Hyper-Man

Re: DnD Familiar's Ability to do Touch Spells ...

A couple of options come immediately to mind:

1. Buy the spells with the indirect advantage. With appropriate limitations like only what familiar can touch etc. The only question here is how to resolve any possible damage sheild effects on the caster.
   
2. Buy the spells with stretching, does not cross intervening space. Again problems arise on how to resolve damage to familiar and caster due to damage sheilds.
   

Re: missile deflection for ego attacks

According to FREd, missle deflection cannot be used against any attacks against a target's Ego Combat Value. (page 136)

A mentalist themed campaign however might be an appropriate setting to allow mentalists to use 'mental' versions of some HTH manuevers. I think that the 4th edition suppliment 'Ultimate Mentalist' went into to details like this.

Re: House Rules for Hit Location

It is an interesting chart. I am curious if has increased the lethality of your game? I assume that if no one 'picks' a target on the chart it is assumed to be 'ribs/11-'. If this is the case it normally would not change much.

I don't see the ability to target other locations as an opportunity to turn a 'hit' into a 'miss' as much as making it too easy to hit otherwise hard targets.

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!)
  

It's been a long while since I took a statistics class in college but this appears to increase my chances of getting X2 Body with no OCV downside except for the risk of some hits going HIGH. Way more lethal than standard rules in my opinion.

Not a criticism, just an observation. I know many players of heroic games look for different ways to make the game more lethal. This appears to be one of them.

Re: Weapon & Carry size rules

It looks like Steve and the gang already have plans for a new 'Dark Champions' and 'Pulp Hero', hopefully one or both or these will have the weapon size/visibility tables you are looking for.

Here are some links to the release schedules:

2004

2005

Re: Sidekick v FREd, among other things.

First off welcome to HERO,

FREd gives you access to more rule variations and examples of how to apply them. Sidekick was intended as an easy way to introduce the core system rules to a new player without overwhelming them with the full rules that can admittedly be a bit much to take in all in one chunck. FREd does include rules for hit location as well as for VPP's.

The Beastiary is the 'generic' creature book for ANY campaign setting, MMM is complementary to the Beastiary but is targeted more towards 'Fantasy Hero' games. They are both good reference material.

If you plan on running a Fantasy Hero game and decide to pick up the FH Grimmoire you would probably need to get both creature books as many of the summoning spells refer to specific creatures in both books. If nothing else all the mentioned books are good as reference material on how to construct certain combinations of powers.

If you are looking for information on constructing 'supers' check out the UNTIL superpower database.

Hope this helps, good luck

Re: How do you get players to role play in genre?

I applaud everyone's great ideas on this all too common situation.

It's almost like we need to come up with an equivalent to nicotine gum or 'the patch' for 'hack&slashers' who want to (or maybe just need to) quit but don't know how!

Re: Fist vs. Train

On to other types of attacks you spoke of like the sledge hammer example I would suggest using existing rules for item's defense and body to determine if the defender's weapon survives the block. If said weapon takes too much damage it still blocks 'that' attack but is then destroyed in the process and the defender either looks for another weapon to use or goes on barehanded.

If fighting an opponent armed with an Axe while barehanded, apply the rules from UMA that apply penalties due to weapon length on potential blockers in such situations. If the block is successful, it is usually due to the defender deflecting the handle of the weapon or the arm of the attacker (some movies show a defender grabbing a blade of an attacker between the palms of both hands, but this seems more like a 'Grab' or 'Disarm' manuever than a 'Block').

Re: Fist vs. Train

Sorry about the previous screwed up link,

Here is a working one: http:/www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16103

Getting back to your original question regarding stopping trains.

I am assuming that the primary goal is to STOP the train as opposed to just avoiding taking damage from it hitting you. If this is the case I have to agree that block should not be allowed to stop the train. It will prevent the character from taking damage but like a block performed by a player in the old arcade game "Marvel vs. Capcom" the block does not keep the character from being moved backwards. Sufficient strength, movement or knockback resistance would be necessary to accomplish the stopping part.

It's the same reason that Batman, regarded as the DC equivalent to Captain America from Marvel as being the best non-powered martial artist, can't stop a train with a block (Captian America might be able to with his 'Sheild' since I have seen it used to protect him from being smashed by the ground after falling out of an airplane, but that would be an application of 'knockback resistance').

The ability to stop moving objects (larger than someone's hand) is the primary reason that 'Boring old Bricks' are such an important (and FUN) part of a good Champion's game.

Re: Fist vs. Train

Hi guys,

For a more extensive discussion on the use and application of the BLOCK manuever see the following thread: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16103

Re: Psionics + Invisible PE in a multi-genre game?

Any game where the party turn up in a non magic universe will seriously annoy the magician of the group' date=' same goes for other arche types.[/quote']

I fully intend to use the risk of that happening as a story telling asset. It gives me access to a very easy mechanic to eventually give every character type 'their day in the sun'. Some worlds will have local physics that keep gunpowder and other high tech from working, others may instead enhance or remove limitations from mage and/or psi types instead of limiting them. The possibilities are endless. They may visit a 'Supers' world or a 'High Sorcery' world where the characters get a boost in power but the locals will still outclass them.

 

I don't like the personal energy vs. external energy argument since it goes against my personal definition of what fits in the Psionic category (Please let me know if this is similar to that of Rolemaster).

 

My personal definition of Psionic vs. Mage:

• Anyone can learn to be a Mage, some may have better aptitude than others but not just anyone can learn to use Psionics without some type of outside alteration to their brain chemistry or such.
   
  
• A Jedi is not a Mage. 'Episode I', like it or hate it, defines Force powers as something you are born with the aptitude to learn and control.
   
  
• This is very similar to mutants like 'Scarlet Witch' who just happens to be a good example of a 'tweener'. She has learned spell craft that enhances her mutant powers but it is not dependent on her mutant abilities to cast a spell like a normal human such as the skilled 'Dr. Stange', it would just take longer without her 'Hex' powers.
  
• Also, a Mage still has to use 'personal' energies to gather and manipulate the external energies that he directs via his spells, he just has to plan ahead more than the Psionic/savant who just happens to have a talent for one particalur aspect of energy manipulation of some sort.
  

I have used the term 'Psionic' rather than 'Mutant' up till this point in the discussion to point out that I do not want bricks like 'Colosus' or 'speedsters' like Quicksilver (Mutant? yes, Psionic? no to both) as PLAYERS in the game since each would seriously outclass the other varieties of characters present with either Extremely high defenses or high movement and speed.

 

I would not be suprised if anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 of my players are players decide on talented normals instead of the mage or psi options. Normals are the bread and butter types of this multi-universe. The exotics are the exception, not the rule. Super-exotics exist as they should in any setting but I don't want to referee 'those' uber-characters.

Re: Psionics + Invisible PE in a multi-genre game?

I'm not exactly sure what you are looking for, Hyper-Man. If you insist on using IPE, those Power will be more expensive, and rightly so. If you just want to differentiate between magic and psionics, but have the costs come out to about the same, you can simply choose a set of Modifiers to define each, or make requirements that each SFX must abide by.

 

One thing I've done in previous games is define magic as using "external" energy. Spells had to draw off an END Reserve, and all must cost END. Psionics used "internal" energy, and could be bought to 0 END or use the character's normal END. I also limited the types of Powers that could be chosen for each SFX (Mental Powers were almost always Psionic, for example). I also detailed what visiblity aspects of each would require (no Psionic "light effects"). Magic ended up being much more versitile and varied, but Psionics was a bit more powerful and sometimes cheaper, but tended to tire out characters quickly if used too often.

I appreciate your input,

I guess I am looking for a shortcut to something that there really isn't one for.

I want to avoid getting too specific in local 'flavor' of magic or psionics since this game is intentionally a multi-dimension hopping universe. the characters are mostly recruited for the 'universal' nature of their abilities, that is, they should be able to use their 'talents' in most places, a full super would probably not. Kind of the same logic used to explain Flash's power loss on Marvel Earth in the recent 'Justice League/Avengers' team-up book. Also a theme hit on in the Amber novels of Roger Zelazny.

I just don't know how granular I want to get on the parameters that I do enforce since I want to celebrate everyone's differences while keeping the game fun and playable. I want the feel to be similar in some ways to a wild D&D game with all the positives that the HERO rules bring to the table.

Re: Some holding phases questions...

Another way to look at the Viper example is when you walk up or down stairs next to someone else. Unless one of you is far more of a hurry than the other you both tend to follow the same rhythm in your steps. However, one of you could decide to syncopate your steps so that neither of your feet is 'hitting' the steps at the same time.

It is not waiting for a 'thing' as much as the absence between things, or troughs between crests in waves. It illustrates a granularity of the speed chart that actually fit real life.

GM's may want to require a rhythm check to accomplish this effect in the heat of combat since adrenaline tends to speed up one's internal clock but it makes a valid case that some characters should be able to have a 'god-view' of their timing. Captain America and Batman would qualify in my opinion.

Re: Manuver question as brain short circuts

Ok , here goes .

 

There are 12 Segements in a combat turn and a PC w/SPD 4 Dodges on Segment 6 . A NPC attacks in Segment 8 . Does the PC get the bonus from Dodge until his Segment 9 ?

 

In otherwords do Manuver Modifiers effect only the Segment they are used or do they carry over until the next Segement the PC acts in ?

 

Hope that was clear ?

 

Thanks

 

QM

I believe the rules state that any DCV bonuses or penalties for any combat manuevers carryover until the begining of the next phase that the character gets to act.

Re: VPPs and Limitations

But your 60 point pool costs 150 points' date=' so you've paid for that flexibility. And if you want more than one power at 60 AP, you need to limit the powers prety extensively.[/quote']

 

 

A good measuring stick to judge the usefulness of a power pool is to compare how it could be built with a more traditional Multipower.

 

Give it a 120 point pool and choose to build all slots as 'ultra' with a 60 active point max (not sure if this is worth a limitaion bonus on the pool cost or not). This gives you five 6 point slots in which any two can be used together. If you decide to tack on (1/2) worth of limitations on each you can get seven slots. Seems as though you could choose different limitations on different slots to 'cover' the weakness of the others about as easily as the cosmic pool. Not that I advocate this, I am just pointing out the similarity.

Re: VPPs and Limitations

I think this was the key concept I was missing. For some reason, I thought VPPs limited total powers by AP, like multipowers do. I understood the AP of a power couldn't be greater than the pool cost. I just didn't realize you "filled up" the pool based on the RP of the powers. This makes a little more sense now.

 

Thanks, everyone.

Glad to be of help.

And looking back I should have been more careful in my use of appropriate limitation examples as 'not in (certain situation)' probably does 'break' the intent of the rules.

Activates rolls, increased end and practically all 'spell like' limitations are appropriate ways to be able to use multiple powers where each power's active cost is equal to the pool total and whose collective real cost also equals the pool total.

Re: Psionics + Invisible PE in a multi-genre game?

Also,

By default Tk is more expensive than the stretching option because it is inherently an Indirect power. Stretching is not to my knowledge. It would have to be bought as an extra advantage and would probably put the cost back in line with that of standard TK since it is a (+1/4 to +3/4) adder.

Re: Psionics + Invisible PE in a multi-genre game?

Now you guys are getting off subject. Like that never happens on this board! LOL

If you start substituting stretching for TK you start skirting issues on another recent post regarding movement and TK. Stretching uses cause and effect rules that TK bypass. That is, if I grab a character with flight and he takes off and and I don't have flight He will do one of the following:

A. Not go anywhere until I let him.

B. Breaks the TK hold due to boneses to his STR roll from his flight inches.

Using stretching adds a third option similar to a 'tractor' beam. I could get pulled allong (which makes NO sense whatsoever for a Jedi).

Re: VPPs and Limitations

You would usually add some limitations to let you do more than one thing at a time with the points in the pool.

example:

50 point cosmic power pool

75 point control cost (25 base with +2 advantage)

character can use any power at 50 active points but can also use the folloing at the same time:

1. 10d6 energyblast with limitations (like increased end) that add up to (+1) which makes the real cost= 25 pts

2. 25pd/25ed force field also with any combination of limitations adding up to (+1) which makes the real cost= 25 pts also

The limitations on the powers do not have to be the same either, one could be with an activate roll, not usable underwater etc..

The key difference between power pools and multipowers is the way the pools points are divided. power pool divides on REAL cost with each division then governed by the pool max as an active point max. Multipower non-ultra slots split the pool by ACTIVE points and only the slot costs get reduced by any limitations (unless shared by all slots and then the pool too just like PP).

Re: World creation help (Magic system question)

I like the idea as a fair way to define differences among spell casters but I worry about the effect on non-spell casting characters in the sense that it tilts the future balance (experience spent vs. effect on character effectiveness) even further in favor of the spell casters vs. even the most focused fighter type.

This effect would be amplified even more if OCV or DC maximums are in place which would affect the fighter more directly than the spellcaster who can add more 'patch' spells with access to a multipower method to spend experience more effeciently.

This might balance out however considering that multipower reserves have to be built with highest active point cost of any slots (minus points saved for limitations shared by all slots). I believe the math works out to be a higher starting cost for a well rounded spell caster who then passes one built on the system suggested in FHG like a dragster.

For an experience hero system gaming group this may not be a problem but would be very daunting to new players (this is very much like what I am currently facin with my D&D/D20 addicted gaming group.)

Re: Psionics + Invisible PE in a multi-genre game?

I run a normal Supers campaign that involves a lot of Psionics. The way I handle it is to hand wave the IPE and just say there are no visible indications that an object is being moved telekineticaly.

 

This isn't the same as IPE, because anyone looking will be able to tell which character is moving it and will be able to tell it's something TK like doing it. Same things go for TK Force Fields and Force Walls. You can't see them, but you know they're there. Watch all the Star Wars movies and tell me if you can't tell which character is using TK or not.

Thanks for the feedback,

I have seen similar ideas on other sites but I am worried that this kind of ruling would unbalance Psionic based characters in comparison to Mage types in particular since I plan on using the FHGrimoire writeups for available spells which only a few of which are obviously invisible. I will probably split the difference and go with a (+1/2) advantage for TK based effects with a sliding scale of visibility around the character using the power based on how much power he is actually using.

Also, the comparison to Jedi is good but not exact. Do we ever see a Jedi use Telekinesis at a range much higher than about 4-8"? I don't think so, and although I would build a "true" Jedi TK with the gestures limitation I would not let that be an automatic excuse to not force a potential "true" Jedi to buy some level of IPE for the power too. Since we never see Jedi using TK at high ranges maybe some type of reduced range limitation would be another appropriate limitation.

I guess my real question to the discussion boards that I was trying to ask with the TK/IPE example is how to use the existing heroic level rules with as little modification (and added character creation complexity) as possible by way of "house rules" to allow the absolute widest variety of character conception and preserve game balance.

I already know that game balance and player interest will hinge upon the following cruical factors:

1. Availability of real weapons and ammo supply

2. Magic/Future-Tech item as well as spell component** availability and ammo supply

2. Current/Future-tech physics (see the 'Amber' novels by Roger Zelazny)

3. Local magic and/or psionic physics## (see 'Magic Goes Away' universe by Larry Niven)

** The spell system in FHG creates most spells with an alternate to the more common charge limitation disguised as 'expendable focus'. This basically puts the availability of spell components firmly in the GM's control just like modern weapon ordinance. I like it in the sense that the players are not forced to do more calculations depending on the number of spell castings they want to be able to do at the same time keeping endurance as a factor which would not occur normally with charges.

## Although Psi's can be thought of as low powered 'supers' I am wary of allowing any concept that involves inherent resistant defenses like damage resistance or armor, I wan't guns and swords to still be a threat to all characters. Vampires, Werewolves and other such mystical creature/character hybrids have their own well know weaknesses and therefore would be allowed. I could create a 'kryptonite-like' artificial counter to Psi's like 'orbo' from 'Witch-Hunter Robin' but I don't wan't the game to revolve about any one type of threat.

Hi everyone,

I have been working on a multi-genre, quasi-military, dimension hopping campaign (think 'Sliders' meets 'Stargate: SG-1') using HEROIC rules with starting point levels in the 250-300 point range.

I basically want to devise a fair system to allow nearly any character type short of a full powered super since anyone will be able to pick up 'items of oportunity' and keep them with out paying points.

The 3* clear options so far are:

1. All the variations of skilled normals (martial artists, modern weapon master, sword masters etc.. as well as all the variation of non-combat types) These guys are going to be very very good at what they focus on. Since they are going to be up against magic, psionics and everything in between they need to be.

2. Spell based characters since the new FHG spell system puts these types on a somewhat equal footing with the gun crowd since spell component availability can vary just like ammo and favor spell casters in some dimensions and gun users in others. Also spell casters tend to stand out in a crowd far more than any other type and tend to draw enemy fire because of this I think this balances out the variety of abitlities they bring to the table. plus: running a mage is well is still one of the most complex characters regardless of gaming system.

3. The last group I want to add to this mix is the classic Psionic varieties: telekinetic, telepaths as well as any other single theme, low power 'super' types (like old Legion of Superheroes) that are setup with similar limitations as spell casters in that the 'powers' have to be turned on. nothing always on. skill rolls would use EGO instead of INT. Since I do not want to rehash spells from FHG and I want Psi's to have a different flavor than spellcasters but not be more powerfull I planned on letting them use elemental controls and limited multipowers both having fit very very tight themes. The idea being that spell casters and Psi's are tapping into the same energy except for Psi's it far more tightly focused and limited in scope than even the spell colleges in FHG.

*(4.) Lycanthropy, Vampirism or any other mystical creature hybrid would be allowed but not encouraged since it would have to be worked out case by case.

I don't want any one type of character types to be obviously 'better' than any other. I am trying to encourage uniqueness as well as teamwork in almost any world setting amongst players (On some worlds gunpowder will not burn, others will be low/zero magic, ditto with Psionics)

As a test case for Psionics I am attempting to create a classic 'Jedi' telekinetic. That is, the telekinesis is invisible (no 'green glowing' hand for example) with some degree of fine control and not too much strength (20-40 max) forcewall, missle deflect etc.

Should these types of powers be built fully invisible power effects (+1), all but mental senses (+3/4) or to sight only (+1/2) with the anime convention (see 'Witch Hunter Robin' on cartoon network) that the visibility of power in use is based on the level of strength being displayed? (ie.. lifting a pencil accross the room would not make the TK user obvious but lifting a car would)

If I enforce (+1) it makes the character expensive and underpowered and almost too powerful in certain situations (think Vader choke hold coming from nowhere)

Any Ideas on what guidelines to give potential 'Psi' characters when compared to 'Mage' and 'Normals' ?

I welcome any and all opinions on this. I think this type of simultaneous genre blurring is what the HERO system was ultimately designed to do better than any other system out there!

Re: Block Confusion

I understand the desire to use less dice rolls...But IF you are going to bypass the Block attempt if the attack misses why not just use a Dodge instead and define the manuever's special affect as appearing as a Block (but one that gets no initiative bonus or ability to protect another target).

I am assuming in this case that you are choosing the block manuever because of it's 2 extra abilities not included with a dodge.

another way of looking at is as follows:

imagine an incoming attack as an enemy missle heading toward your military base. Your radar can see that it's heading in your general direction but has no way to determine whether it would actually hit any vital target. You decide to activate your 'anti-missle' missle (block). Your 'anti-missle' system is such that you have multiple missles but your targeting system can't fire a new missle until it confirms that the previous target has been destroyed. If the first target is missed your targeting system crashes (and your ability to pre-emptively attack the enemy missle launcher) due to a programming glitch and must be rebooted. Whether or not the original incomming missle would have hit any vital target has no bearing on how your missle targeting system functions for both defense and attack. In the same way a character choosing to block (with the intent of gaining initiative) should not get this benefit for free just because the attack missed its target (its target was you, not your blocking fist,arm etc.).

If I am overstating the obvious I appologize but what I see everyone agreeing on is bypassing the block attempt and making the attack roll first with the defender getting the +2 DCV. This looks exactly like a dodge with a smaller DCV bonus. I can only assume then that the intent of using the block manuever instead was for the ability to gain initiative vs. a higher DEX opponent in which case the block attempt must NOT be skipped (it could be rolled afterwards I suppose but this would not reduce the dice rolls as some suggested).

Also, this discussion would be moot if we were talking about non 'martial' manuevers or standard blocks and dodges as the block gets no bonus. A far simpler solution would be to just put the points you would have spent on the martial block and dodge towards HTH levels instead of combining these two otherwise distinct martial arts manuevers as listed in the rules.

Re: Block Confusion

If we are talking about 'martial block' and 'martial dodge' here are the major differences between them:

dodge only affects defenders DCV +5

block can be used to defend an adjacent target.

block can give the defender initiative on next phase vs. the attacker (if he otherwise has a lower dex)

block still gives +2 bonus to DCV

dodge is simpler to use if your goal is only to not get hit, but if you have allies or innocents to defend or need to take down a higher dex opponent block is the tool to use.

Re: Block Confusion

I look at it the other way -- the goal is to not get hit. You abort to the manuever before knowing if you are hit or not. If the defender must roll to block first thats a die roll and if they miss the attacker then rolls to hit for a second die roll. Two die rolls for a missed block on an attack that may not have even hit in the first place. Plus, if the block is missed the defender cant try to block anyone else.

 

If instead the attacker rolls to hit and they miss then 1 roll determined it and the defender is free to continue blocking further attacks until their next Phase without risking a missed block on a missed attack.

 

Makes Block a little better IMO, and requires fewer rolls to determine.

This takes away one of the risks involved in blocking. If you miss you can't continue to block other attacks. Whether or not the attack that your block targets would have hit or not should make no difference.

Re: THE ULTIMATE BRICK -- What Do *You* Want To See?

A simple throwing chart which tells you how far you can throw something with your excess str over its weight' date=' how fast it goes, how much damage it does. If im 1000x stonger i expect to be able to throw something more than a extra 20m.[/quote']

 

I found a very interesting throwing table at: http://hjem.get2net.dk/Klaudius/HEROm.htm

 

It dates back to 1999 and requires some detailed math and still appears to fall short of the extreme throwing being discussed here. However, if you just incorporate a 'new' power or variation of 'superleap' used just as a 'non-combat' throwing distance doubler, extremely strong characters probably could launch baseballs (or footballs) into orbit (they should probably burn up from friction, but that's another story).

 

Some caution to GM's however. Think about how powerfull this would be in combat. If a Brick grabs any non-flying character he can take them out of the combat with one throw! If no flyer is available to catch the thrown character he might end up reaching terminal velocity before he lands!

 

The level of realism you are looking for in a Champions campaign starts to break down at these levels. The Hulk movie was pretty faithfull to the characters strength but when the character heaves a M1-Abrams what looked to be at least a quarter of a mile and the soldiers are shown getting out just like an old GI-Joe cartoon it tends to break the realism slide rule.

 

This balancing act of realism and playability with high power bricks is for each GM to decide for his game. If players are forced to spend extra points for throwing strength but not allowed to use it in combat due to campaign DC limits it will frustate players on what essentially is just a special effect of strength. Also, the character point levels necessary to make this argument worth having are going to be obscene (500+). I am willing to bet that the upcoming Galactic champions (Legion of Superheroes ?!) suppliment may deal with characters on this power level and higher.