eepjr24

Interesting. Have you tried other table top simulators?

Curious why no Roll20?

I would lean toward just making them Uncommon, unless they are already uncommon and just subtract 5 points if they are uncommon already. - E

Sent you a message. - E

Also wanted to say I can boot up TTS and create a character to play around with if you just want to test some scenarios. I am vacillating between TTS and Roll20 for my next game so it would be a good exercise for me too. - E

I have a game brewing, but it will likely not happen for a few months. If you are interested in working on a character that is an option if you want. FYI, most of the players will come from an existing DND 5e game, some have played a version of Hero before (an MHI campaign I ran), others not. - E

I never really make the math a part of the limitation in my games. I just use it to figure out a reasonable amount to make the limitation. I try to balance it either against raw probabilities or compare the effectiveness to existing limitations or look at how many points it saves and what else you could do given those points in the main power. And with Hero I generally find that it is VERY well thought out and math based so the three all arrive at about the same answer. - E

Most of the rest of your comments go to your intent for the powers, so I won't address those, opinions are opinions and equally valid. But no, just because something is available to be bought in Hero Designer does not make it legal or valid. 6e1, 303 / FREd 235: So the power you built originally would be more like: (unless you are talking time travel as well, then start at 77 CP) EDM: Any physical location in any dimension [45 CP]; Area Of Effect: 2m Radius (+1/4), Usable Simultaneous: 16 others (+1 1/4); Real Cost: 112 You would be a lot better off saying you needed to research each dimension and just building a spell for each one. More like: EDM: Any physical location in one defined dimension [22 CP]; Area Of Effect: 2m Radius (+1/4), Usable Simultaneous: 16 others (+1 1/4); Real Cost: 55 If it's just a plot device, then the GM probably would not even need to see the point structures, because no matter what they will provide a way for it to happen. - E

I don't think I would be much help in HDC, I get by but seldom use it right now. However, I can point you to some nice starting adventurers for 5e that are easily translated over to FH. And I am working on translating the content for Sunless Citadel if you want to run an old school dungeon crawl. Hit me up and I can put stuff on Google drive or something for you. It's just Excel sheet templates, I have a tendency to build everything manually anyway. And you can take a look at the threads I posted on map resources for some great battle maps. - E

I bought it as a Increased Endurance cost on the spell (FB in this case) that has an RSR on the Increased Endurance limitation. Not exactly, but close enough. Basically, I looked at the likelihood of missing the roll based on flat activation roll. The example you use above replaces that with a skill roll, which makes the math a lot more variable. You'd have to pick an average or some other method of determining what the normal skill roll would be. But it will vary, since Malus can cast his FB spell as 1d6 (22 AP) or a 2d6 (45 AP) which would be -2 or -4 to his roll (assuming he uses -1 per 10 AP instead of -1 per 5 or -1 per 20.) Personally, I would just call it a wash and use the -1/2 value since it is unlikely that most players will let their roll get below 11- for their most commonly used spells. So for -1/2 you make an activation roll. If you miss the roll, the spell still goes off, but for each 1 you miss it by the END multiplier goes up. Miss your roll by 1? 8 END. Miss it by 4? 20 END. Cesar save you if you miss it by 7 (probably rolled an 18), that is 32 END gone bye bye bye. For a less harsh version, call it a -1/4 limitation and for every 2 (or part thereof) you miss your roll by the END multiplier goes up. So miss it by 3 or 4 and that's 3x END. If you are feeling generous you can also have spells cost 1/2 END if they make their roll by half or more. - E

Either way you can lose your action, actually. Of course, if you are making this a feature of our magic system you can change how that works if you like as the GM. - E

Specific things I would not allow and why: Transdimensional on Teleport: This is called Extra Dimensional Movement and is a defined power. Precog / Retrocog Clairsentience: Campaign breaker unless the GM decides to make it useless. If you bought with "Vague and Unclear" I would consider it. Entropy: I don't allow AVAD "Defenses" structured as "Not a dwarf" or the like. It must be a power or the like that can be acquired. Courage / Will: I prefer you buy these as AID to the appropriate characteristic from both a flavor and a mechanical standpoint. However, if you did buy aid here, you could get 8d6 of AID with an area of effect of 4m and eliminate the need for them to stay in sight. Questions / Suggestions: 1. Why do you have combo powers in a VPP? I mean, it's legal, but it reduces your versatility. Buy the Flight and Desolid as separate powers. 2. On the invocation of water, I assume this is to avoid killing villains or bystanders outright? Why not go ahead and make it Reduced Penetration? And probably you could add in No Knockback to help even more, KB on even on 6d6 normal can kill a civilian with bad rolls. 3. I would add "Only Magic Effects" to the entire pool, for -1/4. Saves 6 points. 4. Why are all the powers without limitations? Part of the flexibility of a VPP is to have a variety of options available to you at one time. The way you have set it up you can basically only keep one power at a time in it? Example: https://surbrook.devermore.com/adaptationstv/asstd_tv/macgyver.html 5. Ditch the Reduced End / Zero END advantages. If you get to low on END, set up an AID to REC or an AID to END. 6. Set up some spells with Foci (wand, staff, rod, skull, whatever). This cuts the real points, giving you options for keeping multiple things up at once. Not everything, of course, you want to be able to operate without them, but villains like having things to knock out of your hand and it sometimes saves you getting shot instead. 7. Set up some Full Phase attack actions, maybe with a couple other limitations as well. They won't always be what you use, but options are key with a VPP. - E

Link: https://www.kestrelarts.com/jolrhos-field-guide

Isn't that like 42, pretty much the answer to everything?

Hrm. It does not sounds like you are affecting the END battery or the spell. Both will work. All that is in question is how much END it costs. Here are some ways to build that. It does require a bit of initial math. Variable END Cost: 10x END, Requires a Roll: 11- . For every point you miss the roll by, move up the Increase END chart (x2,x3,x4, etc.) I just took the odds of each value on 3d6 and you would average to a x2 END (well, 1.9583), so we call the limitation -1/2. If you move to 10- it's about midway from x2 to x3 END (2.458) so call it -3/4 limitation. At 9- it goes to x3 END (3.083) so call it -1 limitation. If you'd like to play with the math, here is the chart I was playing with, copy and paste to excel or similar. Roll % Probability END MULT END AVG 3 or less 0.46% 0.46% 1 0.0046 4 or less 1.85% 1.39% 1 0.0139 5 or less 4.63% 2.78% 1 0.0278 6 or less 9.26% 4.63% 1 0.0463 7 or less 16.20% 6.94% 1 0.0694 8 or less 25.93% 9.73% 1 0.0973 9 or less 37.50% 11.57% 1 0.1157 10 or less 50.00% 12.50% 1 0.125 11 or less 62.50% 12.50% 2 0.25 12 or less 74.07% 11.57% 3 0.3471 13 or less 83.80% 9.73% 4 0.3892 14 or less 90.74% 6.94% 5 0.347 15 or less 95.37% 4.63% 6 0.2778 16 or less 98.15% 2.78% 7 0.1946 17 or less 99.54% 1.39% 8 0.1112 18 or less 100.00% 0.46% 9 0.0414 2.4583

No factual disagreement with you, I just find that Costs END to activate is pretty fairly costed for what you get. You change a power to constant, make it cost end once per day and it becomes visible as a side effect. You have turned a power that cost 30 END per turn (Arcane Shield) to one that costs 6 END per day. If it were not for the visible and constant it would really be a +0 Advantage. /agree on your other points, though. - E

For a supers campaign I would make a few tweaks to the limitations. Gestures, Incantations in the Compound power (where the power only has to be started once per day) I would just call a -1/4 "Restrainable". On the MP, I'd allow them. But I would also rule if you were hit before your DEX, it interrupts just like in FH. And remember, changing variable limitations is a Full Phase action when you are at 1/2 DCV. Tech is correct on the Perceivable limitation, in addition the power becomes Constant. I'd ask you to work on the complications as well, others have pointed out most of the problems there.

Spiked buckler and short shaft spear. http://cultofathena.com/product.asp?item=CS95FS

When looking at costing for limitations I try to figure out how much of the time it will affect the outcome of the attack. Here, I would say that the limitation is more powerful than your opponent buying penetrating on their 3d6 killing attack (on average). So that is a significant amount (22 points), but defenses always cost way less, so a value of half that (and only for the body, so actually a quarter or so) would be in the right range. Another way to figure is using the limited power chart. I think it is not affecting you more than half the time since you have other armor and it's a window of 5 body. DC's in FH heroic are going to be in the 6-10 range so I think this will come into effect more than 1/4 of the time. I'd say somewhere around a third or 2/5ths of the time seems right, which would put me at a -1/2 limitation. That's around 5 points saved total, which works out to around what I speculated from the amount it would cost to defeat. If the average DC's will be greater than 6-10 then you can probably bump it down to -1/4 since it will always be used at full in that case. - E

I ran an MHI campaign using the magic systems from Here There Be Monsters. It worked pretty well and was balanced for the setting. We ended up with a psychic, a Daemonsouled, a professional / gadgeteer, a professional / sharpshooter and... well the last was an innatus but basically he had spells laid on him by his dead wife to protect him from her enemies. It was a nice mix and played pretty well. I have used variations on the Alchemy system and will be using another variation in my new campaign. The base magic system in my new campaign is very loosely based off of Runecrafting but has since morphed into something that would likely not be recognizable from the original. 😃 - E

On the original topic, I don't find anything on shields requiring END to use their DCV. 6e FH 226 has a 3 paragraph write up on them, but the basics is that it is a multipower with DCV with OAF, STR Min, Real Armor, Mass and the other slot for bashing. STR Min means the amount of STR required to effectively use it and does not indicate one way or the other END expenditure. For example, the DCV for shields is not bought as "Costs End" and the HKA for weapons are bought with Reduced End Cost: 0 End. All of that said, for the same reasons mentioned earlier in the thread, if the GM wants to house rule that you need to use END for it, they can. I would find it inappropriate in all but the most gritty heroic settings, and I am a fan of enforcing END (and LTE) costs generally for balance reasons. - E

Multiple attack does have special rules for END, but not sure exactly how they would interact with the above rule on STR. 6e2, 73

Galvanize?

Defense Maneuver, UBO Teamwork skill would be good. A small amount of teleportation, UBO, defined as swapping places via maneuverability Presence Defence, UBN To expand a bit on pawplay, the Change Environment could be area of effect selective Corner case, but missile reflection used conditionally to represent you maneuvering people between two opponents and having one shoot the other. Weirder stuff could be things like aids to powers to add Indirect (coordinated fire from unexpected direction), AoE selective drains to movement (tripping up opponents with feints and strategic movement), triggered attacks (concentrating fire), etc. - E

1. Depends on the campaign and what I think is suitable for it. 2. In my current campaign I am not "excluding" any, but some maneuvers you need a familiarity with to use. Examples: Hipshot, Unarmed block, Multiple attack all require familiarity (1 point skill, like a weapon familiarity). 3. If I am using hit locations, no. You want to simulate hitting a vulnerable spot when using hit locations, call a shot. If I am not using hit locations, usually yes. Although I tend to favor the Offensive Haymaker rule on 6e2, 69. 4. Generally, no. If the campaign does not have a standard "Spell" limitation, I would consider it. That is where I usually build in things like not using haymaker. I do sometimes allow a player to "push" a spell in extraordinary situations. - E