slaughterj

Re: END and Equipment? Might as well just spend the points on STR instead.

Re: Killing Damage in 6e I've seen that in the book, but I think it is really overstating the situation. According to the system, 60 STR does 12D6 Normal damage, which is equivalent to 4D6 Killing damage. Converting from Normal to Killing damage should be a wash since the system considers 12 DCs of damage to be equivalent regardless whether Normal or Killing, so really all that is going on here is adding 1 DC of damage, not exactly game-breaking and certainly overstating things to call the GM a fool over it. Further, if the PC actually paid points for 1 DC of killing and also for the 60 STR damage, then the PC paid the points for 13 DCs of damage, and in that case, it would arguably be penalizing the PC if they couldn't use it together since they paid for it (sure, it would be a cheap way for a PC to use their Normal damage for Killing, but they could have bought another 5 STR instead and done even more Normal damage than they would otherwise do). Part of the problem is the idiosyncracy of DCs of Normal and Killing damage don't "exactly" cost the same (5 STR is better than just 1D6 Normal damage).

Re: END and Equipment?

So Guns have charges, and therefore no END costs to use, right? It seems therefore that in modern campaigns, versus fantasy where you use muscle-powered weapons, that END is not particularly useful, any thoughts on that? (Most of my Hero has been supers and fantasy.) So I was thinking that for modern campaigns where one doesn't buy guns with points but rather just gets equipment that is available, to require END costs for guns, good idea or no? It seems that could be tied to the "real" limitation (though arguably would be an additional limitation), and is at least somewhat sensical, as it takes effort to hold up the gun, take the recoil, lug it around, etc. One issue I have though is if you move from modern up to scifi-type weapons, e.g., blaster pistols, it is even harder to justify that they cost END, so maybe for modern, it isn't the best idea? But in a relatively modern game, END would seem to be relatively pointless to track, anyone with experiences on that care to comment?

Re: Killing Damage in 6e

Re: Killing Damage in 6e One possible problem I see with the hit location chart not conforming to the default damage rules is that in games that use hit locations, most attacks will get the benefit of hit locations, but area effects generally won't, so effectively they are relatively weakened versus other attacks in games which use hit locations. Similarly, it seems that non-damaging attacks (Drain Stun, etc. etc.) are also relatively weakened versus regular damaging attacks.

Double post

So now that people have had an opportunity to try out 6e Killing damage (with the lower Stun multplier) versus 5e Killing damage, what are people's thoughts on it? Like it? Feel it's better balanced? Thoughts on frequency of foes being stunned? Feelings on it vary by genre? Also, since Killing damage Stun multiple is 1-3x, why is the hit location chart still as set in 5e, i.e., with a 1-5x Stun multiple? Is that an error? Something forgotten to be updated? Been discussed at all?

Re: HERO System Bestiary It seems to me that creatures should be statted about the same under 5th and 6th (i.e., if a creature was to have X STR, X combat skill, etc., then there is no reason it should change between editions)? It seems I should be able to get by with the 5th Bestiary fine enough (I have MM&M also)? Understandably, the desire is for there to be sales of the book, and I'm sure I would get it sometime, but is there any real reason to rush out and do so, given that I have the prior books?

Re: Building a Wall of Fire spell Good question! Without Time Limit, then instead, maybe a disadvantage would be appropriate for a short duration, e.g., 1 Turn? This makes me have to look back and see what the point of Time Limit is again?!

Re: Building a Wall of Fire spell Offhand, I think that AE(Line) is only +1/2 in 6e, and Constant is +1/2, so that may help.

Re: Building a Wall of Fire spell

Re: Building a Wall of Fire spell Thanks for the response. I'm just trying to stat it out based on the main book for 6e, and am more concerned about AP than RP, e.g., for fitting into a MP, as well as what is reasonable overall for a build. With massive disads and/or fantasy campaign specific cost reductions, I can certainly bring down the RC to a decent level, but that still leaves it as a purchase of undereffective power, and pretty expensive to raise even marginally. Note that changing it from 1D6 RKA to 1D6+1 RKA, while a significant increase in AP cost, is not a significant increase in actual effectiveness. It goes from 3.5 Body and 7 Stun on average to 4.5 Body and 9 Stun, i.e., it does hardly anything to even a mook in leather armor. Further, 1D6+1 RKA does nothing more on the Penetrating than 1D6 RKA, just 2 Body on average for either. So even with a significant cost increase for a negligible power bump, it is still quite underwhelming in effect unfortunately. And stepping away from fantasy level, trying to make it for a superhero still won't make it effective given the low dice of effect versus the excessive cost for the advantages, the AP making it hard to fit in MPs, the lack of disadvantages or cost reductions for fantasy, etc. I just wonder if there is some sort of solution to making this sort of thing effective and work as intended, but at a reasonable cost.

In tooling around 6e some, I decided to try to build a Wall of Fire spell where the mage casts it and it stays up and running for a short while independently (i.e., mage can run away, get ko'd, switch Multipower, etc.), and just damages (i.e. not an actual barrier). After some effort, this seems to be what I need to include: Area of Effect (Line), 4m tall & 16m long +1/2 Constant +1/2 Uncontrolled +1/2 Costs END to Activate +1/4 Time Limit, 1 Turn +1/4 This leads to some questions: 1. Is there anything I am missing? Other advantages/limitations to include?) Something I am not understanding about the foregoing to make my construct work as intended? 2. These are a lot of advantages, meaning the base attack power has to be pretty low in order to not bust AP caps (or ability to even buy it). To keep within 60 AP (a stretch for standard heroes in Fantasy Hero under the guidelines), basically this means either a 4D6 blast or a 1D6 RKA with Penetrating (AVAD/NND is possible too, but don't seem particularly appropriate). However, either of those options are not particularly compelling, as even against mooks, the blast is maybe 8 stun after defenses and the penetrating RKA is 2 body - that's just not enough to deter someone from going through it (sure, people don't *know* how strong it is, but PCs facing an evil wizard with this kind of effect could guess it to be very weak given the inordinate cost of advantages to make it happen). While the advantages do add up, they are not *that* powerful in the grand scheme of things without some decent base damage. What can be done to make this work as desired, yet actually be meaningful in terms of game effect? I like the detail Hero can provide, but the inordinate cost of things like this seems a bit troubling.

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e Thanks! I'll check that out, sounds like some incremental progress on this.

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e That's one hell of a slow car. I can probably ride a 10-speed that fast, so that doesn't seem too superheroic.

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e Check out MnM, movement was handled much better there. In Hero in the past, one usually spent as much on your defense and other powers, since they would go into an EC together, but because the EC cut the cost in half, the high cost for movement was somewhat controlled, but without ECs (though there seems to be the same power source limitation), the unduly high cost for movement really stands out, as one should be able to buy a decent movement without spending the equivalent amount as they did for their defenses, etc. as the need for attacks and defenses are much more significant than is movement.

Re: 6e questions - still no move after attack, expensive movement, defense favored, e Thanks for the responses.

Played Hero since the mid/late 80s, just now looking into 6e, and had some questions: 1. Did I see correctly that an attack still ends the action, i.e., can move before but not after? If so, was it ever explained as part of the big system review why this was still the case? I changed this rule to allow movement afterward about 20 years ago and it never was a problem. 2. Movement powers for combat use are generally still bought on a linear scale, right? (Setting aside MegaScale for NCM.) In the big system review, was it discussed why this is the case? It seems like movement powers are unduly expensive, e.g., compared with the scaling movement in MnM. (And it seems like one should not need to spend nearly as much for a decent movement than they do for a decent attack, as the latter is doing a whole lot more). 3. Hero had in the past slightly favored defenses versus offenses by making equivalent defenses a bit cheaper, is that still built into the system or is it now evened out? 4. Has the adjustment to the characteristics finally dispatched the imbalances of DEX, CON, STR, and otherwise, or are there still some legitimate discussions of balance issues with the new characteristics setup? Though I liked the backward-compatible ways of past editions, I generally favor the concept of this change for purposes of balance and look forward to exploring it further, but was wondering if there are still previous issues or perhaps new issues due to the recosting and decoupling of figured stats.

Re: Heat Vision Ugh, that may generate the desired effect, but is so cumbersome to develop in the system. Not to mention, all those advantages cranking up the cost on something that isn't often as good as just using a regular RKA on someone.

Re: Do characteristics break the Hero way of doing things? There's more to it though. DEX is undercosted (as well as other stats), and therefore it will be bought up. That creates inflation. This is a fault of the system itself, and even if you try to "behave," the boundaries will be pushed and people will make "dextrous" character designs to justify the higher DEX. Even when I've doubled the cost in a group of non-power-gamers, it was still bought up. Also, to the extent that the range of scores significantly affects one's chances of success also affects things. I.e., with the 3D6 system, DEX 5 gives you OCV 2, versus DEX 18 getting DCV 6, you have a 7- chance of hitting, which is a very low %. If the spread were 4D6 for instance, the gradations would be finer and a spread would be more acceptable.