Mike W

I think it depends on the character's definition of "human". In a world where aliens exist, this becomes more problematic. However, I think that undead...things that by definition have already died and shold be dead are easy to justify "killing". A particularly religious character might even look at it as a service(restoring peace to their souls). Demons are, in any religion/mythology that I'm aware of, defined as 1. Clearly not human and 2. Irredeemably evil. So again, most characters can freely kill a demon for the same reason you shoot a dog with rabies - it isn't human and it isn't capable of behaving in a humane way(note that I did not say human way). Now if the demon appeared to show some kind of compassion or other redeeming quality it could get more dicey...assuming it was genuine.

Q: In what kind of state is Dick Cheney's health? A: 42(A classic I know.)

You don't really need True Invulnerability when you have 75% Damage Reduction. Combine that with 40 points of DEF and a high STUN total and you might as well be invulnerable to everything. And you can get virtually unmissable attacks by giving a character just a few CSLs. I also think that there should be a little chance to miss, no matter what -and not just on 18. But then, at 14- you're at 90% to hit.

Doug, the vast majority of people I've played were smart people, not average but above average intelligence. Some of them like playing dumb characters, which is fine. I don't though because a lot of the fun for me is figuring out what's going on and what the GM is up to - and so I want to play a character that actually could figure it out.

I'm a smart person so I never play dumb characters. I usually pile on the skills too, though the character type obviously has a major influence on what I pick. I usually go for characters with above average defenses(though I generally don't play bricks so they aren't tremendously high). I tend to like characters with a variety of offensive options too.

I have a couple of favored characters or archetypes(though I'm trying to move away from the archetypes), but I always make sure to put a good chunk of points into skills. I like being a skill monger, though different characters pick up different skill sets. I hate people who play game breaking characters. People who have so many defenses or such huge attacks that the GM has to pull out people that are way out of power for the rest of the group who can do little more than try to set up the big gun for a haymaker. If you can't play within the power guidelines of the game, then don't play.

Points and power level are not quite the same thing. When my GM decided to run a 350 point street level game, I took an old four color character whose background would fit and adapted him. It worked out fine. His variable pool got cut in half and replaced with more skills. A little other tweaking went on too, but he's basically the same character other than the VPP modifications. What makes it "low-power" is the increased restrictions on what yo can buy. We all want to play street level, so we accepted the increased power restrictions. We did play a Star Wars game on 100+75 for a while too. You'd be amazed at how well it converts - once you get past the basic idea that Star Wars ships are designed in a way that NO ONE with even the slightest military background would design them.

I can live with the occasional error on the character sheet. We all make mistakes or write things down wrong from time to time. Hopefully, we catch them before they come up in game. But the two things that really bug me are: 1. Players who aren't ready/paying attention and need to ask not one question, but several or who need a whole recap of the situation. Be prepared. 2. Players who play versions of the same character, over and over and over again. The player who is always a brick of some kind for example. He's got the dwarven fighter in D&D, the 80 STR brick in Champs, the Wookie in Star Wars, and on and on. 3. Noisy eaters who just HAVE to eat at the game table. 4. Players who don't take criticism from other PCs well(or even don't recognize it). I once played a Champs game with a someone whose character went off half cocked all the time and when the other players told his character "no, don't". he said "well, it's what my character would do so shut up!". We actually had to sit down and explain to him(even though he was an experienced gamer) that it wasn't the other players talking,it was their characters trying to rein in his and he need to be more calm about the situation. We almost had to kick him out of the group.

Yep, I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree Ghost-angel.

Ghost-angel, The being you just described obviously needs to buy uncontrolled on its power - it isn't in control of it(and the case could again be made that it should be built as multiform, not shapeshift) but in either case, you're essentially changing the basic definition of the power - whether you're in control and pay END or whether your body is in control and you're not is a big difference in the definition of the power. And even something in a "constant state of flux" had to start out as SOMETHING, even if it was nothing more than a gelatinous pile of goo.

Ghost-angel, If you're building it as a multi-form, then it's not really shape- shift like we've been talking about and works differently. Multiform is persistent, shapeshift is not. The question has been, should a character be able to pay for "only costs END to shapeshift" and then not revert when they are knocked out and should they have to pay end to change. I would argue "no" to both because shapeshift, as it is defined in the book, should turn off when the character gets knocked unconcious and not cost END to revert to "normal" because a shape shifting character, by definition, must have a "default" form and returning to that default form WOULD be turning the power off. You build the werewolf who thinks all of their forms are equal with multiform. You build the one that reverts with shapeshift. And sorry, picking up a glass is not the same thing at all, though I don't think too many people who got knocked out would hold onto one they were holding when it happened.

I've always advocated use of Anti-hero types. Not outright villains per se, but people who see themselves as heroes but have methods that the heroes wouldn't sanction, or who have different agendas that may/may not be sanctioned by the authorities. Such characters make the PCs think about where they actually stand/ what they stand for and whether or not they are even heroes. Someone like the Punisher, or even Mr. Sinister was as much anti-hero as villain. Marvel turned Venom into an anti-hero too. Spidey's rouge's gallery was full of anti-hero types.

Actually, I think you would be hard pressed to define a special effect where reverting to base form is not the power "turning off". Also, the idea that you could have a power that costs END to change you to your base form when you are concious but which changes your form when you are knocked out, yet does not cost END is, to me, impossible or nearly so. After all, the power shouldn't revert you to a base shape if it doesn't turn off - unless maybe you're buying the power with some kind of concentration limit, which would not be the same thing. Even then, I've never seen a GM that would let you have an effect that normally costs END operate when you're unconcious. I'd argue such a thing should be bought at 0 END if it's going to change your shape while you're out.

Actually, in looking through the book, you would get a lot more than 17" with a 60STR and double KB - you'd get at least 40", running you might make a case for 80, this is comic books after all. It takes a character 4 segments to fall 40", and 6 segments - half a turn - to fall 80" - that is a LOT of time in a combat, not to mention the fact that after 6 segments the character crashes into the earth at terminal velocity - and takes 30D6 damage. Believe me, 60STR with Double KB on throws is PLENTY.

My GM and I decided that it does not cost END for me to resume normal shape because I am effectively turning the power "off". Also, if you would revert from getting KO'ed - wouldn't you take additional STUN damage from getting KO'ed, then reverting and having to pay END you didn't have? Logically, you shouldn't pay END for turning a power off.

You're doing this the hard way. Buy Double KB as a naked STR advantage with a -1 limit, only on throws. With a mere 60 STR, you get an average of 17" of KB on each throw.

For reasons I posted on another thread, I'm against eliminating END, it's a balance factor. So to is SPD. People with higher SPD should, generally, have lower DCs and such. And the SPD difference is relative to the comics/movies too. After all, Bruce Lee gets more punches than the bad guys, Hulk doesn't act as often as, say Capt. America(but he hits a lot harder than Cap), and so on. Players need to be thinking ahead. The GM in our games has, for years, worked out a SPD chart in advance so it is simply a matter of looking down the chart to see who goes next. Players are given a BRIEF time to ask questions to clarify the situation or to debate and then they HAVE to declare an action or they are passed and their character is declared indecisive(they can still use the action if they think of something before their next phase, the character is assumed to be holding). Combat goes smoothly and we can run a full adventure with a 5 on 5(or so) combat in 4 hours or less consistently.

Perhaps a bit lazy, but certain things in the comics/movies just work differently too. I've seen websites who laughed at the Spiderman movie because the force of catching the bus should have ripped his arm off. Well, to me that's just too picky, particularly since Spidey's physiology ISN'T human, so normal physics have to take that into account. Cap's shield is a bit of a crutch for the writers, but at the same time it is of an especially hard and sharp mythical substance, it gives you some leeway. After all, most people can't punch through a brick but if you watch the Karate championships, you'll see people breaking several at a time.

Alright, I'll do this the short way since the system won't let me do the long answer. END is a play balance factor. It affects a lot of things including: 1. How often you can push. Most characters should only have 20 END or so left after two turns of combat - if they never push. And since combats(at least in our game) generally run 2 - 2.5 turns, pushing a lot is risky. Plus, if a player is spending more on END then that is fewer points they are spending other places. However, keep in mind that PUSHING IS SUPPOSED TO BE JUSTIFIED NOT A CASUAL THING. So any character pushing more than once in a fight better have a psych lim kicking in or extraordinary cirucmstances. 2. Advantages like 0 END and Charges should be watched carefully for justification and play balance - just like any other advantage. 3. It helps balance SPD and DC. There isn't much point in having an 18D6 EB and 9 SPD if you can't afford to pay the 81 END per turn it takes to fire it. 4. Eliminating END gives characters back all kinds of points that were spent on END and controlling END cost - not mention almost requires that you lower the cost of CON which would give them back even more. Most players are going to put at least half those points into combat stuff which makes everyone more powerful unless... 5. Instead of only limiting "stressful" powers(which wouldn't come up very often at all) you made all powers pay STUN - but that would really cause problems as now every character would want 100+ STUN and the math would be really screwed up. Also, pushing would virtually disappear since only the heroically stupid would do it. The bottom line is that there should be middle ground between what you're describing and what you're proposing and I would argue that said middle ground would be to actually enforce the rules as written and with an eye toward game balance.

One of the things that has been most useful to me is the Ultimate Martial Artist books. Not just the maneuver lists, though those have been very helpful but the origins(so I can give a character a geographical correct art) and the power listings. Those are the real "extras" that can help distinguish one martial artist from another. Boy did that Suppress Fire power come in handy last time.

You still get one freebie and have to pay for the other. I would say this because a) It is game balance. Characters shouldn't be buying beginning skills/powers/contacts etc without it being written into their background. It might give the character an excuse for purchasing an exotic language(I once played a character with a legit reason for knowing Iriquois in his background), but the character should have to pay for it the same as any other character would have to pay for background skills.

I find it hard to believe that END never comes into play. What about pushing? What about the character who gets knocked to -3 STUN and wakes up with 7 STUN(and therefore 7 END)? What about long fights that go 2- 2 1/2 turns? We always buy enough END to last at least two turns but it still comes into play from time to time.

I'm not fond of the recovery from CON stun rules either so we generally just say that you get the CON stun recovery unless you have been CON stunned again. However, we still say that you can't take a normal REC if you take damage in the phase.

Yeah. My brain's not working today. At any rate, I saw a character(once) built with 5 point of Flash Def, resistant, hardened.

One, He was a gadgeteer who liked to use flash grenades. Not sure why you would both since AP/Penetrating Flash is almost unheard of.