Phil

Re: Likelihood of a Country Producing Costumed Heroes A few points. Firstly, superhero genre is widely spread around the globe now, so in theory they could pop up anywhere. Superman, Spiderman and Batman are pretty iconic characters, thanks to the movies, so I think residents of every major urban area around the world would recognise them on site. Less so rural farmers in a hindustani backwater, but in population terms they're very much in the minority. Secondly, I hate hate hate hate the assumption that US superheroes will dress up in spandex, while superheroes everywhere else will become some cheesy parody of a historical figure or some national characteristic. There's no super Abe Lincoln wandering around, or super Davy Crockett, so why must we assume that all Greek heroes will become Ares or Poseidon?! They have as much right to don the lycra and become Άτομο ψύλλων - Flea Man Thirdly, it all depends how realistic you want to be. "Heroes" is probably a much more accurate reflection of how people would behave with powers than most comic books, except that it doesn't have anyone exploiting their powers for fame & fortune, which would definitely happen in the modern celebrity obsessed world. The White Wolf Aberrant game also had some interesting ideas in this area.

Re: How Would You Model This? A lot of very interesting thinking going on here, but it does strike me as a simple build. You want to increase the active points of something. We have a power that does that, called Aid. You can then play around with the Aid, in terms of fade duration and making it an all-or-nothing fade, adding in the casting elements, etc.. , but the build at the top seems the way to go. Though please do carry on, I'm finding it all fascinating

Re: Heroes TV show regeneration

Re: Heroes TV show regeneration Normally, I'd agree - it could be that. However, the short-term discomfort exhibited suggests it isn't the case. It really does almost seem like the flipside of having regeneration is that you suffer with brittle bones!

Re: When sfx lie

Re: Heroes TV show regeneration Which is the easy way out of course! But if you don't want your game to be different from TV, the Hero System should let you model it. Not sure I understand your comment on trading regen for defences? Similarly, the physical disad of clumsy might cause someone to stumble more often, but doesn't necessarily lead to the game mechnical effect required.

Re: When sfx lie He's not absent, he's just bought Penalty Skill Levels against your Perception roll

I'm slowly revisiting series (sorry, "season") 1 of Heroes, and have noticed that any character who has the regeneration power seems to get hurt inordinately often! Far, far more than one would think is coincidental. It's easy enough to model for a single character with Regen - just buy down BOD and PD. But when it also strikes characters like Peter Petrelli who absorb the regeneration power, that complicates things slightly. So I was wondering how to model this. Two options that immediately spring to mind are Side Effect, or simply creating a Unified Power out of a combination of Regen and Negative BOD. Thoughts?

Re: When sfx lie

Re: Invisible Armor

Re: AOE and DCV weirdness That is genius. Bloody pure frickin' genius! Although seems odd that it should cost more, when in effect it's limited DCV. Maybe add the limitation "Only vs AoE attacks"?

Re: AOE and DCV weirdness

Re: Too Transform

Re: AOE and DCV weirdness

Re: AOE and DCV weirdness I don't think there's any issue with Velocity not affecting DCV. After all, we Effect-Based Facists view these as two different Effects, so the fact that they are independent suits me just nicely. If you want velocity to influence DCV, just buy additional DCV linked to your movement powers. The issue is more with the construction of 1-hex AoE's and the way they interact with the granular nature of turn-based gaming. In this respect, I quite like M&M's solution, which is that AoEs still have to roll to hit - the benefit they offer is that they have the *chance* to hit multiple targets, but they still have to use exactly the same targeting mechanic. For me, this is the ideal solution. Has this change happened in Hero 6? I somehow doubt it. Then, if you want the added benefit of rolling to hit the hex, simply buy some additional OCV, "Only for AoE powers, only to create equivalence of attacking vs. DCV 3" . Hehehehe. That'll learn ya!

Re: Too Transform We didn't

Re: Too Transform I think it came along before the whole Demon stuff. I just remember it being unpleasant and undefensible! Typical GM. Blaming the players

Re: Too Transform I just think Transform papers over cracks in the Effects-based nature of the game and, without intending to directly insult everyone who has ever used Transform, allows for slightly sloppy thinking by promoting SFX over Effect. Personally, I'm against all powers which can duplicate the effect of another power, and Transform certainly falls foul of that. But I suspect that the transformation of Transform will only be able to take place if and when Hero achieves an even greater level of effects-based purity than 6th edition offers. And now I'm *really* starting to sound like some kind of Ku Klux Heroite!!

Re: Too Transform That's the wrong question, and it sums up my issue with Transform. The correct question should be "What's the effect you want to achieve?", and then I'll happily tell you how I'd propose doing it To all intents and purposes, in the game we played, being turned into sand was near as dammit being dead. So it's a Killing Attack. Another version might just be very strong Entangle, or Drain STR. Any one of a number of mechanisms that don't actually require to be game-mechanically transformed.

Re: Too Transform In general, I'm totally in agreement with Sean. The very existence of Transform is an aberration to the effects-based system, a catch-all that allows you to do "any other business" where the other powers and abilities break down. I like your thinking, and agree that I'd rather find some ways to tweak the existing Adjustment powers for most cases. Could be some tricky calculations, but Effects-based Nazism requires that we strive for nothing less. I'll never forget Doc Democracy putting us up against a villain with a simple little 1d6 cumulative transform, who promptly turned the entire group into sand - and he knew, he goddamn knew that none of us had power defence, because he'd made the bloody characters for us dammit!! Since that day, I've vowed to wipe Transform from the pages of the game

Re: Why are Limited Defenses so costly?

Re: Super Law: Power stealing No, it's entirely fundamental to the point of how guilt is proven. It's much trickier to fit something like the theft of a superpower into existing laws relating to offenses against the person, than it is to create a new crime that specifically matches the action.

Re: Teleport Strength Or do we change the rules, so that Grab / Disarm are both within the Effects toolkit, and then it's simply a case of applying Ranged and Indirect?!

Re: Super Law: Power stealing Unfortunately, as far as I'm aware (and my knowledge is of English law, but it is the sister-system of US law) it is not down to the Judge or Jury to determine whether a particular action is a crime. What they MAY determine is whether a particular action falls within the remit of an existing crime. Then the process is: - the prosecution determine the charge they wish to make - they collect and present evidence as to why the specific action meets the definitions as set out in current law - the judge makes decisions in relation to the law, which may rule certain evidence inadmissable or certain legal constructions to be unacceptable. - the jury makes a decision on the facts of the case In terms of the prosection, in English law it would be tried as an assault, of which we have 4 main categories: - Common Assault & Battery - must either have physical contact with the victim (battery) or undertake actions that cause the victim to believe that physical violence was going to result (assault) - Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm - as Common Assault, but you will have left some lasting mark, such as bruising or a cut. - Unlawful Wounding - as above, but causes "serious" bodily harm - Grevious Bodily Harm (GBH) - as above, but both intends to and causes "serious" bodily harm. In English law, it would come down to three things: 1. Was there a physical contact such as could be considered an assault? In superhero land, there is probably already precedent relating to SFXs such as Spiritual and Ego attacks, but if not, this is a major issue and could see the case being thrown out. After all, loss of an intangible and undefineable power by an intangible and undefiniable force is a tough case to make! How powers manifest and how they're detected in your campaign world is a key consideration. 2. What scale of damage is the loss of a superpower? This would vary dramatically based on SFX. There is precedent in English law that psychological harm can be ABH, so that would be the starting point. The permanence alone wouldn't be enough to lift it to GBH, and would be down to the jury to decide on a case by case basis - as such, the prosecution would probably try for ABH, Wounding AND GBH at the same time. Context is key - loss of radar sense for Daredevil qualifies, as would loss of forcefield for the Invisible Woman. There could be some very interesting legal arguments in relation to the "Eggshell" principle, which says that an attacker takes his victim as he finds him, and it is not a defence that the person has a thin skull if you strike him lightly on the head and he dies. In the same vein, it is arguable that loss of a superpower is an extension of this principle. NB: Google just pointed me to the current sentencing guidelines, and suggests that one type of GBH is "Victim suffered a very serious injury or permanent disfigurement" - if I was the prosection, that's what I'd be aiming for! 3. What was the intent? Did the Aggressor intend to take the power, or was it a side-effect. This would judge whether it would be a "Wounding" offence, with maximum penalty of 10 years, or GBH, with maximum of life. If this type of case has never been tried before, it is extremely unlikely that the judge would allow a successful prosection. However, he would almost certainly permit grounds for appeal so that a higher court can adjudicate on the specific legal matters. In English law at least, you cannot appeal on a finding of fact (i.e. the jury think you did X or did not do Y), you can only appeal on a matter of law. It is also worth noting that true legal precedent is only set by the higher courts - in England, only the Court of Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal and Supreme Court (formerly House of Lords) sets precedent. I suspect the same is true in US law. So whatever this judge decides may be influential but is unlikely to be binding on any future case.

Re: Usable [As Second Form Of Attack] (+1/4) Strikes me that Usable as a Second Form of Movement is a clumsy solution for a problem that just requires common sense adjudication. So long as the multipower slots are not Ultra's, I see no issue in allowing characters to take a 3/5ths move followed by a 2/5ths move, or any other fractional combination of movement powers - now technically, doing this will allow the character to move 9/25ths of their first movement power, because they will be using 3/5ths of a movement power to which they have allocated 3/5ths of the multipower. But again, I'd happily handwave this for the sake of "reality".