secretID

Re: Pondering Grab house rule; comments welcome

I had a player suggest that, and I declined. By my count, an entangle has three benefits over a grab:

1) no ongoing DCV penalty to attacker;

2) no OCV penalty to attacker;

3) attacker remains free to do something else (though it's true that with a grab the attacker can squeeze);

4) can be used with some maneuvers.

Advantages of a grab:

1) the breakout issue;

2) it's free;

3) it doesn't interfere with attacks on target.

The price issue doesn't really mean much to me, since entangles always seem to be in MPs.

I think that grab is probably a little too good as compared to entangle, but that making the breakout exactly the same is overcompensating.

Re: programmer/hacker skill set?

Dark Champs, actually. I posted it here b/c I thought I'd get more responses.

I'm looking for a full suite of skills for an accomplished programmer and hacker. A few are obvious, but I'm looking for things like KS and Analyze.

BTW, I'm also looking for a way to search the HD characters and prefabs, since I would bet there's something there.

Thanks for any help.

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

[Too lazy to read whole thread - here's my 10 minutes of thought.]

You're not going to get anywhere on the privacy questions. Existing law obviously doesn't cover things like telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition. The GM has to determine to what degree the campaign world has developed laws accounting for super powers. There's some brief guidance in the Champions book.

Re the slavery, I seriously doubt it - it's not at that level. Slavery, false imprisonment, kidnapping, etc. generally require a threat of force. However, it's likely a battery (harmful or offensive touching) and/or similar offenses, criminal and civil. Again, though, you've got some problems applying real life law to this situation. Most basically, how do you prove who caused them to turn pink?

I'll expand. You walk up to me and dump a can of paint over my head. I have an easy battery suit against you, because you've touched me in an offensive way (though my damages are minimal). If I can get the cops to care, you'll also probably get something like misdemeanor harassment, since criminal assault usually requires harm.

When we switch to your situation, you only have the civil battery if you can get this accepted as a "touch." Whether that could happen is - you'll be happy to hear - your GM's call! FYI, the law does allow for "touching" to be indirect, so programming a robot to offensively touch someone would be a battery.

Criminally, your situation is far worse than the can of paint because it's permanent. If I were a prosecutor, I would certainly be thinking of things like assault and mayhem. But again, you have the question of whether in your world the substantive law and the rules of evidence have been adjusted to accommodate supers.

Female Don Blake/Thor-type character*, but in Dark Champions. She first uncovers/receives her powers (i.e., is transformed and inhabited by Norse spirit) as her family is being slaughtered by vampires.

I'm looking for a way for her to trigger her OHID transformation that is limiting and interesting without being cute. Something like Don Blake or Billy Batson, but more...er...dunno - Dark Champions.

*Without the whole thing about how Don Blake was always really Thor, before finding the cane, etc.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Re: Bad character design or broken rules ?

1) I agree with everything that was said already.

2) However, I do think that skills, etc. are on average overpriced in a supers game. I don't really believe in the idea of a universal system - at least not with universal pricing. As a GM, I have very specific build guidelines to ensure better rounded characters.

3) However however, depending on the adventure design, skills, perks (like contacts), etc. can make all the difference. With supers, I think of them more like on/off switches. If you build two 400-pt. characters, the one with fewer points in powers will likely have a tougher time in fights, but the one with no points in skills, etc., may well hit brick walls.

Re Super/Bat Men, think of how many simple mysteries you could build that would completely stymie Supes. That's great that he can easily demolish the bad guys, but can he even find them?

In a team of supers, I think you want at least one or two with each major skill and perk. Beyond that, I think the group as a whole is probably wasting points.

One last thing re character write-ups. It seems to me that the point often is to write a particular character at a particular point level. Two characters who seem unequal to you may be built on the same points simply because the builder gave him/herself that rule: "build these characters on [x] points each."

Re: so is this broken?

I the Club Weapon maneuver in 6e? Might that not be a cheaper way to do this - just have the HKA, and club with it when desired?

Re different MP constructs, my house rule is that the only limit on MP powers is that they could be used simultaneously if not in the MP. Swinging and HA is OK, but Swinging and Gliding is not. I'm a little more flexible with attacks - e.g., no problem with a mental and physical attacks in the same MP.

Re: quick Q re DCV mods

Oh - that's nice and simple. Thanks.

Does the DCV halving for no PER with a target sense stack with the halving for attacked from behind? I can't find it, and I can't decide.

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression

Buying HERO isn't like buying a big bag of possibilities' date=' its like buying a big bag of decisions and rules. Theorically that is similar, in fact that is totally different.[/quote']

I like the system, obviously, but you've had some pretty good and well put points in this thread, including this one.

Re: Quantum of Time

The ability to hold 1/2 phase and to dodge (which I use to always do-hey I'm a ninja!) is well worth the cost at 3 points per 1 Dex.

As opposed to just aborting to Dodge? You meant that the ability to half move and then abort to the Dodge later is worth a lot? (I don't mean that sceptically; I'm just trying to understand.)

Re: Potion of Giant ST example

Call me old fashioned' date=' but isn't all that 'concentration/extra time/gestures/incantations/alchemy roll' just part of the 'difficult to obtain' bit of 'focus', for which you're already getting additional limitation value?[/quote']

I saw it as part of the difficulty of getting more charges, but either way, I guess.

Re: Quantum of Time

Get rid of DEX as the prime determinant for combat order within a phase' date=' and reduce the cost to 1 point per point. Even simpler...THEN use modified OCV to determine combat order: high OCV attacks go off faster than low OCV attacks: snap punches before roundhouse kicks.[/quote']

I'm not sure I see this as any better or worse than the current system.

 

As far as realism goes, I think there's a big problem with the number of decisions that are made in less than a second. "I was going to start a haymaker on A this phase, but on an earlier DEX my buddy hit A, knocking him back so that I would have a range modifier, so instead I'm going to do a move through..."

 

I haven't thought about it too much, but I could see a system in which the main activities are to activate powers, move, and "engage." Different types of fighters (i.e., those with different skills) would have different capacities to make small decisions after "engagement." E.g., a MArtist could still choose strike vs. dodge vs. grab, but for a dumb slugging brick, the first choice made ("grab that guy") would be the action tried until a new engagement choice was made. Does that make any sense?

 

In case it does, I'll say a little more. Much of that last paragraph could be kept under the hood (an attack actually equals multiple attacks, little dodges and blocks are inherent in DCV, etc.), but there would still be a significant modification in the relationship between movement and attack/defense.

 

What do you think?

This reminds me that in another thread recently, when you were saying how that Hero is actually quite simple and accessible, I forgot to say, "Are you crazy?"

 

Your proposal doesn't strike me as any more complicated than the existing system, though.

Re: Potion of Giant ST example

A Potion could be OAF.

 

If you have a wand that fires a Continuous Charge (say Paralyzation) at a target, taking away the wand after the charge has gone off ain't gonna stop it, the Limitation is that you can stop them from shooting the wand in the first place, and that would qualify for OAF; just like OAF could be for stopping you from making a 'shooter' out of the potion

Hmm...I guess so. I'm not sure I would rule that way on the wand, though I probably would. It does seem somewhat contrary to the requirement of retaining LOS.

Re: Potion of Giant ST example

The other reason it's an Advantage: even at the +1/4 Action' date=' the Zero Phase Action does not constitute an Attack Action: if you have a Trigger on a Blast, it won't end your Phase. That's a massive Advantage.[/quote']

That's still different than a potion, because the triggering action has its own purpose. I agree that triggers of "whenever I jump," "whenever I Dodge," etc. should be Triggers, because there is an advantage to doing two things at once, but quaffing a potion has no purpose (usually) other than to activate the power.

I think it's highly appropriate on Potions in many cases of how they are treated in Fantasy Gaming' date=' thought as I said above, at the +1/2 Level.[/quote']

If you allow a potion to be drunk at any time, then I agree that that's an advantage in some cases, though I'm skeptical that there are many, or that I would be willing to pay +1/2 for it in most cases as a player. Also, it doesn't fit the sfx to me, as quaffing a potion is actually a pretty complicated action, but to each his own. Regardless, I don't see what the advantage is for the trigger in this STR potion example.

 

Something did just occur to me: is the idea of the power that you can stack the STR - drink two potions, for +60? That would certainly be an advantage, but I would still build that differently.

Re: Quantum of Time

I guess my answer adds up to "simplicity." I don't think there's a lot to be gained from questions about how phases are broken up unless one is considering a radical change, because there are far bigger questions about timing within phases.

A and B, two normal human characters are toe-to-toe at the start of the phase. In the exact same time, A can either strike at B once, run 18 feet away and strike someone else, or run 36 feet away. Right. How many punches could you throw in the time it would take you to run 36 feet?

One explanation is that an attack actually represents more than one RL punch. I'm sure there are other explanations, but the point is that if you're going to get into realism in the subdivision of phases, I think you've taken on a big job.

Re: Potion of Giant ST example

Frankly I've never even been happy with Gestures on potions....It's not often we allow Gestures on those things unless there's a definite additional limitation that makes the use incredibly obvious to distant observers and obviously supernatural.

Yeah, I see that, but focus doesn't work for me at all, b/c you can't stop the STR after it's activated by removing the focus.

Expendable Focus covers it in my opinion' date=' just as much as it does with a gun, a sword, an amulet or whatever.[/quote']

With a sword or gun, you take it away and you end the power. The potion is more like...a scabbard, maybe. As a GM, I would probably do the focus, -1/4 for "only to activate," as with gestures and incantations.

 

No' date=' Trigger is an Advantage because you can set specific conditions for it to set off, it has nothing to do with actions take or not taken (a common trigger is pushing a button, or saying a command word).[/quote']

I'm not saying it depends on the action; I'm saying it depends on the actor, or lack thereof. If to activate my power I have to push a button or say a command word instead of just willing it to activate, that's a minor limitation, not an advantage. If someone else can activate my power by pushing a button, that is often an advantage.

 

The advantage of a trigger, in my mind, is that it can be activated even w/o the will of the power's owner. That's why a potion as an Aid trigger makes sense to me.

 

Whether any of that is appropriate to a Strength Potion is up to the reader; the book Example is just that' date=' an Example.[/quote']

Right...and this is just a discussion of the fitness of the example.

Re: Potion of Giant ST example

I think that example is a lot like the one in 5e that I never liked. I don't get why drinking the potion is a trigger to own's STR - isn't a trigger an advantage because you don't have to do something to make it activate? Drinking a potion to make one's own power activate just seems like power activation to me.

I don't remember all of that stuff about creating that potion from the 5e example, but I don't understand that, either. That's just sfx of recharging. If this were an Aid I could understand it, b/c all of that would be limitations on giving the power to someone.

I would think a STR potion would simply be either: 1) STR, Gestures (not focus b/c don't use the vial during the whole time you have the STR), Continuous Charges (with whatever tweaks on the charges as appropriate to account for creating more potions), and maybe a custom lim to reflect the fact that the potion can be destroyed; or 2) Aid STR, foci for the potion and also for the creation of it, various lims related to the creation of the potion as in the example, and Trigger (b/c someone other than the owner of the power is activating the power). If the creator of the potion is its only user, I would say the STR build; otherwise, I'd say the Aid build. (And I guess another possibility would be to put UOO on the first build.)

Re: Basic: OCV combat mods?

If you are both in the same condition (in zero G' date=' in a tilting plane, et cetera) then you get -3 OCV and the target gets -3 DCV, meaning your chance to hit is exactly the same? I don't have the book yet, but that sounded odd to me? And I reading you right?[/quote']

I don't know about 6e, but in 5e, zero g is 1/2 DCV, so it would be a net advantage to the attacker, in a supers game.

Re: Basic: OCV combat mods?

page 46 of 6e2 under 'Environmental Conditions Table' suggests -3 OCV and -3DC for any attack that requires that you have your feet on the ground - when in zero G and a rapidly descending plane is rather like that. P47/48 go into detail.

 

BTW, PhilFleishmann makes an excellent point about how to approach the situation absent specific rules: overall is it harder or easier to hit/hurt the opponent.

Cool - thanks.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge

But is there a DEX contest when the defender is Aborting to a defensive action? I thought DEX-offs were for Held Actions when used in an offensive nature (like "I use my held action to shoot him before he draws his gun to shoot me" or sumsuch)?

I think you have it right - there's only a DEX-off when you can't abort to the action you want. For this discussion, that means that there's no DEX-off for FD or DFC, but there is for interrupting an attack with a move.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge

When I was resolving this question as a GM, one of my players quoted from FRED (I only have the unrevised) a passage that said that when there's a DEX contest, each side is committed to the "announced" action.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge

FD should be compared to DFC, but also to holding an action and then interrupting an attack with a move. You can’t do that as an abort, but you can via a DEX v. DEX roll, and a non-AOE attack would automatically miss.

E.g., Speedster, with 29 DEX, 10 OCV, and 20” MV is facing Blaster, with 20 DEX, 10 OCV, and a ranged attack, on the first seg 12.

Let’s say Speedster can’t/doesn’t want to move very far.

DFC:

Speedster holds his action (or he wouldn’t be able to DFC, since he can’t move twice in a seg). Blaster attacks, and Speedster aborts to DFC, moving 4”. He all but automatically hits the target hex, so Blaster automatically misses. Speedster is prone.

Interrupting move:

Speedster holds. Upon attack, Speedster rolls DEX at 15 vs. 13. If he makes it, he runs around behind Blaster, Blaster misses, and then Speedster, who is not prone, gets to attack Blaster!

FD:

Speedster holds, then aborts to FD, moving 4”. Blaster still gets to shoot at Speedster, but effectively at -4. Speedster isn’t prone, but has used his action. Speedster is at +4 DCV to other attacks.

Even if Speedster had the FD maneuver, he might well choose one of the other alternatives.

The further Speedster can/will move, the greater the advantage of FD. The choice will depend on relative DEX, SPD, and MV. And of course, FD costs 5, and requires that the character have at least 5 more in MAs.

Countering FD and DFC. DFC has serious problems if there are multiple attackers attacking at different times. FD has that same limitation, though it’s better - as it should be, because it costs. Fighting in closer quarters but with ranged attacks largely counters the FD, but not DFC. Timing can help – hold an action, then attack at the end of the seg before your next scheduled action, or hold an action and try to interrupt the next attack from the artful dodger. These might not be so easy, but we know that SPD and DEX have combat advantages – you’re probably a lot stronger than the little gnat.

Oh - and the thing about FDing around cover not stopping a ranged attack is ridiculous - it would actually be worse to dive around a corner than to run into a field. That I won't use, but the rest works for me.

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression

But I'm not sure that is an answer I want to see implemented.

I wonder if it would be a problem to just have some overlapping books. From what we're hearing in this thread, it looks like most people come to Hero either for Hero or for Champions. I.e., people don't come looking for Fantasy Hero and stumble onto Hero. If most people are in one of those two classes - "I want a good universal toolkit" and "I want a good supers game" - then maybe the products should include the current line plus a different version of Champions, which included all core rules most relevant to supers. It would be more appropriate to give that flashier packaging.

As a comic book lover who was looking for superhero games George Pérez's covers sold me on Champions 4th Edition and Hero System. [period]

I keep hearing references to that. I assume that was the one that had stuck in my head when I went looking for a supers games years later, and thought "Champions."

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression

I think it would be backward to come out with Champions:HERO' date=' and then create (and re-release all the rules) for [b']Generic:HERO[/b].

I think the answer would be just to drop the Hero brand, more or less. Champions, Fantasy Champions (not a full rulebook, but a tweak), etc.

Yes' date=' there are those of you who mostly purchase online nowadays. I'll bet however than nine out of ten of you did not discover the Hero System online. You found it either through friends, or someone like the OP talking to you about it.[/quote']

Even though I researched an shopped online, I started with looking for Champions (not Hero, which I had never heard of) first in part because I remembered the cover of the game in a store from years back.

 

I'll note, though, that it was a different world when I saw that cover. V&V was the only competition I had seen, so it was easy for a supers game to stand out.