Legendsmiths

Re: Paying Points for Equipment... That could work, although that seems awful similar to Resource Points which will be part of Dark Champions. That might also solve your problem as well. I think what you have going is a good way to go. I think the equipment store can be anything, anywhere, with attunement based on the points shifted around. 25% for 1 minute 50% for 5 minutes 75% for 20 minutes 100% for 1 hour That way it scales with the size of the Equipment Pool. I guess that said it is really nothing more than a VPP with Can only Change at the Appropriate Time/Location -1/2 (use the % chart above for time required), No Skill Required +1, Powers are Limited by Equipment Character Posesses -1. This last limitation means that when the character is created he has one set of equipment. After that, he can aquire new pieces. This makes the pool cost 1.4 points per point in the pool (includes control cost and ads/lims thereon). As a campaign rule you could state that the "world' pays for the control cost, but since everyone has to pay for an equipment pool of some kind you might as well have everyone pay the control cost as well. Items loaned from one character to another simply "lock" those points. The character loaning the item cannot recover those points until the item is returned or the GM declares the item lost (and unrecoverable).

Re: Lil' Help Please: Travel by Sail It's in FH on page 333. 900 miles = 1500 km calm water 4.5 rough 3.5 sailing w/ current +5/8/13 weak/avg/strong " against -5/8/13 sailing w/ wind +5/8/13 weak/avg/strong " against -2.5/5/8 weather fog -.3 rain -.1 storm -.5 I think I heard on NPR that someone did the cape horn run (on Earth) in as little as 10 days. However, others have taken 92 days if they made it at all. So, average wind, current, and calm seas for the whole journey: 73 days. storming 1/3 of the time 119 days. perfect weather, strong wind, and strong current: 49 days. I'd say roll 4d6, count the body at 10 per day and add that to 40 days. That will give you a heavy curve from 50 to 120 days. Over long distances a ship can average 5 mph (8kph), with negligable currents and winds averaging to weak, or less than weak.

Re: Power Question How about Summon Base? You are specifically creating occupied area, not turning oaks into bunny shapes. I agree that a cosmetic or minor transform would work, but a big tree has 11 body and you'd have to use the megascale advantage to cover the area appropriately. Using standard effect that would take about 7d6 transform, AE +1, Megascale +1/4. Or, summon 46pt base, Slavishly Loyal +1, is a 20 active point power which should not be allowed in the hands of most people. You need to make such a power have other costs so people aren't running around creating villages because they can. 36 pt base is 500m long and 250m wide. That represents the "village". 6 pts +1 DEF, +3 BODY = base is made of wood. 4 pts Grounds of the base are surrounded by a 2 DEF 2 BODY hedge, covering 15x the area of the village (see image, green are grounds, the numbers represent the extra points which covers those grounds).

Re: Paying Points for Equipment... I've thought about this, and I see some of the problems that have been posted. Here's a twist: Tools: all tools add +2 to a specific skill Weapons: make a character's STR killing damage Armor: adds +3 DEF at -1 DCV/DEXr Weapon Types: short/medium/long (2H). Each category has its advantages (short can be used in grabs and close in, medium are good all round and can be used with shields, long have reach). Shields are "tools". Then, make the characters pay points for anything beyond that. Does the pulp hero not change weapons because he's only good at one, or because it doesn't matter which one he uses so he keeps his current one for style. Then use Deadly Blow to allow people to do more damage. Someone wants to be a good knife fighter, he doesn't have to put points into STR or anything else. 7 pts gets him +1 DC with knives. If you are feeling generous, make the 7 pt category short/medium/long/thrown/ranged instead of by WF type. "magic" items: just have the characters pay for them. Period. However, should they wish to sell them, through whatever exchange system you have, the points invested in the attunement to such items are "locked". This means that if a character finds a 7 pt magic item he has to pay 7 pts to attune to it. If he later finds a different item he would rather use he can move those 7 pts to it, but he never gets them back. Characters can attune to different items at a dramatically important moment. Other examples include the knight who owns a fine suit of armor, but doesn't wear it all the time because he would rather have his other items. However, when it is time to do nothing but battle, he dons the armor with an appropriate amount of ceremony. Such a campaign should probably be more focused on action and adventure than on loot acquisition -- that just doesn't work in this kind of game without introducing questions of point to money conversion. There are probably some other details to be worked out, but I think this works. This lets you have regular thugs (15 STR = 1d6K with a weapon, be it knife, sword, or spear) without them having to pay points for it. Just stick to the philosophy that mundane items provide some mundane value that can be enhanced through a general application of points. Let me know if this works for you. I would be happy to correspond and help work out the details as this is something I've been thinking about for a while.

I'm trying to reverse engineer some of the weapons in FH, specifically bows. Building a Bow: Very Heavy Bow 2d6 RKA (30) OAF -1 STR MIN -1 (min cannot add) 2H -1/2 Conc -1/2 Real Weapon -1/4 Beam -1/4 RC 10 +1/4 Active: 37 Real: 37/4.5 = 8 Very Heavy Long Bow 2d6+1 RKA (35), +1 RMod (3 Active, 1 Real) OAF -1 STR MIN -1 1/2 (min cannot add) 2H -1/2 Conc -1/2 Real Weapon -1/4 Beam -1/4 No Horse -1/4 RC 10 +1/4 Active: 44 + 3 for Rmod Real: 44/5.25 = 8 + 1 for Rmod = 9 I come out 1 pt short in both cases. Have I missed something?

I checked the FAQ and didn't see it so apologies if this is clarified. If I choose to drain someone's Conversation skill, is it affected at 2 pts/+1? Or would the usefulness of this demand that the adjustment power be halved (like for defenses)? I'm assuming that it is a 2pts/+1.

Re: Need Turakian Age info... I like Turakian Age a lot. It is a nicely detailed fantasy setting with a lot of depth, and does a good job of tying many of the options presented in FH together. I would also suggest as another option to take a look at Killer Shrike's stuff (http://www.killershrike.com/), as well as our own setting (http://www.narosia.com). I think that will give you a lot of fuel.

Re: New Limitation: Does not Stack. Gm's please look I agree, although I allow FF to stack with Armor. Within our current magic systems, FF generally do not get above 4-5. However, Hero is a geometric progression. Each level of DEF is a doubling of protective value. If that is the case, it should not stack unless the special effect makes it fit. If you layer 2 iron plates of 5 DEF, you get 6 DEF not 10, just like if you have 2 people lifting something you get 15 STR not 20. My stacking rule is that if the DEF is within 2 points, it adds 1 to the highest value. Otherwise, it doesn't contribute to the DEF. This is based on the idea that if a STR 5 person aids a STR 20 person, effectively you still have about 20 STR of lift (450 kg), which isn't even half way to 23 STR (600 kg). Therefor 3 points is too much of a difference and is like adding leather to steel. Does it help? Maybe a little, but realistically if something is doing enough damage to penetrate steel, adding leather is probably not going to help.

Re: Spell Durations I don't allow Reduced END, Increased END, or Uncontrolled, and all spells must cost END. That said, we use a Duration advantage that determines the interval between END payments. So, if a caster doesn't buy duration, he pays every phase. +1/4 = END every other PHA +1/2 = END per TURN +3/4 = END per Minute +1 = END per 5 minutes Beyond that is GM's permission, and the spell's has to justify the extended duration. The idea is that 0 END Uncontrolled is a +1 advantage. Paying END every 5 minutes is about the same thing, given the context of all the other rules (maintaining, no other END modifying ads/lims, etc.). What about recovery? While a spell is being maintained, you cannot recover END. You can cast a spell and then "let it go", at which point it will last for 1 increment and then need to be recast. However, you can then recover in between. Maintaining a spell is also a -1 to all casting rolls while maintaining.

Re: New Limitation: Does not Stack. Gm's please look I agree. I hate caps. I think guidelines are important, but if you need a "cap" it should come out in the rules you create. With the magic system we've had in place for the past year or so we have not seen rDEF greater than 12, and that was only for 1 combat in a 160pt game. Usually deal with the standard range of 0-8.

Re: DCV from a character's size Thanks. Our full matrix will be in the release of our fantasy setting Narosia: Sea of Tears. The playtesting, especially with races, has worked very well.

Re: DCV from a character's size Ben, House Rule. Always On size powers still don't address the OCV issue. I think that needs to be a part of it. My size matrix includes all of the aspects that always on size powers would provide, plus OCV, plus some others. The big issue is that a larger creature is easier to hit by a smaller creature, just as as smaller creature is harder to hit by a larger creature. Just because human-sized is a base +0, doesn't mean that it still shouldn't be relative. The CV mod I use is 6pts per +/- 1. That's to both DCV and OCV, with size being the special effect. Essentially each (OCV and DCV) are 3 pts each, which also dovetails nicely into using Penalty Skill Levels to offset any DCV bonus (for attacking a smaller creature) or OCV penalty (for being a larger creature). I'm not sure this would be appropriate for Supers, but I don't see why not.

Re: DCV from a character's size That's why you have to have an equivalent OCV. 2 smalluns are +2 OCV +2 DCV. If they attack each other, they are net +0, if they attack a normal it is at +2 and the normal is -2 to hit them. Adding the OCV mod is key however. If you don't do that, it doesn't work.

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder It depends on your definition of bending over backwards. Coming up with a limited power limitation that negates the immobility aspect of entangle, one of the fundamental aspects of the power. The flash write ups use established advantages to extend the duration of the flash. "does not limit mobility" seems to be right up there with using entangles to build bridges. It makes sense, sure, but that's not what the power is for. What about Darkness, usable as attack, with the same ads/lims as the flash powers?

Re: DCV from a character's size Or do they? Didn't the right up for the towel include a size modifier? <Fuels Fire>

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder As much as I love entangle, I'm in the continuous, 0 end, uncontrolled camp. Uncontrolled requires a set of circumstances to remove the effect, and 1 DEF 1 BODY per 2d6 Flash seems to work for me, possibly per 1d6 w/ difficult to dispel 27 Blinding Goo: Sight Group Flash 4d6, Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Difficult To Dispel (x2 Active Points; +1/4), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Continuous (+1) (60 Active Points); Can Be Missile Deflected (-1/4), Does Not Work Against Desolidified Characters (-1/4), Limited Range (Spitting Distance; -1/4), Physical Manifestation (-1/4), Restrainable (Only by means other than Grabs and Entangles; Hold Mouth Shut; -1/4) [Notes: Effects are dispeled by any attack which does 1 DEF 1 BODY per 1d6 Flash (due to difficult to dispel)] 5

Re: DCV from a character's size Agreed. That should be part of the special effect.

While your DCV is zero, target size is still a factor (otherwise playing darts would be simple). I would only make this an issue in combat (e.g. a small character KO) if someone were trying to off the target. Out of combat there would be no roll. We had an encounter (no size issues however) where the leader was KOd but not dead (not at all). He had a persistent FF up, making it very difficult to hurt him. One of the players was trying to hit his head (1/2 hit loc pen = -4), which implies that size mods would be halved as well. The head is a smaller target and relative to the conversation, but his base DCV was 0. It was a dramatic moment as the player was trying to finish him off while other baddies were shooting arrows at him, not to mention the pressure of reinforcements. For reference, we play that thugs don't get recoveries and such so when they're out they're out. Signature NPCs however do, so finishing off such a character is important. If the mooks could have drove them off they could have saved their leader, knowing that he was protected. Once he was dead however, they ran.

Yet everything else in Hero is accounted for except for size. I can see your point about saying in human-centric games all other creatures default to a human-based CV modifier. That just doesn't sit well with me. In the HB, size is presented in a number of ways, including costs for negative DCV. That however leads to your example of giants having a harder time hitting each other, which makes no sense. So, if you balance that with an OCV modifier as well, all is good. A human (size mod 0) attacks a giant (size 2). The human is a net +2 to hit the giant (since the giant has a -2 DCV due to size). The giant is at a -2 to hit the puny human (since the giant has a -2 due to size). Yet 2 giants attacking each other net to +0. That is 100% objective and assesses the same penalty to a giant that humans have attacking a dog. Why shouldn't it be that way? Logically and objectively that makes sense. Now, really large creatures will have AE attacks (e.g. big stomp), so the CV of their targets are irrelevant. A rhino need only charge through your hex and he hits you... you don't "dodge" or "block" a rhino - you dive for cover.

But something must be persistent to be inherent, so you have to have both (as in my power write-up).

I agree. Certainly you could do a change environment for a few point penalty, but that wouldn't have any effect on the size based DCV. The generic "Hard to Hit" power used for some small creatures in Bestiary and MMM is supposed to represent some of that, but that costs a full 5 and isn't inherent.

But the Bestiary was only 6.99 Not that it isn't cool, just that I was savin' up for the Grimorie and FH. Will FH also be a full price, or is there enough content between the powers to warrant a reduced price offering? Grimoire I'm sure will be the same deal as the USPD.

4 Size DCV: +1 with DCV, Inherent (+1/4), Persistent (+1/2) (9 Active Points); Always On (-1/2), Limited Power Size Based Modifier (-1/4), Visible (-1/4) That comes out to 4, but I prefer a cost of 3, simply because that balances with the Penalty Skill Levels, and being able to buy skill in offsetting the size penalty for small creatures (if you wanted to).

In our setting, part of the Real Armor limitation is the "stacking" limitation (essential at no increase to Real Armor. Spells cannot confer Armor, although items can, and are subject to the same stacking rules. Force Fields can stack with armor, as it is a different form of protection. But force fields cannot stack with other force fields. Combat Luck also does not stack with armor (essentially use the higher of the two). There are other aspects to the magic system that make defensive magics balanced and no cheaper than any other power (unlike the default costs). After over a year of playtesting, this works very well and we do not see rediculous levels of DEF.

We've worked up a chart as well that we use for our Narosia setting that has all of the modifiers for size (STR, reach, running, etc.) on it so we can easily say, "gimme a Huge creature... how many points is that?" and know exactly what we need.