Sean Waters

The problem with Luck, as Deadpool points out to Domino, is that it is just not cinematic. Luck in Hero is not even visible and, unless the villain explains he has Luck Powers, the players will never know that what just happened was a power use and not a plot device. 12d6 gives you a pretty good chance of 3 points of luck so almost anything could happen. Here is a suggestion: roll the luck before the session even starts so you know how much Luck the villain can rely on and actually plan what happens - realistically if the villain is winning he does not need his Luck, so you only have to plan for a loss. Maybe have several of the PCs Hunters turn up, maybe have another emergency happen across town, maybe have an alien invasion. The point is you can have the intervening event planned in advance. If that all seems like a lot of work, get the Advanced Player's Guide which suggests alternative ways of dealing with luck, like rolling your Luck dice for Body at the start of the session and you get that number of points to add to or subtract from any rolls during the session. That seems like a pretty straightforward way to adjudicate it. 12d6 Luck would be like having 12 (on average) Overall Skill Levels with a single charge apiece. The villain might blow them on hitting the characters or hoard them to guarantee they miss him when he is trying to run away. Hmm. An overall skill level is 12 points and 1 charge per day is a -2, so a single use OSL would cost you 4 points, and 12 of them would be 48 points, which is a bit less than 12d6 of Luck would cost you but then the active points in that would be 144. 1 OSL with 12 charges (-1/4) would cost a mere 10 points, but obviously you could only use one OSL at a time bought like that, whereas the alternative approach to Luck allows you to use as many as you like for a single roll. I'd probably have the Villain quip "Lucky Me!" or "Bad Luck" every time he uses his Luck Levels to hit someone or dodge an attack. Anyway. That is what I would do.

The problem with multiple possible outcomes is that is a lot more work for the GM, and I’m not generally in favour of that ? You can structure things though so that most of the scenario bits you write will have to be completed and the important thing is doing them in the right order (otherwise it may make no sense to the PCs) and doing it quickly because this is a time sensitive mission. It feels more freeform than it actually is, but it is like an escape room - you have to do all the bits, to get to the end, except for a few red herrings. So… Luigi Linguini, mob boss, has been trying to increase his revenue stream, which is usually fed by drugs and prostitution, to the lucrative area of child pornography, the bastard. Fiona Fettuccini is a working girl and sometime squeeze on the side of Linguini. No angel, but heart of gold. Robbie Ravioli is a small time dealer who works indirectly for Linguini and was with Fettuccini when they both saw four frightened kids being delivered to one of Linguini’s warehouses three days ago. Fettuccini took a picture on her phone which shows the kids and Linguini in the frame. Ravioli and Fettuccini are low lives, but that is far beyond what either of them are happy to turn a blind eye to. They have been making not so discrete enquiries about what Linguini is up to and meeting up to discuss their options, and they have decided that they have no choice but to go to the police. Tonight word got back to Linguini and he had a couple of his boys drive the streets looking for them. They shot Ravioli and bundled Fettuccini into a car to take her back to Linguini who plans to interrogate her to find out what she knows and who she told before killing her. Hungry Henry is a former history professor who suffered a serious mental breakdown and is now homeless and on the streets. Hungry Henry loves hamburgers. He was the sole witness to the shooting of Ravioli and the kidnapping of Fettuccini. He can give some details of the car and the two men in it and is the only one who knows that Fettuccini has been taken. He can describe her but he does not know who she is. Rachel Ravioli is Robbie’s wife and she’s pretty mad at him because he has been hanging round with Fettuccini and acting all secretive for several days, and she suspects they are having an affair. She will be an emotional wreck when she finds out he is dead but recognises Fettuccini from Hungry Henry’s description, but only if she is specifically asked. Peter Penne and Steve Sagnarelli are the two heavies who offed Ravioli and took Fettuccini back to Linguini, and all four are at the warehouse where Linguini is threatening to move into snuff movies. Fettuccini is threatening him with the photograph and trying to exchange her life for the phone’s location. The PCs respond to a call – gunshots heard, possible shooting and find a crowd around Ravioli’s body. Initial enquiries (appropriate social skills) reveal that none of the bystanders were present when the shooting occurred. There are no street cameras in this part of town. If the PCs can work out who was first on the scene and get them to talk they find out that Hungry Henry was there when they arrived, but he’s gone now, the mad old bugger. PCs can: 1. Speak to Ravioli’s wife (Conversation, Persuasion). She can tell them about Fettuccini, but unless they have spoken to Henry they won’t know she is missing and might waste some time looking for her. 2. Try to find Henry (Streetwise) and talk to him (Bribery – he will only talk in exchange for hamburgers). He can tell them that Ravioli was shot by two men in a grey sedan with the bumper hanging off and that they took a girl who he can describe. 3. Try to find more witnesses – there are none, so that just wastes time, but make them make several rolls and, possibly have some gloryhound called Andy Anelli come forward with a story they will have to discount, just to waste their time. He describes a guy in a white Impala shooting Ravioli. The white Impala is real and belongs to the Anelli's neighbour who Anelli hates because he had an affair with Angela Anelli, Andy's wife. 4. Check cameras at local intersections. They won’t find anything unless they know about the bumper hanging off the sedan as there are just too many vehicles and they won't see Fettuccini – there was a collision at a red light less than a block away and a grey sedan drove away with the bumper hanging off. Cameras can ID the plate and it can be traced to Peter Penne, but he’s not at home and his car is not there. Further enquiries will eventually trace it, but by then Fettuccini has met her end. Steve Sagnarelli is a known associate and they are both known to work for Linguini. Linguini has a lot of properties across the city. He is not at home and it going to take far too long to check them all. 5. Check at Fettuccini’s place. Another girl who lives there, Therese Taglierini, can tell the PCs that Fettuccini has been acting jumpy for some days and left her phone with Taglierini, but she pawned it, she'll get it back Friday. Fettuccini’s been her hanging round with someone who fits Ravioli’s description but only for the last few days. She assumed Fettuccini was jumpy because of Ravioli. She was talking about going to the police but was clearly scared. 6. It is the middle of the night and the pawn shop is closed. The PCs can break in, try and find the owner or get a warrant. Breaking in is quickest, but might cause problems later down the line with chains of evidence and such. 7. The picture on the phone is clearly of a warehouse near the docks and shows someone who could be Linguini and four frightened kids. There are missing person reports for two of them, one of them is diabetic. If you want to you can have some fun with them trying to guess the unlock code. 8. This leads them to the warehouse. Depending on how long they took, Fettuccini might be mildly distressed, badly beaten or dead. There are four traumatised kids in cages. One is in a diabetic coma and may not make it if the PCs have dawdled too much. Linguini will try to escape and get Penne and Sagnarelli to cover his get away along with however many other goons you need to make it an interesting fight. 9. Aftermath: best case scenario, everyone (apart from Ravioli) lives and Linguni is arrested at the warehouse and is taken into custody and Fettuccini agrees to testify against him. There might be some shenanigans providing protective custody. Worst case scenario, the warehouse is empty by the time they arrive, except for Fettuccini's body. Linguini gets away and the phone evidence gets thrown out either because they obtained it illegally or because the picture identifying Linguini is not clear enough. The kids are never found. Linguini will arrange to have the PCs watched and may cause them further problems down the line. I obviously don't have enough to do...

Hello Black Rose It seems to me that what you have here is failure to communicate. No, hang on, that's a GnR lyric. What you have here is a pricing and supply problem. Anyone can afford, or make a personal focus for low level spells. That is just bought as a focus, probably an OAF or OIF. High level spells require an expendable focus, so they get an additional cost break: -1/4 to -1, depending on how difficult the focus is to replace. Personally that does not seem like a sufficient cost break for something you only get to use once and then have to replace at great cost, so I'd probably use a single charge with restricted recovery because that is a better cost break - still not enough IMO, but better. The real problem is Middle level spells because there is no obvious additional limitation within 'Focus' that you can add to reflect the difficulty in obtaining the focus and the increased trouble of replacing it if you lose it. So, perhaps some lateral thinking. Middle and High level spell focuses are going to be coveted and people are probably going to try and take them off you if they know you have them. So you could add a Limited Power limitation along the lines of 'Targeted by thieves' - 1/4 to give a bit of an extra cost break and justify the increased risk of losing the focus and so the power. You could apply the same limitation to the High level spell focus. Alternatively having High and Middle level spell focuses might justify a Hunted character Complication. Not quite the same thing as a cost break, but at least you are getting something for your trouble...

Seriously, that. The group I play with it can be like herding cats.

I'm not a fan of the PRE attack. Players tend not to like it when it happens to them ("Terrorfex rolls 48. You surrender and will need a change of underwear.") and it intrudes into the already somewhat besieged territory of social interaction skills out of combat. If you want to interrogate someone, buy Interrogation. The mechanic is also weak, to my mind, very much a blunt instrument. No roll to hit, no range limitations, automatic AOE. I could go on. I have in the past. Anyway, what is it that this character uses his Intimidation PRE attacks for, and what is it that the character is actually doing - how does the ability work? Bear in mind that 5d6 is only going to net you 17 or 18 points of effect on average and repeated attempts take penalties. You can boost that in the right situation or modifiers but I only allow stuff like 'violent action' as a bonus if it is something the NPC can not do, or can not do nearly as well. Bending an iron bar might impress Joe Wimp but Joanna Strong can just pick it up and straighten it again, so she is going to be far less impressed. I mean, sure you can theoretically spend your points on anything, but I always like a bit of coherence in the character design: why is this character so scary? Bear in mind as well that going round terrifying people all the time will have in-game consequences. The character might develop a reputation - that might actually enhance his scariness in some cases, but in many others it just means that people won't engage with him at all. In many places, threatening words and behaviour constitute an offence. If he walks into a bar and smashes the place up to intimidate a potential witness, someone is going to report him to the police and anyone who thinks he is after them is going avoid him. He'll have to catch them before he can intimidate them. No one is going to like him, and he's going to die sad and lonely. Like I say, not really a fan...

Conversation would work, but it does not feel quite right, at least not on its own. What you are describing seems to be more structured than simply chatting to someone. There are probably several steps to this process. In real life, officers may go door to door and speak to everyone and 90%+ of those they speak to will not know anything useful. From a game POV there are a number of challenges. First identifying who you want to speak to. Your Policing idea is a good one - you could do it as PS Policing (or Investigation or Canvassing or whatever), but you could also use Streetwise. Next you need to get the witness to talk to you. For some it will be enough that you are in uniform and the Conversation skill probably works well enough there. For others the uniform will be a negative and you might need to use police powers (so you will need a relevant Perk) to detain and question them, and you may need Interrogation for that. In the middle ground, you might even use Bribery or Persuasion to get someone to open up to you, or even Oratory to appeal to someone in the crowd to come forward. Ultimately you want to give the players the information so it is a balancing act between doling it out and making them feel they have worked for it and spent their character points wisely.

OK, took more than half an hour, but.... Right, tear out all the bits about existing social interaction skills and replace with the following: Skill name: Feel free to change this to better reflect your character, but changing the name does not change what the skill does, just the flavour of the skill. Definition: What the skill allows you to do. Characteristic base: the characteristic that the skill roll is based on. Resistance: what the subject of the skill attempt can use to try and reduce or remove the effect of the skill in a skill v skill contest. In addition to whatever is listed, the subject can always use a characteristic roll at -2 (usually the same as the characteristic base for the skill to resist the effect of the skill use). Skill name: Argument Definition: The ability to make someone accept information (and act on that information) using logic. Characteristic base: INT Resistance: Argument, Cross Examination and any relevant Psychological Complication. Skill name: Cross Examination Definition: Finding any inconsistencies or errors in a statement. Characteristic base: INT Resistance: Lying. Skill name: Lying Definition: The ability to tell a consistent lie or avoid providing certain information. Characteristic base: INT Resistance: Cross Examination Skill name: Persuasion Definition: The ability to make someone accept information (and act on that information) based on emotion. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Persuasion, Insight or any relevant Psychological Complication Skill name: Insight Definition: The ability to determine someone’s true emotional state and whether they are trying to emotionally influence you. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Persuasion or Dissembling. Skill name: Dissembling Definition: The ability to conceal your true feelings or intentions. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Insight Skill name: Charm Definition: the ability to make someone feel positive toward you. Generally people that you charm will feel well disposed toward you and be willing to see the best in you. This can act as a Complimentary Skill for many other Social interaction Skills. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Insight, or Psychological Complications Skill name: Intimidate Definition: the ability to make someone feel negative toward you. Generally people that you intimidate become fearful of you. This can act as a Complimentary Skill for many other Social interaction Skills. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Insight, or Psychological Complications Skill name: Imitation/Mimicry Definition: the ability to observe and copy the physical mannerisms of another person or thing. Characteristic base: INT Resistance: Insight or Cross Examination Skill name: Oppress Definition: the ability to make someone feel a negative emotion about themselves Characteristic base: Resistance: Psychological Limitations Skill name: Inspire Definition: the ability to make someone feel a positive emotion about themselves Characteristic base: Resistance: Psychological Limitations Skill name: Engage Definition: The ability to draw and hold someone’s attention, which can be useful for distracting them and may act as a complimentary skill in some social situations. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Psychological Limitations Skill name: Animal Training Definition: The ability to condition an animal to do what you want it to. Characteristic base: INT Resistance: Pychological Complications Skill name: Animal Empathy Definition: The ability to understand the emotions of an animal and react appropriately. Characteristic base: PRE Resistance: Psychological Complications So, to determine someone’s motivations you’ll want the Cross Examination and/or Insight Skills, possibly backed up with Charm and Engage. Cross Examination will not help much with the motivation but can detect lies (assuming you can get the subject to talk to you) and may give some pointers to the truth (as they understand it) if they are, indeed, lying. Insight will not help you get at the truth as such but will detect lies and may get you some idea as to why the subject is lying. OK, let us assume that there is an NPC who is lying to the PC. The NPC is lying because he has been told to because a member of his family is being threatened. Have the NPC roll Lying and Dissembling, and make a note of how well they do. The PC has to roll at least that well on Cross Examination or Insight to get any information. So if the NPC had an 12- roll with Lying and actually rolled 8, the PC has to succeed by 4 or more to get any useful information with their Cross Examination roll. Even if the NPC fails their roll (say they rolled a 13), the PC still has to make a roll, but, effectively, gets a +1 on their roll to succeed and get some useful information. If the Cross Examination roll succeeds then the PC is confident that the NPC is lying. In addition the PC finds out either that the NPC does not know the truth (if they do not) or some or all of the truth (if the NPC knows it), depending on how well they roll. If the Insight roll succeeds then the PC is confident that the NPC is lying. In addition the PC finds out some or all of the truth about why the NPC is lying and may then be able to use that knowledge to succeed in an Argument or Persuade roll to find out more. Something like that. You can use other skills (like Charm or Intimidate) as complimentary skills or simply to get the NPC talking in the first place - one very effective way to stymie information extraction is to say nothing at all. This is not that well thought through and not at all play tested but it seems to have the potential to give more nuance to social interaction. Maybe give it a go and let me know?

The problem with Interrogation is that it, well: A character with this Interaction Skill can extract information from people, either forcibly or through psychological manipulation. ...so I've always thought of it as a skill you can not really use in polite company, especially as it goes on to say the character knows how to avoid leaving marks. interrogation, as written, is not a very heroic skill and may well be counter-productive.

Hello Toxxus. I'd probably start by overhauling the HERO system social interaction skill system... I'm half serious: there are some real gaps and a decent social interaction system should be central to any decent RPG and HERO is definitely a decent RPG. This being HERO there is no one way or best way to flense the feline, but I would hesitate before going to power builds. You can, for example, buy PS: Empathy. I mean, that would do it, but that just seems lame. Professional Skill: This Background Skill gives a character the ability to perform certain professions, crafts, tasks, and the like. Arguably being empathic (in the sense of understanding the emotions and motivations of others) could fall under this catch-all category. I don't like using Persuasion because, well, Characters with this Interaction Skill can convince, persuade, or influence individuals, or tell believable lies: is that really what is happening here? I thought of Analyze (sic) but then I checked what it actually did: This Intellect Skill allows a character to analyze (sic) another character’s abilities or skills to determine the other character’s level of power or degree of competence. Is that really what is happening either? I tell you what, give me half an hour...

That is the rule for a single defence, but why - what is the need for that rule?

Both, I'd say: he certainly regenerates fast but he recovers fast too.

My take is this: if something is going to do more damage it should cost more AND if something is labeled a killing attack it should not be doing more STUN than a normal attack with any frequency, but a reasonable amount as getting cut up hurts. I have never liked the volatility of the KA mechanism, even as it is nerfed in 6e. I come back to the question "What is a KA for?" and the answer I have is to cause Body damage. There are plenty of mechanisms to do that in Hero without KAs and there are better mechanisms if we want something new: for example - you can buy your Killing dice to Penetrate or Damage for 4 points per 1d6, so for 60 points you could have 12d6 penetration and 3d6 damage, for example. If the penetration dice get through defences then the damage dice take full effect, otherwise it bounces. If the Stun is exceeded but not the Body, you only take Stun damage. E.G. Omnicide attacks Horus with the above attack. Horus has 20 DEF, 10 of which is resistant. Roll 12d6, it easily tops his normal and resistant defences so he takes 3d6 damage (3 Body and 10/11 Stun on average). With a 'current' 4d6 KA he would suffer 4 Body and 8 Stun on average, but that is highly variable. With a Normal attack he would suffer 0 Body and 22 Stun on average. Killing Attack Type: Attack Power Duration: Instant Target: Target’s DCV Range: 10m x base points Costs END?: Yes Cost: 4 points per die You may buy Killing Attack dice which you then divide into Penetration and Damage dice. The ratio is set at creation. You must allocate at least as many dice to Penetration as to Damage. If you buy an advantage for the power you must apply it to all dice. Using Killing Attack Roll your Penetration dice. If the total Body roll equals or exceeds the resistant defences of the target then all of the Damage dice apply. If the Body total is less than the resistant defence of the target no damage applies.

HS61.147 says that defences can not be bought part hardened. Can anyone see a good reason for that rule, especially as you can specifically buy different defences some of which are hardened?

REC complicates things in some ways, but allows you to build a Wolverine or Hulk like character who recovers incredibly quickly. I would not remove the PS12 recovery but I would and do make it take longer when you are unconscious - nothing is sillier than knocking the brick out only for him to spring up again next phase. Doesn't happen in the funny papers, why should it here? If you WANT to be able to bounce back from unconsciousness you can buy healing triggered by going unconscious.

You need to say his name in a Yorkshire accent, if you know what that sounds like.

Ultimately it comes down to why you are doing this: if you want more 'realistic' guns then you can do that with character creation guidelines, no need for a new mechanic. The best reason to change things is to increase consistency.

It uses the existing mechanics and an advantage which is hardly complicating matters, it gets rid of a legacy mechanic and replaces it with something that works. It is not AVAD, it is a different advantage entirely. The cost of 1d6 of damage remains the same, you then add an advantage so that is not a different cost structure any more than any advantage is. Even though, in heroic games, few characters will actually have resistant defences, in other genres they almost always will. In heroic genres, KAs should be scary. This idea balances for cost too, so there is that. It is consistent with the existing system (resistant defences being a +1/2 advantage on normal defences, in effect). The other way to do the same would be to make a KA cost 15 points per 2d6 but that feels messy and has cost implications of its own. As for add STR: fine, but you have to buy the same advantages for the STR, or pro rate the added damage. The big problem is that the cost of damage is wrong. It should be 3 1/3 points per DC plus advantages (like 'range' and 'can add STR'), or the cost of STR is wrong and should be, well, more, or broken down into individual cost units (lift/throw/direct apply).

Enos Thanos has Cumulative Mental Illusions and wants to attack Horus so that Horus does not realise that the illusion is not real, which requires +20. Cumulative normally allows you to keep rolling before the attack is applied. Horus has The All-Seeing Eye which, amongst other things, gives him Mental Awareness so he can see mental attacks. Question: Which trumps which? Can Enos Thanos trick Horus or will Horus see though it? Question 2: Would your answer be any different if Enos Thanos was using his Cumulative Telepathy instead, or his Cumulative Mind Scan (from out of immediate LOS)? Question 3: Would your answer be any different if the power were not Cumulative?

DELETED

I agree that the KA mechanism is not ideal but why have STUN defended as 'normal'? Balance? How about we just say Killing is a +1/2 advantage and is only defended against by resistant defences? Heroic: 6-8 PD, no resistant 6d6 punch does 21 Stun and 6 Body ( in practice no Body against another hero, probably, and maybe 13-15 Stun in a heroic game) 4d6 Kill attack does 14 Stun and 4 Body on average and it all goes through unless you have resistant defences (probably not in a heroic game unless you are suited up). Seems easy. In a superheroic game with much more resistant defence then KAs will be much less useful, which is why bullets bounce off Superman, even the first version. Superheroic 20 PD 10 resistant 12d6 EB does 42 stun and 12 Body (or maybe 22 Stun in a superheroic game) 8d6 KA does maybe 18 Stun and usually no Body, but may get the odd point through on a good roll, unless the target has lots of extra Resistant defence. Making KA an advantage also creates advantage synergies so you CAN make Wolverine type claws, at least sort of: 6d6 AP KA (61 points) gets 16 Stun and 1 Body through 10 rPD.

A 20 STR barbarian weighs 100kg and has the same casual STR as a 10 STR goblin that weighs 50kg. A 40 STR dragon weighs 6400kg and has the same casual STR as a 20 STR barbarian. 20 STR is 4x 10 STR. 40 STR is 16x 20 STR. It makes sense that a very lucky goblin could hold a barbarian, at least momentarily. It makes no sense that a barbarian could stop a dragon, but the rules on casual strength do not take into account the exponential nature of STR in Hero. They should.

The specific rule about characters is that a grab or entangle stops them moving (subject to breakout etc). I don't think the rules treat characters as objects. For balance.

How much damage do you expect these objects of opportunity to usually cause and what would the damage range be?

I believe that there is inconsistency in the rules in the name of 'game balance'. If two people pay the same for their flight (30m) then they should get the same benefits and effects (or at least balanced ones). I do not like rules that are there for balance. I would prefer rules that simulate reasonable expectation and if my 800 kg 50m flight 60 STR brick is grabbed by a 100kg no flight 35 STR character standing on the ground, even if the casual breakout roll fails I would not expect the character to come to a dead stop. The problem is that is what the rules say happens.

Apologies but I could not help myself...