psyber624

Look to various TV shows/movies for what forms of information would be available to you. Because we humans lack a Radar/Sonar sense of our ownand sight is our primary sense most shows depict visually what you would "see" with this sense. Basically I would say you can see a the definite outline, with (as Hyperman stated) some method of telling how "Radar Reflective" the substance is (think shades of color that you, through training, can use to roughly identify what something might be made of). Fine details will be lost, as will any form of color so reading isn't going to happen. Of course don't forget the amount of detail you get depends on the Modifiers you buy the sense with. Analyze/Discriminatory will go a long way towards allowing you to use such a sense to replace vision.

The other side of the "What not to spend points on" argument is that you could apply that to nearly EVERY Non-combat Skill, Perk, Talent, or Power in the game. Unless the ability is intrinsically tied to combat then it is completely useless if the GM doesn't write in some way for it to be useful in his adventures from time to time. So basically the two options I am seeing are either 1. Remove all non-combat related aspects of the system from the game. They are really just there for flavor and roleplaying opportunities and player's shouldn't have to spend points on them. 2. As a GM consider the non-combat abilities of your players and make sure that they get some use for the points they spent. If a player spent points on it then it is worth something to that player's concept of the character and part of your job as GM is to make sure that those points are well spent. Obviously I am biased in favor of option 2 as I feel that the non-combat aspects of the game are well worth the time and effort involved in developing them. And yes, I do understand the concept of "What not to spend points on" but I interpret the spirit of that section differently. My interpretation is that if I, as the GM, decide that what the player is spending his points on will likely never matter to my campaign and I can't reasonably bring it to relevance I tell them that the ability doesn't cost anything. If he wants to put AK: South Africa on his character sheet but I never plan to take my characters out of campaign city then he gets it for free, it just wont matter. On the other hand if he puts KS: African Magic on his character sheet then I think to myself well, guess I should start a Tribal Shaman villain for the group to go up against so he gets some play out of his points. He is telling me that he wants his KS: African Magic to be important so its either my job to tell him no, it isn't so its free, or to make it so. Same thing with Languages, Contacts, Skills, whatever. Saying they are "roleplaying only" and not worth spending points on is missing the point in my opinion. This isn't a Computer RPG where all the plot and choices about what will and wont be important were made LONG before you sat down to play and so avenues are opened and closed based upon how you build your character. HERO is more than a combat simulator, its an interactive storytelling medium as well, and its things like the non-combat aspects of the characters that allow the characters to have some input into the plot and, IMHO, a good GM will recognize and make use of that. Character Points are there not just to balance combat effectiveness, but to balance "Spotlight Time" as well. Granted, if you don't have Dr. Mcartney as a contact then I as a GM will have to give you some other means of resolving the conflict. But if you do then in this situation you get to be the one to resolve the problem, you get to be the HERO because of your skill that you spent points on. (the fact that the GM decided you would be the HERO is hopefully not too obvious but its there) That's why you spent those points. There is more to being a HERO than being good at combat and kicking villain butt.

The chart confusion was probably my fault. If you are using a weapon from a list in the book (such as the one on pg 204 of 6e2) in there it will tell you whether that weapon example was built as a Killing attack or as a Normal Damage attack (different lists do it differently). This is normally only used in Heroic level campaigns where your players routinely obtain and use weapons they find/purchase. In a Supers campaign any "weapons" are built as powers and weapon is just the special effect of the power. The whole idea behind Damage Classes (DC's) is that they are designed so that different powers, built different ways, can be added and subtracted to fairly by other powers (STR is a prime example of this). Things can get REALLY complicated when you start using Advantage'd powers and calculating DC's but for the most part just remember that (again UNADVANTAGED) 1d6 of Normal Damage is 1 DC, 1d6 of Killing Damage is 3 DC. The power/ability you are using will tell you whether you are using Killing Damage or Normal Damage, then you add any DC's from Strength or Maneuvers or Combat Skill Levels or whatever. Once you know the total DC's you have in your power you can quickly see how many dice to roll, but remember whether its Killing Dice or Normal Dice depends ENTIRELY on the power used and not on whats added to it. In the case of a Weapon the Weapon is the "Power". And yes, clubs can kill. Clubs are normally built with Normal Damage but even Normal Damage does Body (which is what determines if you die from an attack) so a strong enough Normal Damage attack can quite easily kill someone without defenses (a common problem for High powered heroes when you add normals into a fight). Just because an attack does Normal Damage doesn't mean it can't be deadly. Killing Attacks are called that because they are generally INTENDED to kill and are far better at it than Normal Attacks (They average slightly higher Body Damage per DC and ignore non-resistant defenses).

Technically her power works like a dual linked Transform as she has been shown to steal other mutants powers, not just copy them.

That's what I am saying tho. Red Rover would be simulated in HERO as a Move Through. The Mover gets his STR + Vel/10, the players get their STR (probably not combined total due to how STR works in HERO, I would say Stronger Players STR maybe + a slight bonus for the other player as well, probably based on the result of a Teamwork roll if I was actually doing this) Then you have a STR vs STR Roll just like for Disarming and such. I played Red Rover. While it was hard to not loose your grip we did it plenty of times, especially if you had stronger players gripping. And I wouldn't even BEGIN to call that training in staying in contact. Just my opinion tho.

I'd have to agree with Steriaca in that it all depends on who the other person is. Two PC's controlled by the same player is a far lower limitation than a PC and an NPC. I will say that -1 1/2 seems rather high to me. If you go by the Limited Powers chart that would mean the power looses about 2/3rds of its overall effectiveness and if the pair frequently fight together and are used to dealing with the need to stay together it seems that it would loose far less than that. Take Mas y Menos from Teen Titans for example. They make good use of their power even tho they have to remain touching, and while breaking them apart might be technically easier than disarming someone "relatively" speaking its about the same (and personally I would allow similar rules such as Str vs. Str rolls to determine whether they can hang onto each other after a KB/Throw/Etc.)

You haven't eliminated the math, you've just hidden it. Or converted what was an addition problem to a subtraction problem. I fail to see where that simplifies anything. Especially for new people coming into the game. I have NEVER met anyone who had a problem understanding the old way of presenting it, I have seen people fail to grasp it by the current way. It remains true that 25+75 = 100 and that 100-75=25 Whether you make the equation explicit or leave it as an exercise for the reader. I don't think you can change that. If you CAN change the fundamental laws of mathematics, I urge you to go to Washington DC, Congress desperately wants to be able to spend just as much on bases and tanks and aircraft and even more every year on military pay and benefits but somehow get the total to add up to less than the sum of its parts. It also bugs me that while it is still not mandatory to take the full possible value of Complications, it seems as if the intention was to create the impression that it IS mandatory. As I recall, a prospective new player reading the book doesn't know there's a choice until getting to and reading the chapter on Complications. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary notes that we're off topic Except that in 6e you never have to do the subtraction (most don't and as you pointed out you don't even learn that its POSSIBLE to do any subtraction till the chapter on Complications). In 5e you did have to do the math (even if it was so common and so easy that most players didn't really have to think about it.)

Hyper-Man has a point. In a system as complex as Hero, changing one thing may have unpredictable consequences. But I wouldn't say that on that account you should never change anything. But it's worth noting that everyone runs their game a little different. For example, ​ Note that for a character with NO Combat Skill Levels (which won't include many player characters, admittedly) surprise is now LESS devastating. If one normal were ambushing another in regular Hero rules, they would have OCV 3 vs DCV 2 (halved for surprise) giving a base 12 or less to hit. Of course, even under your rules they're better off not yelling "I'm coming to get you, Joe Normal!" because if they give no warning Joe can't abort to Dodge. For characters who DO have Combat Skill Levels, which is likely to be most of them, surprise attacks would be more devastating. On the other hand, they were already pretty devastating what with halving the DCV. But this does highlight the fact that there are OTHER situations where OCV or DCV may be halved or cut to zero. You can probably cope with that by re-interpreting it as "Levels on Defense" (or "on Offence") or halved or disregarded. Even then,someone moving at noncombat speeds for instance will be marginally better off. Consider how things like Area Effects are targeted....actually, let me address something Christopher said before talking about that. This is not exactly the case, He's saying the chance to hit is 11, modified by manuevers and skill levels and circumstances. You may think this is the same as "fixing them at 3" but wouldn't it also be the same as fixing them at 9, or at 21, or at 0? Speaking of fixing things, phoenix, consider how to handle unusual targetting situations such as Area Effects. By Rules as Written, an adjacent hex or the hex you're in is DCV 0. Unless you want it to be exceptionally hard to drop a grenade where you're standing without it rolling away, consider giving a +3 to the to hit roll of someone targetting their own or an adjacent hex. Another of those little details I think HyperMan had in mind. But I think you have an intriguing idea and encourage you to try it. Let us know how it works out. Lucius Alexander ​Defensive Palindromedary Value Hrm, I had intended to mention that it commonly does work that way (at least in games where I played) but RAW it doesn't. Must have left that part out while typing out my thoughts. My bad.

Another thing to remember is that this game works by GAME MECHANICS, not by SFX. It doesn't matter whatsoever what you CALL a power, or how it is logically, theoretically, etc supposed to work, but how its built in the game. One guy might build a Pistol as a 2d6 RKA, another might build it as a 6d6 Blast. They might both be called Pistol but all that matters is how the power is built. If you are using prebuilt equipment there is always a column that tells you what type of damage it uses the way it is built for THAT build.

Contacts (like background skills and obscure powers) are what you make them as both players and GM's. They may not be relevant all the time in which case they may not be "worth" their cost but if you as a GM want them to be worthwhile all you have to do is give them a place in your campaign. If you like the concept of Contacts and want to see them included your players sheets then there are a couple of things I would recommend in order to make them more appealing. 1. Always know and keep in mind what Contacts your players have and work ways for them to be useful into your campaigns. 2. Make sure that successful use of Contacts has some ACTUAL BENEFIT to the player that has them, and to the team. While an entire adventure shouldn't come down to whether a Contact roll is passed or not you can easily make an adventure easier or more rewarding with the successful use of contacts. 3. Make sure that the player who bought the Contact gets to be the "star" with successful use of the contact. If all a contact does is provide some knowledge to the team then frequently it may feel like the "player" shouldn't have spent the points on that contact. If the player himself gets some personal benefit however they will become much more popular in your campaign. Some potential uses of Contacts: Information that could lead to a tactical advantage (That VIPER Base? Yeah, we have been studying it recently. There appears to be a secret entrance somewhere in the sewers as we have spotted a number of suspicious vehicles coming out of there [FBI Contact] ). Possible bonuses to related Skill rolls (Your trying to reverse engineer some alien tech? Sure bring it on down, you can use the lab here and Prof Jenkins loves that stuff. <+2 to Engineering Roll> [Dean of Science Contact] ). Increased Rewards from a Mission (Great job taking down that DEMON Cell, they had some interesting Tomes in their library and we translated them. Thought you might learn something from these translations. <+2 Mission XP> [Trimegistus Council Contact]. Additional Avenues of Success (My Interrogation roll failed, so he wont tell me where he hid the bomb. Hmm, maybe its time to call up my old buddy Mentar and see if he's free to come try and pry something out of this guys skull) [superhero Contact] of course there are many more. Its up to you as the GM to determine exactly how useful they are to your players. Of course any or all of the above could be given out for free by the GM if he wanted to, but IMHO Contacts help to broaden and give depth to characters so ensuring that they are worth the points spent on them is the job of any good GM in my book.

This basically hoses Melee, particularly MA builds especially if you do not change the rule that CSL's can only be used for DCV against the same types of attacks they are bought for (melee vs ranged). Ranged (unless they have a huge multipower) tend to rely on one "attack" so their OCV will simply be bought as cheap 2 pt CSL's with their attack, + some 3pt CSL's that they can use for DCV against ranged attacks. They can still rely on being "out of range" to protect them from melee for the most part. Melee on the other hand rely on having multiple attack options (strike, Grab, Move Through ,Throw, Trip, etc) so they cant get their OCV at 2pts each, and they can't get ANY DCV vs Ranged without buying a token ranged attack and then buying CSL's with that attack (at 3pts a piece min). So ranged attackers don't loose much (plenty of Blaster Builds don't buy much in the way of OCV/DCV anyways because its cheaper with CSL's) but the melee builds that RELY on them will struggle as they now have to pay more to get the same levels of defense they had in the old system. Oh, and lets not forget that CSL's aren't persistant (you can't say you always have a CSL assigned to a certain spot for instance) but OCV/DCV are so surprise attacks could be more devastating than they already are.

I was using a 100 Point Character as an example. If you say "100 Points, with 75 Points Of Complications." you have a 100 Point Character in 6E. I did nothing wrong with my math or explanation. If you say "100 Points + 75 Points Of Disadvantages" in 5E you absolutely get a 175 Point character. And THAT is why the distinction needs to be made, and it not merely just a different way of expressing the same thing. If you want a 175 Point Character in 6E you just say "A 175 Point Character. 75 of those Points are accounted for by Complications." Right off the bat, in 6E it has simplified itself down - you know your point total in the first sentence. No further math is needed at that point to know the grand total of points characters will be built upon in 6E. not to mention it eliminates the math altogether. No more need to add Base CP to CP from Disads, you just know right off the bat! We will leave it to the math geeks to deal with the "You can reduce the number of points of Disads by reducing the Base CP" aspect that is now missing! (sarcasm) YAY! Less Math in HERO!!!!! (/sarcasm)

Professor X. The only reason he doesn't rule the world is that he doesn't want to.

The problem is by RAW that construct wont work. First off you have to have LOS to grant the power to someone, second your range calculations will be off because you have to apply an additional advantage to UBO in order for it to grant powers at range, and the range is calculated off of the AP as standard, so you would be able to grant someone within LOS the ability to teleport 100km with that build (assuming you added the Range Advantage to the UBO) but wouldn't be able to grant it to anyone out of LOS (or out of the AP based range, which will be decidedly lower than 100km)

I do agree with GA tho, its easy to misunderstand (especially if your new). 5e was 100 +75, 6e is 175 with 75. Not hard to think that 6e winds up with a 250 point character in that situation.

Interesting concept. I have done limited skills before, but mostly it was with Foci (such as Lock picking tools) or for oddball stuff. (My Cyberkinetic wound up with a really weird Computer Programming Skill with Advantages and Limitations to represent the ability to program with a thought)

The problem with the "Low Speed High Damage" concept is this is a team game (mostly) and high damage characters are just REALLY good at stunning their targets. Someone with 14d6 (and ESPECIALLY 16d6) in a 12d6 world is that they will almost ALWAYS Stun anything they manage to hit if the 12d6 crowd has the slightest chance to do so (on their own at least). Every d6 is 3.5 more damage so 2d6 over is 7 points, 4d6 is !14! more points of damage getting through on average. Expect your villains to be stunned ALOT and if the player is part of a team its pretty much game over once a target is Stunned. The low OCV High Damage is a bit more workable, however it can get really frustrating (and you have to make sure its not easily countered by the player or his teammates). If his attacks don't hit often but really hurt when they do combat becomes a bit more unpredictable (which is actually a bad thing to most grognards but as usual YMMV). Sometimes he will wipe the floor with his opponent, sometimes he will be totally useless. Of course the low OCV is not a problem if s/he or the group has ways to negate it, then your back to the same issues as the Slow Cannon up above.

But I've never seen an Ice Slide used to Tunnel. Ever. So it doesn't fit the Mechanics. Buy Flight or Running Usable as other form of movement and you can use it in the air, on land, and in the water as well. Also, "leaving it open behind you" most certainly does not allow others to "use it". When a power is "Usable as another form of Movement" it acts as the other Movement Power when used that way. You can't buy Tunneling Usable as Flight as a cheap alternative to Flight Usable By Others. Especially since it flat out doesn't work. The rules state that when you use a "Usable as a Secondary Movement" advantage the rules of the Alternate movement power take effect and replace the rules of the Main power. So Tunneling Useable as Flight would not "Leave it open behind you", that's a rule of the tunneling power (which cannot tunnel through gases or liquids) which would not apply if you were using it as Flight.

6e1 pg 84 specifically states that you cannot buy OPSL's to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver. Pulling a Punch is a Combat Maneuver, therefore, RAW, you cannot do that. I don't see how its all that unbalancing tho so if you wish to allow it I'd say go for it, although I would probably set it at the +3 level since in that interpretation your not treating it like a "Combat Maneuver" but like a combat modifier and since you can apply the "Pulling a Punch" modifier to any combat maneuver +3 is the appropriate category, YMMV of course. As far as buying CSL's only with Pulling a Punch, why not? I would at least require them to be 3pt CSL's because of the text about 2 pt CSL's with Strike (applying the same reasoning). Of course you might want to make them 5 pointers but I think that's more a matter of taste. I can easily envision a character that is so adept at pulling punches that he actually has a BETTER chance to hit when doing so than if he is going all out, of course if he wants the full BODY damage he can't use the CSL's so that's the balancing factor.

Another way to put it is for DN to prevent you from taking body damage from a 12 DC attack it would cost you 60 AP, for rPD to protect you from body only requires 36 AP. The difference is even more pronounced when you realize that a mere 21 AP in rPD will prevent all the Body from MOST 12 DC attacks where anything less than a full 60 AP of DN will result in you taking some Body from every attack. Stun works out a bit differently and DN is slightly cheaper at negating ALL Stun but especially as the DC's increase your getting diminishing returns trying to be "immune" to Stun in this fashion as higher and higher totals become more and more less likely. On a different note, I always wondered how DN works with "Drain STUN" and "Drain BODY" attacks. According to 6e1 DN affects them but as they are not Energy or Physical, and you have to buy DN to affect one or the other (or buy it twice), how would this work vs the Drains? if you have both Physical DN and Energy DN would you add them together if you were attacked by a Drain? Take the highest of the two? Or something else I am missing here?

Susceptibiltiy in 5th and 6th alike is designed for the "Superman & Kryptonite" Situation, so long time exposure is designed to be deadly. Making it non-deadly would propably warant a strong drop in worth as a Complication, unless the game is non-deadly anyway. How about: Succeptibility, Damage is DRAIN STUN? Halving for defensive Characteristics would apply (it is a rule, not a defense) I checked the 6E APG's, but all I could find where addiotinal Rules for Vulnerability Effects That works, of course your STUN is gone longer in that situation (theoretically at least, I am sure some builds wouldn't notice the difference between REC and Drain Return)

Something to remember about costs of followers is that its not necessarily how they are built by your group, but how they COULD be built that has alot to do with pricing structures. 45 points gives you a character that can act on its own, go where you cant, and has its own powers. That 45 points buys you up to 225 points of sidekick to go with you. You can spend those 225 points any way you want so you can create the Glass Cannon side kick (where you basically have another attack, which can be up to campaign max strength, but just doesn't get all the bells and whistles). You can create Skill Sidekicks which can do all your non-combat stuff, you can create Stealth/Spy sidekicks who can get where you can't and can find out all sorts of things for you. Or you can create the "watered down Hero" sidekick that you seem to be thinking of where you try to build a fully formed character, just on far less points (which is most common in source material, the Robin's and Kid Flash's and such). Then you have to look at their effect on gameplay as well. If one player has a sidekick he gets more "action" in a combat (if the sidekick is designed for combat). More of the "play" time is dedicated to his actions as he is effectively controlling two characters (or easily many many many more with the doubling rule). That can also create unfun situations in your gaming group. So, at least in my opinion (and yes, this is just an opinion post, as always YMMV) 45 points is appropriate for a 225 point hero. Yes, 45 points could buy a hero alot of powers, but 225 is EASILY configurable to be worth that even if you take into account for everything a second character has to buy.

Thanks. While it would be far from the most broken thing buildable in HERO Followers sound like they would be way to cheap with that pricing structure. Just my opinion and I am sure that its possible to build followers that are truly only worth 20 points to the main character with that structure but especially when you add in the whole 5 point doubling feature it sets my GM alarms a ringing big time.

The problem with that concept is the held action vs movement action. If I win the Dex Roll in a passing strike but can still be hit, then, by that same reasoning, even if I win the Dex roll and move out of range of an attacker then they can still hit me because by that reasoning our actions are occuring at the same time. If that is your intention thats fine, it definitely helps melee attackers and makes melee builds a bit more attractive but that was not my understanding of how the rules work. I believe this same argument was largely hashed out in a similar thread about Interposing to prevent someone from simply moving by you (at least until it got derailed into a discussion of AOO's in D&D.)

I think the Palindromedary would be instantly KO'd since Suceptibility bypasses all defenses and a character with Takes No STUN has no Stun