Hyper-Man

Re: Martial Arts w/ TK

I had a Psi/Telekinetic character in a 250 point 'heroic level' dimension hopping game a few years ago who had this very combo. He had 20str TK with fine control and IPE for sight and sound. He also had Jeet Kun Do as a base MA with the addition of a Kenjutsu Takaway and Simgondo Rapid Strike. The GM and I agreed on spending an additional 1 point for a TK weapon element in addition to his blades and club elements. The character also had +2 Damage Classes with MA attacks giving the character effectively an 8d6 indirect TK punch.

The use of Psi and Magic powers had other limitations in this game that offset their usefullness compared to that of the skilled normals on the team. Namely, Psi and Magic abilities would not work at full power or at all on some dimensions/worlds that they visited. Of course sometimes this would swing in favor of the Psi/Mage characters since some worlds affected the properties of gunpowder and other technology.

Anyway, back on topic, the Psi/TK character had a martial block as well as Missle deflect 15 active points with a Str minimum built in (-1/4) so fighting an opponent with a HTH weapon or TK fist at range with MA bonuses was being paid for multiple ways. All the TK and MA cost about about 150 points which matched up pretty close with the teams mage who between spells and skills to use them had about the same points invested.

I think the combo is workable but you may run into balance issues if using this combo in a full Supers campaign for some of the same reasons discussed in the 'flying dodge' thread however.

Re: Autofire for OCV bonuses

Actually, all the autofire skills are just as easily viewed as combat maneuvers. Maybe this should be looked at in 6e. We have martial combat maneuvers, Multiple Attack maneuvers (Rapid Attack, 2 weapon fighting) and Autofire Maneuvers. Pull them out of skills and give them their own sections.

 

And charge points for them. Is it pretty easy? To me, that depends on whether you're trained with automatic weapons. And whether that training is a skill, talent, or combat maneuver, I think the character should pay for it.

The question then becomes what is considered 'everyman' manuevers as part of basic weapon familiarity. Maybe we need a two tiered approach for autofire weapon skills similar to that used for basic HTH and Martial maneuvers. However, it could be argued that the current Brace manuever is about half as effective as Dust Raven's proposed 'Tracking Autofire' skill. Again, good stuff to consider for 6e or maybe even the proposed Ultimate Skill book.

Re: Autofire for OCV bonuses

Eureka! (or maybe I just need a shower )

 

Tracking Autofire

A character with this Skill can use an Autofire attack to increase his chance of hitting his target. When attacking a single target, and firing the maximum number of shots possible, the character receives a +4 OCV with the attack. This Autofire Skill cannot be combined with others (because they only apply when attacking multiple targets). Using this Skill takes a Full Phase and halves the character's DCV. Tracking Autofire costs 5 Character Points.

 

---------------------------

 

Will this work?

 

It's basically based on 4 5 point levels with OIF (any automatic weapon/power), Instant, Full Phase, Concentration 1/2 DCV Throughout, Only When Attacking A Single Target and Must Fire Maximum Shots Possible. I've figuring that's about a -3 in Limitations, which results in a cost of 5, and functions just like any other Autofire Skill.

I like it!

Another great solution by Dust Raven!

Re: Autofire for OCV bonuses

I've taken a look at both this thread and the related thread and what I'm curious about is why know one simple suggested rolling for each attack w/ the autofire penalty and keep on rolling even if a shot misses rather than the current mechanic where you roll only once. Perhaps include it as a new autofire skill, Target Tracking, or something like that. Rolls for each shot fired, a miss doesn't make all remaining shots miss.

 

Under that effect you'd more than likely get the results you were looking for. As with each shot you would get an extra chance to hit, if only a slim one.

 

just my .01 cent

This is an elegant solution in one sense but would require an extreme number of dice rolls to keep track of. Also, what if you are firing at 'WonderWoman' ?!?

Re: Autofire for OCV bonuses

the mere fact that your trying to hit some one with say a 125shot autofire weapon would not grant any bonus in your view.

 

What SFX exactly? i use a autofire advatage is not a SFX, its a mechanic.

 

Why should a brick be able to hit some one with a AA car or bus or mountain, should they have to buy that as well?

It sounds as though you are comparing a mini-gun to a brick throwing a humvee. It's comparing apples and oranges when it comes to the level of 'realism' involved in a game.

Supers are not realistic, throwing of anything much larger than a moped requires extremely UN-realistic levels of strength.

For Realism:

• Most gas action full auto submachine guns have an inherrant muzzle rise that tends to make every shot after the first go higher than the last. A person familiar with this effect can compensate but it does not increase the chances of the 1st shot being on target, the autofire gives you a 'stream' of bullets that you can focus on an area like a water hose. This sounds like it would take more than 1 phase of firing. I beleive 'suppression fire' describes the mechanics of doing this in Hero.
  
• Technically, most bullets are supersonic and therefore should be considered a type of invisible attack since the only way to effectively apply a full DCV or dodge bonus would be to watch for the muzzle flash of the firing weapon*. If you want guns to be this difficult to deal with in your game you can give all gunpowder weapons IPE sight*+sound(supersonic means if you heard it, it already hit!) which would effectively make most targets 1/2 DCV since the only the muzzle flash NOT the 'bullets' are being perceived by the defender.
  

This really just comes down to how 'technically' correct of a 'game' you want to run or play in.

Re: Autofire for OCV bonuses

here's my nickels worth...

FREd updated many stats for 'real' weapons capable of autofire. I believe that it includes bonuses to ocv and range mods based on the weapons being fired in full auto mode. These extra bonuses were chosen to show the differences between different weopons that may fire the same round (do the same damage) otherwise. A long barreled weapon is usually better vs. range and a short barrel might be be better at close range.

Earlier versions of Hero gave a flat bonus to auto fire attacks based on # of shots. the new version does not. That does not mean that you can't add levels as part of an attack built into a focus however. Also, a character could buy 5 point levels only usable with autofire attacks.

Any 'extra' bonus for firing multiple shots could be thought of as the attackers reaction and adjustment to his first shots missing as in 'tracer fire'. I believe that a mechanic already exists for flooding an area with an autofire attack.

Re: Help me with a limitation for twins

:jawdrop:Am I the only one here thinking about this??

Zan and Jayna...

Wonder Twin Powers Activate!!

The Twin's forms can only change if they can touch.

Figure out how much this limitation would be worth and then usable up to 12" range should be about half.

Re: Plot device or by the rules

Yes, but then you enter the realm of "Yes, I know you had a 30 defense, 20 Body character survive a nuke in the past; your 35 defense, 50% damage reduction, 25 Body character still dies, because I'm the DM and I say so."

 

I *HATE* arbitrariness. The DM has no excuse for arbitrarily ignoring the rules when he has an unlimited point budget to play with.

 

IOW, if you want to absolutely, positively kill the players, then use some of those unlimited points to build an 35d6 RKA doomsday bomb, rather than exaggerate the effects of a real-world weapon.

First, different nukes can have different yeilds.

Second, how many dice a GM is rolling should not be known to the players, the GM should be the only person with a god's eye view of things.

Either the players trust a GM to create an interesting situation for them to interact with in a fun way or they just don't trust the GM. If the later is the case maybe there are other issues that need to be addressed.

The Rules (of ANY RPG) are a FRAMEWORK that the GM chooses to use, not the other way around.

Re: Exerience Wish List/Character Creation Question

One of the ways' date=' I try to deal with this possibility has to been build the character with some form of all the powers and skills that I want them to ever have just at lower levels, weaker, or with more limitations, and use experience to improve what is already on the character sheet.[/quote']

Thanks for the feedback.

 

I have tried this approach too. I think that how well it works depends greatly on how much 'steady' experience a GM plans on giving. I have also seen players purposely build lopsided characters with the intention of filling in the gaps later. It has been my experience that If a GM rarely gives out XP OR instead gives out lots of XP but tends to restrict advancement to the scope of the character you already started with it eventually leads to a unsatisfying gaming experience one or more players involved in that game.

 

With such a good system for mapping out a character's abilities right now, HERO does tend to leave XP advancement up in the air too much for the tastes of some gamers. By no means am I saying that a completely structured and mapped out system such as those used by D20/D&D for XP is necessarily better, just more structured from the outset which some players and GM's need from time to time. I am going to discuss this with an old friend of mine who is about to start a new Champions game as well as include the idea as part of a new multi-genre heroic game I plan on starting soon.

I was curious if any HERO GM's or players out there have ever been part of game in which players were asked to submit a wish list of things they wan't to be able to add with experience at the time of character creation?

I ask this because I have seen too many assumptions made by both GM and player alike after a character has been approved for a game where the player then gets upset that he can't buy something for his character (increased characteristic, power, skill, you name it) that he believed was part of the character conception that the GM later ruled to be unbalancing to the game. And not all cases were 'obvious' like DC or CV limits of the campaign. More often they were disagreements over what a particular character's future developement limits should be based on his conception or schtick (as some here on the board have called it).

Has anyone else (as a player OR gm) ran into this problem before and/or seen a formal sytem used at character creation like this?

As always, thoughts and opinions are welcome.

Re: Retractable Nanotech Force Armor - Part 2

I smell a munchkin!!

Re: Retractable Nanotech Force Armor - Part 2

Isn't there already a rule for OIF powered armor characters that if the character and by default the armor itself suffer body damage that any other powers bought as part of the armor (linked or not) may have a chance of failing? I seem to remember seeing an example like this somewhere in FREd.

I agree, the points in this case do not add up to much difference either way,but it seems to be another case of trying to determine exactly what is considered the 'standard rule'.

Re: Plot device or by the rules

I know almost nothing substantive about Amber. Do you find that the system penalizes people who are not articulate? If not' date=' how does it avoid doing so if the system is largely based on "descriptions" and "story-telling"? This isn't even intended as a back-handed criticism, I am truly curious. If it odes not, I wouldn't condemn it, though it would seem to me then that it is clearly for a specific subset of RPGers.[/quote']

The only thing the system might penalize is lack of imagination since the settng of the Amber books literally covers just about ALL aspects of reality. A full desription would take pages. Anyway, the 'Amber' series and RPG based on it are both just awesome and I strongly recommend them to anyone.

Re: Plot device or by the rules

It's amazing' date=' Hero and Amber are about as opposite in rules as you can get, but they are my two most favorite rpg systems.[/quote']

Two of the best long running games I ever played in were using these 2 systems as well:

• My first Champions game was run by a math-phobic GM who in effect ran it like Amber diceless before the game was invented. Almost none of the characters were book legal, we didn't care since the stories were awesome. Does anyone remember the Keith Giffen era of Justice League where Guy Gardner takes off his power ring and challenges Batman to a fistfight?(Batman one-punches GG, funniest scene I had ever seen in JL) Our game was LIKE that before Giffen started writing that book!
  
• My first Amber game which eventually turned into a throne war despite the best story telling efforts of the GM. The final outcome was definitely not boring.
  

Re: House Rules for Hit Location

Does anyone have a copy of or know what the Bell Curve percentages for 3D6 actually are?

I seem to remember that rolls between 8 and 14 add up to something like 50-75%, which would imply that odds of getting either 11, 12 or 13 probably end up being about 20-30% on the curve. So referring back to my original example below: 1 in 4 swings to the head (that hit on the initial non-adjusted attack roll) will hit with NO minus to OCV! as opposed to standard rules which just give the targeted shot a -8 OCV penalty.

Corrections to my math and/or logic are welcome!

 

Say a character is sniping at someone who has visible body armor (kevlar) but not complete head coverage. They aim at the face, they are getting a double chance at a direct hit with better odds it seems:

 

 

 

 

• If I hit by 8 more than the target's normal DCV, I hit the target in the head. (same as normal rules.)
  
• If I hit the target's normal DCV but not by the 8 extra I go to your chart and get the chance that a secondary roll of 11,12 and 13 also give me a head shot! (Wow, definitely not same a normal rules!)
  

Re: HKA Damage Sheilds?

What happens if you get a munchkin wet?

My appologies ahead of time for the scatterbrain structure of this reply. Feel free as always to poke holes in my flawed logic!

I did not use the Lightsaber/Energy Sword example in my earlier post because I have seen several different versions of this weapon concept that treat it as a RKA with no range (see Star Hero page 148) but not too many that use HKA with Str does not add damage. Seems as though the writers of Star Hero give RKA the 'energy' preference over HKA like I do as well.

I have never visualized the blade of an 'energy' sword as having any mass. The original method used by Lucas and company to render wooden sticks to appear on screen as energy blades is the cause for the swinging effort by the actors as opposed to what should be no harder to swing than the beam of a flashlight (I know, I know, too much realism!!) Now that modern special effects could maybe eliminate this 'flaw', Lucas chooses not to so he can maintain continuity and I can respect that.

On a related note i remember the comic 'Legion of SuperHeroes' had a villian team called 'The Fatal Five'. One member of that group called 'Mano' had one main power. A negative energy source on the palm of his hand that disintigrated anything he touched. I think most people would choose to write this up as RKA no range as well.

Another way to visualize the problem with allowing a HKA to do energy damage is when it is constructed with no limitations at all. This raises the question of how Strength is increasing the dice of damage on an 'Energy' based HKA? (I think this is what the designers of the Energy Sword in Star Hero thought as well).

Energy Blast actually is very easy to imagine as a PD attack, take a classic Green Lantern blast or any Telekinetic. I am imagining EB's higher than any punch based on the STR of the TK these characters may have. Granted GL should be able to choose either PD or ED based attacks based on the rings abilites but you get my drift.

I know I am probably splitting hairs on something that does not affect game balance but it does appear strange that Steve Long ruled that Damage Sheilds must use HKA wherther energy or physical based ( I guess he was visualizing the cleric spell 'Wall of Swords' from D&D or something ).

Re: KA: The power at the core of RKA and HKA

Sorry I did not give an example of why this might be a problem.

Instead of HKA take a look at the 'new' 10 point/dice KA in place of a RKA with a no range (-1/2) limitation. Yep, alone they cost the same. Does this hold true if they are part of a Multipower or a VPP? Nope.

Given: 60 point Multipower Pool

• (CURRENT) 4D6 RKA with no range (-1/2) still has an 'active' pool cost of 60. Only the slot cost will be effected by the no range (m8 or u4)
  
• (PROPOSED) 6D6 KA for 60 active and real cost, on the slot costs would increase (m12 or u6)
  

2-4 points giving a full +2D6 Killing is a BIG difference in my eyes.

Another example: If I want to use a multipower I have to have a 90 point pool to have a 18D6 EB even with no range (-1/2).

Also, 10 points does not seem to fit with the all the other 5 point /15 point breakpoints built into the system already with Damage Classes, Transform effects etc.

Even a 'META' system such as HERO appears to need its own smallest building blocks for a good reasons.

Re: KA: The power at the core of RKA and HKA

I like it.

A doubling of the standard cost of damage sheilds might make it fit more in line with current power costs.

The only problem I see is that the active cost of a 'straight' killing attack might be too low for the taste of some since it now means a 60 active point KA with no advantages is 6D6 !!

Re: HKA Damage Sheilds?

I am glad Dust Raven openned this thread, It's been too long since I communed with my inner munchkin.

I may be having a 'Mountain-Dew' moment but I never understood how an attack defined as an HKA, (that is an attack original defaulted to allow STR to add damage) be defined as doing 'Energy' based damage. I guess I never noticed the point discrepancy between the two methods but this special effect goof actually bothered me more.

Maybe I am getting hung up on the meanings of the words in too much detail. T To me Flame=Energy=(RKA or EB) but not HKA defined as doing Energy damage. Hand to Hand attacks have always seemed to have the implied meaning of PD damage and RKA could go both ways, but not the other way around.

Anyone else have this thought?

Re: Retractable Nanotech Force Armor - Part 2

Nice write-up,

I am curious about the ablative aspect though. I don't have a rulebook handy right now to verify but I thought ablative only loses defenses if body damage is taken (that is, in EXCESS of the defense). IF this is correct then the level of attacks in your campaign would have to be huge for the linked limitation on all the secondary powers to be truly limiting and worth the additional points saved.

Those with access to the rulebook please correct me if I am wrong.

Re: Damage Evaluation

I would take a look at some similar sized dinasaurs from Beastiary and extrapolate damage from there. Shouldn't be TOO different from a T-Rex other than swimming (sorry I don't have the book in front of me now).

Re: Plot device or by the rules

If you ever get a chance, take a look at the 'Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game'.

It is based on characters and events from the 'Amber' novels by Roger Zelazny. Like HERO it uses a point system for 'powers' and 'characteristics' but it does not define many set effects for any of them. Conflict resolution is all handled by comparing 'rankings' in whatever arena the conflict takes place.

The game power mechanics are admittedly tied pretty close to the setting of the books but the characteristics actually cover a lot that matches up with HERO quite well:

• Strength: covers HERO STR, BODY (maybe PD and ED* too).
  
• Warfare: covers DEX SPD as well as combat abilities for any setting (from swordplay to chess).
  
• Psyche: covers EGO and mental combat, magic.
  
• Endurance: covers CON, END and REC. (The main character from the the 1st 5 books 'Corwin' was described in the RPG as having the higest Endurance.)
  

A swordfight between say the #1 warfare guy vs. the #4 warfare guy WILL eventually go to #1 but #4 might win a battle or two if he can pull off a suprise. He might even win outright if he has a much higher Strength and is willing to take a sacrafice hit from warfare guy #1 for a chance to land a killing blow.

There is no 'random' dice rolling but instead the purest form of GM common sense at work. There is nothing wrong with doing this in HERO sometimes as well. Does every GM force characters to run the complete combat vs. the dozen Viper agents EVERY single time? If not, they are in effect, performing a mental 'ranking' of the players vs. the agents just like the Amber RPG and saving useful game time in the process.

Re: Marvel's Rogue

Again, saying about the same as what I mentioned earlier in this link

Moving on slightly, I am curious to hear everyone's opionion on whether the idea that ALL super-team members have to be or start at the same power level given the following:

• We have just shown that Rogue will cost more 'points' than most other 'X-men'.
  
• Phoenix goes without saying.
  
• Even Raven from the 'Teen Titans' probably qualifies to some degree.
  
• And the classic from the original 'team' comic 'Justice League': Superman who almost by definition is the most powerful superhero on DC Earth.
  

Now it seems as though the creators of both DC animated series have gone to some lengths to play down the power level differences to some degree and in some cases it makes sense. Green Lantern is pretty close to being as powerfull as Superman. Still, I think there have been episodes where Big Blue is purposely left out of an 'episode' to give the rest of the team something to do 'as a team' (that he might be able to handle on his own in some cases, see the 2-part Vandal Savage episode with the Rail-Gun as an example).

The idea of one character being more powerfull than others in a roleplaying game is not new. My old memories of 1st ed. D&D recall that a Paladin was pretty damn tough, the powers gained seem to more than balance the lower 'fighter based' characteristics.

Has anyone ran or played in a 'supers' game where one player was given a significantly more powerfull character like Superman and sometimes correspondingly more powerfull oponents that go with that level of power? And if so how did it work out?

Re: Marvel's Rogue

I think Vorsch's transfer suggestion the most 'mechanically' correct solution to the puzzle but at the price of extreme accounting requirements for both the player and GM.

see a related thread I posted in an answer to essentially the same question for someone new to HERO here.

Re: missile deflection for ego attacks

However' date=' I don't see any reason that you couldn't buy it Based On Ego Combat Value and then allow it to do so.[/quote']

Well, since all Ego powers are ranged by default and missle deflect is just a ranged form of the hth block manuever I would stress that this is really a campaign question on whether all mentalists have a basic set of 'mental' combat manuevers available to use or not, because if they do missle deflect becomes redundant.

 

If we are talking about a non-mentalist however, call him 'Reflecto-Dude', and he is able to deflect mental as well as normal attacks he probably should buy a SEPERATE Missle Deflect power BECV with plenty of extra levels. Ego defense with an activate roll might be simpler. Just depends on the special effect you are trying to accomplish. If the use of his power requires his concentration, Missle Deflect BECV is probably the more 'accurate' method to use.