gojira

Re: Base Power, Disadvantage or just sfx

I'm thinking the size of the base needs to be bought, and Darkness for all hexes. I don't think she needs to buy anything for being Air Tight, most buildings are assumed to have some sort of structural integrity. She might have to buy Def for the base equal to "rock." And the air supply is fine, most builds are ventilated, no special points for that.

I think the base needs to be super well hidden, you'd need a serious Detect to find the thing. *She* might need some special detect to "see" where she's going when under the earth, or be able to "read" where she's going so she can actually find the thing. Unless it's actually relatively close to the surface.

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

I can see cases where the individual groups play-style is such that certain things in the RAW are either undervalued or overvalued, and that needs to be corrected.

I can also see cases where the GM wants something to be undervalued or overvalued, and makes a rule accordingly. For example, equipment is often free and costs no points. "No points" is clearly undervaluing the utility of the equipment, but in certain types of campaigns it doesn't make much sense to require tracking equipment with character points.

Likewise, in certain types of games, powers might be unavailable or only available as Talents or Equipment. Or certain powers might be available only with limitations, or the base cost might be increased to make the power more rare (for PCs).

Etc. All those are houserules, but clearly could be reasonable in the proper circumstances.

Re: Images vs. Detect: who wins?

Buy an unusual sense that works like sight (costs about 30 points' date=' depending on how you buy it)[/quote']

 

I'm using Champions Complete, btw. I've always found the RAW for Detect and Enhanced Senses to be rather confusingly written (regardless of edition), even though I understand the basic concept it's trying to describe.

 

First, Detect is by default in the Unusual Sense Group, correct? That's what it says on p135 of CC. So let me add up the points:

 

Detect: Class of Things: Fae (5 points) + Range for a Single Sense (5 points) + Sense (2 points) + Targeting for a Single Sense (10 points).

 

5 + 5 + 2 + 10 = 22 points. Then I'm going to arbitrarily say that +10 points of Perception is enough to counter Fae Images. 32 points base total. OIF Fragile on top of that.

 

(I think the only complaint with CC at this point is that on page 134 where it says there are six sense groups and lists them, it should say seven and list "Unusual Sense Group" too.)

 

So if I use a "Simulated Sense Group" of Sight, then I think the +Perception is clearly needed. But if I leave the Detect as an Unusual Sense, then I'm not sure it is, since Fae Images would not have Detect Fae as part of their Images (in my game world.)

 

Thoughts? Discussion?

 

OR just add loads to your sense (only to see through Faerie Glamour -2 (depending on how common it is compared to other stuff)). I'd go with that one.

 

This would work too. Hmm, so what's the difference, RAW-wise, between a Detect and just a load of +Perception? Because just the +Perception seems a lot cheaper.

Re: Images vs. Detect: who wins?

Perhaps by adding 4-6 levels with Detect Fae as part of the Goggles. That way you have enough Levels to pierce many illusions on top of the Detect.

This is more or less what I was thinking. Give the Image enough levels so that it "always works" and rolls can be ignored in most circumstances. Give the goggles enough levels to counter that. Then it could be considered an even Perception roll, and even "obvious" under some circumstances. Just like you don't need to roll to see a '67 Chevy right in front of you.

Hmm' date=' you could build the detector on a sense that isn´t normaly covered by images[/quote']

 

Make the Detect its own Sense, not part of the Sight Group.

 

Then put a Limitation on it that it's effected by Flash, darkness (and Darkness) etc. like Sight.

 

Hmm, perhaps. I'll think about that.

 

Or give the glamor a Limitation (maybe -0 or -1/4 if they are common) that the illusion doesn't fool technical methods of seeing through it.

 

Yes that's an idea too. I like this a little better, it seems to flow better with what I have in mind.

 

Randian is right' date=' this isn't a clear case of always wins in either direction. This is all about a PER Roll. Some GM's might reward a bonus to the PER roll to see through the illusion based upon the specifics of the powers involved(which modifiers it takes, relevant senses, how the Images power was built, etc.)[/quote']

 

Yes, I was thinking this way as well. In obvious circumstances, allow the goggles to just see the fae. If you're scanning a crowd, you have to roll. But if you have a fae right in front of you, it's obvious.

 

Do you want the goggles to always work' date=' or just usually work?[/quote']

 

Always work. Like infrared goggles, they just work.

So I've got a question that isn't covered directly by the rules. An illusion (Images) covers an object. A character has a Detect for what the illusion is covering. Who wins?

Assume the Detect is sight based, and the illusion also creates Images to sight. An example might be an illusion that covers a secret door, and a character has Detect Secret Doors.

What I'm actually trying to do is make goggles that see through fairy glamor. Normally, the fae disguise themselves with a glamor, but these science based goggles can see right through it (the goggles have "Detect Fae." Assume it has at least Discriminatory and Targeting). This is also one of those annoying situations where both effects should be absolute. The glamor should always work, unless you have some sort of counter-spell, special item (like rowan berries), or these goggles.

Any thoughts how best to handle this? Note I don't want the glamor dispelled, I just want the goggles to see through it.

Re: Tell me about Fantasy Hero 1st edition (the self-contained one).

Heh, the OP (I assume) posted the exact same thing on RPG.net, where it garnered a pretty good amount of attention, and folks waxed nostalgic about their old FH campaigns.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?666268-Tell-me-about-Fantasy-Hero-1st-edition-%28the-self-contained-one%29

Aside: If Hero Games runs out of other ideas, I wonder if "Retro Hero" would be of interest to consumers. Release an all-in-one, nostalgia product with all the old rules of some of the early Hero stuff, like the old 1st edition Fantasy Hero. Probably should fix anything obviously broken, but the briefness of the rules, their "old school" feel, and the relative quirkiness that comes from that should be a selling feature.

Re: I craete my Space Colony and populate it with...

Haven't looked at it yet, but the first thing I thought of was "Dwarf Fortress in Space."

Re: What Can’t Hero Do?

There's also just using "Move-By" for any Attack-then-move action. I think you have to adjudicate which portion of the movement, if any, gains the velocity bonus to damage, but Move-By seems to work ok for a lot of situations.

Re: What Can’t Hero Do?

This might be obvious, but Hero doesn't do light-weight gaming well. You're not going to run a game of Toon with Hero.

Re: Wish List: Other Licensed Content

Seriously.

Heck I've thought about writing a gritty hard S/F PA setting. If I decide to get more serious about writing it might just happen.

Just happens to be a fun thread on rpg.net about food supplies in a mostly realistic post-apoc world.

Re: Conversion - M&M to Hero 5th(revised)

I'd probably go the AoE route, with Selective Effect and a custom limitation that says "Only until the first target is not knocked out." Just because that's how it seems to mechanically work.

You could standardize that and allow players to buy it as an Independent Advantage for any power they want to use it with. It would be variable per power AP, sure, but would function reasonably close to the way a Talent works that it might feel the same to a player.

Re: Wish List: Other Licensed Content

A full campaign setting book. PA settings can be very specific...

OK, I can understand that. TDAR looked very "gonzo" to me, very fantastical. That's not bad, but if you're in the market for a grim, gritty, technological PA setting I can see how TDAR might not do the trick.

Gesalt Bennie and Michael Surbrook (Kazei 5) need to get together and write that book.

Re: Wish List: Other Licensed Content

Fallout is a setting that could use a good tabletop adaptation.

Basically, I'm curious again, so same question: how does 5th ed. Apocalyptic Hero and The Day After Ragnarok not meet your Post Apoc gaming needs here?

Re: Wish List: Other Licensed Content

Game Worlds

 

FGUs Space Opera setting. The game mechanics were '80s FGU - kitchen sink-style. But the setting - an amalgamation of space opera tropes (as "space opera" was defined in the '80s) that somehow *worked* as presented - yum!

I actually have a copy of Space Opera and a couple supplements also. The system is too cumbersome for much gaming' date=' but I agree the background is fantastic. For that reason, [b']Villains and Vigilantes[/b] was good also.

I'm just curious if you've checked out the Star Hero settings that are currently available. There's like friggin' seven of them. (Or I assume they're settings, maybe they're scenarios or some sort of one-shot.) If these were selling better, I assume Hero Games would be producing more. But for a product that is probably a modest seller, it seems to me that Star Hero is very well supported.

Serious question: what have you bought from the Star Hero line, and how did it not work like the Space Opera setting you were hoping for?

Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUOqTIaau3o

Re: Wish List: Other Licensed Content

I used to really enjoy the Redwall books. There's a new Kickstarter project for "fuzzy fantasy RPG," whose art is very reminiscent of the cover art for the Redwall books. You don't need a license to do something along the general idea. A somewhat simplified Hero System with fantasy anthropomorphs might be fun.

Re: Guns In The MHI RPG

OT: My background is mainly D6 and D20' date=' what's the learning curve going to be like?[/quote']

 

FYI: Hero System in Two Pages.

Re: Psych Limit for Spellcasters in Non-Magical World

I think the correct interpretation would be to ask how much does this delusion affect the PC in play?

If other people are aware of the truth and ridicule or shun the PC because he's crazy, that's a problem. If most people have no idea that magic isn't "real" then it's a common believe that's part of the campaign world and worth no points.

If a deluded person's magic works notably worse than those who are not deluded, then that's a problem. If everyone's magic works about the same (or at least all PC magic), then it's just a feature of the campaign world and worth no points.

Mostly, this feels like just a campaign feature to me. If being deluded means they can't ever learn spell school x, where other PCs can, then you could charge some points for it. Otherwise... *shrug* they aren't really deluded, they're just misinformed. There's a difference.

Re: [New Product] Champions Complete

Then Competent Normals have 22 STUN.

True, and that's wasn't what I was addressing in that post. I was just referring to some of the equivocation answering the question. I'd personally prefer that the chart continued to progress up, but it's not a big deal.

Re: [New Product] Champions Complete

Too many "guidelines." At the end of the day, new people need definite answers. Put a stake in the ground. It says right in the beginning of Champs Complete that anything can be changed. If someone wants they can change around any parts they like; they'll move that stake if they need to.

Re: [New Product] Champions Complete

5th ed. revised had a table on page 40, Characteristics Comparison Table, that listed the actual values for Weak, Challenged, Skilled, Competent, etc. STUN for Competent is listed as 28-40. That's pretty much what I'm going by.

The table in Champs Complete, Characteristics Benchmarks Table, is a companion to that table in 5th rev. But there's no listing of actual numbers, just word descriptions.

Re: Champions Complete

The triple cost thing is a side effect of the "Takes No Stun" power for Automatons. (CC pg 89)

Darn it, I read that entry but somehow missed that note. Thanks!

I believe it's in Advanced Player's Guide

Ah, at least I didn't miss that one. Thanks also!

Re: Champions Complete

I found a few other things that might be omissions, deliberate or otherwise.

Reading Kazei 5, I noticed that several of the "androids" (built as automata) were paying triple cost for DCV and other Defensive Powers, like PD, ED and Resistant PD/ED. I didn't see anything in the Champions Complete about that.

Also in Kazei 5, one of the Mind Control powers has the advantage Long-Term Control, which again I didn't see.

Just trying to point out some errata, and if I'm wrong then someone can give me a pointer to what I missed.

Re: [New Product] Champions Complete

It looks like an error to me. I would increase the Competent Normal STUN to 28, 30 or more.

Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now?