Black Rose

Hugh provoked me to go look at numbers. 
 
If you look at the "full power" here you would have 16m Tunnelling through 13PD.  That is 3+15+24 = 42 points.  Any answer to the cost of the more limited power needs to cost less than this. 
 
If you look at LoneWolf's plan, then the core cost is 28 points, with an additional 12 points that add PD at the cost of reducing movement.  With a -1 limitation that is +12 points that comes to a total of 40 points.  I think the limitation on this power is probably worth more than two points.
 
If you used my custom limitation then you would be paying 28 points...it is the same as the extreme at either end so you might think that you have more flexibility than purchasing either extreme, so perhaps a 1/4 limitation is the right one.  that comes to a cost of 34 points.
 
Doc
 
 
 
 

I'd start by looking at the cost of 16m through 6 PD and 2m through 13 PD (the two extremes).  Either would cost 28 points.
 
A Multipower of both would cost 28 + 3 + 3 = 34 points.
 
If we went to the extreme of a multipower for every increment, there are 8, so 52 points. 
 
Usable as a second form of movement is +1/4 - I'm not sure anyone has ever assessed how this might be applied to Tunnelling, but it feels like we have multiple modes of Tunnelling here.  We'd have to assess how many different forms.
 
Allocatable resistant protection is a +1/4 advantage (with a caution sign). It seems like moving defenses around is no less useful than shifting Tunneling around.  If we applied a +1/4 advantage to one of the two extremes, we would get 35 points, which is remarkably close to placing the two extremes in a Multipower (although that's skewed a bit by rounding - we could bump to 20 meters/6 defense or 2 meters/15 defense for 32 + 6= 38 vs 40 for a ++1/4 advantage on 32.  Still in the ballpark.
 
This is a bit more flexible than just choosing one or the other.  I'd also interpret it as "auto-adjusting" - the player moves 4 meters through defense 6 (or less), then hits rock with 10 PD, so "spends" 8 meters to shift up to 10 defenses and has 4 meters remaining, just as if he had allocated 18m/8 PD from the outset.
 
 
If it were a VPP, it could have a 28 point pool, Cosmic, no skill roll, Tunnelling Only(-1 1/2), so 28 + 17 = 45 - a bit more pricy but with many more variations (including advantages) available.  That also backs up 42 points.
 
So a bit more flexible and valuable than a +1/4 advantage, which leads me to a +1/2 advantage or 42 points.  More pricy than a "pick one or the other" multipower and less pricy than "pick any combo" as a multipower.  This does not seem unfair, so let's call allocatable a +1/2 advantage.

I think I'd also call it +1/2 for defenses, and even for Entangle switching between dice and defenses.

Seems like a custom limitation "Movement through substance reduced 2m for every +1PD above 6PD".  You simply then have to consider how much that is worth.  +1/2??
 
I think people sometimes look for complexity rather than reach for the obvious solution but this looks nailed on to me.
 
Doc

Bruce Lee had a vegan brother - Broco Lee
 
Happy Thanksgiving 
 
 

I was always more focused on the character i was trying to make rather than ruthless efficiency, so I built bricks with 13 DEX and energy projectors with 11 CON.  Was it the best possible build with secondary characteristics?  No, but it fit the character design I had, no matter what the breakpoints were.  This guy wasn't especially durable no matter how many points of END I'd get for free, so he had a low CON.  But I admit that I was an outlier in this.

You're right in that there's nothing but word of mouth out there, but that word of "mouth" is now spread electronically. 
 
I feel comfortable saying that there is no person getting into the HERO System who doesn't have access to either an experienced player -- otherwise whose mouth is the "word of" coming from? -- or the Internet in some way.  I'm happy to be proven wrong. 
 
And any person creating a character intended for actual play in a game is going to have a GM who is going to look their characters over, check their stats for viability and whether they meet the campaign guidelines, and advise them where they don't. 
 
And if they do?  If they happen to create a character that somehow slips through? 
 
The world dies in nuclear fire --
 
No, it does not.  Nor does the patient die on the table.  Nor do the Gaming Police show up and haul everyone away to Gaming Prison. 
 
We admit that we made a mistake, and we fix it. 
 
My first two Champions characters were made using just the rulebook, without reference to a GM or an existing game.  I'm fairly certain they weren't viable in play, mainly because I didn't have a clue where the stats, including the Figured Characteristics, came in relative to any particular set of campaign guidelines.  In my defense, they weren't intended to be; they were me playing with the character creation mechanics in order to learn them.  (I'm pretty sure Feline came to about 180 total points -- this was third edition).  I showed them to my friend, who by then had been playing Champions for a couple of years, and he told me -- nicely, in case anyone was wondering -- why they wouldn't be viable.  My third character was as viable as a character could be that was created using only the third edition corebook and none of the supplements, which everyone else in the group had...
 
Figured Characteristics aren't an automatic protection from non viable characters, nor do they allow you to disclaim decision making for each one.  (Unless you've gone full Goodman School of Character Efficiency, and have built your characters with way-out-of-any-coherent-concept levels of STR, DEX, and CON, but if you're that person then nothing in any part of this discussion applies to you.)  You're still looking at them to decide whether the 8 base ED from your 38 CON is enough or whether you need more. 
 
I'll tell you what eliminating Figured Characteristics did do: it made it so that we don't need 28 DEX or 38 CON to hit the minmax breakpoints on CV's or Figured Characteristics, which means we build to concept rather than arms race, with housewives or grad students gaining energy powers and 25 STR and 23 DEX.  SPD 4 and DEX 15 are viable in play in a 375 point Champions game. 

Hero System has an intellectual buy-in to open the locks, but once you pick the lock you’re done. Many other systems (looking hard at you d20) have different rules for everything and everything has a description that is open to interpretation. You can’t just read the formula and you need to constantly memorize what you saw and where. 

If you get the "Complete" versions of the books, you get 4th edition level brevity with 6th edition detail, I think its the best of both worlds.  Could do with a bit better presentation and tone, but they do the job for rules.  Hero's biggest problem is lack of market presence and too few adventures.  We independent people are trying to fill in the gaps, but the company really needs to step up.  You cannot even find Hero on the shelf anywhere, sitting on line and offering POD is not good enough for a game company.

Speak for yourself.
 
I had a spreadsheet for character building...gosh, late 80s, maybe early 90s?  I forget.  Handled figured characteristics, managed Elemental Controls.  I think it derived net movement too.  OK, had to enter advants and limits by hand, but that's easy enough.
 
 
Yeah, it's like 6E contains the rules and all the commentary on the rules...wrapped together.  Which is a big part of why it's so wordy, altho another aspect is that it could desperately use serious editing.

Hero is not overly complicated. It is overly frontloaded. 

Thanks, everyone, for all your comments.
 
Looking at them, I think I'm going to <sigh> fudge it slightly and use Allocable (+1/4) on 14 Active points worth of PD/meters. That would give me:
3 (base) + 1 (2m Tunneling) + 10 (6 PD material) = 14
+ 14 * 1.25 (Allocable between meters and PD) = 17
for a total of 31 pts.
 
I was thinking of doing something with Lockout on the PD and Meters above the minimums (2m and 6 PD):
3 (base) + 1 (2m Tunneling) + 10 (6 PD material) = 14
+ 14 / 1.25 (+14m Tunneling) + 14 / 1.25 (+7 PD), both Lockout on the other (cheesy, I know) = 11 + 11 = 22
14 + 22 = 36
 
And the RAW do say you should go for the more expensive option...
 And 36 isn't a crazy amount for the ability, considering the alternative is only 31 pts.

For practical purposes, let's say 8m radius is a good start, with 16-32m radius as a "soft cap", and 500m radius for the "oh God, the villain is stealing the House of Lords!"
 
Basically bare earth or empty water. In a city, there would probably be some cinder blocks (whether or not there were any there), empty pipes and bare wires sticking out like some kind of cartoon.
 
The affected area "shrinks" in on itself for about a Turn, maybe two if it's bigger. When its all done shrinking, it looks like a cantaloupe-sized (or bigger, just not casually one-hand-holdable) model of what was just taken, surrounded by a translucent spherical "energy field".
The caster or someone else can then carry the sphere to where they want it. The caster can just "turn it off" and bring the stuff back, but someone else would have to break through the field somehow. The sphere "grows back" at the same rate it shrank.
 
Think of this more as an "I just stole the Crown Jewels!" effect as opposed to "I just kidnapped every member of the Royal Family and the corgis!" It might even be better to skip affecting "living things" entirely -- I wouldn't sterilize the soil or kill the plants, but I'd leave the cat behind.

If you are a face to face group, I find the best thing for that is to have physical tokens, glass beads or poker chips or something and a hat or other receptacle at the side of the table.  Players are likely to have those things in their hands, especially the ones that also like fiddling with their dice, and so be quite awre of them.  If they want to use them, they throw them into the hat, which begins to accumulate tokens.  I keep thinking that I want to do something with that hat and the tokens inside it, but I am never sure what fits.
 
One idea, was that I did not use HAPs as normal.  I would give out tokens instead of experience points, the used tokens are the core pool for what I had out at the end of the game (adding things in for specific stuff - like player invokes a complication).  When a player uses a token, THEN they mark down an XP on their sheet that can be used for growing their character.
 
Doc

This bears repeating.  Players want to win.  They want to not suck. Often, they are tired of sucking in life and want their characters to do what they cannot.  If you make your foes too tough, too hard to hit, too hard to hurt, then:
 
1) they won't stand out, when there's that extra tough bad guy to face
2) If you roll to hit and miss, you're DONE until your phase comes around again, after everyone else has moved, sometimes more than once. 
3) Players feel like losers.  You failed, you tried and struck out, you weren't heroic.
EDIT: I should add one:
4) they will start to power up and stop showing any restraint because they are frustrated and angry at failing or a feeling of not being heroic
 
I'm not arguing that it should necessarily be easy to hit all the time or easy to defeat, just keep in mind what players are expecting and want from their characters.  After all, some players are there just to do something fun with their friends, or to see how the story unfolds, or to role play their character's personality and background without worrying about how well they do in combat.  But for the ones who care, they care a lot.

I've played numerous characters who never needed to go first. They can weather an attack or two.  A friend I gamed with for years ran an "Overconfident - 20 Points" character.  I recall a session asking "What's your DCV?"  He replied "Um...four".  Another player yelped "FOUR - what's his DEX???"  The response was "His DEX is 23. His DCV could be as high as 8.   But I've never even HEARD of this clown - there's no way he's powerful enough to hurt me anyway."
 
I've also read numerous GM tirades about players who won't play to the tropes, and always open up with full-force attacks against unknown opponents.  Guess what? If showing restraint means generally losing the battle, the scenario in its entirety or even the character, then the players won't show restraint.  We all need to be playing the same game, and one of those tropes that goes hand in hand with "the Good Guys show restraint" is that the Good Guys may end up at a disadvantage because they show restraint, but they don't end up losers or corpses.
 
 
A lot of things that the Beast and Spider-Man do are superhuman feats of agility. Nothing Green Lantern does shows impressive agility.  Beast and Spidey have high DEX skills in general.
 
 
It's Rasputin's constitution, Hercules' strength, Bruce Lee martial arts and Casanova's charm.  LEGENDARY because it is vastly superior to the masses. Not " bit above the norm" or even "professional athlete".  Maybe "consistent winner of contests that establish the best in the world".
 
 
An average human is 8s across the board by the RAW. They use the sellbacks from 10 to buy some skills, maybe a stat or two above average, maybe even well above average.  That's defined. A 20 is about as good as a normal human gets - so stacking every NFL linebacker with 18 STR, DEX and CON? Not likely.  Exceeds 20?  LEGENDARY.  You might see a 23 or 25 once or twice in a generation.  A 30 will be remembered for generations.
 
The problem is that the very first group of Champions characters, way back in the first edition, set the bar that Supers - even "not all that unusual" Supers - have DEX of 18 minimum, much more often 23 - 26,and sometimes 30-35.  Then along came Danger International, Justice Inc. and Fantasy Hero and we had to set parameters for "normal humans" when it was too late to dial back "Supers that aren't super in that respect".
 
 
Doing things at work probably also allows extra time.
 
 
I don't think it's unique to Hero. I definitely agree with "oh, you blew the roll - that's an utterly catastrophic failure" mindsets being bad for the game.  Even a 1 being a horribly bad result - 5% of the time you totally blow it? Even if a 2+ would have been a complete success?  No, thanks.
 
I believe there was a reference some time back to the "he doesn't need a roll - he's effing Tarzan!" rule.

That's how I read it as well, its not just streamlining, it is simply logical.
 
And there is a corollary to this rule: if you have a skill, even if you fail, you do better than people who don't have it.  Say you have acrobatics; I screwed this up once in a game, and the player never attempted an acrobatics roll again.  He wanted to flip out a window to avoid a bad guy with a gun.  I had him try the roll, fail, and he ended up draped over the window sill.  OK it was funny but... I failed as a GM.  He should have gotten through the window, but landed on his face, or kicked out part of the window frame in the process, something like that.

Hero Skills System already has an auto-roll rule: you only need to use your skill or characteristic rolls for actions out of the ordinary or under stressful conditions:
 
 
I discovered this while copying the rules for Western Hero, and it made a world of sense to me.

Sure; I'll bite!
 
This thread is now four pages long.  This is in large part because all od the active participants in this thread have very diggerenr opinions not just about how named, defined, official maneuvers are to be interpreted and which ones are  important and which are not.
 
5e was the first edition of this game- from core rules to supplements and genre conventions to adventures to-    to whatever-  to be written _almost entirely_ by one man.  He isnt going to  have a lot of disagreement with himself.  (To rectify this, I have generously volunteered to do all the disagreeing with him: one on one just kind of simplifies this, and,having already spent a couple of decades really not liking the original Dark Champions, I was already practiced.  Path of Least Resistance amd all that.  It has been a thankless job, but you are all welcome anyway.   )
 
The same,can be said of 6e, where an even larger percentage of the material was written by one guy (which made my job harder: do you have any idea how hard it is to maintain disagreement when you are in total awe at the volume of output?!  Wow!)
 
Look at the earlier examples that you cite.  Sure, a,lot we're written by L Douglas G, but not all,of them.  And even of the ones that were, going through contributing names and, where available, editors, you will find each of these books had different creative teams
  We all know that persuasion qmd debate are an important part of deviding what goes into these books (unless you are just going to show off and write almost an entire product line by yourself.  Twice.  Like some kind of show off.  Or cyborg.      ), amd we,know that diggerent people are foinf to have different ideas, etc, etc.
 
There is also the chance with a recurring author or lead writer of editorial team that after having spent time with his previous rules, he found something lacking or superfluous, and took this new opportunity to make what he felt to be a much-needed correction this time around.  Given a third opportunity, he may devise that it was better the first time.
 
 
Now keep in mind that I have absolutely no facts to suggest that this was the case in the instances you  cite, but I am willing to bet that it has a large degree of accuracy.
 
 
 
 

I propose (and have previously posted about) a new Power that I'm calling Extras.  It's basically the Power equivalent to a generic Perk, and I've shamelessly ripped it off from M&M's Feature power. The generic Extra would have a cost of 1-10 points, and would give the character some minor helpful ability that isn't otherwise covered by a regular Power, or that the GM feels that no one needs to bother working out with a Power build.  If it's through a realistic gadget of some kind, it's half the cost, on the theory that it's replaceable but otherwise would be considered an OAF; if you need any more definition than that, you'd use the full cost and apply whatever Advantages and Limitations you want.  
 
The ability to create light could be considered an Extra.  If you can, for instance, cast a Light spell, it might cost 3-10 points depending on amount of light &c, and half of that -- 1-5 points -- for a flashlight.  If you want it to be a Maglite or something similar that you could bash someone over the head with, go back to the 3-10 points, apply OAF, and buy a couple of dice of HA through the same OAF.  
 

Here's the fluff as I envision it. Evil-nasty necromancy spell that "prevents" its victim from healing. Natural healing simply doesn't work. Any kind of assisted healing can try to "fight" the spell and get through to heal the victim. If you "win" the fight, the spell is weakened a little, and eventually dissipates.
 
Here's some crunch: every time you try to regain BODY (Paramedics, Heal spells, etc.) there's some kind of Skill vs. Skill contest (I wanted it to be less about "big honkin' Heal spell!" and more about effort). If the Healing side wins, you regain however much BODY and the Spell side gets a little weaker (kinda like Ablative). Eventually the Spell side is gone.
 
Any ideas for how to put this together? Aside from "Major Transform 8d6 (person to person with the affliction I just described; heals back after being chipped away enough)"?

Re: Defense vs. mind-switch
 
To me this is one of the areas that Hero handles least well, unless the GM has done lots of setting up work to answer such questions.
 
Personally I would not mind a player coming to me with a multi-defence power - something like 20 points of multi-defence. It would cost 1 point per point and would protect against a specific attack type.
 
Thus for mind transference - depending on the power build, it would give added mental defence, or BODY or EGO (for transforms) based on 20 active points.
 
The player gets a multifaceted defence against that attack type and it costs the base 1 point per point of defence.
 
 
Doc

Trying to figure out how to cost this build.
 
Here’s the fluff: I turn into swirly mist and send out misty tendrils (of mist!) that can turn anyone nearby I choose into the aforementioned swirly mist, then draws us into a big ol' knot of swirly mist (BOKOSM). Said BOKOSM then flies off to our destination, and we all turn back into ourselves. If I try and pick you but you don’t want to go, you can attempt to avoid it.
 
Crunchy bits: “anyone nearby” is within about 10 meters; “flies off to somewhere” doesn’t need to be Flight (I am currently using Teleport, Must Cross Intervening Space) and is within about 10 km; “try to avoid it” is currently the required defenses for UAA -- Desolid (can't touch you), energy-based Defenses (also can’t touch you) or a flat out DEX or CON roll at -1 (you "dodged" or held yourself together with intestinal fortitude); "Casting Limitations" are Requires A Roll, a fatiguing Side Effect, and Variable Limitations.
 
The build as I have it currently written: Air Vortex: Teleport 10m; MegaRange (1m = 1 km; +1), Usable As Attack (defense is Desolidification, energy-based Defenses, or a DEX or CON roll at -1; +1¼), Usable By Nearby (10m; +1); Casting Limitations (-2), Extra Time (1 Turn (Post-Segment 12); -1¼), Must Pass Through Intervening Space (-¼). AP/RC: 42/9
 
Any thoughts?

Okay, I wasn't clear. Apologies. Clearly I've been in my own head too much lately. Let me try to explain again.
 
Your character (REC 5, END 50) has a Defensive power with Costs END on it; it costs 5 END per Phase to use. I can modify the END cost in the following ways (as I understand the rules):
1/2 END or 0 END on it (modify or remove the Costs END Limitation) Costs END Only To Activate (modify the Costs END Limitation) (if it's a Defense power) use the Defense-Based END Cost -- I do think this is a cool idea, BTW Delayed END Cost at "per Turn" or "per Minute or more" I want to make a modifier that says "This END you just spent right now? It can't be Recovered until this power is Dispelled/turned off/wears off/etc. Your END ceiling is lowered by this much." The guy in the example above? He spends 5 END, lowering his END to 45, and no matter how many Recoveries he takes? Can't get his END above 45 until that power is Dispelled/turned off/wears off/etc.
 
Obviously this is of no value for powers that last less than a Turn. I see it used more for Persistent powers and Instant powers where the effect sticks around for a while (Transforms, Mind Control, etc.). Effectively, it "Drains" some of the user's END until the power/effect turns off -- that's where all that Drain-based Side Effect stuff came from in the OP.
 
 
The reason for the heavy END spend was to simulate a system (GURPS) with a smaller energy pool from which to cast and which recovers more slowly. GURPS Fatigue Points are different from HERO END -- in terms of just recovery rates, it's a 1:200 ratio. And I have no interest in modeling it that exactly. That's why I liked the idea of spending END and not being able to recover it for a while.
 
 
Not exactly. What I want is a way to say "this Characteristic (specifically END, but I've toyed with the idea of spells that reduce the caster's other Characteristics, like INT, EGO, or something like that) is penalized until the effect is over." Like the really powerful spells that cost the caster INT or years of life, but once the spell is over, the "cost" comes back to the caster. Like a rental deposit.
 
I really hope I was clearer.

I've had a strange idea that I keep mulling over since Chris posted this in another thread:

from:
http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93164-recovering-charges/?p=2499847
 
 
This is probably not an original idea but I think this simple 'leap' could be used to create a spell system where:
Characters only ever purchase the 'Prep' version of any spell they know (or have written in their 'spellbook'). The spell 'frameworks' can then be simplified and modeled to behave more like equipment pools from Dark Champions where how much 'equipment' can be carried on an adventure is determined by a Perk. Thoughts?



HM

Change Environment to put a penalty on tracking would work too, its just going to be really expensive, so of questionable use for the minor value of the effect.
 
 
And it can be done multiple ways.  Its not really a "rule" of Hero officially, but in my opinion the cost should reflect the value of the effect.  So if you just want to light a match and it costs you 45 points, that's not a good build.