Angaros

Whoa Steve, I didn't mean it like an insult and certainly not as to imply there's an objective worldwide standard to adhere to. We seem to come from different schools here but the books I've read about typography and layout all insist on margins being used in a particular way. I agree that this reference to a supposed authority (the books) isn't a real argument (philosophically speaking), but I cannot fathom how miniscule margins (not talking about sidebars here) can be a careful design choice. Perhaps Andy can enlighten me. I am honest when I say this. No smirking sarcasms. Hearing about how people think when they design a product is often very informative and in itself a creative experience. Just to make it clear what I'm saying: I'm not demanding an explanation, I'm curious about the motives for this aspect of the layout since I don't share your opinion on the end result. edit: Kolava mentioned having an inch left to spare at the top of the page. The margins in my book are (inner, top, outer, bottom) 20, 15, 10, 5 (in mm). Just to make things clear: I'm not at all talking about sidebars., but the whitespace ousidethe three columns (including the page header).

I'd like to see an improvement in layout, or rather a facet of the book's layout. As it is now, HERO 5th stands out as a well-edited and nice book to read. I don't find the language particularly dry (maybe that's because I'm used to reading scientific papers on color reproduction and similar stuff), and the art is also good. BUT, there are virtually no margins. I understand that there's a lot of text that needs to get into as thin a book as possible, but I don't find that a good enough excuse for taking a nose-dive with this part of the layout. The margins of a page is not the space that is left after everything else has been put in. It's a form element like everything else (typeface, type size, leading, column size etc.) and it does affect readability, first impression and so on. I know I might come off as overly zealous about something that others might consider a minor issue (or none at all), but I've worked a bit with layout professionally and it annoys me when a game this good lacks a basic layout quality. Apart from the margins though, the game is well-made layout-wise. Thanks for listening.

Umm yes, that's right. +5 for a sense and +10 for a group.

Thanks for all the input! I believe a part of the solution lies in defining what you want ghosts to "be" in your setting. They could consist of some sort of paranormal energy occupying our own plane of existance or be entities living in a "realm of the dead" somehow partially co-existing with our own plane. If the latter is chosen, the question of how (or even if) ghosts affect people in the mundane plane. Using the "other plane" version, I'd probably use the +10 Clairsentience adder for other dimensions to both normal sight and hearing (for a total of 20 points). This option has the advantage of actually being sight with an advantage rather than a detection ability working similarly (or even identically to) sight. If the first option is chosen (paranormal energy in our plane), the Detect version would probably be preferred. I guess I'm over-theorizing considering the power was for a test character I built to understand the system and for a setting not even existing, but it was a fun exercize. Again, thanks for the input. (@L. Marcus: Jo det är alltid trevligt med svennar på ställen man frekventerar. )

The Excel sheet is nice Midhir, but your Tables tab has a small error. It says that a Toughness of 4 equals a CON of 19. I guess it should be 10, right?

Watching Frighteners got me thinking of this ability that Michael J. Fox's character has: being able to see the dead. How would you describe it in game terms? Would you do some form of Enhanced Senses or some heavily limited and modified form of Clairsentience? The effect I'm looking for is being able to see and hear dead people, like Fox does or the kid in Sixth Sense...