ghost-angel

Or he bought an AoE Attack that's part of a Leap.... Or what we watched was actually several phases of combat in a row, just focusing on one character at a time... Dozens of ways to handle a movie scene, which doesn't actually follow game rules and a supremely poor thing to use as an example of game mechanics in action.

One thing about Limitations is yes, they only show up as often as the GM lets them when setting scenes and creating adversaries. And sometimes values only show their worth over a long period of time. But we can always discuss them in a more abstract form regarding their possible value when compared to either similar modifiers or which rules they directly affect. Take "Only For Casual STR" - first there's was the misconception that if you bought 30STR, Casual Only all 30 would add, which is not true, it adds 30 to your STR which then determines your Casual STR (an effective add of 15STR). Then there's the intersection of where the desired Limitation and the Rules occur; breaking out of Holds and Entangles, pushing through walls and pushing aside objects. These are small, usually uncommon to rare occurrences. But, then there's the other side of the coin: casually bursting through walls and doors isn't tried that often because the chance of success isn't always that good. Even for 60STR Characters, anything tougher than a simple wooden door might pose a problem. But if they suddenly pay points to raise their Casual STR, they may use this option more frequently, thus making the value of the Limitation look too high... But really, is that so bad? To create a more common use of a function for a smaller point expenditure? Why not encourage such uses of the rules... If I had to pay 45 more points to increase my Casual STR to 60 versus 30 or 20 more points, it sounds less appealing. And it doesn't help outside Casual attempts of STR; I'd rather spend less points on Martial Escape and add 2 more dice on every attempt, than spend 10% of my Character Total (at a -1/2 Limitation) on what is probably only a 50/50 shot of success against a similar target... At -1/2, unless you have a low STR score, it just doesn't seem like a useful investment for such a limited series of circumstances. The ROI is too low for most games.

Casual STR only is worth at least a -1; it has extremely limited uses and usefulness compared to where STR is otherwise applied. "For Casual STR Only" has no Lift capability, no Damage capability, and can only be used to overcome a small set of the overall situations in the system.

As an aside to Windows10 fun... If you're using a laptop (make/model seems to be irrelevant) and upgrade to Win10 they've had a habit of not coming out of sleep mode, requiring a hard reboot. I've found several fixes messing with power/sleep settings, but if that all fails downgrade (or install) Intel Management Engine 9.5; there seems to be a almost-universal issue with v11 and Win10 on laptops and waking from Sleep... Also, UAC has to be on for some rather basic apps (calculator) to be on, Win10 generally borks itself without it. Setting to the lowest setting is all that's needed.

Page 4 is an introduction to what RPGs are, essentially.

I think you're misreading the rules. Even in 4th Edition they did not treat Characters as New. Players - yes. Always have the text assume the Player is new. Characters - no. 4th Edition had two levels of Superhero: Standard & High Powered. That's not the Rules assuming New Inexperienced Characters, just the opposite, it's providing rules for both. Explicitly. That's what drew me to Hero in the first place, as I started with 4E, it did not assume you went from Zero To Hero, it assumed you started out as a Hero and went up from there. Especially in Heroic Level Play (also, where I started, with Fantasy and Cypberpunk games). I started specifically because the rules did not seem to assume my Character was an inexperienced as I was with the System. That's the whole draw to me. I actually have one GM I've gamed with for almost 2 decades now who assumes the exact opposite: The Character Points you get are your Hero at their most competent, they start out fully experienced and at peak power. I've had a standing discussion with him for years about it... He's been playing since 2E or 3E IIRC.

It's true that the suggested point increase from 4th to 5th Editions was mostly just to provide more points, but not more power. The suggested power levels really didn't go up, but the suggested spread of points across a character's abilities did change, and character's started to pay for more abilities... the point increase from 5th to 6th was specifically to cover the removal of Figured Characteristics, however.

It's pretty bulky when you try and move it on your own; Bulky Focii that provide Movement should only have the 1/2 DCV rule when not using the associated Power (i.e. if the Character is attempting to carry it from the beach to the water they're at 1/2 DCV). Unless they have to carry the Focus to use the Focus, they shouldn't be at 1/2DCV just to use the associated Power.

The mayor/police commissioner bought Contact: Batman (Contact has access to major institutions, Contact has extremely useful Skills or resources, Contact has significant Contacts of his own, Very Good relationship with Contact) 17- The phone is SFX.

Windows implementation of the registry deals with two entities: a registry hive in memory and a registry hive on a disk. When a registry hive is mounted, it's being read or mapped into memory from a disk. When you change something in a mounted registry hive (e.g. when you create a new key or modify a value), these changes happen directly in memory. The process of writing these changes back to a disk is called a hive flush. Before Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2, the flush process writes modified data (also known as dirty data) to a transaction log file first (overwriting modified data from previous flush processes), then the flush process writes the same data to a primary file. If a system crash (e.g. power outage) occurs when writing to a transaction log file, a primary file will remain consistent, because no data was written to this file during the failed flush operation; if a system crash occurs when writing to a primary file, a copy of modified data from a transaction log file will be used to finish writing to a primary file, thus bringing the file back to the consistent state. Before writing to a primary file, the flush process will invalidate its header to record the inconsistent state, and after modified data was successfully stored in a primary file, the flush process will validate the header (so it's possible to tell whether a primary file is consistent or not by examining its header). The flush process for a hive is triggered by a kernel at regular time intervals or by a userspace program using the RegFlushKey() routine. This flush strategy involves writing the same data twice, thus reducing the performance of an operating system. In Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2, a new flush strategy was implemented: when the flush process is triggered for a specific hive (either by a kernel or by a userspace program) for the first time or after the status of a transaction log file has been reset, a log entry with modified (dirty) data is written to a transaction log file, and the header of a primary file is invalidated. When the flush process is triggered again, a new log entry with modified data is appended to a transaction log file, and a primary file remains untouched. If a system crash occurs, a transaction log file will contain log entries required to recover the consistency of a primary file and to bring it to the up-to-date state. When all users (local and remote) become inactive, or when a hive starts unloading (e.g. during the full shutdown), or when an hour has been elapsed since the latest write to a primary file, the reconcile process will write all modified data to a primary file, validate its header, and reset the status of a transaction log file (next flush processes will be overwriting old log entries with new ones). The new flush strategy has performance improvements based on the significant decrease of the number of disk writes.

One way is the VPP with two different overall SFX as noted, and the Contacts (and other Perks) all Limited By Identity as needed. If you truly need two different people, Multiform is the easier way to definitively split the two apart.

1. correct, it's just the base damage. 2. You could buy HKA with Damage Shield that matches the damage the dagger does w/ STR to simulate this better.

Skills Levels in 6E get you OCV, DCV, or Damage Classes. not just OCV/DCV.

I think it defeats the purpose of the idea. I like it, I just think it doesn't do what is asked here either mechanically or thematically. And it does violate one of the core tenants of Hero: don't use one power to duplicate another. Doing Body Damage kills the target, not Transform. And "Does Body" cannot be applied to attacks that don't do Stun. Transform doesn't do Stun. So the entire thing is complete handwavium already.

This is perfect for Romero Zombies; but as I understand Pathfinder Undead, you only return if you're actually killed by one, not a slow transformation just because you were attacked by one...

I started with 4E, but not with Supers; which shaped a lot of how I view the system. To this day Superhero is the genre I pick last when asked about what kind of games I like. (I still play, obviously, because a good gaming group trumps any dislike I have for genre or rules...) I really liked 5th Edition, and despite any noises made here, I also really like 6E - I think the flexibility the base 6E offers is amazing, but I also think the rule books got way to thick, far too verbose. By the end of the DOJ era they were producing less than 10 books a year, I think the low point was 6. I don't have any special look behind the doors really, but I think things could have gone better with smaller splat books more frequently instead of the mega monsters... the 6E HSB should have been 2-3 books, not one over sized tome. The Grimoire could have been a bunch of splat books that really zeroed in on specific styles of magic systems instead of the uber-generic tome we got. So yeah - I love 6E almost wholesale, but the presentation could have been so much more user friendly.

Nah. Transform: Corpse into Undead This is Hero, dead is just a condition, like Stunned or Unconscious. There's just a more limited means of ending the condition. The Transform just needs to do enough Body to overcome the typical Body of a Corpse (just to ease things along, it's whatever Body the Corpse had while it was alive) plus all the Undead aspects you're adding onto it. Of course, if this is an automatic thing that always happens in the game world when an undead creature kills a living creature, you could always apply a 0 Point Physical Limitation of every living being: When Killed By An Undead Will Rise As An Undead Afterwards. And get on with it. Certain fundamental aspects of the game world's physics don't always need to be defined mechanically, just thematically.

A few from the non-gun toting variety of Urban Fantasy; -Jilly Copercorn from Charles De Lint's Newford series. no powers except an unwavering cheerfulness, but she knows everyone and can sense the Otherworld. -Door from Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere who doesn't want to open all the doors... -Mercy Thompson from Patricia Briggs Mercy series Coyote walker, and a solid mechanic. -The City from John Shirley's City Come A Walkin' Who doesn't need an anthropomorphic San Fransisco ... (other cities also have their own personas) Edit; almost forgot, and since a fighter isn't a bad thing: Sandman Slim from Richard Kadrey's Sandman Slim series. Punched his way out of hell for revenge...

Same thing for Champions Complete: two books under one cover. Hero System and Champions. And the System side of Complete is even less complete than the System side of the BBB.

I would not have pared down the rules descriptions (especially in the Powers section) as far as Complete did. It was a step too far back.

Personally, I think the Complete books are passable, but fall short of adequate by about 100 pages.... After reading them cover to cover I'm actually disappointed in them.

Note the description says Hardened FOR 30 Points of ED/PD; not 30PD/ED with Hardened. As Hyper-Man pointed out: it's giving you the cost to add Hardened to 30 Points worth of PD and ED. Not buying 30PD, Hardened + 30ED, Hardened. That total is 90 Points.

I remember doing the spreadsheet for Armor Piercing, it was rather elaborate and took into account both a Normal and Killing damage progression using defenses as recommended by the book and a series of above and below average defense numbers, and went from 1/2DC to 20DC. As I recall, at +1/2 for the majority of parameters it was almost never worth the actual cost vs drop in raw DC (DC not accounting for the cost of AP). It numbered out to being useful in such a tiny handful of situations that it only looked good on paper, but would rarely play out to players expectations... Anyway, I like it at +1/4. Frankly, 4E needed it. Badly. I think 6E got too detailed, I really like 5ER as a system in terms of detail and size.

I also like the larger number of examples, and more of explanations on interactions. I also think a good editor could have pared that word count down quite a bit; there's explaining, and then there's being overly verbosity. Take Hardened; there's an entire paragraph defining how it works in situations agains multiple Advantages it works again - apparently this caused enough issues that Steve felt the need to split Hardened vs AP and Hardened vs Penetrating into two Advantages in 6E - taking away a massive usefulness of buying just 1 level of Hardened: It blocks both, but you have to choose which one it blocks in case both are encountered. Could it have been so hard to say: When you purchase Hardened define the priority order it blocks AP, Penetrating, and Indirect in case an Attack contains two or more of those elements. Instead it gives an example both in explanation and an example breakout paragraph. Overly verbose. Sure - that alone is maybe a couple dozen words; do that enough through the book and entire pages of text start to disappear. Now, in 6E, we have a whole new Advantage to keep track of for ... reasons, I guess. I have no idea why Hardened really stopped doing the trick other than to be a pain in the a-- and because I did keep seeing questions regarding clarification come up semi-regularly.

Indeed, let's not put on the rose colored glasses when it comes to the kind of feral arguments 4E could generate - I won't say 5E generated less arguments, but I felt they were at least a little more controlled; the system desperately needed further explanation in a lot of areas in the 4E era. It got it in 5E. And beyond. Specifically because people keep on asking questions and clarifications and have interpretation arguments and rules lawyering ... perhaps it is now over correcting a little, but if we step it back, it just needs to be a little bit... There's still plenty of open space in the system to work with.