Vondy

It has been since 4th Edition.

So make it one! The lists of everyman skills in FRED are basically suggestions. You could come up with a list of everyman skills that differs without changing any rules.

I find - if I don't know the people involved or I can't interact with them - the sythesis of shared concept is strongly diminished. In addition: I don't game to just game anymore. Its also about spending time with friends.

I handled a modified airwolf style bell chopper with twin pop-out vulcans this way: 4d6 RKA, AF 10, AE Line... Considering these things have an obscene rate of fire it means: everybody in the 2 hex wide area in front of the chopper gets hit with 10 20 MM Rounds per phase -- A Lot (Unless They Dive For Sufficient Cover (Like The Team Brick) I'd just do an area effect attack with an autofire equal to the number of times you estimate each character should be hit

I would grant the fief in conjunction with titles. In other words: anyone with a perk that indicates "landed gentry" has lands. A fief isn't properly a base, nor is a castle, unless you are are playing super-heroic style fantasy. I would give them modest lands and suggest that the revenue from those lands, if properly managed, gives them some level of the "money" perk. If you're worried about castles and manors there are ways to handle that: 1. Generally nobles needed a writ from the crown to crenelate (build or expand fortifications). Unless you were a royal or a duke the best you were going to do would be a keep. 2. Whatever fortifications they do end up with could be one step above a ruin (collapsed roofs, some walls leaning, rotten draw bridge), which would force them to acquire more money to fix them up. LOTS more money. 3. Their grants of land could be for frontier areas without fortifications - forcing them to construct them out of pocket - EXCEEDINGLY EXPENSIVE. I wouldn't require points for bases, though. Not in a heroic game [unless they started with them]

My long term [13 year] campaign centered on just such a team

For those who are interested in reports produced by people who don't write for gun magazines go here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm One of the better articles is here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm And here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm As for the comparison between a .22 Pistol and a .50 BMG. A comparison between a rifle and a handgun cartidge is laughable, let alone bringing a .50 BMG round into the equation: .50 BMG Average @ point blank: 15700 Joules .22PST Average @ point blank: 248 Joules Yeah, that's three times more powerful (not). It doesn't take into account other major wound factors such as penetration, bullet size, and expansion. You can't use these types of conversions in a role playing game. Damage is an ABSTRACTION. You have to take a general sense of how lethal a weapon is and translate it into play. A BMG that hits center mass will basically be lethal even for uber tough. At 3d6 it will average 10.5 body, which kills a normal man (8 Body) flat out, or takes off a limb if it hits one. I think that does the basic job fairly well. The question is penetration and stun (kinetic transfer). Add on AP [or Pen] and a +1 StunX [average 37.5] and it translates fairly nicely. Its not always about the dice.

Who? I went looking and couldn't see any of their posts...

I guess my point was that a general rule shouldn't be assumed to apply to every specific case.

/nitpick alert It would be the Capitol Police, not the Secret Service. /end nitpick alert

First -- in a world with super beings the government probably has a few on the payroll. If they don't, they probably have access to a number of super beings they feel can be trusted to varying degrees if the need arised. Second -- what do the other super beings in the courty think. Some of them might feel a need to step forward and deal with these "lunatics" right off the bat. If I were a powerful super and some group of heroes decided to overthrow the government you'd find me knocking on the White House door. "Mr. President, what do you want me to do?" Third -- it is entirely likely the government has dossiers on these characters with an idea of their abilities. They may even have selected specific weapons or techniques for dealing with them. In addition, the government has contingency plans for all sorts of whacky things. "Supers take over the capitol" is probably one of them. Fourth -- with those stated intentions and the unlikely prospect of bringing the characters to justice the government will likely elect to terminate the threat as quickly and decisively as possible. Fifth -- the government has some extremely effective weapons, both conventional and otherwise. Most supers couldn't take on a division of infantry (dear lord: consider the amount of anti-tank weaponry and helicoptor support such a division has, let alone guns and grenades. if they wanted to, let alone a combat wing of jet fighters, a battalion of tanks, or a full on cruise missile strike from the navy [let alone all of these things combined]. Sixth -- Unless these guys have a whole team of Hulks, or are hanging in Superman's League, they are totally screwed. The only thing they have going in their favor is that they're holding the congress hostage. They are doing that right? If not, God help them. And if they are, was there some reason it was a full session. If not there were probably three guys in their talking to an empty chamber. Seventh -- sounds like martial law just got imposed in Washington DC and the place just became an armed camp. Ever hit a super with a full on blast from a 30 MM Vulcan? Or several Vulcans? Or a 120 MM Tank Shell. Let alone the fact that they constitute a cause for the use of unconventional weapons. What happens to a super hit with a gell-ball filled with VX Gas Goo? Or when they get nailed with a Sarin Gas shell? What if the government gets tricky and drives them into the bunker beneath the capitol. Sure, they can hold out, but what happens when the doors are cemented shut and carbon monoxide is pumped in? Eighth -- from a role playing perspective, unless they intend to start bumping off hostages/congressmen, their only out is a surrender, and if they can get the word out on why they went to such extreme steps, maybe a pardon, but here's the flaw with that. They didn't walk in and say -- we need to draw this to everyone's attention and this is how we're going to get the word out.... They wen't in and announced they were taking over the government. OUCH!

Just as a point of order: From a real world perspective an exponential doubling of kinetic energy doesn't necessarily translate to a exponential doubling of damage. There are numerous factors that go into determining the lethality of a wound and kinetic energy is only one of them. As such, using the damage classes of an attack to determine relative kinetic energy is a flawed paradigm. In ballistics we have four basic wound factors: Permanent Cavity (Bullet Size) Temporary Cavity (Stretching from Kinetic Transfer) Blood Loss (Placement) Nevous System Damage (Placement) Permanent cavity damage, blood loss, and nervous system damage can all be increased based on various sizes and innovations related to the bullet in question. For instance, a .45 Golden Sabre round will create a bigger cavity, has a greater chance of inducing blood loss and disrupting nervous function, that a .45 hardball round. Increased kinetic energy does impact temporary cavity, and can, with larger rounds, kill with hydrostatic shock, but in regards to bullets -- size does matter. As does sophistication: a .50 BMG round won't do as much damage to a target as a .50 BMG APEX round will do. The attempt to use DC's to extrapolate kinetic force makes more sense when relating to muscle powered weapons, but there you don't have the issue of temporary cavity. You just have the force of the swing. There are still issues to address in this context, such weapon concept [blade versus bludgeon] and size [claymore versus dirk], which will effect wound size and type. The only place kinetic force truly equates to DCs is brute superstrength.

Eugene Orowitz?

I think its an excellent idea. Since I'm the one who generally manages the mechanics, math, and whatnot in my games, it would simplify some of my more rules skittish players lives.

Glad I could help

Re: Re: Powers That Shouldn't Have Been Approved I had a player with a similar construct who never figured that use out.

Maybe the "/Rant Mode On!" should have been your first clue.

Sounds like a move-by or through with the bricks throwing distance used to extrapolate the velocity.

Not a movie, but the old Showtime Robin Hood series was pretty cool. Its also the first place I heard Enya. I think it was titled Robin of Sherwood and appeared on British TV first. Not sure.

Yeah -- I just wanted to have one of those cathartic experiences one of my gamers [a psychiatrist] is always trying to induce in his patients. I thought the priceless part was that he tried to respond to it in rational manner.

Night of the Living JLo's...

That would be the follower: Wife With Title In Her Own Right. On a more serious note: what about purchasing the summoning power for each castle and applying various lims (immovable focus, additional conditions, etc)

/RANT WARNING ON!!! Dear God help me! What is the point of debating wholly subjective preferences in relations to a somewhat geeky and perfectly enjoyable hobby? Someone likes 3E better than Hero? Bully for them. Someone likes Hero better than 3E? Bully for them. This is almost as ridiculous as debating the which version of Star Trek is better. Its COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE. What is the point of wasting all of this testosterone on a stupid freaking game system?!!! If you used all of this testosterone in your professional and personal lives you'd have completed your PHd and acquired a HAREM of adoring women. I personally loathe 3E, but if someone what to play it or likes it better that's their personal taste. The same goes for Hero enthusiasts. We love it, but that's our personal taste. Its apples and oranges as far as the mechanics are concerned. I could understand GURPS V. HERO, but 3E? The point is utterly unfathomable. The spider man is a brick debate, the batman has normal characteristic maxima debate, and the how to build caps shield debate are all understandable within the contect of uber-geek gamerdom, but this I honestly don't get. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!! Plonk! Plonk! Plonk! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!! /RANT WARNING OFF!!!

I house ruled it and said: damage shield is a +1 advantage and implies "no range" for ranged attack powers.

Its only a lim if those circumstances are likely. And God help Lt. So-And-So when he pisses off Lady Clonfert and makes a decision for the whole group [over her protestations] -- I hope her husband (or brother, or uncle, or father, or son) isn't an admiral, or in the Lords when the next naval appropriation comes up. A few placed words and he gets cashiered for the good of the service's budget, or to scratch a fellow peer's backside. Let alone what it would do to the young man's marriage prospects if he was hoping to marry up (socially speaking). I would give the points if it were a game where the female PC was going to be in positions of social disadvantage due to sex regularly [in a naval game, or a we're government secretaries game] , but money and rank had so much to do with Victorian society that I wouldn't give it carte blanche. Victorian era games that occur in urban scenarios, or within "society" don't necessarily favor the male of the species. In fact, the inherent sexism can very much work in the woman's favor when intrigue is afoot.