AmadanNaBriona

Re: Boudicca and The Lion of Shaolin Look at GURPS Celtic Campaigns for a few ideas. Look at the tales of Cuchulainn's hero training on Scatha's Isle and the training and entrance requirements for the Fianna under Finn MacCumhal for more. Then look into the Fighting techniques adopted by Brian Boru from the Norse invaders. Check out how they evolved into the fighting style of the Galloglaigh class of professional soliders from the 12th through early 17th centuries. Before the years of systematic cultural suppression, the Celts developed some fairly fancy fighting styles. Not real team oriented, but big on over the top heroism. Or go the Mike Myers route and use a lot of grunting and head butting

Re: Stat Inflation Yeah...It took me a while to get used to my 25 pound, short sleeved knee length mail hauberk (1/4" I.D. 4 in 1),heavy leather & chain gorget and my plate gauntlets. And I still dislike fighting with a shield... mostly because I'm used to the reach and coverage I can maintain with a longer weapon. I am, however, very skilled in blocking with gauntlets. Little trick I discovered early on... the articulation of my gauntlets was such that I could flex my wrist back a bit and lock my lames in place, giving me a nice rigid bladetrap on the back of my hand... My gauntlets, alas, were in the car when it got ripped off, so I don't have the evidence to show anymore... I got used to the occasional question about why my left gauntlet was so beat up along the spine compared to my right. Well...the other reason I dislike sheilds is because, for theatrical reasons, I used a targe. The long adjustable strap that I used to sling it across my back for marching worked great crossbody to help support the sheild, but no matter what you do, a 20" round sheild leaves your off side open from about the knee down. As this is exactly where my mail stopped, I stopped fighting with it... I wear tough high boots, but even so, getting hit in the shins with a blunt steel blade HURTS. EDIT: I stopped fighting in plate when I broke a strap on my right leg and had the whole leg slip down enough that my kneecap caught in the lames above the knee cop when my opponent slammed into me. That hurt WAY more than getting hit. Dropped me like a poleaxed steer. Feild plate... great protection, lousy mobility. One of the things I like about HERO is that really good armor has really good penalties... its quite true.

Re: Stat Inflation perhaps I didn't make my post clear enough.... My campaign is a 250 point Epic fantasy campaign, and yet still the heros have to respect the city guard, or face the consequences. Its all about character design, having broadly designed characters, clamping down on powergaming, and making sure that low level threats don't ACT like mooks.

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced? looked at from a practical fighting POV, block is an active defence, whereas Dodge is a passive one. In RL fighting, blocks cover both stopping an attack cold and deflecting an attack so that there is no impact. Missile deflection, IMO, is basically an adder to block that allows it to be used on ranged attacks. One of our Irish games we used to trot out at faires and special occasions like Lughnassa is a varioation on the old Irish Spear feat... The object is to hit your opponent with a javelin while avoiding being struck. Catching an incoming javelin and hurling it back is an accepted part of the game. Our more rigourous version, used for initiations and to wow onlookers, is a variation on the Fianna trials, where 9 people each have a javelin and the target gets a stick to defend himself. Personnaly, I have about a 80% return rate on the first game, and about a 75% success rate in avoiding being hit in the group game. So Missle deflection isn't exactly a superpower... for thrown weapons, its pretty easy, with practice.

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings? Hmmm.... Hadn't really thought about DR.... I'd be inclined to agree with RDU neil and say that the body is determined from Stun before DR, but I'd then let the DR reduce the damage. I like the rule for the same reason you mentioned, Zorn... I've seen major brick on brick slugfests that have resulted in NO body damage at all, even with old skool haymakers in play. When Granite got slammed with a 90 str haymaker (old rules... 27d6 damage) and then knocked back into an "unbreakable" wall for another 22d6 or so damage (in an average 14 DC campaign) and took NO body damage, it just felt somewhat wrong. Maybe not crippling amounts of harm, but like someone else mentioned, it just seems that in there circumstances, he should have come away a bit cracked up. My martial artists tend to be very low DEF compared to their offence, so I'm OK with thier body taking rate (and MA characters are the most common DR heros in my games, usually), but your standard brick is nigh invunerable in many circumstances. Heck...In one star hero game, a PC in Jump Armor launched a VERY large missle into an underground fuel storage tank, under a skyscraper in the underground parking structure, basicallly causing a Oklahoma City bomb effect with himself at ground zero. He took no body. The player didn't even blink at the iidea...he knew that he was effectively immmune to normal attack body, so he did something his character probably wouldn't have done logically. He got a stern talking to afterwords, but it made an impression on me as a GM. (I also let him know that the next time he tried something that stupid, he was going to run into a GM fiat intervention) EDIT: I did make him miss about a week of game play, however... The suit had sufficent life support systems to keep him OK, but there wasn't enough leverage for him to dig himmself out Petty, yes, but so was his munchkin approach to the fight.

Re: Stat Inflation Interesting thread. I have to agree with Storn on a lot of his points... I've been a live steel fighter at Ren Faires for many years, and the Str minimums (and to a lesser extent, weapon damages) are gaming conventions that have been flawed from the get go. I am a 6'2" beanpole, weighing around 160 lbs, without a whole lot of muscle, and I usually fought with either a Claymore (greatsword), a 5' hafted bardiche (great axe), or a bastard sword. Real honest metal weapons are a LOT easier to weild than SCA clubs, which is where I suspect a lot of the original game systems got the idea that big weapons require high STR to weild. (this, BTW, is also tied to a lot of the old Runequest/Arduin/Arms law fumble rules, most of which are self admittedly based on SCA combat... real steel weapons tend to be less clumsy than their rattan counterparts... Its REALLY hard to make a "combat safe" padded version of a melee weapon that actually balances the same way that a real weapon does) I can see the Extra Str to offset penalties, but its still a bit clunky...and it still falls a bit short. Last week, I was installing wheeled dollie on a piano... which I turned over by myself, then accidentally snapped the head off a case hardened lag screw while installing the wheels. Neither of which I should have been able to do, according to my "lifting capacity": STR. Anyway... to the topic at hand... My FH games have been 100+150 (for 250 points) for a very long time. In my personal opinion, the standard hero "normals" are FAR too normal. I can write up your average serf as at least a 25 point character, more likely a 50 pointer. I usually make solider types around 50 ponts base, with a few disads as appropriate. In my campaign, character shtick stats have almost always been over CHA maximum. The Conan type had around a 28 STR. The Grey mouser type had a 5 speed, and a 21 dex, IIRC. It really isn't all that hard to rescale things up a touch, and makes for a more cinematic/literary style of game, IMHO. As an example, look at the characters in the Belgariad. A good argument could be made that a significant number of the characters are in the 18-23 STR range, yet thier designs are sufficiently arctypical that no character steps on anothers shtick. As for my soliders... They all get package deals. Most have a few skill levles. They average around 13 str. the well trained ones have levels wiith coordination, unit tactics and the like. They fight as smart as they should. Veteran troops from a war torn border are going to be a LOT meaner than the town volunteer watch. One of the nice things about using HERO for heroic level games is the potential fear and loathing factor. Being Covered by a half dozen heavy crossbows should give most folk pause.

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings? I don't know how the rule was written in Fuzion (*shudders*...I can't believe that there is actually a rule from Fuzion I'm considering using....) But I'd play it on an attack by attack basis... every 20 stun inflicted in an attack, through defences = +1 body damage minimum (if more body penetrates then don't add additional body). No extra bookkeeping, and allows a bit of Body damage in a Supers game, something that seems to be lacking, especially from Normal attacks. IME, Body damage in champs games tends to come very rarely, but then in big chunks, unless taking body is part of a characters Shtick (wolverine clones and the like).

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings? I like this....it gives a bit more game rules effect to the "Real" limitations. I'm also thinking about adopting the 20 stun damage +1 body blunt trauma rule mentioned in another thread, probably again for "real" armor only.

Re: Punisher Vs Batman

Re: Punisher Vs Batman With the caveat that I like both characters and haven't read comics in over 15 years, I'm gonna take an unpopular POV and look at this froma gaming standpoint. Both characters are obsessed vigilante types, with enough available funds to do pretty much whatever they want to do. Both have extensive gadgets and other focus related groups of powers. Both extensively study every martial art they can get their hands on and incorporate such manuvers that are most efficent for their needs (very similar to the way Bruce Lee created Jeet Kune Do in R/L). Both fight to win, not for flash. Both have beaten supers through nothing but training and skill. Both rely on research and gathered intel to tackle tough opponents. Both have been handed their asses on occasion by non powered bad guys who have simply gotten the upper hand. Bats is the better detective. By far. As well as the better gageteer. Punisher is the better shot. Practice makes perfect. Punisher tends to pull a win out of the jaws of defeat more often, from what I've seen. He really seems to have a handle on the "The more I get whooped, the better I fight" talent style constructs. Bats does the "He who fights and runs away, lives to study the opponent and hand him his head in a rematch" better. Completely ignoring examples from the comics and working off character ideas I'd say that they're pretty well matched. In practice, I see the characters as very similar on paper. Granted, Bats has probably an extra 150 xp on Punisher, and for that reason, I'd give the nod to Batman, but I think that it'd be a lot closer than most folk are saying. And I suspect that Punisher would out and out KILL Joker... J:"Back off or I kill the girl." P:"No, you won't" **BLAM** J: "Gurgle"

Re: light saber color signification Anyone see Foxtrot in todays Sunday comics? Speculation (played out with action figures) about why Anakin turns to the dark side... One theory... Obi Wan gives him a pink lightsaber and he snaps

Re: EC balance fix I've been pondering this topic, and the thoughts I've been having are that EC needs to be reworked in much the same way that the old Gadget Pool rules were reworked into the VPP rules. Steps are as follows... #1) Rename it to something more neutral (Concept Pool? ) #2) Boost the Control cost to 1 RP per 1 active point #3) remove most of the "illogical for all aplications" built in limits on the EC #4) add a variety of metagame based Advantages and Limitations to the control cost to allow for simulation of different types of pools... thus the current EC would have something like: (-1) One power source: Any Adjustment power effecting a power in pool also affects All other powers in pool and control (-0) Any Stats in pool are required to take No Figured Stats at full limit value (default limit) (Incedentally, the option for advantages and limits on the control allows for more use variations on the power without GM hand waves... Have a +1/2 Advantage: Persistant powers OK and suddenly GM permission is no longer needed. Or a +1/2: Stats in pool generate normal figured stats. Presto. Problem solved.) I think that EC has had something like this coming to it for a long time, myself. It has always been a bit of a holdout from the "Good Old Days" and really is one of the last constructs that NEEDS to be dragged kicking and screaming into the toolkit age.

Re: The Random Champions Project To be fair, I haven't used the Random Generator in the Champs book, but if you use the program mentioned, be prepared for an interesting campaign world. EVERYONE will have Code VS Killing. Even the Bad guys. unless you tweak it. Or perhaps there is some option in the program that I'm not aware of.

Re: Long Term Endurance Limitation Works for me. The extra limitation value will certainly contribute to the use of this on "mighty powers" which feels right for a lot of magic systems.

Re: Long Term Endurance Limitation Incidentally, Burning LTE for spells really helps create a metagame effect that results in the genre convention of mighty mages who are reluctant to unleash their powers. Yes, Merlin can send Uther after Ygraine, but it means he's gonna have to sleep for the next 6 months.

Re: Long Term Endurance Limitation I've done what you're suggesting before. I usually consider it a custom limitation Burns Long Term Endurance (-1), to represent really taxing spells that take a long time to recover from. I've also used a Side Effects (spell cost X5 normal END cost, all taken from LTE) as a global limitation for a magic system, to represent situations like the scene from the Belgariad when Belgarath overexerts himself and is laid up for days. LTE works great for these kind of effects. I realize that some folks might think it shoudl be greater than a (-1), but it seems to work well for me.

Re: A grenade thought... I knew I got these from somewhere... I've still got all my old Firebird stuff around somewhere. the original Golden Age of Champions had a lot of ideas I used for my first Star Hero campaign (besides the grendage rules, I remember using AP capped extensively for AP-HE small arms. Thanks for the fond memories

Re: A grenade thought... Hey...we may have actually found a use for the "requires a OCV roll" RSR variant from the revised Edition. Can't say it'd work quite right (I don't have a copy... I only got Fred a year ago, and am not up to another $50 upgrade). But it sounds like it may. Sigh... back when I first dreamt these up, I handled them with a fixed OCV to represent the quantity of fragents. Could still be done, I supose... remove the Non selective, add a RSR OCV or a limt requiring 2 attack rolls (to place the greande, then to see the effect) and add OCV levels for the second roll... hmmm...

Re: A grenade thought... The reasoning here is that there have been plenty of examples of folks in frag explosions and not taking any actual fragment damage, while others get riddled and wind up perforated. I've also used a similar construct for a minigun similar to Reason from Snowcrash, using a 10 shot autofire, AOE line.

A couple of thoughts crossed my mind while I was pondering grenade write ups... I've always liked the idea of doing a Fragmentation grenade as a: 1/2d6 RKA, AOE radius, non selective, autofire(5) as the basic construct Now on to the questions... #1) autofire is normally doubled for AOE attacks, by the rule that it uses a special attack roll. Would this still apply to Selective and Non selective attacks? #2) Grenades are classicly bought as Charges, for obvious reasons. Autofire attacks consume 1 charge per shot. Can anyone think of a less clumsy way to sim this than Clips (so each grenade takes an action to prepare) of 5 shots each? #3) I don't recall ever seeing anything in the system that accounts for an autofire AoE or explosion that is simulating one blast that can hit the targets within multiple times, rather than being spread to multiple targets (like an autofire grenade launcher). I'm thinking this is a +0 limit. Thoughts?

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

Re: Hitting things with Thrown Things you have a point there, and thinking about it, I seem to remember the Digital Hero article addressing the same problem, with the ultimate suggestion of adopting approximately the same manuvers you just suggested in place of the current ones if you're going to play with freeform standard manuvers, as the basic versions of the various Fmove manuvers are among the few that don't balance out, pointwise. Worth pondering still...

Re: Hitting things with Thrown Things Nahhh.. I don't have problems with either as part of standard manuvers... they cost enough that the balancing negative elements would work it out... there are already several FMove +V/x standard manuvers...Move By, Move Through, and Grab By. Why couldn't you make another as long as it balanced?

Re: Hitting things with Thrown Things and as a post script...I'm leaning more towards the "any manuver you can write up for 0-1 point is OK by me for you to use if you can justify the effects" school of combat manuvers. Something I saw in DH, IIRC. Seems to fit the genre conventions well, and allows for more combat flexibility. With the addition of ranged MA manuvers usable as "standard" manuvers, it allows for tricks like an Energy Projector cutting the legs out from under a fleeing opponent without requiring the character to pay points for the manuver.

Re: Hitting things with Thrown Things I just caught up with this thread, and in rereading parts of it, I had another "devils advocate" thought pop up that messes with the established cannon... While I realize that this falls into the "Its a weapon, so it can ignore the rules" category, think for a second about a bullet. A little hunk of lead, 1 body tops. I don't know the DEF for lead, but seeing as you can cut it with a 1 pip HKA pocketknife, I'd say thet its got a pretty low DEF...say 2 So wouldn't that limit damage to 3dc for all guns? No? Why? Because somebody paid points for it is the "official" answer. Because its designed as a weapon is the "rules justification answer. Because the bullet imparts more energy than it can sustain in damage and in the process destroys itself is the "real world" answer... the last of which is a decent argument for why you should be able to inflict more damage with an item than the def+ body say max DC with an improvised attack as DEF+ (BODY X2)... enough body to "Destroy" the object, not just "Break" it. Any attack exceeding DEF+BODY breaks the item and renders it useless for further actions... but for that one shot, you should be able to inflict more grief with it than its mass based damage, to reflect the force involved as well. I agree that Genre conventions should support Bricks doing more damage with improvized weapons... I'm in the Why else would they use them camp. On the point balance scale... would you allow a character to take advantage of the extra DEF from hiding behind a high DEF/BODY item without paying for the extra defenses? Hows it different? Heres a few "Optional Standard Genere manuvers" I quickly threw together.. all manuvers use the default WE: Improvised weapons group all manuvers are built at 0-1 pt cost as per "standard manuvers" listing in UMA, pg 150 perhaps assume that all manuvers have a +/- 0 limit that any improvised weapon must have def+body= at least (Str/5)/2 to gain any additional dice Bash +0 OCV -1 DCV +1d6 damage Smash +0 OCV -2 DCV +2d6 damage Crash +0 OCV -2 DCV +3d6 damage, unbalancing Wallop -1 OCV -2 DCV +4d6 damage, unbalancing, time+ Fling +0 OCV -2 DCV +2d6 damage, ranged manuver Hurl +0 OCV -2 DCV +4d6 damage, -2 RNG mod, time+, half move required, ranged manuver