Sean Waters

Re: What is up with falling? Ah, yes! Thank you, Blue Jogger: my other beef with falling (and this applies to most game systems) if that something like plate mail should make no difference to damage at all. Think about it: the reason you take the damage is because you go from 130mph to zero in a fraction of a second and momentum squishes your internal organs all over the place- what you are wearing makes no odds (unless you are wearing a giant inflatable matress...). In fact it is arguable that only damage reduction and defences with the appropriate special effects (I'm made of metal: the armour goes right through!) should apply. I do take on board what you say about the fact that you can survive 'impossible' falls relatively easily, but your average mook dies when they fall that far, and Arnold, a normal human max character is PC who probably shouldn't die for dramatic reasons anyway: no PC is going to enjoy even taking 5 BODY... I suppose my problem is that you get someone like Grond with 90 STR (I can lift a large submarine!) who can only do 24d6 with a pushed haymaker, and he's one of the strongest characters in the world: falling off a building shouldn't do more damage, I feel.

Re: No Frameworks? I think it depends how your game is set up. If you want to have every 'spell' have a list of REQUIRED limitations, they can work out quite cheaply, and if the whole thrust of the game is magic, the tights and laser bolt brigade might not be making an appearance at all. It certainly is not impossible to build these characters, but I grant you they will not be as powerful as they could be with frameworks. One interesting idea is to remove any upper limit on active points: you then have a game in which everyone is, in effect, carrying nukes. It is definitely superpowered, but combats tend to be very short (whoever hits first) and a lot more tactical. This works very well for 'spell-power' games where it is logical to have a whole slew of limitations on the powers.

Re: No Frameworks? I've got the Hero System Resource Kit. In it there is a character creation checklist the GM can hand out to players before they create characters. It enables the GM to say that any power, skill, talent, perk or framework is required, and if not,whether it is permitted at all. You don't want them, you don't have them and boo sucks to the nay-sayers. It may or may not make characteristics more desireable and points efficient, but I'm sure the campaign will accomodate it. Hell, you could have a house rule that no one without an energy blast can have an ED of over 12. Whatever works for you. However, I think that frameworks can be useful for the GM: Flame Femme may have effectively twice the number of powers as anyone else in the team, but she'll have nothing when her arch-enemy Snuff comes along with his flame suppression powers. You shouldn't just take advantage and destroy carefully crafted and loved killing machines though, at least not if you think you can't get away with it. As has been pointed out though you don't need frameworks for coherent character design - just someone who is designing a character and not a points efficiency machine. I like to think that at least some of the characters I create make internal sense, but not all of them have frameworks. When I do use them I favour multipowers over elemental controls: making someone pay full price for two or three different attacks that go logically together doesn't seem fair to me, but you may differ in your opinion, and long may it be so. Mind you in a game based on magic and mysticism, where a range of powers and effects can be built in to a single multipower it may lead to less differentiation betweeen characters. The ultimate in control, I suppose, is to require a half page+ of concept from the player and you design the character based on that. If you leave out frameworks, so be it.

Re: Fellow GM's - help define spacial awareness Spacial awareness is N-Ray plus: they are the same base build but SA has more bells and whistles. It has targetting and sense, so it makes little 'sense' to attach it to a sense group that already has them, like sight, or indeed to any of the normal senses, which have sense already. If a character had an unusual detect, then you might want to attach SA to that, if not you'd need to add range to make it any use and define it as its own sense group. The big plus there is that flash,darkness, shapeshift, images just won't really work against the character. You start by defining how it works though: if it is based on 'seeing through stuff' just buy N-Ray, or scratch build the power would be my advice.

Re: Character for Comment : Coldilocks Like the character. Not sure if I'm off base here, but I don't think that your damage shield will get through your force wall, so it would only effect people who used cold powers to knock the wall down. I appreciate that it is transparent,but not to cold energy, so it will keep that safely locked up inside.

Re: Dimensional Hole and Symbiote I take it your player is not familiar enough with the game system to design their own character? Coming up with a concept that is practically all - powerful is easy. Design that is the trick... With the dimensional character, if he exists across all dimensions he is going to have a real perception problem. I'd have a physical and/or psychological limitation that he has to make some sort of EGO roll to keep focussed on 'this' dimension - otherwise he just wanders off and does something apparently nonsensical, and will need to make PER rolls for even the most obvious things. Don't forget that designing a character involves designing the flaws too... The symbiote...hmmm. Never likes this sort of thing as a concept, but how about using a mental transformation to change the 'possessed' character to his current mind, coupled with a...dunno,maybe dimensional travel to the 'mental realm' to simulate disappearing into their brain/body (the way we used to simulate the net). Limitation is that, becasue he is effectively an observer and it is not strictly his brain, he loses half the experience that he gained while in that body when he leaves it. In addition he is vulnerable to mental attacks (2x effect) when possessing another body as he has to keep mental channels open. He has a dependence on possessing another: he can not live long in his natural form. I reckon those sorts of disadvantages will tell you whether you have a creative and interesting role player or a power gamer, and it gives you enough ways to balance the potentially devastating power if he does agree to play it...

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles Ah Worldmaker, sarcasm cancels sarcasm then. Point is I was using it to make the point. Ineffectively, obviously. You can add whatever you like for not much more cost, and all you are doing is using summon as a mechanism for getting round paying for the powers. I may be way off in the hinterlands here, but myonly real objection, to re-iterate, is the, I consider, very high DEF. As an effect, in principle, it is peachy. Want something constructive to comment on, what do you think of the suggestion for simulating a homing missile using powers rather than buying it as a vehicle?

Re: What is up with falling? No, absolutely. In fact if you start at 1d6, you get a ridiculously small amount of damage. I was proposing a more logical progression that still made falling a lomg way quite scary. When the Hero system is not logical it is usually for dramatic purposes: I just think they have gone too far this time!

Can someone explain... You fall, it causes lots of damage. Fine. IMO too much damage. Why? Damage, as I understand it,in the Hero system follows a (reverse) geometric progression: +5 STR is twice as strong, but you don't do twice the dice in damage, and it is my understanding that this is one of the underlying principles in the game design. I could be wrong in that, but that is what I always understood Falling damage is an straight progression. If you double the velocity you are doubling the dice of damage. I agree falling should be something to be avoided, but (as a suggestion) if 5" fall velocity does 5d6,then 10" should do 10d6, 20" should do 15d6 and you'd take 20d6 if you got up to 40". 30" velocity would be about 17d6,which is plenty. One silly point to close,should you ever reach terminal velocity, well worth trying a move through on the Earth. You are not likely to miss and, assuming you don't add strength or achieve knockback, you'll only take 10d6. Funny old world...

Re: Is Force Feild Overpriced? A number of good points all around. IMO, FF is not overpriced: I have never been concerned about the cost in any kind of instinctive way (like I am about the cost of Damage Shield...). I am surprised that 5th Ed didn't rationalise the defences though. The way they are at present, they are seperate powers and as Vorsch points out,that means the costs of advantages is less for FF but the points savings for limitations is greater for armour. All we really need is PD, ED and damage resistance, with appropriate advantages and limitations. We could probably roll force wall in there too, with a few more advantages and limitations. Whilst all this is logical, I must say I don't really feel the need...it isn't something that really bugs me that much.

Re: Tricky Power Design You might be better off with a mental transform to, in effect, put your mind into the wielder. Mind control, as has been pointed out, will almost inevitably get broken out of on a regular basis. Or I suppose you could buy the wielder as a loyal follower... As for the damage,I think your original idea works, subject to you, presumably, not being able to withold permission to use the damage - for instance if someone that you don't want weilding you and you have not controlled grabs you and starts stabbing your mates. You could do this with a physical disadvantage rather than a limitation on the cost of the power though. BTW very much like the idea. Very original - even though it has been done with, for instance Stormbringer, it is never told from the point of view of the sentient weapon. Nearest you probably get is Crang (I think that was the name) in Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels.

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles ...and laser cannons

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles No. You buy a flying tank,it gets trashed and then you have to go and build a new one. You summon a force bubble, it gets trashed, you summon a new one good as new: it doesn't have the limitations of a 'real' vehicle. Oh and if you summon it you don't need to worry about getting through the front door.

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles OK,sorry about he beer thing. If I add +10OCV to the gnats it it only another 4 points in a summon: the point is they would not be allowed in a reasonable game. Yes they are easy to kill, bu they are deadly andf there are lots of them. Think how you'd feel if your GM used them against you...lets assume you swat 3/4 of them,and only half of the remainder hit, that is still 8 major hits,probably enough to take you out in one phase. Seems too powerful. Look, I like the force bubble summon idea: I have said so several times: my concern is that 15 DEF. Given that you drive the things from outside, if you stick an enemy in there it is a lot cheaper than a massive entangle. If you are sticking friends in there they are not going to be resisting the grab, so OCV is not really a concern: you can do them all at once, and whilst the vehicle may be 'stunned' when it first arrives that doesn't mean it isn't a useful defence if, for example, you summon it in front of you. It seems to be as powerful as a force wall, but isn't necessarily going down if breached (it has 40 STR,presumably to carry the load: not actually necessary if it is going to be moved by external means: I would have the STR bought back to zero). I'm not arguing with the principle, I'm arguing with the execution. Summon is a STOP power, and should not be used to do things that you can simulate with powers. You could, for instance buy the vehicle tomove your mates around safely and then protect it with yout own force wall, bought as a power. I'm pretty confident that the force wall you could buy as a power would nto have 15 PD/15ED, 0END: you could not afford it (that would be 112 active points!).

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles OK, couple of things: 1. I don't mean to have a go at anyone, it is just the way I express myself. If anyone feels offended by the, admittedly, sharp to one of some of my responses, I'm sorry. Call me, we'll meet and I'll buy you a beer. 2. Summon is a STOP power. If you summon a swarm of 64 killer gnats from dimension X who are loyal and have the powers Flight 30" and 4d6HKA (killer proboscis), all for 81 points, you are abusing the system and you're not getting in my game. Actually you might, but you'll find yourself liquidised by a whole group of villains using broadly the same schtick. If the power is being used in a clearly abusive way, whether it is 'a perfectly legal build' or not, it clearly should not be allowed. That is my opinion, and I doubt whether the Hero glitterati would disagree. The point I so laboriously make is that it is a question of balance and IMO, harking back to the original point of the thread, 15 DEF is too much, unless you are playing in a game in which every charcter can dish out that kind of damage in which case 15 DEF is pointless, so I would not allow it. 3. Nothing to do with the original rant, but I doubt whether GL force bubbles weigh anything, let alone 6.4 tonnes...

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles That was irony, Andrew, please tell me you see that? Look, you've got a car. You park it in the garage. You don't carry it into space or into the villain's underground lair. How can you think that summoning it from nothing in not a major advantage? In fact you are not summoning the vehicle, you are summoning an identical vehicle with none of the disadvantages of a real vehicle,eg the damage it took last time you used it. I really shouldn't print what I'm thinking....

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles I haven't got USPD, so I have no idea what you are talking about. Mind you, ANYTHING, given a sufficiently drunk GM is 'just fine'. In this instance, if Steve thinks it is OK to summon a missile that does the same job as an EB or a RKA for a fifth of the points you'd normally have to spend on them if bought as powers, he is wrong, as I'm sure he would readily accept. We could ask him...

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles Don't be daft: you buy a missile as a vehicle, use it and it is gone, you've lost the character points: buy it as a summon and use it again and again and again...

Re: "Anopheles" (Horror World) text online Thank you.

Re: Skills Help: Entrepreneur? You might want to have that 'fabulously wealthy' on an activation roll: it depends on the markets and what you have in liquid assets...

Re: Get out of that It was Heather who told me off last time for posting on the Hero board after I realised that was the more appropriate forum...

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles

Re: Reasoning from effect/I think I have finaly done it/GL Bubbles