Sean Waters

Intangible [Constant, Stop Sign]
This power allows the character to become intangible in a specific aspect of the character. Intangilble is purchased component by component to fit the SFX. When this power is activated the character becomes intangible to those aspects purchased. As an option, the character can define at purchase that the character is intangible by default and must deactivate the ability to become tangible.
 
Aspects
Physical: Character is intangible to attacks vs PD/rPD and any power defined by a Physical SFX. Character may not use any ability that is defined directly or indirectly by Physical SFX.
Energy: Character is intangible to attacks vs ED/rED and any power defined by a Energy SFX. Character may not use any ability that is defined directly or indirectly by Energy SFX.
Adjustment: Character is intangible to attacks vs PwrD/rPwrD and any power defined by a Altering SFX. Character may not use any ability that is defined directly or indirectly by Adjustment SFX.
Mental: Character is intangible to attacks vs MD/rMD and any power defined by a Mental SFX. Character may not use any ability that is defined directly or indirectly by Mental SFX.
Perception: Character is intangible to attacks vs FD/rFD is any attack targeting the character's senses directly. Character may not use any senses to perceive the tangible environment.
Movement: Allows a character to move via the laws of intangibility. This is a unique ability with no similarities to any other movement power. This allows movement in all directions is not blocked by any tangible obstructions.
 
Exotic Intangibility: This advantage expands a single intangibility aspect to attacks/powers that use AVLD/NND/UAA and so forth.
Limited Effect: This limitation restricts intangibility aspect to a subset of the main aspect purchased.
Twoway Mirror: This advantage allows normal usage of abilities for a specific aspect. Example: Perception Intangiblity with this advantage allows the character to see the tangible enviroment around them.
Amorphus: This advantage is applied to normal movements powers to allow an intangible character to use normal movement for mobility while intangible. This does not grant any additional abilities to the movement power.
 
Costs
Physical/Energy/Adjustment/Mental/Perception: 10 Points Per Aspect
Movement: 5 Points Per 1" Of Movement
Exotic Intangibility: +10 Adder
Limited Effect: -1/4 Minor, -1/2 Average, -1 Major, -2 Severe
Twoway Mirror: +1 Advantage
Amorphus: +1 Advantage
 
Endurance
Intangiblity Activation: 1 END Per 10 Active Points
Tangiblity Activation: 1 END Per 10 Active Points [Caution Sign]
 
Thoughts?
 
- Christopher Mullins

Re: Older HERO rules in 5E games
 

 
 
I've always used it as a synonym for 'upset' but it is more accurate to say (apparently) 'heated' (and you can see where the contraction came from):
 
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=het

Re: Taming Absolutes
 

More BODY than a normal attack would seem in line with the concept of killing attacks. The objections from those who dislike KA seem to center around the way Stun is executed (We love that word!). No single method will be acceptable to everybody. Persuasive arguments have been made on both sides. Perhaps rather than disputing the rationale for KA and since Hero Games has indicated no intent to change the Killing Attack rules, it would be more profitable for posters to focus on coming up with a couple of reasonable House Rules to address those issues?  
Fnord.
 
Hammerlock shows his corset with rotary.

Re: Storn's Art & Characters thread.
 

 
As they would say on FIREFLY ... Shiney!
 
PDS

Re: Taming Absolutes
 

Sci-fi has bulletproof characters, even not just robots, and in the non-comics quasi-realistic Unbreakable the character is apparently bulletproof.
 
The "problem" is that people want to mix and match these concepts - and in an Iron Age era, that's probably even MORE common to desire.
 
But I was thinking about something important here - we invest a lot of energy in talking about the source material, and ultimately, really...I daresay...the source material is almost irrelevant. Yes, I said that. The reality is that we in the RPG world are enjoying creating more and more RPG-centric stories, and more and more imparting out own visions that don't match source material. In fact, it's the tradition boldly established by Gygax himself. It's oft been said and quite properly that AD&D <> "real" traditional fantasy, that it shares the trappings but has wrapped around it all sorts of concepts which don't match that. And I think Champions itself did a lot to move to the side of the comic book genre per se. I think the real world play experiences some of us went through early on, as RDU Neil and others discussed in an important conversation sometime in the last year, illustrates that RPGs are a thing unto themselves.
 
Now, I said "almost" irrelevant and even at that was overstating somewhat for effect. But I find that increasingly we are modeling worlds and scenarios which are unto themselves. So many indie games these days (and even in the past, to be fair) have little or nothing to do with any particular genre in the true sense, rather borrowing elements and then putting it into something else.
 
Which makes sense. RPGs are not writing, they're not even stories, really, even if the end result is a reasonably coherent story.
 
I think this is a good thing, too. I think we are tending to hobble ourselves a bit if we focus much on fiction recreation.
 
That being said, I actually do agree with using the source material as a bar, and using it as the starting point for likely mentalities. I just think we should be equally supportive of original constructs. For HERO, this should mean anything which fits into the mold, reasonably, of heroic action adventuring, at the core. Which doesn't preclude things quite divergent from the stories we are accustomed to.
 
By the way, re invulnerability...vampires...

Re: Taming Absolutes
 
Bulletproof.
 
Can you think of a good justification for being bulletproof? OK it happens in the comic, but they model bullets differently and situationally.
 
You want bulletproof in Hero? Get rid of the killing attack mechanism

Re: Build me a Satellite
 
The satellite is sfx to my mind: I'd build this as clairsentience (sight group), retrocognition (it has a memory for the places it has been) enough megascale to cover the world and a custom lim (only places/times the satellite was overhead. You can build in extra senses if you want, and you don't have to worry about buying telescopic - if the satellite can/could see it - so can you.

I know we talked about this recently but the thread has been dead a few days and was quite lengthy anyway - I didn't want to put people off, having to catch up.
 
So the question is: to what extent should sfx enhance the abilities of a character by giving bonuses to a character?
 
I would argue that, as a base, given that Hero is supposed to be a system of mechanics with sfx laid over the top and not being integral to the function of the mechanics, NOT AT ALL.
 
It has long been accepted in Hero though that sfx can have inor effects. Start of the rot, I'd say. A concession to sloppy character building.
 
Part of the proble, of course, is the lack of detail that limitations and advantages provide: on a 60 point power, a -1/4 to +1/4 spread is 48-75 points. That is a lot.
 
Thus we have the '+/- 0' advantage/limitation - something that doesn't justify saving 12 points or spending 15. this hole has been filled (to an extent) by the introduction of adders, but the +/- 0 is still with us and, barring a really major change in the system, always will be.
 
Fine. Why are you writing this, Sean?
 
I was looking at the mechanics for grab, and noticed, that 'depending on sfx you can use streching to escape a grab'.
 
What?
 
I mean it is one thing for a GM on an idividual basis to allow a character, possibly with a power skill roll, to escape a grab using, or aided by, stretching. No problemo.
 
What pushes by buttons is the system which professes to have used sfx for flavour, and nothing more (you may want to catch Darren Watts pod cast - there is a recent thread pointing at it) specifically approving using sfx as a justification for piling on the utility. Presuably Mr Fantastic's stretching let him escape but Machine Man's doesn't. Logical, fine, but also a voilation of the principles of the system.
 
Being able to escape a common combat manouvre like grab is far more than a +0 advantage, IMO. It is something that Mr Fantastic's player should have paid points for.
 
I like Hero above pretty much every other system simply because the ground rules are clear. What you do with them once you have them out of the box is up to you, but if you build a character and give it to 10 people, and they all get to fill in the background and sfx, but the powers, characteristics and skills remain the same, they should all do the same thing in game, as far as I am concerned.
 
If the sfx do not match the powers that is a failure of the player to think through their concept, or a good excuse to spend XP.
 
I do appreciate I am ranting but this is something I feel strongly about.
 
Do we want a system that is mechanics led? Or sfx led?
 
Or a little bit of both?...like every other system?

Re: Missing
 

But that's all part of the fun! It can make a superheroic combat into something more than just a hex map wargame. Even in the midst of a heavy fight the heros have to be heros; not just machines of destruction.

I know we talked about this recently but the thread has been dead a few days and was quite lengthy anyway - I didn't want to put people off, having to catch up.
 
So the question is: to what extent should sfx enhance the abilities of a character by giving bonuses to a character?
 
I would argue that, as a base, given that Hero is supposed to be a system of mechanics with sfx laid over the top and not being integral to the function of the mechanics, NOT AT ALL.
 
It has long been accepted in Hero though that sfx can have inor effects. Start of the rot, I'd say. A concession to sloppy character building.
 
Part of the proble, of course, is the lack of detail that limitations and advantages provide: on a 60 point power, a -1/4 to +1/4 spread is 48-75 points. That is a lot.
 
Thus we have the '+/- 0' advantage/limitation - something that doesn't justify saving 12 points or spending 15. this hole has been filled (to an extent) by the introduction of adders, but the +/- 0 is still with us and, barring a really major change in the system, always will be.
 
Fine. Why are you writing this, Sean?
 
I was looking at the mechanics for grab, and noticed, that 'depending on sfx you can use streching to escape a grab'.
 
What?
 
I mean it is one thing for a GM on an idividual basis to allow a character, possibly with a power skill roll, to escape a grab using, or aided by, stretching. No problemo.
 
What pushes by buttons is the system which professes to have used sfx for flavour, and nothing more (you may want to catch Darren Watts pod cast - there is a recent thread pointing at it) specifically approving using sfx as a justification for piling on the utility. Presuably Mr Fantastic's stretching let him escape but Machine Man's doesn't. Logical, fine, but also a voilation of the principles of the system.
 
Being able to escape a common combat manouvre like grab is far more than a +0 advantage, IMO. It is something that Mr Fantastic's player should have paid points for.
 
I like Hero above pretty much every other system simply because the ground rules are clear. What you do with them once you have them out of the box is up to you, but if you build a character and give it to 10 people, and they all get to fill in the background and sfx, but the powers, characteristics and skills remain the same, they should all do the same thing in game, as far as I am concerned.
 
If the sfx do not match the powers that is a failure of the player to think through their concept, or a good excuse to spend XP.
 
I do appreciate I am ranting but this is something I feel strongly about.
 
Do we want a system that is mechanics led? Or sfx led?
 
Or a little bit of both?...like every other system?

Re: Adjustment powers...
 
Just talking here...the advantage nicely defined, though illogical, drains and power defence is that it is easy in play to administer.
 
I, personally, would like to see adjustment powers and defences to be very much sfx oriented but the problem then becomes one of consistent and fair interpretation in-game.
 
For example, if you buy Power Defence (Chemical Resistance), it is clear enough that if someone sprays you with acid you can resist it. Somewhat less clear is what happens if someone injects you with a poison and less clear yet is what happens if you are infected with a disease (some of which damage the host purely incidentally with their waste-products which are, basically just chemicals. Indeed, arguably most viruses are just clever chemicals...)
 
Whilst many examples will be obvious, many more will be less so which can slow play down. The other problem here is that it can be very difficult to properly work out if a particular sfx in worth an advantage or limitation. I mean, fire and heat are very common sfx but, in my experience, not that common for adjustment powers. Moreover you then have the interaction of the character's own powerset with the sfx: one character who has Power Defence (Fire and Heat) might use if far more than another character with the same powerset if the first character is called IceStar or SolarFlare and the second character is called The Fist of Fury...
 
I am not trying to crush a nascent idea: indeed I would like to encourage it, but I do think that the basis would need to be codified quite carefully yto make it work.

Re: I know I have seen this lim before
 
Re--
 
all the stuff that G-A just put up.
 
There is not going to be any resolution to this. Honesty, a group of outsiders taking someone else's character and trying to deconstruct it without the creator will all run into the problem of infinite regression. Regardless of construct, I promise you that you can find justification to give every possible limitation a -5 if you're willing to step far enough 'outside.'
 
But without knowing what the intent of the construct was--- what specific ability and limitations it was intended to represent, we're just practicing.
 
The majority of the people on this thread see it as a very crippled version of Running, which is fine. I have no way of knowing that it's not representative of a track star that now walks on a cane, or any other such thing.
 
Personally, I think it is a cobble to represent a currently unmade new talent, power, or somesuch thing and that it simply represents the ability to make a full move with no 'can't attack' penalty. As such, I don't think that the character is really 'limited' at all, since he is being 'denied' only things that he doesn't want anyway. Sure, I'd allow some cost break (if I allowed the ability as written) simply because it doesn't make sense to charge him full price if he doesn't want / need full use, etc.
 
But as I understand the power, I am not going to allow both 'No NCM' and 'Only for half moves,' it's just not happening. Not with what I feel the construct represents.
 
The argument can be made ad nauseum that the construct represents something else entirely-- and it may well do just that, and it can be made ad nauseum that it represents what I think it does, and it could be bantered about for months that it represents four as-yet-unannounced concepts. And each and every one of these positions would be right.
 
This isn't even a 'PC' thing; it's a simple fact. Without knowing what the intention was, there is really no way to accurately asses what does or does not work any more than there is a way to asses what the right 'value' for the limitations are.
 
In previous editions of the system, simply adding a new ability of some sort would have easily solved this. Really, it would in 5E as well, but 5E does seem to go out of its way with cobbled and hammered constructs to avoid creating anything new. It's in its infancy still, so it's understandable that there would be extra effort taken to show the utility of the system.
 
Now getting back to my other problem with the construct (I'm done discussing price, as it's obvious that there are at least two completely different interpretations of what the construct actually is, and without the creator here to chip in some details, I happily accept that there is a logical impass), this construct allows the character to make what is undeniably a full move for him in any direction without penalty to his CV. Any direction, of course, except straight towards, in which case the move by / through limitations come into play. So the character can run full tilt away and fire over his shoulder at no penalty, but takes a hit to shoot what he is running toward. Odd, to say the least.
 
Thoughts?

Re: Avlse
 
OK, if we have a more sfx based approach to defences (and have AVLSE) it IS certainly more difficult to build a character that is virtually indestructible: has defences to anything you can throw against them, even if, pretty much by definition, if you have ALL of the defences, none are likely to be spectacular. I accept that fully. Same argument goes if you make power defence sfx based.
 
As you bought it up (I was restraining myself: I know this is the standard argument path, and I've not always been on this side of it) we COULD go the other way and have a single defence stat that covers pd, ed, mental defence, power deefence, flash defence, whatever, then define the character's defences by limitations on the stat or disadvantages. I'm not advocating that, just painting in the whole spectrum.
 
At present, Hero is a balance, and a balance that has worked pretty well for a long time, no denying that.
 
I don't for a moment think that Mr Long is lurking, pen in hand, re-writing 5ER, but if you are, Steve, it's S-E-A-N, not Shaun, Shawn, or for that matter, Shorn (although I have had a haircut recently, so maybe it is), BUT there does seem to be a sizeable body of interest and support for a more sfx based approach.
 
Like anything, this can be abused. Take enhanced senses: if you want to be able to see no matter WHAT the enemy does, you pick an obscure and bizarre unusual sense group no one will ever have the foresight to have a flash for. That's what sfx can do: open up the abuse potential. I suppose this is the argument mentioned above (immoveable or irresistable: you can't have both!)
 
OTOH, it seems to me that, whilst a mechanically based approach makes a great deal of sense from the GM and character designer's POV, it can make very little apparent sense from the POV of the actual characters.
 
HERO, in common with most rpgs, is a game of imagination and storytelling (and, of course, scads of dice and property destruction ), and the biggest knocks the narrative often seems to take is when mechanics intrude into the game, like a six dimensional object pushing into a three dimensional world: you have no idea what it is, or what it is for, you just know it is in the way; and the only way to deal with it is to step out of theat 3D world for a while.
 
With foresight and planning such disruption can be minimised, maybe all but eliminated, but the same can be said of an sfx based approach.
 
The difference is that the problems with an sfx based approach all tend to occur in the character creation and planning phase where, frankly, I don't think it matters so much. The mechanics based problems tend to apepar in-game, and whilst it would be pure hysteria to suggest that they could de-rail a game, they can certainly make the ride a lot bumpier than it should be.

Re: Curious of Other Opins
 
I wouldn't allow a power like this in most campaigns because:
 
a) Conveying the information would be a major cause of delays unless the character was very on the ball.
 
Possessing that information kills a lot of mystery in the campaign and makes it harder to sustain mood. (Constructing the power appropriately can negate this, of course.)
 
Also, the way it was presented to us was very game-mechanic oriented, which makes it seem like the player was more concerned with mechanics than special effects or roleplay. This always makes me suspicious of "questionable" constructs.

Re: Rep Points?
 

Zen and the super sniper
 

 
I think you have enough technical answers: time for a philosophical one, or rather a question:
 
Why would you want to?
 
I mean it is going to be a pretty specialised campaign where you get to shoot targets from miles away as a PC. Might be OK for a solo game, but I can't see the character fitting in with a group in most cases.
 
If it is a villain, I tend to use the lazyman approach: he just CAN, yeah?
 
If he's a PC, I tend to also use the lazyman approach: he just CAN'T, yeah? (Or he can if he wants to build it but I'll make it clear he'll hardly ever have the opportunity in fact).
 
With decent equipment you can do some pretty amazing shots: the first time I every shot a gun I popped off a dozen or more shots through a 5cm circle because the gun had a decent sight, some sort of stabiliser thing and so on. Trust me, it had nothing at all to do with my skill!
 
If you want to build a character who can pick up any weapon and be good at range I'd buy PSLs(ranged) and/or CSLs with rifles: I am just not keen on unnecessary naked advantages, but that is just me.

Re: "There is no pain; you are receding...."
 
Naked power advantage: Invisble Power Effects (touch group), with Usable as attack applied to the naked advantage. I think this is against the rules, but it kind of works. This way, most blows will be completely unfelt, but really bad ones (those with too many points) still cause pain.
 
Aid EGO, only to resist pain (Remember, one of the times ego comes in handy is when you need to resist pain to keep going.) This is a great choice for the "just something to keep me in the game" effect.
 
The flash thing could work too.

Re: Cure for Cancer (Healing)
 
Lemming- It is true that cancer (and most kinds of degenerative diseases, like lupus, diabetes, and Alzeheimer, BTW) aren't very well covered for by hero system. However, this is a defect common to almost all RPG systems, which mostly envision disease as infectious disease mostly (or poisoning). I think this comes both from the fantasy setting roots of RPG, where disease mostly was indeed infections, and from PC typically being healthy, young subjects in their prime, not very liable to degenerative disease. However, in a modern scenario this is extremely unrealistic: real health concerns, both for individuals and the community, are chronic, "internal" diseases like cancer, lupus, kidney failure, diabetes, Alzheimer, Parkinson, induced by a mixture of genetic liability, unhealthy lifestyles, environmental long-term damage, again damage, and human body simply not being built to last forever, and even infections that are still a major concern have similar features (chronic course, cumulative long-term damage) AIDS and hepatitis. (of course, this callously completely ignores the plight of third-world areas where "classic" infective diseases are still a very major concern).
 
Therefore, for cancer (and similar "modern" diseases) in Hero you can either: add to the system some tweaks (such as Healing adders and LS subtypes) that explicitly cover it, or seek the most appropriate features in existing system. Assuming the latter approach (which I'd prefer): you can assume that Healing works just as well to repair body damage induced by cancer and chronic degenerative diseases as it does for wounds, infections, poison, radiations, fire, etc. damage: almost all RPG systems work under the same assumption, after all. There is something for semplicity, and it no great stretch of disbelief to assume that Healing, whatever its SFX, works as well on cancer that it does on life-threatening wounds. As reagrds Regeneration, well, one may assume that just as it is able to quickly repair wounded tissue, it works equally well to eliminate cancerous cells as they mutate, or repair DNA damage. It works very well for typical Regeneration SFXs (hyper-efficient immune and healing systems, nanotech repair, healing enchantments, etc.).
 
As it regards immunities (ie. LS), well, cancer may be assumed in most cases to be caused by lifetime exposure to cumulative aging damage, radiation damage, environemental chemical poisons: so you can assume that cancer immunity may come from being immune to such sources of damage: in hero terms, having any or a combination of: LS: longevity (aging damage), LS: radiation, LS: poisons.
 
Anything that would prevent body cells from mutating to cancerous cells, reapir harmful mutations as they occur, and/or quickly eliminate cancerous cells as they develop before they are able to grow to a sizable cancer mass, would make one effectively immune to cancer.

Re: Cure for Cancer (Healing)
 
I would just consider curing a disease like cancer to be a +10 point adder to healing. Regrowing limbs is 5 points, resurrection is 20 points, so curing diseases seems to be about right at 10 points as it's more powerful than repairing a limb but less powerful than bringing someone back from the dead.
 
Sometime we get so caught up on how to do somethings within the system that we forget we can add things to the system. Steve Long has added plenty of things but even he can't think of everything.

Re: concept vs. booklegal
 

Thanks, not original though. I think I heard about the idea from discussions of the Ultimate Brick.
 
Can be scaled down to 1" = 1km for Megascale as a (+1/4) advantage has been used for published characters. See Photon from CK&C pg 189.
 
I dropped the MegaScale flight + sight slot from the post #27 version BUT, the idea is really no different than applying the safe blind teleport advantage to that power and I was applying a heck of lot more active points towards the same goal just for non-combat bragging rights and plot device.
 
HM