AmadanNaBriona

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? you pretty much just went through the same reasoning I used for my starship combat rules. the big bitch of which is that you need to map out the vessel, showing wheer the various barriers are, where vital systems are located, when crew stations are and the like. Which is part of the reason we used the traveller system... it was geared towards mapping out ships, and gave us plentey of premade maps for common vessels. it works pretty well in a dramatic and realistic fashion. We did rate the ships with an overall body rating based on Mass modified by materials and superstructure, but I onestly can't recall how we delt with the depletion of superstructure BODY. I know that hull braches affected the body a bit, some types of internal damage did so more, and the like... but its all long lost in my notes, and this was a campaign I ran well over 15 years ago, so the details escape me... On a related note, FOX1 said something in anopther thread that reminded me that the old Fireboird suppliments had a bunch of good rules for this kind of thing. I don't have GAC anymore, but I know I used a lot of the rules like armor deflection and AP capped in my games. Some of thesew rules might be good to convert to 5th to se how they play.

Re: How can an Napoleonic Era frigate fire a broadside every 12 seconds? Perhaps you misunderstand why some of us bring it up (I can't speak for everyone, but it certainly applies in my case). Its not that we feel compelled to bitch about way certain things are written up when they don't reflect reality. Sure we could fix the problem in our games. Its more a matter of wanting to spark discussion, see how other people do it, and point out the occasional absurdity for folk to ponder, especially if they don't have as much RL knowlegde of a subject and might be confused by poorly done "official" examples. Incedentally, I think that Age of Sail ship combat would and should mostly be done in platoon level battle scale (from FH Mass combat rules) 90 second turns for manuvering and ranged combat, then dialate to normal time scale for close action. then 1 turn cannon reloads hit just right, small arems fire from marines can be conducted each phase instead of each turn and the ships move in a more realistic faashion. Bam. its all good. And gunners should be able to "rapid" fire cannon for 2 shots in that time period at a substantial penalties to the activation roll on the cannons and greatly increased chance of side effects. In an emergency, you can skip the worming and swabbing( which accounts for about half of the realoding time), but you greatly increase the risk with each subsequent shot of a catastrophic malfunction. *BOOM* And yes, I have done gunnery drills with muzzleloading 16th century falconets... we used to have 3 of them for our battle reenactments. So I'm not completely speaking out of my butt here.

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Sounds like I need to take a closer look at TUV...maybe I'll pick it up tomorrow if i sell anything tonight at the club.

Re: Help with a character's powers Linking the Damage Reduction with the armor is a bit reprehensible and munchkinly, and as both are persistant always on abilities I'd be inclined to say its not even legal, but I don't have my book nearby to check. As for the blasts, its all up to you...there's no hard and fast rule. If you want them to be Energy, then they are energy. If you want them to be physical, then they are physical. Iron man's repulsor blasts, for instance, are probab;ly defioned as physical attacks even tho appearance wise they look like energy bolts. Its all up to special effects.

Re: How can an Napoleonic Era frigate fire a broadside every 12 seconds? well... I can't say for certain about the 5th edition rules (as I've mentioned in other threads I don't have UV yet) but the 4th ed sailing rules used a time scale modifier similar to the Mass Combat rules, so a turn was a longer amount of time. Its a pretty good fix. Sailing ships manuver pretty slow, and playing out a naval engagement at normal HERO speed would take bloody forever.

Re: Intelligent multipowers When I've done this style of thing before I've always considered it a SFX because MP slots are 0 phase to change, but from a rules lawyer perspective, I'd say a +1/4 custom advantage, as you could build the effect with a clever use of triggers for the same advantage (tho it'd be a lot clumsier)

Re: help! how do I build the super sniper? LOL We're already over it

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? This is the kind of thinking that will get us somewhere. Bravo. and in defence of DR in these builds...it works better than extra Body because it can be limited to create vunerabilities to particular attacks. ( like a sailing ship with DR, doesn't work vs AoE or explosions) Repped

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? And as a quick side note.... In my games, I tend to build heavy weapons like Tank Guns as Multipowers, to better simulate the various munition options. And even if I don't, explosive heavy weapons tend to get built with Penetrating. If they are shaped charge weapons, then they get AP too. Why Penetrating first? Its the best fit we have in the system to represent spalling (The inside layer of armor blowing off and spraying the interior of a vehicle) Most modern MBT's have a spallguard on the inside to prevent just such an occurance (An extra level of Hardened, Only vs Penetrating) Edit: Not to mention additional DCV levels (or possibly missile deflection, tho the CV vs CV roll doesn't really sim it right), triggered, with charges for reactive armor

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? its a problem, I agree For biological targets, I don't see a problem with the system, as there are few things as interdependent as a body ("What do you mean a hole the size of a pinhead in a little artery just killed me?") I usually solve the damage issue with big critters and giant types with DR. For non biological ones... its more complicated. Back in aforementioned olden days, I used the Justice Inc gadget rules to write up cyborgs and robots with almost every system and location as a seperate "focus". Worked well for Mecha, Terminators, Jump Armor, and Genocide Minuteman Robots (I ported the idea over to our Champs game when we decided to do a Mutant campaign). I even had one Cyborg character who used the system and it worked out great. But it was a bit of a headache on construction.

Re: help! how do I build the super sniper?

Re: help! how do I build the super sniper? THAT, my friend, is a nice sneaky end run around the wierd Megasenses rules. I like it

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Thanks! Nice stuff... I'd probably give Tanner a bit more to work with (the main things being an increase in his Southwestern AK, some dirty infighting moves, and a bit of stun only DR, based on willpower), but otherwise, it looks great. Now if they'd only do a REAL movie of the book,instead of that travesty that starred Jan Michael Vincent. EDIT: Just looked closer at your write up for the Car. Cool stuff too... tho, as another fan of the book, I thought I might point out that the move by limit on the wings probably shouldn't be there. IIRC, he mentions the ability to sweep the sides of the Car to clear away vermin, and also that they could be couched in front to act like lances. That and I'm thinking that the Eyes need to be an OAF... they were the only part of the Car, aside from the wheels, that was vunerable to small arms fire. Speaking of which... Brilliant job on writing up the wheels

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Master and Commander, Far Side of the World Damn..you're right! Pretty damn good... I knew I liked you

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? I admit this... I don't have a copy of UV yet... I perused it at my FLGS and didn't see enough actual system additions to make it worth my limited fundage. I am looking for a way to deal with comparmentalization, hit locations, and hopefully a good way to sidestep the whole "vehicles have a set Body And Def value that is used in all combat" issue. This thread could, quite easily, devolve into the same kind of discussion we've had time and agin on similar threads, in reference to the whole Exponential Damage discussion. There is almost NO way to write up a large complex vechile that can take the kind of punishment that a battleship, or star destroyer, or The Enterprise, to name a few examples, that doesn't break under the +1 body = x2 mass system. A tank gun is NOT going to kill the Iowa in a couple of shots. Its the same issue that comes up in the "How do you destroy a planet" discussions. I'm not saying we need a ruleset like Star Fleet Battles. But there needs to be a paradigm shift if we want to involve the vehicles in the game plot in a more complex manner. I still think that it can be done, and I'm willing to bet that the base rules are a good starting point. The Base rules are written with the expectation that they will be too large for any single attack to detroy (barring large AoE attacks or megascale) Essentially... wouldn't you agree that for functional play purposes, something like a Starship or a pirates Merchantman fuill essentially the same plot role as a base, rather than the role of, say, a starfighter. And even in the Starfighter... If its your character piloting it, wouldn't you like a better system than " Well...your fighter took 15 body. it explodes. you die. Sorry"

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? I don't see this as a niche client issue, however. I see expanded vehicile rules as quite important to every genre EXCEPT Supers. In the superheroic genre, Vehicles are basically props. A tank lets a solider threaten Grond. A tank is a conveinent projectile for Grond to throw at someone. The Batmobile is a plot device that lets Batman get places quickly and access better lab gear than he can reasonably fit in his belt of holding. A Battle ship is a setting for a fight, or something for Superman to airlift to saftey to show just how freaking strong he is. The current vehicile rules are fine for Champions. Its ALL the other Genres that suffer. Any subgenre that treats vechiles as, in a way, complex characters. What I'm trying to dream up is a Simulationist ruleset that allows for increased dramatic potential from a Narationist perspective, with the right balance of ease of play and accuracy to keep the Gamists happy. HERO is almost unique as a system in that it allows the flexibility to do this, usually. I don't see this as a "too complex so not needed" thing. I see this as vital to a true "universal system" I want to be able to call engineering on the com for a damage report after a Klingon suprise attack. I want to try and cripple the Archeron with a clever tactic that takes advantge of its only weak point. I want to be able to disable the Star Destroyers hyperdrive so they can't follow me back to the Rebel base. I want to keep fighting in my delta while systems redline and burn out and redundant systems come online to keep me from buying a farm. I want to run a shipment of Haffakkine antiserum across the Alley to keep the Nation of New England from dying of the Plauge. I want to feel the rumble of my scythed chariot wheels as I charge the front ranks of the Formorian army. I want to drive a tanker truck out of the badlands, and try an keep the mutants from stopping me. I want to command a ship in Heliums navy, turing my radium cannons on the endless horde of Tharks who are marching to besiege the city. Basically I want advanced vehicle rules. Obviously.

Re: Dragons on TV (#2) I may have to search around a bit, but this idea has been bantered about before. I really like the idea of doing a FH game in a Conan fashion using a bit of para science and cryptozoology in place of magic and monsters. Heres a thought I've had about the Neandertals... If they moved underground to avoid the ICe age and have subsequently evolved, isolated populations could easily account for the different underground races (Dwarves, Orcs, etc..) In addition... IIRC, Scandanavia is rich in rare earths and radioactive ores. Between background exposure increasing species mutation (Can you say Trolls?) and the possiblity that the "elder races" may have started incorporating some of these ores into their metalwork or crafts ("Wait...Excalibur was radioactive?") and you get all sort of neat options opening up. And I love the idea of cryptozoological monsters. Dragons as a living fossil species, like the colececanth (sp?), probably one of the crocodillians, with a venomous spit attack (like a spitting cobra) perhaps. Or even a regurgitation type "defence" ability (I serem to recall some other reptiles doing this...I don't know)

Re: Reduced Gravity Effects Sorry, but I saw this thread and the first thing that popped into my head was "Women he rescues will bounce just like the superheroines do!"

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Yeah, I have a copy of autoduel Champs sitting in my storage unit. As well as a copy of Robot Warriors. And Champions 2. And the original Star Hero. And these all show that some advanced vehicle rules can work with the system without totally destroying it. I was, however, being lazy and wondering if someone like the hardy souls who are working on their Traveller HERO conversions, or perhaps an intrepid Pirate Hero GM might have posted a set of working house rules somewhere. I actually have a pretty good set of kludged houserules myself, but It'll take a load of dedicated effort to get them converted to 5th edition and point balanced.

Re: YOUR FRIENDS: Cost You Points, or Get You Points? Most of my friends would be contacts, with a few favors thrown in. My lass, I'm afraid to say, would be a DNPC that gives me a few disad points. I love her dearly, and shes quite talented, but I wind up dealing with a lot of grief as a result of her proclivities Thankfully, shes gotten well over the stage where she wanted me to defend her honor in casual situations, and is now better at dealing with catcalls and the like as (offhand, crude and offensive) compliments.

Re: When to use larger than normal weapons UMA has more than before, but there could be a lot more

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? I really, truly think that there must be some way of merging the base rules with the vehicle rules. The scale thing gets me... maybe I'm just set in my gaming ways, but I'd much rather see a workable system that treats large items on a hex by hex and/or system by system basis than as a whole. Even DR doesn't work out right. Besides added realism, it would add a nice degree of drama... targeting gun turrets, hits to the magazine, engine damage...all that rather than the current "you did its BODY so its broke" system currently in place. I don't have UV yet, but from what I've heard, this is still a problem. *sigh*

Re: When to use larger than normal weapons The funny thing is.. this is a defining characteristic of most greatswords in real life, especially the later ones like the Zweihander and the Flamberge. They are really mostly geared towards defensive fighting, and use the long arc to allow the cutting foreward 1/3rd of the blade to reach the velcities needed to inflict harm. The ONLY time I've ever seen this addressed was in an optional set of combat rules for Runequest was back in the day, from an issue of Wyrms Footnotes. Even back then, he mentioned that the genre convention of "greatswords do more damage" was too ingrained to easily break. And we still need a good write up of some off the 16th century weapon based martial arts, like the German and Italian masters were teaching in the age just before fencing took off.