Markdoc

Re: Macho HEROes With Guns Thanks, Steve! But I didn't find it, I made it - rendered in Bryce, with fairly heavy reworking in Photoshop. It was inspired by reading two comments here - this thread plus a comment (by von-D-man, I think) about his Escher gang in the Necromunda game. I also played an Escher gang who had a lethal "heavy" with a big gun ("Machine-gun Sally" ). So that's her. Provided an amusing couple of evening's work. cheers, Mark

Re: What have you used Hero for? Good heavens. A dead thread shambling zombie-like back to life.. Well, I've run: Two superheroes games - they only lasted 3-4 months. I like the genre but have difficulty sustaining my own interest. I think it's because you tend to start off with fairly-rounded characters, so development is slower. A science fiction game set in the WH40K universe: I've run one-shots in this setting which were good fun for all involved and the players convinced me to run a campaign. Mistake: it only lasted a few sessions. My only fizzer to date. I think this was because I wanted to run a dark and gritty mystic conspiracy campaign and most of the players wanted to Shoot Things with Big Guns. Medieval Japan. This is the only campaign I've actually replayed. I started while I was living in the US and really enjoyed running it, but we only got half way through the story arc after a bit under a year and a half. Then I moved to Europe. I ran it again from the start and this time we went weekly for over 2 1/2 years. Fantasy. Still my preference. Started the game (in my own world) under dee'endee, ran it for 2 years, then, like so many of us, converted to Hero, ran it for 2 years under Hero and took a year off to hitchhike round the world, came back and ran it for another two years, then moved cities to do my PhD and ran a side game set in the same universe, but with the players playing immortals for another 6 months. I like running long-term games which means I haven't actually run that many. I've played in: Standard Supers games - I've played in several, but only one actually had any legs and that was the game that introduced me to Hero. Ran erratically for three years. EPT - Roleplaying in Tekumel. Great game. I played for 3 years although the game was older and mutated from using the Fantasy Trip to Hero for rules. Ended when the GM went to Australia, curse him. Bog-standard fantasy. Only once, strangely enough. Another Dee'endee game that shifted to Hero under my beneficent bullying. The GM was excellent but tended to be a wee bit obsessive - which meant that the games were brilliant but he required 6 months prep. to run a three month game... Cyberpunk - actually Mike Surbrook's Kazei 5 game. I played for less than 2 years, but the game was older than that. Much fun while it lasted. Modern Martial arts - an excellent game and successor to K5. Sadly died after about 6 months, when a lot of players got tired of their characters being used as punching bags. Wimps. Judge Dredd. Actually two different games. The second was a bit of a fiasco, but I loved the first game - the GM for that one was a big fan and got the atmosphere just right. Sadly, only lasted about 4 months before the game self-destructed over out-of-game personl troubles. Strontium Dogs. As noted earlier in the thread: mutant bounty-hunters in space. The GM with the failed Judge Dredd game ran this, a bit more successfully, but his tendency to turn PCs into bloody corpses* ended it after only a couple of months. I think that's it (barring one-offs or occasional games) Cheers, Mark *This ended his superhero games too: the following exchange was famous. GM: "OK, Morningstar has hit Gecko, doing (rattle, rattle) 21 BOD and 84 Stun, killing. How much are your resistant defences?" Gecko's player (in a tiny, tiny voice) "Ummm. Resistant defences?"

Re: New Limitation: Does not Stack. Gm's please look >>> I think this is beating around the bush. I think you should just tell your players what maximum defense they can have. And tell them not to have that cap, would unbalance the game.<<< Well, every GM has their preference and some do use caps, but we have tried this and it has not been conducive to good play for several reasons. 1. It's arbitrary - and a lot of players don't like that. They especially don't like it if the NPCs are not subject to the same cap, which tends to tie the GM's hands a bit. 2. It tends - like all caps - to lead to a rush to the top. So your heavy armoured fighter has DEF10, your wizard has DEF10 and your rogue has DEF10. Balanced, but not so much fun. 3. What's a suitable cap in the first 6 months of the game when the opponents are city guards, thieves and orcs doesn't fly so well in the second year of the game, when the opponents are Demons and wizards. That means either laying out a progression in cap based on character points in advance (possible, but more work, and it tends to distort character balance a bit) or adjusting it as you go - a fine art and also even more conducive to a "gamey" feel. None of this discussion is saying use such limits instead of social factors - it's in addition to social factors. Saying "Wizards don't wear armour, because it's considered a sign of shoddy workmanship in their spells" is fine. It does nothing to stop the Rogue or the fighter who wants to combine combat luck with plate armour and a ring of protection, though. In general it's a poor GM who can't get some licks in on the players when they are not tooled up to take it. But often they addition will be tooled up and this discussion is about how to keep that from getting out of hand - without having to be heavy-handed. cheers, Mark

I got bored: here's Uhklor, priest of Solf (the god of Volcanoes, debauchery, sexual deviancy and suicide) - my PC from a runequest game cheers, Mark

How about: ================================= Blood madness plague Power: 2d6 BODY Drain (Plague) Specific Modifiers: Recover 1 per hour (+1), 0 END (+1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Continuous (stops if victim makes 8- Recovery roll after each BODY Drain, +1), Uncontrolled (+1/2), 14- Activation Roll (-1/2), Recovery roll makes target immune to this spell thereafter (-1/4), Drain only effects specific target species (-1/2). PLUS: Power: 6d6 major Transform (into blood crazed man-beast) Specific Modifiers: linked to plague (-1/2), triggered by successful recovery roll (+1/4) Combined specific Modifiers: Sticky (Can be carried by host species and a single species of vermin) (+1/2), Costs END to cast (-1/4), No Range (-1/2), OAF Major Sacrifice on Altar, immobile (-2-1/2), Gradual Effect (every hour) (-1), Extra Time: 1 hour (-2 1/2). Active Cost = 322 points, real cost = 40 real points. END Cost: 32; Magic Roll: -32; Casting Time: 1 hour ================================ here's how it would work: you come in contact with a plague victim or the requisite species of vermin - the GM makes the activation roll. If it fails you're not infected. So you are OK - for now. If you are infected, you lose 2d6 worth of Body each hour - but you recover 2.5 Bod as well - so on average you'll lose about 1 BOD per hour. This will kill most people in a day, tough or lucky people in less than two, but with healing magic they might linger on for a while. If you make the 8- recovery roll, you'll recover in a few hours, but you also get the transform attack - so you could turn into a bloodthirsty monster. If you survive all of that, you'll be immune. Lucky you! Alternatives are: Dump the vermin carrier and sticky and increase to a megascale area effect instead. That means the plague is restricted to a closely defined area rather than a general area, but means anyone entering the zone will be affected. It will increase the active cost and real cost a bit. I didn't define how you recover from madness - you could either heal naturally - in which case it's a temporary stage (brain fever) or it could require some kind of holy intervention in which case it's more curse-like. Finally, I put the immunity thing in because a) it reduces the cost and I'm an immunologist: I like that kind of thing and c) I like the idea of plague-ravaged survivors who could be wiling to act as guides into the wasted area. You could even have desperate surviving villages, who expose their youths to plague infected rats. With the attentions of a healer they have a decent chance of surving the plague and if they are are tied, and get the brain fever, well.... Hope that helps, cheers, Mark

Like von D-Man, in my game nothing stacks with real armour - or indeed with anything of the same kind. So a forcefield ring would stack with magical armour, but not with a necklace or a spell that gave force field. And because I'm cruel, that was just a -0 that affected everybody and everything in the game. I agree totally - stackable defences are just too unbalancing at heroic levels. cheers, Mark

I agree that independant is inappropriate - unless you can carefully cut the skin off and keep the power intact (I was mostly joking, but it conjures up a great picture of powerful characters decorated with mummified body parts taken from enemies...). I would treat it as an OIF, with the further limitation "power destroyed by damage" - that's worse than an OAF, since you lose the points invested: with an OAF you lose a power if you lose the focus but you can always make a new one. With this power, you lose the points AND the power. So -1 1/2 seems right to me: halfway between truly independant and OAF. Last of all, although like the idea that you can only have one tattoo per body part, I think saying that the tattoo can never be replaced once lost is a bit harsh. If you never do it to players, they essentially get the points break for free. But if you DO do it, then the player loses the power, the points invested AND can't replace it with something else - significantly weakening him compared to other characters. Personally, I think that is a bit rough. I realise you probably want to keep magic restrained, but occasionally scarring and taking away points is probably good enough. There should be some way to overcome that - even if it involves chopping the old limb off and regenerating it! cheers, Mark

The limitation sounds about right to me - it is a pretty significant decrease in power. Two things to think about: Would you make it compulsory on all magic protection spells? If it wasn't compulsory, I must admit, if I was a mage, I wouldn't take it. Secondly, does it apply to all magical protections? By that, I mean, if the rogue finds a magic ring that adds +3 DEF, would it also have the same limit, or would he be able to add it to his leather armour? cheers, Mark

Fusing two threads here's a macho women with a gun from the WH40K universe. Totally irrelevant, I know, it simply happened to be on the zip disk I used to bring some files to work this morning. Cheers, Mark

And you can go here for a bunch of lower-powered critters http://www.angelfire.com/ok3/markdoc/gothick_empires/bestiary.htm cheers, Mark

I'm not sure if I would allow PSLs (strangely enough, in years of running FH, this question has never come up...) But I do allow complementary skills for exactly the reason you state: it gives mages something else to spend their points on and differentiates one mage from another. I also levy penalties for doing things like spellcasting in combat, but give bonuses for extra time, good tools and settings, etc. So the smart mage only uses those high active point, big penalty spells when he can afford to take some time, has all his magical gear to hand and has a bunch of minions on hand to prevent any interruptions! cheers, Mark

Well, not technically speaking roleplay, but I just love this (anyone who's familiar with the Sisters of Battle will get this.... ============================== Sister Superior: All right, Sister Catherine. See that Dreadnought over there? Go ahead and fire your meltagun at it. It's just like those passenger vans we were practicing on back in Rosencrantz. Sister Catherine: That big red one over there? With the claws? SS: Yes, that one. Paste it. SC: (shouldering meltagun) Because red things are bad, right? That's why I'm shooting the hissy gun at it? SS: Um...well, not _all_ red things are bad. The Flesh Tearers are our allies...technically... Sister Margaret: Barely. SS: ...Right, Sister Margaret, but we all recall what happened the last time someone used a meltagun to carve 'Sanguinus sucks!' on the back of one of their land raiders, don't we? And don't confuse Sister Catherine. SC: I'm confused! I thought I just had to shoot it, not spell something on it. SS: Just ignore Sister Margaret. Go ahead and fire the hissy gun at the dreadnought. It's a very naughty dreadnought and it deserves it. Sister Patience: You can do it, Sister Catherine! We beleive in you! SS: That's right...our prayers will guide you. Fire away, Sister Catherine. SM: (muttered) Because we're paste if that dreadnought gets in charge range and you only manage .500 on parked vans. SS: That's QUITE enough, Sister Margaret! Look, she's crying now. I hope you're proud of yourself!

They made a D20 version of Macho Women with Guns? You're kidding, right? If you are not kidding, what's next? The D20 version of Spawn of Fashan?

I use Totemic magic for the Vanaquisl people in my FH game. It's somewhat different from what you suggest - and from other magic systems iin my game - in that it's one of the few magical styles that uses an EC. Also totems are not just animals, but could be spirits of a river, fire, ancestors, or even demons. Here's the write-up from my FH pages: ================================== The other major "schools" of primitive magic are the Totemistic mages. These spellcasters gain their power by partial surrender to a more powerful force. Totems do not have to be animals. Many Vanaquisl mages have "spirit totems" - they can call up spirits of the dead, to animate zombies, answer questions, or even summon deceased heroes to possess their bodies. Of course, possession can also be an associated (and dangerous) side effect of a spell. The most feared Vanaquisl mages have Demon totems, giving them access to a wide range of powers - but also some extremely nasty side effects. Characteristics of Totem magic are : Side effect and Jammed - when summoning greater forces, incurrring their displeasure is always a possibiliy, and it is always possible that they will not come at all. Summoned powers are notoriously difficult to deal with. Not required, but usual, are Focus (totem items), Gestures and Incantation Totemistic magicians tend to specialise in (but are not limited to) divinatory spells, possession (multiform, etc), increased attributes or movement powers (appropriate to the totem), shapeshifting and summoning (Totem beings, etc). An example of a totemistic magic-user is the Vanaquisl warrior Karam Braineater. An accomplished warrior, Karam decides to become a hero-warrior, a position of much prestige. For this he needs a totem, so he seeks out a well-known (and widely feared) mage said to control demons and after a brief tutelege undertakes a quest to bind his own totem. In this he is successful (since he has been saving up his experience!) and gains the following powers : 6 points Elemental control (demon powers) 60 point reserve. All spells take the limitations Jammed 14- (-1), Requires a skill roll (-1/2), Side effect (12 d6 mind control [possession],-1), Concentration (0 DCV, only to turn on, -1/2), extra time (1 turn, -1), Incantation (to turn on, -1/4), Requires Mana (-1/4) for a total of -4 1/2. 5 points 6 d6 Energy blast, damage shield @ O END (flames). 5 points 20 PD/ED armour (iron scaley skin and iron-like muscles). Both these spells have the limit. "takes END to cast" for a further (-1/4), since they are reduced to 0 END 6 points Soul-eating. 1d6 BOD Transfer, +12 max, ranged (+1/2), continous (+1). 13 points In addition, he learns the spell: Summon (Demon mentor, built on 200 points) with the same limitations - he can't put this in his elemental control since it is not a demonic power per se. As can be seen, Karam has spent a similar amount of points to a more commonplace mage, but his attitude to spells will probably be quite different, and there is no chance of mistaking one for the other. Karam has only one route to gain spells - his demon can offer them to him, but it will almost certainly ask a dear price for each one - sacrifices, the death of another hero-warrior or the use of Karam's body for a while. If he fails his skill roll while summoning his mentor's powers, Karam is likely to pass (albeit briefly) into his mentor's control, where he will suffer for any past breaches. If he fails his "Jammed" roll, the demon will be inaccessible for some time, until Karam can placate him. ================================= In my game world "lycanthropes" are also totemistic mages, so you can't catch "werewolfism" from being bitten. Wild or dangerous lycanthropes are simply mages who have lost control of their bestial nature and are possessed. cheers, Mark

I tend to use a rule of thumb - 2 points for an average session, 1 point for routine/easy and three points for good work. Then, in addition, I give bonuses - 1 or 2 points - for really kickass ideas, roleplaying, etc. So 5 points is tops for a session. In this context, "session" is a significant part of an adventure, but it might not be a whole adventure. So if the current part of the ongoing storyline involves deposing an evil wizard who has taken over the city where the players are living, then it might break down into sessions like: 1. find out WTF is going on and who is responsible 2. Try to kill the bad guy (tBG) (GM has determined this won't work snce his lifeforce is hidden somewhere else) 3. Find out why the tBG can't be killed 4. Find an oracle who can indicate where tBG's life is hidden 5. Get to the place where tBG's life is hidden 6. Destroy tBG's life 7. return home and cleanup That could be from one month to 4 months weekly play depending on how fast things go and would generate anywhere from 10 -30 Xp.s In general, 2 years frequent play will run out a story arc and lead to players with a fairly bad-ass character in the 200's point range (I tend to start off at 100 points). If possible, I "retire" these tough characters, and start afresh - but I often write them in in the background of the ongoing stories (players get a kick out seeing other people grovel to "their" old PC) - occasionally these ubercharcaters turn up to play an active role in the game, either as patrons to new characters, or as full PCs to take on major threats. Note - in my game, a veteran soldier will run 25-50 points, so a 250 point warrior would kick serious ass! This kind of overlap can be fun - Mike Surbrook and I played around with it in a series of game - his character in a modern martial arts game (circa 1990's) was the father of my character in his cyber/magic game (circa 2030) - and my characters in the first game, were the descendants of some of the NPCs in my Medieval Japanese game (c. 1500). OK, a little off the "how much XP do you award" thread, but just to introduce some ideas for what to do when the XP totals start mounting up. cheers, Mark

Yeah, Nightshade got it - the "divide real cost by three for powers with the special effect Magic" means that magic users from the Turakian setting are really hard to use if you don't use that house rule. I called it a "weird non-hero system variant" because there's no way to accomodate it within the standard rules. A comparable example would be if the GM said in a standard superhero game "All bricks can buy their powers at one third normal price" Part of my disdain comes from my liking for Hero as relatively robust, balanced system - it irks me that a thief who buys invisibility in shadows as "extra sneakiness" would pay three times the cost of a character who buys the *exact* same power and defines it as "magic" Ordinarily that would not be a huge problem except for the fact that magic-users are the character type that typically take me the most time to generate If I can't use them, then that detracts a lot from the attractiveness of a FH product. Still, like I said, I'll wait and see: there may be notes on how to deal with the problem, or other material to make up for the fact that the mage characters are useless to me. cheers, Mark

One approach is to give the item a skill roll and base it on the CHA or power you wish to be relevant. You can also add the limitation "X per point roll made by: -1/2" Thus a ring of fireballs might have "6d6 EB, area effect, requires a skill roll: based on active points in fire magic, (-1/2), 1d6 per point roll made by (-1/2)" Ifrit the Inflammable with 40 points in fire magic spells has a base roll of 17-. He can use the whole 6d6 almost all of the time. His apprentice Grogan the Glimmer has only 15 points, he can only squeeze a 2d6 fireball out of it most of the time. Bork the barbarian can't use it all: although he wants it anyway, because it's shiny. Strictly speaking, there should be a specific skill to use such powers, but you can easily rule that this is an everyman skill. cheers, Mark

Yeah, but given that the Turakian age uses a non- standard system for magic, I must admit to minimal interest in it. I think it was collossal mistake for the first official seting to use some wierd non-hero system variant for magic, since that is an important part of any FH setting. I generally buy anything FH-related, and I'll certainly check out the the Turakian stuff anyway as a possible source to mine for ideas, but for now am waiting instead for The Valdorian and Tuala Morn settings. cheers, Mark

If you are strapped for cash, you can easily do without MMM. I bought it, and it's OK, but I must admit to feeling a little disappointed smply because so much of it is devoted to DnD clones, which are of close to zero interest for me (though I can still mine the book for some useful ideas, I think). However, if you play a DnD syle game with orcs and dwarves and elves an' all, it could be quite useful. I was kind of hoping for more minion types, though - sort of an "enemies" book for FH. Cheers, Mark

I read the Chrichton novella the Eaters of the Dead, on which the 13th Warrior is based - even as a teenager it was obviously Beowulf retold, but with some stuff from the real life character Ibn Fadlan tossed in. And like you guys, I thought it was great. So much so, that I wrote it up as an FH adventure and dropped it into my game long ago. At least one player had read the book (this was in - oh 1985 or therabouts, so no movie) but he didn't get it until nearly the end of the adventure. cheers, Mark

Dang - its name and author are escaping my overworked brain at the moment, but there was an interesting sci-fi novel that dealt with this predator/prey thing. The predators formed an overclass: their somewhat violent and highly ritualised society kept their own population in check and also stopped them from just wandering off and eating the "prey-person" who had come to deliver their new suit. The prey-people (ie: herbivores) were much more numerous, and they lived in villages, grew their own food and (eventually) ended up in the pot. If you wanted to do the whole furry route, you could adapt this idea to different races: Lion men are noble caste, since traditionally, they can beat up pretty much anything, while dog people are more "middle class". Cows are definately peons in terms of rights, but respected socially because they are the base of the social structure. (I can imagine a dilettante leopard writing a piece entitled "The noble sacrifice of the cow". Omnivores might be more middle class - they eat meat after all - but are probably despised by true carnivores for their disgusting eating habits and resented by herbivores for the same reason. You might buy your carpets from a Rat, but you wouldn't want to invite one to dinner... Of course throw weapons and armour - or firearms - into the mix and you have revolution brewing.... It's an interesting idea. cheers, Mark

well, you know, he's an old guy in a pointy hat. All GMs alreday have lots of old guys in pointy hats

And yet another way to do it is shrinking, usable against others, area effect, continous, 0 END, "only objects fitting fully through the mouth of the bag". Since it's area effect continous, anything in the bag is effected, between phases. Of course this gives you no way to "instantly grab what you want" out of the bag - but I kind of like the image of a player fumbling around in his giant bag for that item he needs Right Now! cheers, Mark

I have read the medieval village article - it has some nice ideas, but also some factual flaws. Nothing in it seems terribly relevant to this discussion, though. I must confess I have never heard of France Giles, although "Life in a Medieval Village" by Jean Gimpel covers land use in detail - and land use rights. The author also cautions against the idea of treating land as a commodity, or indeed the over application of modern concepts of ownership and property rights. I have no problems with basic economc theory - or with understanding your points - it's merely that I feel you are wrong in this case. Pretended expertise is hardly convincing. Anyway, if you are genuinely interested in the subject, i would suggest reading some of the work of Yoram Barzel, who is a specialist working at Berkeley (IIRC) in the field of medieval law and economics: he naturally has an interest in property rights as they did or did not exist at the time. A fair number of his essays can be found on the web, and unlike some of his colleagues, his writing style is easy to read. cheers, Mark

>>>Bottom line is land was a commodity, and tended to be used by the owner, however the owner wanted. This is not an all or nothing affair - owning land was part commodity, and part social obligation.<<< Not really. I think you are confusing the way land was obtained (often with a bribe) with the whole idea of feudalism which is that all land was a gift of the head honcho. In fact, what defined a king or prince was their ability to gift lands. A baron or noble family might hold lands larger and richer than the king's - but any fiefs that they passed out were held "in lieu" - in other words at the king's pleasure - at least in theory. Likewise, even the most powerful baron could not sell or give away part of his domain: that lands was the king's. strictly speaking all he could give away was the income of the land, as long as he owned the rights to it. When he died, the right of gift reverted to the king: that's why heirs had to do homage to recieve their father's lands: in theory the king could say no and give it someone else - and strong monarchs often did so. Here in Denmark, it was common for the king to switch families around to curb or build their power: take away someone's desmene and give it to someone else, then move the deprived family somewhere else. These rules of course really only apply to Middle Europe (Christian Spain, France, England, Little Germany) during the feudal and medieval periods and only where the rulers could enforce them (though the situation in medieval Japan bears many similarities). But within that context, land can't really be seen as a commodity - it could be neither traded, sold or converted, except by the monarch - and even then only within a fairly limited set of rules. cheers, Mark