Markdoc

Hey Shadowpup, tell us what the problems are - there may be ways to solve them. cheers, Mark

Actually I kind of like the independant limitation - it changes the flavour of the game and makes the gems very much more the focus of play. A player who lost a gem they crafted might be pissed off, but by the same token, they could find or steal someone else's, so it would balance out (indeed, knowing player characters, it would more than balance out). IF, OTOH, the gems are just replacable foci, then they become far less of a factor in the game. What's the big deal if you can easily replace your magical gems in a session or so? Then they just become a focus like mistletoe, OAF, -1. cheers, Mark

I'd use the standard Hero system rules as far as DEF went, with the following addendum: real armour automaticaly provides half defence vs most firearms (black powder weapons, pistols, shotguns, submachine guns, carbines) and 1/4 defence against high velocity weapons (rifles, heavy machine guns). Unsually heavy or well made armour could be "shot-proofed" - giving it full DEF against low velocity weapons and half DEF versus high velocity weapons. for example, Military helmets count as plate (DEF8) but only give 4 DEf versus low velocity weapons, shrapnel, etc, and 2 DEF against rifles and machine guns (better than nothing, but not by much). As for adventurers - the primitive kinds of bullet-proof clothing avaialable in the pulp era have already been described - I'd say 4-6 DEF, with an activation roll. Several adventurers in pulp fiction have been described as having chain shirts under their clothes as added protection - I only allow DEF4 for this kind of concealable chain because it was a) lighter than the heavy mail worn by medieval knights and obviously didn't have the heavy padding they wore under their mail (or you'd look like the Michelin man). One thing that might be of interest - the Australian highwayman Ned Kelley made himself a suit of heavy armour - when cornered by the cops, their bullets simply bounced off his armour, letting him do a one-man-army impression. Unfortunately, he didn't armour his legs, and was captued when his legs were shot out from underneath him. That suggests DEF8, full value against handguns. Also in WWI the original German Stormtroopers were issued with heavy Metal armour for the neck and torso - it was supposed to be proof against small arms fire. Neither of these are very concealable, however. cheers, Mark

The rule for magic loot in FH is EXACTLY the same as for D and D. If you give away mucho magical goodies, it will alter the campaign balance - doesn't matter if it's a Vorpal Hackmaster +12, or a Sword of cutting anything (+5d6 HKA, O END, OAF). As for letting charcaters create magic items, the rule is the same - I require rare and precious ingredients, whether running D and D or FH, so making a magic item almost always involves some downtime and a quest (or 6). The one exception is alchemist type chracters who are easier to do in FH - if their main schtick is turning out one use, powers-as-items, then that's OK - it's essentially the same as a mage's spells. cheers, Mark

Very nice system! It's one of the few I can imagine myself using - high praise from me. A couple of questions: as I understand it, all spells are essentially items and independant. Do you envisage them as being usable by anyone, or would you need another skill to use the powers? If so, would you let players buy that skill, or would it only come as a part of a package deal "Before you can learn to summon Great Wolf Spirit, you must know the names and mighty deeds of all the shamans of the wolf clan!" In short - are magic users a defined class, or can you have "dabblers" in magic - or is magic something everyone uses? I can see cool possibilities for any one of these options, but since the mage characters have to pay points to make new items, it would seem to disadvantage them if barbarian swordswinger Grod the mighty can use them too. cheers, Mark

Yep: I loved the original illustration for the adverts, which showed a cowboy in chaps mowin' down a passel o' horse-thieving varmints with his his tommy gun... Cowboys with tommy-guns? I'm sorry, but that just feels wrong :-P

I'd dump the Weapon familiarity - there's no reason that they can't buy it if they want to do weapons training, but I can't see it as compulsory. Many fine strategists (Bishop Absalom or Jan Hus, for example) probably knew enough about swords to work out which end to hold, but weren't fighters. I'd add in some options on economics - understanding money flow has always been a hallmark of good Strategists. If you can choke your enemies means of production while keeping your alive, your odds of winning are greatly enhanced. Finally - in game terms, how is PS: strategist, different from KS: Military strategy. I know the difference between a PS and a KS - but I am not sure of the utility of having two skills that function essentially identically. cheers, Mark

One thing that people tend to forget about elves is that in general although fantasy elves are really long lived, if not downright immortal, they still live life 24 hours a day just like humans and they have to eat just like humans. You could of course alter this (I did for my game, in which Elves are Faerie-like creatures) but in most games, elves are just long shelf-life, new age, humans with trick ears. Given that, I see no reason to suppose they would learn more slowly than humans - they can read just fine - nor that they would idle their time away. "Legolam, Legolam, the orcs are attacking! Where's my new bow?" "Oh, I'd thought I'd get around to starting it tomorrow. Or maybe next month...." Farming, or even harvesting from the forest, making buildings - none of them work well on the "maybe later" principle. I can see elves learning to be more farsighted - but to be fair, most people live to 70-80 years old. How many of you are actively working towards what you'll be doing 40 years from now? cheers, Mark

Yeah, just try to think of them as talents. We started using HERO for fantasy games before champs III came out, and there was no FH (or any other heroic level rules, for that matter). My epiphany was looking at the HERO rules and thinking, "you know you could build a stilletto by simpling making an armour-piercing dagger". OK, it seems pretty obvious today, but at the time - compared to what was available - it was a revelation. I sat right down and immediately converted all the DandD weapons to HERO system, then went round to show my GM friends who all went "COOL!" Within a couple of months we had 4 heroic level games going. All the characters were built like little teeny superheroes. If you wanted an elf character then you paid points for your 2d6 HKA (bow) and your 6 PD/4 ED chain mail. You paid for funky senses and got pointy-ears thrown in as a special effect. So it was just as logical for your lightly armoured fighters to buy "invisible armour" which is what we called what is essentially combat luck way back then. I've used powers-as-skills ever since (called heroic feats in my games). Not only do I enjoy designing characters that way, but as a GM, I find characters with special abilities are generally more fun to run games for than lookalikes. cheers, Mark

These are actually three different things, although the special effects are kinda similar. I would suggest 3 different powers. >>>>Spell 1 Copy book<<< In this case, what you are doing with the transfer to scroll is not copying the book, but carrying around a copy of the INFORMATION in the book in an unintelligle form, that you can later turn back into the book and read it. Since in this case you are copying something you already have, that's no big deal - although it would be a nifty spell for stealing stuff from libraries. It could also be used to carry secret information in an unreadable form. My suggestion: minor transform - blank book into copy of book. Transform requires an OAF (scroll, which must be inserted between pages of book to be copied - probably counts as -1 1-/4, since you need the book to be copied) and trigger (insert between pages of a blank book and say the mgic word XEROX, +1/4) since this simulates the fact that the transform does not occur instantly and that you don't have the copied book on you until you trigger the spell. >>>Spell 2 preserve paper <<<< Pretty straightforward, I think. As described, this does not make the book invulnerable (so you could still burn it, for example) but it will not fade, get dogeared and the ink won't run if it gets wet. Useful for an adventurer. Suggestion: Change environment: dry, even temperature - only applies to paper (-1) continuous, uncontrollable at 0 END (+2). That should keep the book dry if immersed in water, but would not protect from the force of magical jet of high pressure water. In such an environment, the paper would age slowly, so it wouldn't last forever, but given how old some of the paper from various dry places in the world is, it should be good for a couple of thousand years. >>>Spell 3 repair paper <<< This is different again - you don't want the paper back, you what what was written on it. Useful power - a scrap of a possibly incriminating letter beomes much more useful if you can regenerate the whole thing, including signatures! Suggestion: retrocognition - only usable to reconstruct paper fragments (-3/4), usable by another (+1/4) - since you could give the reconstructed paper away to someone. Hope that helps. Cheers, Mark

My approach has been: 1) limit the spells magic users have access to - they have to spend considerable time out of the game researching if they want to make new ones, or they have to find them or pry them from the cold dead fingers of other mages. That lets me control what I let into the game, without setting absolute limits, which I detest 2) allow mages to use power frameworks. Since the VPP costs real points and the MP can only have the common limitations, that means high active point powers normally mean a significant outlay of points. These are points that the fighter types can spend on Stat.s and CSLs. This gives the mages flexibility at the cost of raw power. 3) allow everybody else to use power frameworks too. If the mage has a "powers of the ice gods" spell multipower, the thief can have a "cool thief tricks" multipower, giving him nifty tricks like better stealth, vanishing teleport, etc. 4) restrict points. If you give everyone 150-200 points, with power frameworks in the mix, expect heavy-duty characters. 5) enforce genre limitations. In my games, there are certain (fairly severe) limitations that all mages (PC and NPC) must take, which reduces their effectivenes sin combat (concentration has already been mentioned). A thiefly multipower could contain cool climbing, hiding and door-opening tricks - but not flight or energy blast. Remember all power frameworks must be approved by the GM. My approach is that it sounds like a cool genre thing, it will probably work. If confronted with a "Ki-energy-wielding mutant tiger-man multipower" I'd just say no. cheers, Mark

Like most Fantasy GMs, I have had this problem. And like already suggested, i have thrown out the FREd encumbrance table. I levy the following penalties for armour - light, -1, medium, -2 and heavy, -3. This aplies to PER rolls, DEX-type rolls (climbing walls, juggling, etc) you need to decide what falls into these categories - for me it's DEF 1-3, 4-5 and 6+, modified by how much coverage you have. This rewards the lightly armoured fighters by making them a wee bit harder to hit and is justified not so much by weight as the fact that armour overheats you, restricts your movement and your vision, and is just plain noisy. Sure i've seen armoured guys do rolls and backflips, but I have never seen an armoured guy do it as easily as an unarmored guy. Secondly - and more importantly - I restrict the situations where people can wear armour. If you want to visit the important official, or the secretive mage, no way are you going to get inside their castles wearing obvious armour. Likewise, in many societies, riding cross country in full armour was like declaration that you were looking for a fight. If necessary inflict armour-all-the-time players with crippling sores and skin diseases. These were real problems that afflicted medieval soldiers when they were compelled to wear armour for long periods. That doesn't mean the characters can't HAVE heavy armour. My players used it for battles, dungeon-bashing and midnight assaults. It's just that a lot of the time, they carried it in armour boxes. Which, funnily enough, is what medieval warriors used to do a lot of the time. The bonus was, when the players broke out the heavy armour, they felt really boss - since it made them much tougher than they normally were. cheers, Mark

>>>Originally posted by Markdoc You must remember to give none of the chracters an INT of more than, say, 5. :-) <<<< Well, I was being facetious, (hence the smiley) but the comment was based on their inability to identify really obvious-looking bad guys as perhaps just a teensy bit untrustworthy. Or to stay out of trouble for more than 15 minutes at a time. Or to learn from experience. Or to refrain from blowing things up that perhaps should not be blown up, or.... :-) Speaking of really obvious bad guys, is it just me or is there anyone else who loves the evil councillor in Dragon Half? He carries around a bucket of water and a lump of dry ice, so he can generate his own "creepy bad guy ground mist". ;-)

>>>> Strontium Dog - another 2000ad convert. Mutant bounty hunters in space, loads with scottish accents for some reason. Go yersel McNulty.<<<<< OHHHH god yes. We did this - I still have wee soft spot for my character Mad Gary "scarface" McSlaughter. His mutant power was regeneration with side effect: bits would grow back wrong or in the wrong place. So he ended up with a nose on the back of his hand and an ear in the middle of his forehead - stuff like that. He also had a bad habit of shouting things like "Does yer mother sew? Well get her stitch this up then!" or "That fer YOO, Jimmy" while killing people. I loved that game. :-) cheers, Mark

Yep. There's all sorts of things that you can do like this. In Lacramar, in my game, the temple of Creastor the Watchful in Temple Ward had a stone statue out the front, facing a heavily-trafficked street. It had a detect spell (detect gold) and a visual/audial illusion permanently on. When someone walks by with plenty of loot on their person, the statue of the Goddess apparently turns and points and commands the wretch to enter the temple and make a sacrifice to avert approaching ill fortune. Mostly it catches people new the city, since local merchants go round the other side of the block :-) But you never know - local rumor has it that people who ignored the statue suffered a variety of evil fates (His ship was wrecked. All his hair fell out. His daughter ran away with a Kvarch-Nari mercenary). Cheers, Mark

I'd be pissed at a GM for just saying "it works". Well, to be honest, disappointed rather than pissed. But if you just upgrade it to more active points, then hey, that's fine. Just don't tell them :-)

This is theproblem though - if you let players violate the points limits to Summon Balrogs, them everyone is gonna want one....

If you were talking about a heavy leather coat, Storn, I might agree with you but leather armour is normally both much, much thicker and also padded. We know from historical accounts that both leather and cotton armour were cappable of stopping arrows. So I'm happy with 2 DEF. Cheers, Mark

You must remember to give none of the chracters an INT of more than, say, 5. :-)

I use shields as DCV or OCV for a block ONLY. In the old days, we tried allowing them to act as armour, but that was grossly unbalancing. A guy with decent armour and a big shield could walk cheerfully into a hail of balllista bolts, confident in the fact that they would bounce off his 14 DEF Plate armour plus shield combo (stops all the body from a 4d6HKA on average!). Missile deflection is a skill. You can do it with a shield, but Tajima the Arrowcutter did it with a naginata, and modern practioners use a wooden sword. It's not built into a shield. A shield does make you harder to hit with an arrow - that's what the DCV bonus is for. As for using it as a wall, that makes as much sense as bracing yourself so the impact lands on your breastplate.... If you want to avoid damage from an impending impact, go fluid, don't brace. In truth, a shield will soak up some damage from an attack, so I could see some argument for allowing it to act as extra armour (not a wall though - stun will still go through from the impact - this I know from experience!). But from a game balance point of view, I do not allow it. Shields do not normally take damage in a block. The point - as with a weapon - is to slide or bounce the attack away, not stop it dead. Of course someone can always attack your shield and try to damage it. As for offensive use of a shield, you can use it as a weapon - even a non-spiked shield can still be used as a club - but it takes an OCV penalty equal to the DCV bonus and does only +1-3 d6 HA, depending on size. You can certainly hit harder and more accurately with a club.

Actually it wasn't a dumb idea - it's different from the standard approach, but it should work. It'd give mages a higher starting skill roll, at the cost of the fact that it would drop off rapidly. It's easy enough to justify if you think of lifeforce/Ch'i as the source powering the spell - a kind of "internal magic". The big guy might start with an advantage but a mage who learns to husband his internal energy (Reduced END) or who builds up his Ch'i (buys extra END or CON). The fighter analogy is not a good one - the fighter doesn't normally have to make a skill roll to use his sword in the first place, so the mechanism is different. A similar variant I played around with to model Runequest magic was that spells cost EGO and your magic roll was based off EGO - but also that to "resist" a spell cast on you, you used EGO combat. So the more spells you cast, the easier it was for enemy spell casters to target you... In that game world of course, almost everyone - and certainly every player - has some magic.

If you want useable streetmaps instead of isometric views, hit the web and check out tourist board sites for medieval cities in Europe. I was in Siena last week, and came away with a lovely large scale street map showing the city walls, the gates, squares, churches, castle, etc, etc. File the serial numbers off and your players wil never know :-) cheers, Mark

It's not just for wizards! Wealthy merchants in my game - at least in the more civilised parts - consider birightly lighting the area where they live an useful precaution against thieves, footpads and player characters. You can get around the character point loss by casting one long lasting continuing charge, which just needs to be topped up every 5 years or so.. cheers, Mark

My concern is that it would raise the bar in terms of potential abuse. OK, the GM could control it, but there's enough abuse potential in most magic users worry me as is :-) Letting someone take extra time to cast their invisible armour spell, which is a single charge lasting one month, for example, is a tradeoff most mages would gladly make! And that's speaking as someone who LIKES multipowers in FH! My solution is to split ritual magic off as a seperate category - a way of harnessing magical powers too powerful for a normal mage to control and remain sane. If they want to buy the 167 point SCAR LAND spell to render a whole province uninhabitable - which is not something you do every day - then they can but it as a heavily-limited power outside the MP. MPs already have the potential for severe abuse in a FH game - I'd be very wary indeed of lifting the cap on them cheers, Mark

I'm with GradonSilverton on this one. I am quite happy to do a 50d6 Dispel - that's kind of obscene, but fits within the game universe. Staying within the game universe not only makes things happier for the players - they understand how the universe works - but it also makes things easier for the GM. So yes, it is possible to blast an attack through the magical armour of negation, though it would take an archmage to do so (average of 175 active points!) But the GM gets to play with all the concepts that such a device creates. Who could have made such a thing? Why? Where did they get all those active points from? Do they have new way of making magic items or a source of mana no-one ever thought of before? If you just say "It negates magic. Why? Because I want it to. How? Who knows?" then you lose all of that. As a GM, I appropriate the right to use as many points as I feel necessary, but I always stick to the same rules my players have to use - and I let them know that. It encourages them to use their brains when they find something they don't understand, instead of assuming "it's just like that". OK, sorry, rant over ;-) cheers, Mark