laxrulz777

Re: DEX: and the Marvel Universe I'm a bit curious as to the justification for putting daredevil higher than cap... I can see giving daredevil some DCV levels or something but there's no way that cap (pretty much peak human for all the physical stats) could be less dexterous than daredevil (whose powers are pretty much restricted to heightened senses)... am i missing something here?

Re: Looking to join Genocide Genocide was a very well done villain group. They were designed to prey on your heroes weaknesses and were very deadly... I think the book was called "Mutant File" and it had a write up for the organization and a group of mutants that fought them... very well done nothing new for 5th yet though...

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced? I think the problem most people have is that Passing Strike is too efficient. People are saying abusive and getting the response of, "Then don't allow it" but that's missing the main point they're making... so let's examine the main point they're making... If your campaign has a DC cap of 15d6 here are some simple ways to get there STR 50 Passing Strike +10" leap 55 pnts STR 35 2 1/2d6 HKA 65 pnts STR 20 Offensive Strike +7 DCs with Martial arts 43 pnts so far passing strike doesn't look too bad... Or we could look at it this way: I know I want to make a Brick. I know I want to hit the damage cap. My choices are STR 75 in which case I pay 65 pnts and have a 7 end 15d6 punch STR 50 Passing Strike +10" Leap 55 pnts I've saved 10 pnts and have some more leaping but i'm also down 5 PD and 12.5 STUN and I can't lift anywhere near as much... Note: I actually wrote this email thinking I would side with the Passing Strike haters but I now think that Passing Strike is okay. As long as the GM is paying attention to who buys it I think it's probably just fine and (as demonstrated above) its not terribly more efficient then other choices.

Re: Need help with military rank titles Are the armed forces unified (i.e. airforce, navy, army, etc. all together or seperate)... Perhaps a structure like this Field Marshal Marshal Theatre Marshal Marshal of the (North, South, East, West, *name for upper*, *name for lower*) Marshal of the (Navy, Army, Air Force, etc.) High Marshal Grand Marshal Lord Marshal other adjectives that you might try: Regional, Sectional, High, Lower, National, Continental...

Re: Favorite Abuse I think if I had a player try that I'd either A) veto it outright or tell them that it will only work against someone with at least one radar based sense... Not sure what I'd do against someone who did AVLD touch sense flash defense (millions of tiny needles perhaps)

Re: Has anyone ever had... well the npc in question was getting ready to trash the bar and beat up his girlfriend... the use of MC was already anticipated. What surprised me was that he walked out with the guy without an explanation to the other hero (who was trying to defuse the situation verbally) and the other hero just kinda let him leave. Kinda threw me for a loop.

Re: What??!! The Roman Empire fell to pieces while Jesus was still alive??!! The only reason that I didn't suggest a Persian Empire was that they were kind of restricted by geography. East of them was a very strong oriental dynasty, West of them was alot of land before you got to water and north of them was inhospitable desert and mountain regions. Sardis, Damascus and Jerusalem were already Roman holdings (and had been for almost 20 years) when Jesus died. So Persia would have had to take them back from the dying Roman Empire and then either make peace with the Empire and start trading with their people or start building military vessels there and conquering. In fitting with the Champions motif, I think the most likely European Empire would have been an Arthurian one. A pagan Arthur might have had a very different relationship with Mordred (Maybe not evil but certainly darker). I can picture a long lasting Camelot led Empire with holdings in Spain, France, Germany and Scandinavia. Alternatively, you could use Arthur as the spread of christianity (albeit greatly delayed) with Camelot becoming this world's equivalent of Rome (after the schism with the Orthodox church). I think Europe would have known about the Orient MUCH earlier thanks to Persia however. This might have led to a discovery of America sooner. Marco Polo "discovered" the orient in 1271 and Columbus sailed in 1492 so figure that if someone in 700 had gone to the orient you'd be looking at someone in 900 trying to sail west to get to Asia. That opens up all kinds of cookiness.

an adventure that just got totally screwed because your catalyst event was short-circuited? In a PBEM game in which I'm running I was going to have the Tank run in to the Mentalist over a jealous boyfriend bar fight. The mentalist just istantly mind controlled the guy and when asked about it said, "Don't worry" and walked away and the Tank didn't follow. So because of player apathy the two didn't meet and now I'm stuck either playing them both completely seperate until I can engineer another (now even more contrived) meeting or forcing some kind of encounter in this episode... bah... games would go soooo much smoother without the stupid players in the way

Re: What??!! The Roman Empire fell to pieces while Jesus was still alive??!! The Roman empire was the vessel for the spread of christianity. If the empire falls then Jesus might or might not have stayed alive (probably killed shortly after by the Jews but perhaps not). If he does stay alive then his martyrdom might happen in an entirely different way (if at all) and you might have to look at revising the entire modern Christian faith (salvation through faith alone might not even exist as a modern tenet). Additionally, christianity would probably have stayed more local. Paul would not have made all those trips to Rome and the home of any 21st century Christian church would probably be in Judea, Greece or Turkey perhaps (who knows really but it wouldn't be anywhere near Rome). Christianity would NOT have spread to England and England would have stayed a Pagan dominated island as would Germany. The Arthurian legends might be couched in an entirely different religion (in fact the alterations to England seem like the most interesting variations). Islam's roots might have been very different. Remember that Mohammed viewed Jesus as a prophet. It seems more likely that Islam would have been a tighter offshoot of Christianity (perhaps even its first schism?). The crusades would have been nothing like what we've got today. Either they would have been against another group (Perhaps those Germanic and English pagans mentioned above?), they would have been half-hearted against the muslims (seems unlikely) or (if Mohammed had been more influenced by Hinduism or Zorastrianism) they might have been full scale holy wars with one side claiming complete victory. That above paragraph probably sets up the most crucial changes to the modern era. Let's pick one: Crusades against the Pagans and Mohammed influenced by Hinduism. You'd imagine that Islam's relations with Hinduism and Christianity would be flip flopped (i.e. out and out war with Hinduism now and simmering hatred with Christianity). Pakistan and Turkey would be like Northern Ireland and Ireland were in the 80s (or like Palestine and Israel today perhaps). Israel probably wouldn't have come around. Asia was so isolationist that it probably remained mostly the same as would Africa. However, America probably wouldn't have been founded by puritan immigrants fleeing british religious persecution. More likely that explorers would have founded individual settlements (like spain in FL and holland in NY for example) and that those settlements would have been the major players. I doubt America as a country would have even come about but you might have had a succession of wars for independence as they decided to help eachother out in seperating from their colonial masters. So North America would probably look alot more like South America. Whether the World Wars would have happened at all is anyone's guess but I would think that if they did the wars would have been against Russia (unchecked by America) and would have been later (in place of the Cold War). One or more nuclear strikes might even have occurred. A possible (and interesting) outcome would have been for a WW to have been fought similar to WWII in which the european and asian countries allied against Russia (perhaps with a vietnamese or japanese ally) and in which Europe and China split up Russia piecemeal (just like Russia and the western powers split up Germany) leading to a current Cold War between Europe and China.

support. Like holding up a rock slide or what not (building debris in the case that came up).

Re: Thinking about starting a PBEM. Hero Central? I think that, like Hero system itself, hero central is whatever you want it to be... It might be nice if everyone made a pledge to try to be online off and on during the weekends or wednesday night or something just so you could get through those sessions quickly but it doesn't have to be that way. The one I'm in now (Third Millenium) gets posts once or maybe twice a night and it works pretty well...

Re: Shield of Confusion activating a DS does not require an attack roll so it doesn't qualify as a multiple power attack frankly the rules on DS are a bit unclear anyways (for example, does it cost end every turn or just when it deals damage??) but the MPA aspect is quite clear

Re: Double Knockback too pricey? I kinda like that as a wind blast though... as long as the GM keeps an eye on it that with the AE cone affect could be pretty cool...

Re: Shield of Confusion You'll note that i did not say "can't put linked slots" I said can't put linked attacks which you clearly can quoting from page 204: "You cannot Link Powers in different slots of an EC to activate together. You must buy any Linked Powers in a single slot... " It's not a special case... it's just not a multiple power attack...

Re: Shield of Confusion The powers are constant... The EC rule which you're getting hung up on reads as follows: "Characters cannot combine two or more powers from the same EC into a Multiple-Power Attack (page 234) without GM's permission." The problem here is a logical syllogism... You are looking at the rules of a multiple power attack. But read it again. The rules you're reading are conditions for making a special type of attack. If you say to the GM, "I want to fire off my Ultra Bolt and throw a Haymaker punch" your GM would point to page 234 and ask you if you meet all the criteria to be allowed to do such a thing. However, just because you meet these criteria individually doesn't make it a multiple power attack. (the syllogism would be: All Multiple Power Attacks meet Criteria 1-4, however not all actions meeting criteria 1-4 are Multiple Power Attacks)... I can think of a perfect counter-example. Any linked attack meets all of the criteria for a Multiple-Power attack. And if you're reading of the rules was correct then we could never put linked attacks into an EC. In fact, in reading reading the rules on linked powers its pretty clear that this is not the case. On page 196 the 6th paragraph, 1st column quotes the Multiple Power Attack section almost verbatim but it NEVER says that this is a multiple power attack. For what you're describing to be a problem the section would have to be something like this. "A Multiple Power Attack is any action that meets criteria 1, 2, 3 and 4" I can't believe what a mountain this mole hill has become...