeed.

Re: Metamorphosis Alpha Actually, the Starlin comic (written and drawn) was called Metamorphosis Odyssey. And it was serialized in Epic Magazine, collected into a graphic novel, and then became the Dreadstar comic. Not to pick nits or anything, but there you go. Gotta love something with a character named 'Syzygy'.