Alverant

One of the aspects of sci-fi that makes it preferable to fantasy were the big objects. Things like watching Star Wars for the first time and seeing the Star Destroyer passing overhead in the beginning. Or for younger gamers, the Halo from the video game with the same name. They're called "big dumb objects" but I don't like that name.

Unfortunately you don't see as many in fantasy settings. Oh, there are a few like in Discworld. You'd think that since you can do more things in a fantasy setting using magic there would be more grand scale objects. Where's the city whose walls were made from a dragon skeleton with the mayor's mansion being the skull? Where's the floating mountain? Where's the temple to the gods that can be seen from hundreds of miles away? Where are these things in your campaign?

(I'm not saying you need them or something is wrong if you don't have them, I'm wondering what you do to invoke the sense of wonder in your game.)

Re: Billionaires: Supervillains earn, Superheroes inherit

My theory is that an honest business man who got rich would be less likely to abandon his/her business to become a hero. While a dishonest business man who got rich would be more likely to engage in other criminal activities to increase their wealth.

Those who inherit would become heroes to prove to themselves since they got their wealth by doing nothing or feel that by being rich they have an obligation to help others. OTOH inheriting wealth could mean not understanding the value of money or working and might not care how their actions affect others or feel they are entitled to their position and would do anything to maintain it.

It comes down to what makes a better story.

Re: Billionaires: Supervillains earn, Superheroes inherit

Good point. By extension' date=' business owners occasionally need to take actions that are less than altruistic for the good of their companies, such as staff reductions or opposing collective bargaining. Heirs to inherited wealth who do not operate their own businesses do not face the same constraints. This means heirs are permitted to be more heroic because they do not need to sully themselves with the concerns of the real world.[/quote'] Except often these "less than altruistic" actions aren't for the good of their companies, but for the good of themselves. For example collective bargaining is good for companies because it's good for the employees (most of the time) but not so good for the executives. In fiction (and often reality) those opposing collective bargaining want more control over their employees and treat them poorly. Likewise a company may cut back on safety and maintenance in order to "save money" which really means "more profit for ME".

 

There is the belief that those who get rich quickly in business did so through unethical means. It's not that big of a step to go from raiding pension funds and being lax on employee safety (knowing employees will be hurt or killed) to hiring a criminals to engage in corporate sabotage and political assassinations.

Re: Billionaires: Supervillains earn, Superheroes inherit

Though not a superhero, it's my understanding that Scrooge MacDuck built up his immense wealth from nothing, using a combination of hard work and incredible good luck. He's never struck me as particularly greedy, although he does enjoy his wealth greatly, to the point of having a huge vault filled with massive amounts of golden coins that he basically just rolls around in from time to time.

 

Anyway, he may not be a superheroic example, but at least he isn't a villainous one.

 

Hope that helps.

Re: The Real Reason That The Nazi War Effort Failed

Don't forget about the resources used to further mechanize their air force with robotic clones of their flying ace Otto Pilot.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

The word/notion "God" itself is beyond ambiguous. It's nonsensical. There are certain words that actually indicate knowable things (e.g., "Moon") that are ambiguous because they hang in space w/o context.

 

Talking about God is an exercise in futility...

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

I think that is a logical fallacy myself.

 

Someone once presented to me the idea that, if God knows exactly what we will do in every decision we ever make, then we do not actually have free will.

 

I say that just knowing what someone will do does not "bind them" to doing it; you have predicted their actions but their actions are still their own.

 

I think the same is true here - God could have all the power he wants to change things, and still decide not to, for reasons that we probably cannot comprehend.

 

But then I'm agnostic and really don't care one way or the other.

Re: THE BOOK OF THE EMPRESS -- What Do *You* Want To See?

Sorry if these were already mentioned but I'd like to see more details about

1) How do you conquer a whole universe/dimension? Is a dimension considered a small piece of a universe (like a solar system or galaxy). That way her empire could be in this universe but be a few billion light years away or even outside our visible universe?

2) How she deals with alternate versions of herself

3) Set up a difference between alternate universes and alternate timelines (if there is any, it's possible all alternate universes are really alternate timelines)

4) What these "loss of freedoms" are as described in the first Enemies book (Master Villains)? People toss the phrase around a lot but few actually explain what it means.

5) How much being conquered affects her worlds? Are they pretty much the same in terms of society or are they virtually enslaved? Do they have to give tribute or just pay lip service to the empire?

6) What sort of things are forbidden in the Empire? Is magic destroyed, encouraged, or coddled? Would they allow superheroes to help enforce the law on some worlds? Are there super villains within the empire and how are they dealt with?

Re: God of Redemption

Since this is part of the Fantasy Hero thread, it does raise the question of how often this god makes personal appearances. Does he/she/it only appear in important cases and when called upon, and by "appear" I mean actually appear (if there were cameras, you could snap a photo) or is he/she/it only show up in visions by the person in question. A successor will always deviate from the goals of the founders. This can be good and bad depending on if the successors adapt religious doctrine for changing times so it stays true to the intent or if they change dogma into being more "fundamental" and hampering social progress.

Think about this, during biblical times women were married in their early teens. Today that is considered immoral and criminal. At what point did it become unacceptable and who made that decision? When a god says, "OK, things have changed so I'm updating the rules of morality." What happens to those who are being punished under the old rules? What about those who were rewarded under the old rules?

Re: God of Redemption

I might take issue with this' date=' if I knew where to take it.[/quote']The problem with lawful good is "which laws" and "who decide what's good". One could argue the Borg and the Nazis were LG because they were very fond of law and order. Freedoms aren't a big part of lawful good.

Re: God of Redemption

As far as the tenants of the religion' date=' I would be pulling from very early Christianity - peace, love, kindness, meekness, forgiveness, honesty, etc.[/quote']When was this time period? After Christianity took over the Roman Empire (when it pretty much became a religion) there was forced conversions, a purge of non-Christians, destruction then conversion of their temples to churches, the Donation of Constantine (a fake document giving the Church power of the State), and other similar acts. When was this peace, meekness, honesty, etc you mentioned?

Re: God of Redemption

I know this is a bit late (and I would like to add my 2 cents in later after I had some sleep) but my first question for a god of redemption would be, "What do we need to be redeemed from?" Does the god decide what is good or bad or does the god enforce a higher standard of right and wrong outside of him/her/itself? In the former you risk having a god whose standards don't stand the test of time. In the latter you have to justify the need for such a god at all and explain why people don't go directly to this higher standard cutting out the proverbial middleman (or middle-deity in this case). If it is a LG god, then he/she/it won't say we need to be redeemed for things we had no control over. There would be nothing like "conceived in sin" that taints all people for example.

Also would the standards of right and wrong (however derived) would be strictly applied or would it be done on a case by case basis? Like before either answer would have problems. If it's the former there will be situations where a person did violate the standards, but by a more subjective standard there was no harm done so no crime has been committed. OTOH, dealing with issues individually would leave some feel cheated as they see people who's violations were similar to their own receive lighter penalties.

Re: Weaknesses in Armor Joints

It really boils down to how much realism you want the rules to enforce.

 

On the more abstract end of the spectrum you can just rule that any attack that does Body past defenses vs. an armor special effect usually targets the limb joints (GM descriptive fiat).

You could also say that successful attacks with Armor Piercing or Penetrating are doing the same.

You could also go full bore detailed with Hit Locations and sectional defenses but this can really bog down combat in the supers genre due the higher DC attacks.

I'm a big fan of the armored/robot hero and one thing I have noticed in machines real and fictional is that the joints are not as protected because they have to move. This applies to the natural world too. (Watch Monster Bug Wars on Science channel. Fangs slipping in between armor plates is a pretty common tactic.)

My question is how to reflect this weakness in the Hero system. Normally if you buy a defensive power defined as a kind of armor then you get covered from head to toe in the same defense including areas that are traditionally weaker (elbows, back of the knees, visor, etc). Is there some way to reflect this? I'm thinking more of a house rule that applies to all such situations by default instead of applying a specific disadvantage that players or GMs might not remember or might not want to take.

For example I finished the first chapter of a superhero podiobook where a SWAT team was able to disable Nazi robots by shooting out their knee joints. If they didn't hit the knee, their bullets bounced off. What would be a good way to simulate this without adding a bunch of complicated powers/abilities/weaknesses to the rulebook?

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

What you are describing is an ontological argument for the existence of God.

 

Science requires lab work. Except no substitute.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

That is' date=' of course, assuming you're a literalist when it comes to the Bible. Since so many people are, Evolution strikes at the heart of their faith, which is why they're so vehemently against it, and by extension, science and the scientific method.[/quote']The problem with NOT taking the bible literally is that it raises the question of which passages are "metaphorical" and which are "literal". Keep in mind that metaphors can mean many different things. In the end you have a holy text that claims divine authority but empty of meaning.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

Your base assumption' date=' that science is hostile to religion, is incorrect.[/quote']I think you have it reversed. Religion is hostile to science. Religion makes claims that people have accepted only through belief. Science makes claims it can be backed up with proof. No need for just taking a person's word for something, science was something everyone could do. Science encourages questions, any questions. Religion ... not so much. And when religion and science conflict, science wins by showing that it works. How much technology has been derived from faith?

 

To quote Paula Kirby:

Evolution means that the creation accounts in the first two chapters of Genesis are wrong. That’s not how humans came into being, nor the cattle, nor the creeping things, nor the beasts of the earth, nor the fowl of the air. Evolution could not have produced a single mother and father of all future humans, so there was no Adam and no Eve. No Adam and Eve: no fall. No fall: no need for redemption. No need for redemption: no need for a redeemer. No need for a redeemer: no need for the crucifixion or the resurrection, and no need to believe in that redeemer in order to gain eternal life.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

Science can neither prove nor disprove 'God' -

Wrong. Science can prove/disprove 'God' in two easy steps.

1) Define 'God'

2) Hold 'God' up to the hype

If either step fails, then the notion is disproved. In my experience the main fault in proving God exists comes when the God who made the universe is assumed to be the God in a religion.

Re: Superhero Team Threat Levels

There really ought to be a threat level for Cthulu and Galactus.

 

Level omg (Brown)

 

Call everyone you know, ask to borrow nukes , and start praying?

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

Has the inclusion of heroes of color caused fewer White people to buy the books? Should we worry about that potential consequence?

Let's consider comics. How many comic books by the big two (Marvel and DC) had titles feature a hero or heroine of color that has lasted more than 50 issues? How many featuring white hero or heroines?

I doubt there would be as much "backlash" as people seem to imagine. I'd even say there would be at least a tad more "brand loyalty" with LGB gamers if you publish books with canonical LGB characters.

What about the new bi-racial Spider-man? That itself seemed to have caused quite a stir among comic book fans and not all of it good.

That's an extremely silly hypothetical that wouldn't happen. Just because someone is LGB doesn't mean it's time to talk about kinky sexual fetishes or whatever. Don't oversexualize. And I'm not even asking that sexuality be stated so directly as that (although it might be in some particular backgrounds).

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

Well..with regards to the villain books....most of the characters therein are so sociopathic that their sexuality is the least of their concerns. Also, they're hardly the best role models. Seriously, does ANYONE look at Black Harlequinn and go..."Glad he's one of ours ? that said..a number of villains at least have the potential to be gay/lesbian...

 

Dark Seraph(and possibly Phoenix) are described as reasonably hedonistic..and likely to play both sides of the fence.

Lynx(of Brain Trust)...with her obsession with "catgirls" may potentially be lesbian.

Of The Ultimates...only Slick is mentioned as a womanizer(and I don't use him in the group anyways...he sucks) The rest of the group has some potential for alternate sexualities(though new to 6th ed...Binder is mentioned as having a crush on Lady Blue) Blackstar, Cyclone, and Thunderbolt all have personalities that suggest they could be "compensating" for something.

 

These are just examples...in the end...I think each GM should decide this issue for themselves, but it'd be very easy to see a number of published chracters as gay.

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

The target audience for superhero RPG tends to be hetro white males so a company would do well to pander ... I mean cater to that demographic. For better or worse, things like sexuality, religion, political affiliation, etc aren't mentioned in the character descriptions unless they are key parts to the character. And while it does tend to suck not knowing for sure if the heroes and villains in the book match (or in the villain case oppose) your own choices, in some ways it really doesn't matter. Plus by not mentioning it, you avoid some backlash from the customers and public. If Steve Long came out and said, "Defender is bisexual with a fetish for being Entangled." would people be more or less likely to buy Hero products? (Sorry Mr.Long, not trying to put words in your mouth, just offering a hypothetical.) In a business, sometimes you have to make these decisions.

But I still wouldn't mind seeing more diversity in heroes/heroines. Being good should not be linked to being a particular race, gender, religion, political affiliation, whatever.

Re: Eccentric but plausible ways a character could be rich?

Professional athlete who had to retire early

dot-com founder who sold his company at the right time

out of court settlement

head of own religion

stockholder in a big company that sells so many products you buy one every time you go grocery shopping

winner in reality show

Re: Aliens in Dark Champions

Imagine that the characters are working with a good group of aliens' date=' perhaps as part of a weird conspiracy acting behind the scenes. Their enemies are a bunch of bad aliens out to eat people or destroy the world.[/quote']Since DC tends to be morally ambiguous, instead of having "good" and "bad" aliens, you have aliens with a more complex moral code and desires. For example:

 

1) Alien is hiding on Earth as a refugee (MiB style) and is the victim of a mundane crime. Since he can't go to the police without revealing he's an alien, he decides to take the law into his own hands. He still has some tech that will help him in his crusade against the scum of humanity.

 

2) The aliens want to return home, but their ship is too damaged to salvage so they're trying to elevate Earth technology to the point where it can build a new ship. What happens to Earth because of the advanced tech is of no concern to them (provided they don't have to deal with the consequences).

 

3) The alien is actually a human from another dimension where things are radically different and has problems fitting in.

 

4) Aliens are smugglers shipping Earth "delicacies" off to the stars in exchange for something trivial to them. (Whatever the aliens want would have to be unique to Earth. If it's drugs it would have to be plant based and not one that can be cooked up by anyone with a high school chemistry book. Likewise, what they are offering as trade would be something easy for them to get or make but still valuable on earth. Like maybe they found that if you leave a lump of carbon in their hyperdrive, the energies turns it into a blue diamond.)

 

5) Aliens studying human behavior and performing an experiment by giving a group of disgruntled humans the chance to strike back against the injustices in their society.

 

6) Because Earth is not a member of the Galactic Federation yet, it's a favored spot for criminals to hide. Some just want to lie low while others are trying to carve out their own criminal empire.

Re: Evil Fey

As two of my characters would testify from personal experience, the fey are already evil.

Fey don't really care for anyone but their own kind (if then) and see mortals as playthings and don't consider the consequences of their actions. Fey will "help" if they think it sounds like fun. For example if a fey learns a character's secret ID then later hears the character complain about the troubles of leading a double life, the fey may help by revealing the secret ID to the world. See, problem solved. And now the character isn't boring the fey anymore by complaining about the same thing all the time.