Chris Goodwin

What?!  
 
What do you mean "that doesn't work?!" 
 
Well, great.....  Now I gotta buy an eraser.... 
 
Firkandgrumblemumblecripdegarblegrumb...... 
 

Big thumbs up to the work Chris is doing converting BT to RW/Hero. A very worthy effort!

I got the Robot Warriors pdf plus the guide for later editions.
 
Will it be easy to convert Battletech mechs to this version of Hero? I want to create a campaign around the mechs I have collected so far (AGOAC box), and make it FUN!

I like it! 
 

I'm going to port the heat mechanic in, mostly.  I'm usually an advocate of not doing that, but I think it works in this case.  In practice I'm calling it a Side Effect combined with a Susceptibility.  At the end of the Turn, during the post-12 period, if there's any net heat buildup, roll 3d6 plus whatever heat there is, and treat it as a Penetration Table hit.  Whatever is hit is overheating and down.  If further heat causes a second hit on the same table entry, the equipment is destroyed but can be repaired normally.  (Heat will vent every one of the mech's Phases at the bottom of the segment.)
 
If the equipment is a weapon with the Volatile Ammo Limitation, that second Penetration Table entry causes it to cook off, if there's at least one shot remaining.  Roll the weapon's damage once; the mech takes it with no defense.  Roll another Penetration Table roll, 3d6 plus the damage.  I think any more than one shot worth may as well destroy the whole mech... 
 
Also, an energy attack or explosive attack that rolls a Penetration Table hit against a weapon with Volatile Ammo causes it to cook off.  Same as above.  And Volatile Ammo can trigger off another weapon with Volatile Ammo...
 
Volatile Ammo going off destroys the weapon beyond the possibility of repair, but it can be replaced. 
 

First:  nice work!
 
And frankly, one of the most worthwhile conversion projects of all time. 
 
Suggestion for "Volatile Ammo:"
 
Blend in the value for Burnout.
 
If it's based on getting hit in the general area of the ammo-- well, you have to note the location of the ammo, obviously, but you'd roll either (your choice) whenever that location is hit or whenever that location takes BODY (or component) damage.
 
You could decide that Volatile armor isn't going to get jarred into ignition, but perhaps gets heated into it.
 
Then you have two options:
 
if you are using heat sink rules, when heat gets to point X, you roll for ammo cook off.  Roll every Phase that heat is X or higher.  The lower the cook-off point, the greater the value of the limitation (to a point).
 
Option B:  Sustained fire  (firing the same weapon for X or more consecutive Phases requires you to check for cook-off.  Each Phase that you continue to fire that weapon adds one to the target number.
 
Either way:
 
When the roll is failed:
 
You can either declare that X amount of ammo "cooks off" (essentially exploding in place).
 
You can declare that the margin of failure of the roll determines how many rounds cook off (possibly modified by the number of Phases of sustained fire, if you're using heat)
 
Roll an exploding die (or two) to determine how many rounds cook off.
 
 
You can go deeper and deeper, if you want:
 
explode all at once?  Treat them as individual explosions?  Apply defenses or not?
 
Things like that.
 
 
I'm not saying "this is how it should work."   I am offering some things that might help get the juices flowing. 
 
 

A long time ago a group I was in did a number of Battletech Hero games.  We used Danger International for them because Robot Warriors wasn't out yet, if that gives you an idea of how long ago.  
 
I believe that every 2 points of a weapon's damage did 1d6; armor had 6 DEF and 1.5 times its armor value in BODY, and internal structure had 1.5 times its value in BODY.  (MGs and flamers weren't able to get damage through armor, by design.)  Each heat sink had 10 BODY IIRC.  Weapon damage against characters was multiplied IIRC.  Any X+ on 2d6 was converted to a Y- on 3d6.  
 
Combat was OCV vs. DCV as normal Hero.  Mechs and vehicles moved on their pilot's DEX and SPD.  I'm pretty sure mechs could walk or run and attack.  
 
At one time I could locate a writeup from those days, but three removes equals one fire.  I still have some of the mech sheets with our converted stats, which was how I was able to reconstruct this much.  
 
Edit:  What I've got is here on my Google Drive for those who are interested.

I myself have a large stack of GURPS books that I've used at least some of with Hero.  If you don't mind doing some translation, Champions Complete would do you just fine.   

I myself have a large stack of GURPS books that I've used at least some of with Hero.  If you don't mind doing some translation, Champions Complete would do you just fine.   

This is actually my point; I believe in this post, somewhere, I pointed out that it’s just as interesting if not more so to watch the protagonist meander about without their OIFs while talking to a volleyball. If the points are paid, then that’s that, and I agree its one of the “absolutes” in HERO. What is often unsaid is that it’s a game; things can change, points can be refunded or redistributed. But if you just fell out of a plane and miraculously survived by your parachute catching on a tree, and your stuff is scattered hither and yon, I mean.
 
Good luck finding it. That’s also why I like the idea of “fungible gear score.” That way the math heads have a mechanic they can lean on, while the players can still, you know. Pick things up. 
 
Another point I would make is that its important for players to realize that sometimes things are fungible; you pick up a rocket launcher, you fire the rocket, you fire the second rocket, invariably someone wants to take it with them and call it loot, at that point the GM should say “that’s heavy ordinance and isn’t supported by your current gear; you’d have to pitch something or acknowledge that it’s a giant paper weight.” That’s an all new rabbit hole, though. Sometimes the rocket launcher is there for a scene. And just that scene.
 
Thank you! I always strive to educate and entertain at the same time!

It's like you are reading my mind.... 

Deep down, I like the idea of a Descent: Freespace meets MechWarrior vibe;
 
It’s after the war. Mankind has been busy rebuilding. Despite what we expected, we didn’t get bombed back to the Stone Age, but the deconstruction of super powers gave rise to new leadership, focused heavily on science and the technological advancements required to save our planet. The mechs started as more efficient excavation machines, drilling, moving earth, lifting heavy objects. That sort of thing. It wasn’t long, though, before patterns re-emerged. Market leaders were approached by new governments who wanted to “protect themselves” against non-existent threats; threats that arose because they armed. And here we are, again. That was 200 years ago.
 
Me? I’m a humble mechanic. Then one of my pilots got sprayed all over the inside of his machine by a microwave gun because his shielding wasn’t maintained right. A problem I had logged a half dozen times but was told “Hey, how often do they bring those things out? They’re not going to melt anybody.” Yeah...
 
So they cleaned out the cockpit and say “Jackie! You know this beast better than any of us!” I blinked and pointed out that doing VR sims based on current telemetry, while it’s fun to post high scores, is really a diagnostic tool so we can figure out what’s going to happen or what may have gone wrong or where repairs are needed by simulating stress on the machine. Nope. “Girl, you’ve got a hot hand and you can think on your feet.” I saw the first ones when they came down. The flash. Thought people were dropping bombs, but there were no planes, no radar signatures, it was all visual. Next thing we know, armored nightmares start crawling along the ground. We stood fast. Scanned, scanned again. Nothing came up, system choked like a bad sniper with the game winning goal in his glove. That was ten years ago.
 
This is my apocalypse.
 
Introduce the game as fighting for independence to avoid past mistakes, then ramp into alien invasion. The key for me in this setting is to keep the politics. Aliens arrived. Nothing changed except now we’re fighting a war on multiple fronts. 

Depends if the giant robot wants a co-pilot or not? 🤪

looks like I'm all out of reputation and atta-boys. 
 
 
Remind me to tap you with the Kudos Stick later.    
 
For what it's worth, way, _way_ back when, when Transformers was still a cartoon on the air and played right after (before) GI Joe, we did a Transformers campaign, based primarily off of what Jim knew of the cartoon (I didn't know much at all: I was at work when it aired), his little brother's comics (his little brother lived with him while he was going to college to help save some money), and a couple of the cooler toys we sunk the group's treasury into for "research." 
 
Never really thought about Transformers again until the movies came out (screw all the nay-saying: I liked them.  At least, I liked the two I saw).  I remember early in the movie when the Volkswagen Transformer was HOLLOW inside-- like an actual car!  It defied logic!   (same with Optimus Prime-- the big truck one).  Our "research" confirmed that the "car" when it was car-shaped was actually completely filled with folded robot.  The couple of cartoons we rented seemed to back that up: nobody climbed into them, and some magical driver just "appeared" in the truck when the character  turned into a truck.
 
The comics touched on that by mentioning "holographic passengers."
 
Then there's the common-sense aspect:  if you have 10 tons of giant robot, it doesn't matter how you fold it up, it can't turn into three tons of car.  If you have three tons of car, there isn't enough material to become ten tons of giant robot.
 
 
That's my own take on the whole "Transformers" thing.  But if someone wants to go the movie route and decide that there is a regular car-looking hollow spot in the middle, so be it.  It doesn't bother me a bit.
 
As to the "freebies" of special effects-- I still don't charge.  It doesn't make sense because no one has gained anything someone else can't have:  if your character bursts into flame, and you want to use that to set a fire, I'm not going to make you buy Tranformation: set crap on fire.  If you want to light a torch with your flaming body ten times a day, go for it.  It's not like there's a rule that says no one else can burst into flames.  You didn't get anything they were deprived of, save what the deprived themselves of.   Just like throwing things with great strength:  if you can find a thing, I will let you throw it, every single time.  Why not?  There are times you won't find something to throw, there are times when you won't find the thing you want to throw.  I'm not going to make you buy Energy Blast for that.  I don't even know that I _want_ you to buy Energy Blast with that, because then I have to make sure that every scene contains infinite identical things that you can throw on your whim.
 
There are rules for throwing things.  None of them say you have to buy Energy Blast to make sure you can throw a thing.  None of them say you have to buy things to throw.  They simply tell you how a thing will be thrown, should you find something that you are able and willing to throw.
 
If  guy has ice powers, I will let him chill his drink infinite times.  I will let him chill everyone's drink infinite times.  I'll let him make infinite snowballs so the other guy can throw them.
 
"this guy spent points and got a thing" and "this guy got a way crappier version of that same thing for free" is really not an imbalance issue, at least not for me.   
 
But again, I'm also the guy who has no problems with "points lost are gone, period."  Mostly because points don't balance the game: they never have, and they never will be anything more than a rough ballpark guess.  If points could completely balance the game, two people of identical points would battle forever, balanced and each unable to overcome the other.  We wouldn't need GMs anymore, either: we could simply read a scenario and-- heck; we wouldn't even need the game!  "You're opponent approaches!  He appears to be built on about 350 pts....."  
 
Well, I'm built on 425-
 
"You win!  As you step over his unconscious corpse, you make your way further into the darkened chamber..."
 
 
It just doesn't work that way, and never has  (thankfully.  I think we can all agree that this wouldn't be much fun   ).
 
Given all of that together, I'm not going to charge you points to get a crappy version of something else if you can get a crappy version of it using something else you already have.  I mean, you don't charge knockback resistance to Clinging because that's part of it.  Part of being really strong is being able to throw heavy things considerable distances.  Part of being on fire is that you are a danger to the surroundings-- because you can catch something on fire.  Part of being able to make ice is being able to -- well, make ice.  The same way you can choose between tapping something or smacking the crap out of it, I will let you chose between making an avalanche or making a couple of cubes for your bourbon.
 
 
 The idea that "you can get something free because of your SFX is part and parcel of the universe: if my SFX is an unbreakable staff, I've also got a lever, a door prop, a clothesline, half a hobo kit, and between the right two trees, a chin-up bar.  And I will have it every time I have that staff.   If part of my SFX is being on fire, that fire doesn't become harmless to the environment just because I didn't buy "Gender Reveal Party."  If your killing attack is a deadly blast of radiation and mine is a dozen tiny knives, I've got those tiny knives when I need to split a burrito in half just as much as when I need to split the cave monster in half.
 
 
 
But again: that's just me.
 
 
 
I'll get back to you on that later tonight; it seems I am needed at the moment.  Rough answer: 6e eliminates the smaller steps.  I get why, but I'd have done it differently myself.  What we have now feels more like it does in other, less discrete systems.

On this we agree, especially the part I bolded.  I'd have them pay 1 for 1 rather than 1 for 5, but that's to be a Vehicle rather than have one.  I'm not entirely certain that a character using a Vehicle character sheet, and starting from Vehicle stats, is necessarily point balanced with a character who is a person, but in theory at least they're close enough.  
 
I think we start from the assumption that the character is a person, and go from there.  I know for a fact that I'm not hollow; I've seen my internal organs on various medical imaging devices.  If you want to define your character as hollow for zero points, you can do so, as long as it doesn't change any of the game mechanics.  You could carry someone around inside you, maybe once or twice; if you want that to be a regular thing your character does, then pay the points for it.  
 
An example I like to use: the Hulk can pick up a manhole cover in combat and throw it.  He can even do it more than once.  The third time he does so, the Avengers get a call from the city's public works department, asking if he can kindly stop throwing their manhole covers, and billing them for the costs of replacement.  At that point, the GM suggests that if he wants to carry an eight-pack of 100kg steel throwing discs around he can, as long as he pays the points for it.  
 
 
SFX aren't, and shouldn't, be a way to get additional effects for your Power for free.  Your sonic blast might crack the glass in the area, and that can be one of those extra things you do for free once or twice to stop the robbers' getaway car by shattering their windshield so they can't see.  But if it's something you want to do more often than that, add a slot in your Multipower.  

Forgive the lack of truncation, my friend, but since quotes are now folded into a window, it seemed less critical. 
 
Pregnant:  that was funny. 
 
The difference between riding superman's shoulders and being papoosed:
 
One depends on _your_ strength, with regard to being able to hang on, though the encumbrance is still on him. 
If you are being carried in a gizmo, then it's the gizmo's STR to hold on to you, but it's still Superman's encumbrance. If he has to hold on to the gizmo, then it's his STR to hold the gizmo, too. 
 
If Superman is grabbing /holding and carrying you, then it's his STR to hold on and or course, his encumbrance. 
 
At least, that's the way I see it. 
 
If the character is carrying someone on the inside, then it's his encumbrance, and I put forward the idea that it is his Body score or his DEF that determines how secure they are. 
 
Revisiting the Champs Complete ruling:
 
Does this rule exist because in spite of the unlimited number of things that you _can_ be, from microscopic super-intelligence from beyond the stars to the Ghost of Christmas yet to come, there is no place for cars? 
 
Or is it to prevent doubling-down on the 1-for-5 costing?  Personally, I have no problem with a character being a car, so long as he's paying what any other character would pay for the same abilities. 
 
 
More on pregnancy:
 
Due to the commonality of pregnancy, the average number skeletons in a human  body is always more than one..... 

One of my bedrock principles of Hero gaming is that if you want your character to be able to do something, the rules shouldn't get in the way of you being able to do it.  (Which means that as a GM, I might not want you to be able to do it in my campaign X, but it might be perfectly fine in my campaign Y.)  

If you want to Multiform into a Vehicle, I would say IMGYC.  (In My Game You Can.)  
 
Back in 3e Champions, I had a shapeshifter character using a VPP that I eventually wrote up a number of forms for.  One of those forms was a powered armor suit, with the idea that if one of my teammates was unconscious I could carry them around inside me.  I'm pretty sure the GM had me take Usable On Others on my Armor, Life Support, and whatever Enhanced Senses I was using.  To me that made sense, and was extra utility that costs points.  
 
I'm not saying I'm objectively correct, that my way is the One True Way.  But it's something that was certainly thought of and allowed for, since more or less the beginning. 

We have a Size Characteristic for Vehicles, which -- maybe -- works slightly better than Growth, either Then or Now.  Minor quibble that doesn't change the rest of your point though. 
  
 
My point is, you're either one or the other; if you can be both, that's a utility that ought to cost points.  Humans can't -- typically and routinely at least -- carry other humans around inside them, unless they buy the power to do so (or unless they're pregnant; I know someone will go there).  The same way that Vehicles can't pick weapons up and use them, unless they buy the power to do so; they can't even function autonomously, again unless they buy the power to do so.  Or the same way that Vehicles' DEF, Life Support, Radio Hearing, Flash Defense, and probably other Powers I'm not thinking of, automatically work for everyone inside the Vehicle, in a way a person would need to pay points to have it do.  (I've pointed out a RAW way for Resistant DEF to do so, and suggested it might work for other Powers.)  
 
I may even be nitpicking further than the original poster in the thread; I think @dialNforNinja was asking about what you'd use to securely carry someone, whether inside (like a Vehicle) or outside (like a saddle or a howdah).  I haven't been trying to nitpick or be obstinate; I'm honestly trying to figure out what the difference is between, for instance, someone hanging on Superman's back, and someone being carried in a safety sling like one of those tandem skydive harnesses.  
 
I'm looking at the difference between two cases, trying to figure out if there's a difference there; the presence of the discussion seems to indicate there is one, and I think it's worth trying to figure out if as a general case there's something more to it than SFX.  
 

Vehicles (significant capital V Vehicles) are mechanically different from characters, a lot of which is already baked in.  Among other things, they have a Size stat (which provides STR and BODY for free, making those the only remaining Figured Characteristics in 6e!), and start with 2 rPD and 2 rED for free.  And their DEF can explicitly be bought with a "Does Not Protect Passengers" -1/2 Limitation.  Also, a Vehicle's DEF, plus other Defense Powers, and other powers like Life Support, do explicitly cover the vehicle and all of its occupants automatically.  
 
So... the ability for Vehicles to have passengers is built into the game mechanical construct that is the Vehicle.  
 
(I have a recollection of there being "everyvehicle" equipment such as seats, seat belts, headlights, and so on, but I can't find that verbiage in 6e, so I may be misremembering from earlier editions.)  
 
Vehicles also explicitly don't have END or REC, and have to buy an END Reserve or 0 END on Powers that cost END, other than their movement.  
 
So... Vehicles and characters have different sets of -- largely incompatible -- starting assumptions.  One of those being passenger space...

All of the nitpicking and overengineering aside, just remember that you pay for what you get, and you get what you pay for.  
 
The 10-point Protects Carried Items Adder for Resistant Protection does what it says on the tin, for Resistant Protection.  If I were the GM, I'd likely make that less of an Adder to R.P. and almost a Power of its own; and that would be what lets you wrap your R.P. around a passenger, but also your Life Support, Invisibility, Desolidification, and so on.  I'd call it "Passenger Space" and be done with it.  

I'm out of rep for the day...
 
Probably Multiform would be enough to transform (heh) from a person to a Vehicle, but what we don't have, and I'll assert is the point of the thread, is the ability to build a character that is both a person and a Vehicle, or to let a character buy Vehicle features.  I'm not even sure the Ultimate Vehicle covers that, though now that I think about it the Ultimate Metamorph might.
 
(Interestingly: Robot Warriors has an option for self aware robots and giant monsters using the mecha build rules.  Essentially, they can be built with INT and EGO scores, Skills, Psych Limits, etc.  It might be worth looking at that for guidance.  I also recommend James Jandebeur's Incomplete Character rules (I don't have a link, but it can be found with a Google search).
 
Part of what I'm looking at is the notion that a character who can carry other characters inside them, protect them with their DEF and Life Support, and so on, effectively has an ability that other characters don't.  I can think of ways to build them that don't even need overengineering Power builds, like that 10 point adder on Resistant Protection.  (Conversely, characters are assumed to have arms and hands, but Vehicles need to buy Extra Limbs if they want them...)
 
 
The 10 point Adder for Resistant Protection is RAW, and doesn't require XDM.  🙂

Oh, there's a reason why OIF is a Limitation.  It's because the equipment can go down with the ship.  
 
I'd assume that when you get back to civilization you can acquire duplicates, or spares, or replace them somehow, but "shipwrecked on a desert island" is not one of the conditions that allows you to do that. 

Oh, there's a reason why OIF is a Limitation.  It's because the equipment can go down with the ship.  
 
I'd assume that when you get back to civilization you can acquire duplicates, or spares, or replace them somehow, but "shipwrecked on a desert island" is not one of the conditions that allows you to do that. 

So that would effectively be a naked Advantage to make all of your defensive abilities apply to whatever you're carrying? I can see it, though not without the Extra Limbs (passenger seats) and possibly Clinging UBO (seat belts.) Whether to add Growth or Shrinking depends on whether you're turning into a car, an ATV, or a snowboard, naturally. Great discussion BTW, exactly what I was looking for... and exactly the debate between building everything in the finest detail and just waving a hand and saying "Y'all a car now!" that made me ask the question.

Which brings up a whole separate point, which is this:
 
Are we debating whether its possible, as a special effect (good news, it is) or,
Are we debating the very specific how because it’s an ongoing power use? Or.
Are we debating how many “car traits” you inherited in your transform. Or.
Are NONE of these things fully capturing the question?
 
In the first scenario, I’m fine with extra limbs and strength — exactly as I said in the beginning. If we’re really going into the more granular space of “how do I build seat belts and life support?” That’s almost a separate question, and the answer is exceptionally well documented, with harness being a thing included as part of a vehicles SFX. If this is a question of “how many angels can dance on my butt while I fly?” Depends on the type of angel and the amount of junk in that trunk. 
 
I’m all for a healthy debate, but I do want to ensure we’re answering the same question. That’s kind of important. I mean. To me.