Mazeus Xenon

Re: Identify Spell Ooohh... I like the variant of Telepathy! A truly odd way to do it but I did ask... Now, do I go the cheap way with A detect or a more expensive but heavily limited Telepathy?

Re: Identify Spell Okay, that makes sense - both the potential "negative" effect (that everyone would know) of the transform and the limitations applied to the Detect. I never could wrap my brain around the detect without it seeming to cheap for me (not in cost but ease of use). Thanks - I may have to look into your idea more! Anyone else have input? I love to see what people think...

Okay, if this has been discussed already somewhere please tell me where to go! ... wait, just tell me where the post is... yeah, that's it... Anywho, I have been kicking this around for some time and probably even asked about this one already but how would you define an "identify" spell using Fantasy Hero? Or do you even use one? And if it does exist somewhere in a book - and I am just being dim - please direct me! My version is this (as a base "power" it's 3pts/1d6): Object Analysis (1d6 Minor Transform (Unknown Object Details to Known Object Details)) (10pts) (+½, -4; 3pts) Adv: Partial Transformation (+½) (This is to allow a user to get some but not all information to be discovered if they stop before the full AP of the object is reached) Lim: Extra Time (1 Minute; Cannot Activate Other Powers; -3), Requires Skill Roll (Magic Power; -½), Side Effect: Major (1d6 Aid to Item (Fades at 1 Point/Month; Only to affect Total Active Points for Object Analysis); -½)

Re: Space vs. Atmosphere Movement Here's a thought - what about having the "Megascale" Advantage limited so it can only be used in a Vacuum (essentially space)? Of course this would not be a very big limitation (at BEST a -1/2 but prob. a -1/4) as a starship would not normally be used in an atmosphere and pointless on any Capital Ship (as they would never be able to go into a vacuum). What do you folks think about that kind of a variation?

Re: Space vs. Atmosphere Movement Oh, I know about all the stuff that is in the book (I've been doing my research!). I just want to know if it would be a safe assumption to have a starship buy one flight and automatically scale it based on the map rather than buying a multipower with "Atmosphere" and "Space" movement (Space movement being megascaled). And I know it is Hero - do whatever I want, right? I am just looking for input and how people interpret the rules in StarHero and UV and the like...

Re: Penalty Skill Levels I don't know if that is an exact scenario (a situation where you must make Acrobatic by half), but Raven is just making a point: sometimes a 'penalty' is a level of desired effect rather than a true penalty that can be reduced. It's like the penalty for the 'Sweep" maneuver: you should take skill levels in Sweep, not Penalty Skill Levels to offset the negative effect. (Right, Raven?)

Re: Penalty Skill Levels I've had some seriousl munchkins in my game, hence why I am always looking for "committee clarification" of rules! All in all, though, I have never had a big issue, even with 'power gamers' in my group (Luckily, though, I have managed to get them away from the table). Anyone else have any experiences or comments?

Okay, this may be a seriously dumb question but I just noticed it... Anywho, Penalty Skill Levels specifically state that they can only be used for OCV penalties (I have only been playing Hero for 15 years - you'd think I would have noticed before now!). However, I have used them for all sorts of variations to offset penalties to any skill roll. What do you folks think about that - could the rules for Penalty Skill Levels be used universally or just for OCV Penalties?

OIkay, folks, I have been asking Steve about this and wanted to get other people's opinions and input (as no one seems to be unwilling to talk about game rules here! ) Anywho, I am workingon my starships for my Star Hero campaign. One of the things that is really sticking in my craw is the idea of whether ot not to require megascale movement for space flight. Basically, if you look at any of the sample ships, they will just have something like "Flight (30")" with a x8 noncombat multipler. If I looked at this in real-life figures, a 30" flight and a 4 SPD is... uh (math)... about 45mph. Even with the x8 multipler that is 360mph. That means it would take quite a long time to simply fly from the Earth to Mars, yet we see ships in all sorts of shows and movies doing it in a matter of minutes. So, basically what I am asking from people, is do YOU assume the 30" of movement is automatically scaleable between distances. A ship with 30" of flight can go 30" in any reasonable scale without also applying "Megascale" to it. Again, this is all based on the fact that every sample ship I have seen has only a flat "Flight" movement and an FTL drive (if at all)

Okay, I have read that section of Star Hero many times but it doesn't quite clear up my question. If a Ship buys Flight (30"), does that mean they can move 30 hexes regardless of the scale I may put together? (within reason of course) Or should I also make the ship have a scaleable megascale in addition to the normal movement? I know I can make up whatever rule I want but I would like the "official" rule before I do any of my own variations... Thanks as always, Steve. You are always very helpful to all of us! Oh, and have I mentioned how much the Hero System ROCKS? Just wanted to check...

Okay, I know about how when a spaceship is in "combat mode" the movement is assumed to be factored down to a manageable speed (30-35" or so) and has huge multipliers or even a small FTL drive to jump from planet to planet out of combat. However, in space isn't 1" usually around 1,000km or so? If so, why don't the example ships in the "Star Hero" or "Ultimate Vehicle" have megascale? And if not, does that mean a starship is assumed to be working on a 1"=2m for movement? Any decent-sized capital ship or even a large cargo vessel would take up the entire table, or the scale would be such that a ship would take minutes to move a single hex! Please explain as I want to have ship-to-ship combat for my Star Hero game and prefer to use a hex-map rather than the dogfight rules. I also want to make sure I develop proper engines that work within my own rule variations!

Re: Backpacks and other storage Oh I know even trying to build every little thing is pointless. I wa sjust kicking this around in my head and could wrap my brain around it, so I decided to post it here. It wa sjust one of those things that I locked onto and couldn't put it away until I got a better idea. Heck, with the thread that RPMiller linked in basically covers it. Essentially everything has points but is pointless to define - it just IS!

Re: Backpacks and other storage Alcamtar: I like the idea of entangle an extra limbs for the "backpack" idea although I am not 100% sure on the "Bulky" aspect. I get what you are considering but no one would use one if they lost DCV to it. I might impose a "Side Effect" of a -1 DCV but little else. As for starships - heck any vehcile - I am just assuming 1 hex is 1pt and it doubles for every point thereafter. All that does is a definition of the space; no gadgets (loading arms, tie downs, etc.) included. Rapier: Yes, I know they are freebies and will probably just treat them as that. However, I did want to see what people were thinking and different ideas that might just come up. And I do agree that there should be some kind of alist but who's to say that a 10AP item is actually worth more than a 5AP item? Or even 2 10AP items? You could get a knife that would be a 1/2d6 KA (basically 10AP) for like $5 but spend several hundred dollars on a radio that little more than the "Radio Perception/Transmission" which is also a 10AP item. Unfortunately the AP = $$ just doesn't work the best. I've tried and I have asked about it and it just doesn't work...

Okay, so I know a backpack is just a thing that carries stuff. And a cargo hold of a starship is just a big open area to put boxes and other things. However, if I wanted to actually define a backpack (non magical, nothing special) what do you folks think would be a good way to do it? Ideas: STR with a -2 (?) Limitation of "Only to define carrying capacity" Telekinesis with the same limitation? (this one is just weird to me but a player suggested it) Some goofy Extra-Dimensional space definition? Extra Limbs? I welcome ideas as I am thinking of putting together some specific rules to help someone build a cargo hold of a starship or other vehicle. While I know the rules just say that vehicles will just have them, I tend to make rules up for everything as I always have at least one player who tried to abuse the rules... "No, you can't have that" has become a standard at my table! Sigh... silly players! As another option, I could just make 1 hex of space as 1pt for vehicles... but what about the backpack? Other than just saying one is bigger than another, what game-related rules could work?

Re: Vehicle Height I have been thinking about this and may treat a vehicle as just a 1" height (or half the width - yes, width). Then, if a character does want to have a multi-level vehicle (with a purpose, not just vaulted ceiling) they can take hexes from the standard "area" of a vehicle to make a second level. This may not make a lot of sense with smaller vehicles - like a car or something - but when designing a large spaceship or something (like that personal star destroyer or what have you ) it might work out. I dunno - any more comments?

Re: Damage based on Ammo Well, yeah - why play any other system!!! And I do like your idea of a variable limitation... I may have to apply that...

Re: Damage based on Ammo True - if I really wanted it to hurt a user when used by hand I would make a side effect or something like that with it. I could also apply a Limitation of "Must be fired from weapon" Limitation or something, effectively making them useless outside of the gun. Right now I am just going with the "I'm the GM so it works this way" idea for now... my favorate -0 Limitation!

Re: Damage based on Ammo That is true but I work off the assumption that if someone was to use it in melee they would blow their hand up! (these are basically mini-missiles that explode on impact). However, they could be used as an improvised explosive if one needed it...

Re: Vehicle Height That is the basic concept I am working with... anyone else wish to chime in? I'd love to hear from anyone else!

Re: Damage based on Ammo

OKay, either I am being dim or I just can't find it anywhere... is there a rule (or even a guideline) definining the typical height of a vehicle? The rules state a width and a length, and an area, but what about a height and a volume of a vehicle? I only ask as I am trying to iron out some details in setting up my own rules for vehicle creation. I want to set down the "space" available and since the core rules and the Ultimate Vehicle have for stats is all 2-D, I would like to figure out how to determine the volume of a vehicle. If I design a vehicle, it is assumed that I can simply re-arrange the area to make it more than 1 hex high, essentially shrinking the widht and length to get height or what? Oh, and yes I know that TUV indicates weapons and defenses (and everything else) as using up so many hexes per AP. I would still like to know what people feel/think about a vehicle's volume...

Re: Damage based on Ammo Basically, yeah - it seemed to be the best for my idea. I'll post it when I have finally ironed out all the details!

Re: Damage based on Ammo Actually, just after I posted this an idea came to me. Your idea I did consider but I thought would be too clunky for me - nothing wrong with it, I just wanted something more streamlined... or whatever... I think you'll understand when you see what I am talking about... Anyway, What I am planning is to define each shell as a separate power. This way I can have any level of power from something as simply as a Flash vs. Hearing to a Killing Attack with a Drain, NND, and AoE effect (well, maybe not but you get the idea). So, what I did with the "gun" was to make it a naked advantage to add "Ranged" to the shell. The Rifle adds a little damage to the effect and the autofire add autofire as well. The shells have no range to their power, so in theory one could use them in HTH, although I am not 100% sure I want to allow that (-1/2 Lim to only use with the gun? I dunno...). This would also allow me to make a Grenade Launcher or Personal Missile Launcher and have multiple kinds of Grenades and Missiles that could be used with single delivery device, rather than developing an enormous Multipower and have to cover all the bases wihin a specific AP range. If you are interested in my final definition, let me know and I can post it here!

I want to develop a sci-fi weapon that has multiple kinds of ammo that can be loaded. This means each shot does damage based on the ammo and has little to do with the weapon. I am sure this would be best defined as making the gun a multipower and make it so a slot can only be used based on the ammo loaded (right?). However, what I am thinking is to base a pistol, rifle, and auto-rifle (an other) versions of the weapon and the damage is based on the explosive round(s) loaded into the weapon. It would define a base for the ammo (2d6 RKA or whatever) and then have the Rifle add damage and accuracy, and the auto-rifle add a little damage and autofire (though naked advantages). This way the damage is directly related to the ammo and the weapon just allow a ranged attack with a few bells-n-whistles added. Defining the ammo would also allow different AP to be used, rather than squeezing them into a multipower and possibly having one slot be over-the-top and another to be not so useful when all is said and done! I think the ammo side of things would also work better when applying autofire, as you could have an autofire of 5 shots with five completely different kinds of ammo then... or something like that! Anywho, let me know what you folks think - thanks!

Hey Steve, thought I'd go right to the source on this one... I want to develop a sci-fi weapon that has multiple kinds of ammo that cen be loaded. This means each shot does damage based on the ammo and has little to do with the weapon. I am sure this would be best defined as making the gun a multipower and make it so a slot can only be used based on the ammo loaded (right?). What I am thinking, though, is to base a pistol, rifle, auto-rifle (an other) version of the weapon and the damage is based on the explosive round(s) loaded into the weapon. Would it work to define a base for the ammo (2d6 RKA or whatever) and then have the Rifle add damage and accuracy, and the auto-rifle add a little damage and autofire? This way the damage is directly related to the ammo and the weapon just allow a ranged attack with a few bells-n-whistles added. I think the ammo side of things would also work better when applying autofire, as you could have an autofire of 5 shots with five completely different kinds of ammo then... or something like that!