Sean Waters

The second one - I'm going to assume it does not reduce your STR if your STR is over 30 - is (effectively) buying 30* STR and not being able to use your own STR. Again you could work this out precisely for a given character, which is how I would do it - in my world a magic item would 'cost' more for one character than another. If you do not like that then work out what your average game STR is (let us say 15, for argument sake) and deduct that from 30: you get 15 in that instance, which would indicate that it is a -1 limitation on 30 STR: again Hero tends to undervalue limitations so it might only get a -1/2 in practice. This is not 'fair' - it gives a bigger advantage to weaker characters but it is one approach you could take, if you did not want different costs for different characters, and players are generally not stupid - they will distribute items for maximum benefit. I know you may not want to do this for some reason, but it is far easier to just give a straight bonus to characteristics. *I'm assuming that, even if a small child puts on the gauntlets of ogre power amulet, that child gains a STR of 30.

Hmm. First one first... The problem here is that you want to apply a single solution to several different builds. Ask yourself this: if a character had 15 STR then how much would it cost to get to 30 STR? Easy - 15 points Now ask yourself the same thing but for a character with 20 STR: it would then cost 10 points. You don't want to build it with a limitation, that is not a fair way to do it - you want to build it with a different cost depending on who is using it, if you are in a game where you have to pay points for your magic items and whatnot: if you are not, if they are just equipment, then it does not matter much, but you can still look at it this way: The only base STR that would allow you to get to 30 STR with +15 without wasting points is 15 STR. If you have 15 STR or less then you will get the full advantage of the extra 15 STR so you get no cost break. For characters that have more than 15 STR what the magic item does is provide less of a benefit, so you have to know how common STR over 15 is. If someone has 20 STR, for example, then they are only getting the benefit of 10 of the 15 points of added STR, or 2/3 of the 'full' benefit, which is the equivalent of a -1/2 limitation (although Hero generally as Hugh Neilson recently observed, tends to undervalue limitation values and not give them a precise mathematical value). In fact it still has some utility even then because you can be drained of 5 points of STR and still be at 30 STR. What cost break would you get for Extra Characteristic (only to counter adjustment powers)? -1? -2? Say it is -2, even that 5 points of STR you are not getting the advantage of is worth 2 points (1 2/3 rounds up), which is nearly half of the 5 you spend on it. If this is a game where character STR does not routinely exceed 20 I probably would not give it any cost break at all, so, basically, what DasBroot said.

Clairsentience is a standard/sensory power and it works by (effectively) adding extra range and indirect to a sense or sense group. Page 14 of 6e2 has a discussion on the interaction of sense affecting powers and clairsentience and suggests that clairsentience can be flashed or subject to darkness. * That does not make any sense to me at all, given the vast array of possible explanations for clairesentience and its relation to senses and sense groups, I can not think of a sensible SFX that could affect both a remote camera and telepathically borrowing someone else's vision that does not also affect the sense that is being simulated. You could certainly use an adjustment power (but same caveat) and invisibility to the relevant sense would work, but clairsentience is not necessarily a mental power unless it is simulating a mental sense and, even if it was, I doubt that mental defence would work unless the clairsentience was linked to telepathy or Mind Scan. In effect the defence to clairsentience would be whatever would be the defence to the sense or enhanced sense being used to perceive: one way to view it is that it is just a different way to buy modifiers. * Incidentally it also clarifies that darkness to the relevant sense at the view point or at the power user location will stop clairsentience.

Not that we can do much about it but I suppose that the logic of STR adding to HKAs is that if you have 30 STR you can buy +30 STR (only to increase HtH damage -1/2) and it seems unfair that if you can build a club your STR can add damage to you can't build a sword that does the same. It is the tension between perceived realism and game mechanical consistency, or at least trying to get one to conform to the other. Very much with you on the undervalued limitation point. It can have the effect of making more nuanced characters either not worth it or require you to try and break down limitations in such a way that you have a really complex build to get a decent cost break.

In my experience it is rare for combat to take place at or even near the theoretical maximum range of powers, and anything over 16m is -4 or worse to hit anyway, which makes a big difference on a bell curve. There are certainly ways of compensating (bracing, setting, spreading) but combat is still biased toward relatively short ranges. Hero does not have the consequences that other games impose for ignoring one opponent in favour or another by just running past. I'm not sure how much of a big thing having to move next to your target is, if you can actually do so: compare a one on one combat, a one on many and a many on many - and you would have to ensure that (apart from the reliance on a ranged attack (RA) v non-ranged attack (NRA, ironically)), the characters you are comparing are identical. One on One - all that really matters is can you attack each time you are able to? Sure you could build a ranged flier that can not be touched by a landbound brick, but if we are JUST comparing RA v NRA, everything else being equal, the RA can do no more than half a move before attacking and, assuming the NRA can get to the RA with a half or full move, they can attack too - worst case scenario they have to do a move through or move by as their first attack. Sure you can set it up so they start a long way apart, but again, that is not comparing like with like - it is just as likely that they will start adjacent. The RA will have the advantage if they attack first (which they will half the time) or if they can start far enough away from the NRA that they can not be reached by a half or full move AND they can target the NRA whilst it is moving. So, advantage to RA, but it is marginal. Of course one thing that could make quite the difference here is KB as it might allow the RA to maintain more distance, but that is again going to be pretty situational - certainly in a large open environment the RA has advantage, whereas in a more restricted environment neither does - again I'd argue not worth half as much cost again. One on Many - you can't really do this comparison because it would certainly violate the 'equal opponents' requirement, or favour the larger team always. Many on Many - the considerations here are more tactically dense but similar to the one on one scenario. The RA team probably has more of an advantage (again) in a large open arena as they can concentrate fire on a single opponent from where ever they are, whereas the NRA team have to physically get there. The advantage is probably greater than one on one but still not worth half as much again in points. I'm assuming the NRA team has a zero range Blast rather than HtH Attack, for simplicity's sake. Even if the attack is only 9d6 Blast, the NRA character will either be 15 points cheaper or have 15 points invested elsewhere, like more defence, SPD, move, KBR or whatever. I'm pretty sure that will outweigh the combat advantage that RA characters have. Then we have to look at non-combat applications: I can imagine scenarios where having a ranged attack would certainly be an advantage, but in most cases the NRA will also be able to get the job done, especially given their point advantage. So I agree that it is an advantage to be able to do damage at range, I just do not think it is a +1/2 advantage. Also I may be getting a bit off point...

Hmm. I'm famous for overthinking, but...you can't get round the rules with SFX, that has it backwards: the SFX explain how the rules apply, they don't change how the rules apply. If you are in a darkness to sight field, you can not use the sight group to perceive anything within or outside the darkness field, because darkness to sight is impervious to sight. If you want a form of clairsentience that you can use from inside a darkness to sight field, and you want it to work like sight, you can't ignore the effects of Darkness by simply saying the clairsentience is 'mental'. If you want it to work like sight but not be affected like sight, you don't use the Simulated Sense rule, you build it as a detect and then apply your clairsentience to that sense: it costs more but is more useful, which is what point-buy is all about. Now you COULD decide that the fact that the perception point is outside the darkness means that you can perceive events outside that darkness to sight field with clairsentience, as discussed above, but YOU are still inside the darkness to sight field and, if the power you have bought relies on sight (i.e. you got a cost break) you still can not see. If you want the power to project an image straight into your brain, bypassing the usual sight system, pay the cost for something that works that way i.e. pay for a sense that would work in a darkness field and use clairsentience with that sense, with appropriate modifiers to get precisely what it to do. Nor can you build Darkness to Clairsentience because Darkness works against a sense group and Clairsentience is neither a sense group itself or in a sense group that you can define Darkness as working against. Of course you can ignore all this if the GM is copacetic with doing so, as always, but I think that is how the rules actually work.

The problem is that, in most superhero games, it can be difficult to stay a half move away from an opponent, and even martial artists can sometimes fly/leap/teleport. There will always be some build combinations where having a ranged attack is a big advantage - if your move is more than twice that of your opponent and you are fighting in a featureless desert, for example - but you rarely get to use a ranged attack at a long range (because the longer the range the more likely your opponent will have cover) and at realistic combat ranges the majority of your opponents will have some way to strike back. Really strong characters can throw objects big enough that they are aiming at your hex, not at you - unless they are in that featureless desert I mentioned. In heroic games, where taking a single hit is more of a potential issue and move rates are limited, it may well be worth that +1/2, but, again, it is situational. Generally you don't have flying opponents and you can usually reduce effective range with moves to cover.

I think in 5e the doubling rule was in place for all characters. Also in 6e, if you are playing a heroic game and weapons have a STR minimum, the doubling DC rule still applies.

Interesting question. My initial thought was that a perception point outside the darkness and you could see normally, after all if you are in a dark room you could use your clairsentience to see into a light room just fine. That would make sense (if you know what I mean). However, assuming that the darkness applies to the clairsentience (i.e. we are talking about clairsentience that works with the sight group) then, reading Darkness, the power definition is that the covered area is impenetrable by the senses it affects. This would suggest that, even if the perception point is outside the darkness, sight sensory data can not penetrate the darkness to sight. Then you look at Clairsentience and it says that Claisentience itself is part of the Unusual Sense Group and that the effect of Clairsentience is that it works as if you were perceiving from the perception point as if you were standing there, so that would suggest that Claisentience is not itself affected by Darkness to Sight and you should be able to see with it, so long as you could see from your designated perception point. Then you look at the Enhanced Senses power which talks about the simulated senses rule which says that an unusual sense that simulates another sense is subject to sense affecting powers that would affect the sense group it simulates. That would mean that Darkness would block the clairsentience as it is a sense affecting power, and it blocks sight and you are in the darkness and using the power from there. It is not the same as being in a dark room, because that is environmental darkness, not a sense affecting power, so I guess I was wrong: even if it makes sense, the sense is blocked. You can get around this (in most cases) by building a sense from the ground up using the Detect rules and using your Clairsentience with that. The Unusual Senses Group is not a group for the purposes of sense affecting powers, so it would be extremely unlikely that a given darkness build would stop it. You might (and I would have to think about this one) also get round it using the 'indirect' advantage; clairsentience is already indirect, so I'm not sure if that should work, but I'd probably let you have it as you are paying points for extra utility.

So, a couple of points to consider, which may have already been rehearsed above: 1. In the real world strength is not the determinant of how hard something hits, it is speed, or, more accurately, momentum. Strength plays a part, but if you are talking about something your strength can easily handle, it comes down to how fast you can move it. This is why Usain Bolt runs faster than The World's Strongest Man, and why shot putters are enormous, but javelin throwers aren't. 2. Strength adding to damage is a bit of a relic: DnD did it like that, so everything else had to. 3. I think Strength adding to damage in Hero is messy, because it obfuscates the real cost of a power to an extent. This is a particular issue with frameworks, but should be considered in most character builds: cap the DCs of damage, if you are going to cap anything. 4. It also messes with the damage rules generally: look at the daft convolutions we have to apply to make something like HtH Attack work. Well, I say 'work'... 5. It is probably true that there is a broad general expectation that stronger = hits harder but most super strong characters in comics either do not use weapons or use weapons that are basically a special effect of their strength. We shouldn't be bound by broad general expectations anyway - it is not as if the rest of the system goes out of its way to be intuitive. 6. Nonetheless, that is the rule, so there we have it. Interesting thought: do you reckon that 'Range'is actually worth +1/2 in most campaigns? Certainly in superhero games in my experience, combat rarely takes place at sufficient range that the (non ranged attack) target can not retaliate either because of move powers or strength that allows them to throw scenery. Maybe that is worth a thread of its own...

In summary: 1. The escape velocity for Earth is 11.2 km per second. This is how fast you need to go to get out of the gravity well. 2. 7.9 km/s is the orbital velocity at 1m. Going faster than that will not get you out of the gravity well, it will get you a higher orbit, at least until you reach escape velocity. 3. It will make a difference which direction you are running, because the planet is rotating. 4. Rockets don’t start off at escape velocity, they accelerate up a long way to where the escape velocity is much lower. Just saying. 5. This is Hero, so we sort of assume that you are protected from the natural consequences of our powers. If we can shoot lasers from our eyes, we assume that our eyes don’t fry. If we are running, we assume you stay on the surface you are running on. Assuming that there are ‘natural physics’ consequences to Hero powers, will lead to trouble. Some idiot is going to say they can grab someone, accelerate them to escape velocity then chuck them off the planet. Hmm. I think not. 6. If you are using natural physics consequences, you really can not ignore air resistance, and other forces. If you were travelling at escape velocity at sea level you would ignite from air resistance. The air would slow you down and you don’t have any way to maintain your velocity once you leave the surface because you are running. 7. If you really, really have to do this, it is a power trick, and will only work once. 8. If you have a flight speed of 1m/s you can get out of the gravity well, eventually. 9. If you have bought running, you can not use it as leaping or flying, without the appropriate build so, technically, it does not matter if you can theoretically run at lightspeed, you would still not leave the surface you are running on.

Real armour -1/4 (doesn't work quite a lot of the time) is definitely worth more that -1/4.

Good points and well worth talking about. One of my reasons for doing this little thought experiment is because I think that there are perceptual conflicts because, when Champions came out the system that was used was not really based on guiding principles but as a series of solutions for whatever issues and problems arose as the system was built - IIRC Martial Arts in Champions 1e was nothing more than a damage multiplier for your STR. You can't really build characters like Flash or Quicksilver in Hero. No, let me clarify that. You can, obviously, you just can't make them do some of the cool stuff from the comics, not without some pretty weird patches: EDM to the SpeedZone anyone? The system I am proposing actually will not make a huge amount of difference to day to day gameplay, even though it will require a few changes to how we do some things: If you spend 30 points on Flight, for example, you can fly 30m per phase under the current system. If you spend 30 points on flight in the proposed system you can fly 191m per turn. In both cases you would get extra damage from a move through of 30/6 = 5DC under the old system and the same under the proposed one. You would be moving a bit faster, unless your SPD is over 7, in which case you would actually be moving slower. If you spend 60 points under the old system, 60m per phase and under the proposed system up to 1435m per turn, again both doing 12 DC of damage. The new system is pulling away here: you'd need SPD 24 to go that quick under the old system at 60m/phase. What it means is that for a lot of characters there would be little substantial change in their move distance or damage from moving. It is somewhat complicated when integrating with the SPD system: effectively you would have to divide your move per turn by your SPD, but you would only need to do that at character creation. I've never really understood non-combat movement or Megascale movement except as a way of addressing the question why you can not build a character that runs at Mach 1 (or more!). Under this system you can move at lightspeed, in combat, for 240 points. Lot of points, lot of speed. Another thing, I'm not sure why the OCV penalty for move through is -V/10. As an example, if there is someone in the road and I drive at them at 15mph, which will be within combat velocity, even for my car, in reality I have a much worse chance of hitting them than if I drive at them at 100mph, which is certainly non-combat speed. Hero reverses that: noncombat my OCV starts at zero and 100mph with my (at best) 3 SPD which would apply a -17 OCV modifier. It should be nigh impossible to ever run anyone over. That needs looking at.

I think you explained it better than I did The difference between this treatment and Velocity Factor is that it changes how fast you can move without necessarily changing the game effects of movement. - There are complications though, as always. The range on most attack powers is 10m x base points. At higher (but still affordable) levels of movement getting out of range is a real possibility. - If you want to have realism, then you want to use acceleration and deceleration: Hero allows you to accelerate at 5m per metre so, technically, if you do have a move of 60m you need at least 12 metres run up to get there (and, if you wanted to accelerate from zero and finish at zero you should not be doing your full move: again using 60m as an example, for the first and last 12m of the move you only average half your maximum velocity so should not actually move more than 48m. We wisely ignore this most of the time. With faster moves we might want to consider how far someone has to move to get to combat velocity: indoors finding a 12m long room might not happen that often. I would propose allowing people to buy extra acceleration/deceleration at 1 point per 1m (so for 10 points you could accelerate at 15m per metre and get to your full combat move in the above example in 4 metres. - This would undermine Non-Combat moves and (to an extent) Megascale - We'd need to think about the CV modifiers for move attacks.

OK, so Hero is, or started out, as Greywind said, as a system to play superheroes. Now I don't know about your games but if a character was SPD 6 and had a move of 60m that would be very fast indeed, and yet that is not even 70mph. With a move through the hero can do an extra 10 dice of damage using the normal rules. A fast moving object, say a crashing jet, might be moving at (say) Mach 1 and have a SPD of 4. It would have a move of 1020 and therefore do 340 extra dice of velocity damage. Hmm. That is a lot of damage. If you had enough STR to do that damage, you would be able to lift, well, everything: the mass of the observable universe is about 10 to the 53 and you could lift 10 to the 103. For those of you who get confused over powers, 10 to the 54 would be 10 times the mass of the observable universe (we are including dark matter and energy). 10 to the 103 is, well, it is not realistically describable. It is worth noting that a jet weighs a lot: an F14 Tomcat weighs over 18000kg, but 18000kg only gives it an extra 9 or 10 DCs of damage: if could be a 50kg weight and the damage from mass would still pale into insignificance next to the damage from velocity. There is a disconnect there. The optional Velocity Factor rules do a pretty good job of associating damage with the (real world) energy of movement. We have a pretty special association here because, if we assume that a 2DC punch is 100 Joules (about the same as a 2kg mass being dropped on you from 10m), the amount of energy that is required for a given DC, using the progression in the STR table, is the same as you can lift for that value of STR. Cool, huh? The formula for kinetic energy is ½ mass x velocity squared. So for an object of 2kg mass (halves to 1) times a velocity of 10m (squared to 100) we get 100 joules of energy, which is 2DCs of damage. Now, an object with no mass would never have kinetic energy (according to your basic Newtonian physics) because it has no mass, but we can assume that as a 100kg object requires 10 STR (which does 2DCs of damage) to lift, we can take off 2DCs from our velocity energy/damage calculation to get a theoretical base damage for a given velocity. There is still a problem though because we are then using different scales: if we calculate added damage this way then we mitigate the jet plane problem (now it does an extra 11 dice damage for travelling at Mach 1) but we still have the problem that sort of velocity is impossible for heroes in combat, and there are any number of examples in the comics of characters who move REALLY fast in combat. Here is the new, improved table, which also compares the optional rule Velocity Factor: STR DCs Energy m/turn MPH VF comparison -5 -1 12.5 12 2 9 0 0 25 17 3 13 5 1 50 24 5 17 10 2 100 34 6 49 15 3 200 48 9 65 20 4 400 68 13 99 25 5 800 96 18 129 30 6 1600 136 25 193 35 7 3200 192 36 257 40 8 6400 272 51 385 45 9 12800 384 72 501 50 10 25600 543 101 751 So m/turn is my calculated minimum velocity in metres per turn (12 seconds) and the VF comparison is VF calculation for the same amount of added damage. You will see that they are close, but not quite the same. This shows the minimum move to qualify for the relevant DC boost. The numbers look a right mess, neg? However, if you look, every other DC is a predictable number on my calculations: 1 DC is 24, 3 is 48, 5 is 96 and so on. If you work this out on a ‘per segment basis, it means that a move of 2m/s gives you +1DC from velocity, 4m/s gives you +3 DC, 8m/s gives you 5DC and so on. If we put that in table form it looks much cleaner: m/s +DC 2 1 4 3 8 5 16 7 32 9 I would propose this: you don’t buy move in the linear fashion we have been, you buy it in relation to how much added damage you want to do with it. This gives you a move in m/s (metres per second, or metres per segment – same thing). For interim DCs a reasonable rule of thumb is move for previous DC x 1. If is not completely accurate, but close and gives a round figure, so for 6DCs 8m/s x 1.5 = 12m/s. You then cost it per DC. I would probably go for 6 points per level of move, which means you spend 60 points on move to get +10DC which is the same as the costing in the present system. This allows for a much more superheroic feel to combat. This can easily be extended to throwing and KB too. There are other issues but this post is too long as it is…

I disagree; it is not and never will be a reality simulation but it has always worked within a framework of realism with the addition of fantastic elements. One of the things that first attracted me to Champions was the way that it handled damage: Stun, stunning, Body, END - not elements that are necessarily comic/superhero - but which produced the feel of real.

I'd say it was, for a given value of reality: unless the rules of a game simulate a recognisable reality, it is just an abstract, and lots of the rules in Hero are clearly there to specifically simulate our reality but with a heroic or superheroic narrative overlay. Part of doing that successfully is internal consistency, and part of it is meeting expectations. There is always going to be a level of abstraction - this is a game, not Unified Field theory - but it is also not Holy Writ and just because it has always been done that way until now does not mean it should continue to be. That is the joy of these boards - we can explore alternatives to established practice in a safe environment where we don't have to worry that the exchange of ideas is going to have a deleterious effect on the game or the enjoyment of it. Let's face it: 7e is not on the horizon and some of the rules we are using are old. When Hero started out, it was Champions and we were building stuff with a lot less points. The internal reality of the game has changed over time and that makes it worth examining some of the original assumptions and systems.

I am all for using campaign and build guidelines to get the feel and flavour you want in your game before trying to change the rules.

This is true, but falls are funny anyway, and probably ought to be dealt with as 'Does Body NND' attacks: consider that wearing a suit or armour will have no real effect on fall damage: it is not the striking of the ground that causes the damage but the sudden change in velocity, and the effect that has on your squishy bits. You can go too far down the rabbit hole though and you ultimately need to go for what feels right to you. 30 DCs of damage does not feel right to me.

So you have awesome powers and want to be able to transform into a magical boy/girl? Gender does not really have mechanical game effects so, unless the idea is that you look completely different in boy/girl form, you can probably just do it as SFX. That is not what you meant, is it? We used to have this great, cheap, power called 'Instant Change', then, from nowhere, 6th edition. If what you want is to look different when you raise up an attribute and assume an aspect (have you ever read Lord of Light? If not, do so now, I will wait. Alternatively watch the Netflix treatment when it comes out) then you can, that is just what Hero terms SFX. Really it is little different to wearing a mask. You don't need to pay points unless you want to play it. Can someone work you that your superform and your normalform are the same being, assuming they work at it? Of course they can: no matter how you build it, someone can work it out. Do you want it to just be a thing or do you want it to have a noticeable game effect? If the former, it just happens, gratis, if the latter then maybe a power might be in order: shapeshift, multiform, Illusions, global, cumulative mind control, whatever floats your boat.. Even then, unless your complications indicate that the hero/normal distinction matters (you have DNPCs, for example) then I would not make you pay: it is just cool stuff, and cool stuff should be free to everyone. Mind you I am ridiculously soft.

So 30d6 normal is 30 DCs is 10d6 killing. 30d6 normal averages 30 Body and the chances of 8 of those dice coming up '1' without any of the others coming up '6' is remote. 10d6 killing averages 35 Body and the chances of 9 of them being 2 and one of them being 1 is also remote, but less so and, if you have 10 Body, that is survivable. This is because of less dice. The killing attack will also produce more overkill results but dead is dead, neg?

Go left. Always go left.

It is worth noting that converting falling damage to killing makes the process more survivable on average because of maths. It is also true that some people have survived terminal velocity falls: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulovi%C4%87 This is not the only example, and people have also survived serious falls onto concrete. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/04/usa So, in a game where reality is not perfectly mirrored (and, if it were, why are we playing a game and not simply living the dream?), 30d6 for a terminal velocity fall is plain wrong. That is a worse survival chance than getting hit with a tank shell in the chest. I can not find any stories about that happening. The falling damage rules and the way Hero converts velocity to damage have been with us forever, and, whilst they seemed to make sense in the distant past, now we have science and logic and they should be honorably killed and buried somewhere we can visit and get all nostalgic about but then leave again and get on with the real business of making Hero the only game anyone ever plays, because of sense. They have been passed from edition to edition, like holy relics, the provenance of which is not to be questioned. Am I getting all evangelical? No, I am not, because that implies a religious, unquestioning bias and that, as we have clearly established, would be madness. megaplayboy is right about the squaring thing though. There is a table...

Yeah, but they don't really, because they do not address the plethora of problems that moving in Hero has created for itself. Witness the glory of a genuine alternative: Movement is a bit of an odd duck in Hero because of the weird interaction with the SPD table and the way we use it to add damage for velocity based attacks. Also have you noticed that it is pretty difficult to fly really fast without using megascale? Movement is used for getting between adventure locations (which is usually not something we need to worry too much about), and positioning in combat and doing damage in combat (which we do) So what if we did this: 1. You buy your move in damage dice. 2. Each dice of damage has a maximum move per segment associated with it. 3. Each segment you have a phase you can use your movement, but unless you have a SPD of 12 you will not be able to move on every segment, so will not reach your full potential speed, at least in combat: when moving non-combat you can travel at 4. That’s it. Everything else can stay the same, like non-combat movement and such. This means there is still a bit of an odd interaction with SPD as, for the same cost, high SPD characters can move further in combat, but I see that as one of the advantages of having high SPD. Cost DCs Range Band example 5 (-1) 1 1 Slow walk 10 1 2 2 Brisk walk 15 2 3 3 Jogging 20 3 4 5 5 minute mile 25 4 6 7 4 minute mile 30 5 8 11 3 minute mile 35 6 12 15 Fastest human sprinter 40 7 16 22 Greyhound 45 8 23 31 Swordfish 50 9 32 45 Cheetah 55 10 46 63 Swift 60 11 64 90 Porsche 911 Turbo 65 12 91 127 Diving falcon

Have you considered limited invisibility?