JmOz

agreed

Why did you have the mention Stargate...That complicates my thinking...I want them to be 100 percent loyal/love the queen almost a drug addiction kind of need to the overmind (The queen is the root of the overmind). In a lot of ways they stay the same person, except they put the goals of the queen completely above their own desires...

2 months of streaming service of my choice Air fryer New pots and pans a new blanket

Working on a "Invasion of the body snatcher" type of thing. Basically a bug that transforms people into a drone type thing, granting powers but also taking over the mind in a way makes them obedient to an overmind type of thing Would this be a spiritual or mental transform (Plus the physical one for the OIHID powers)

First, sit down and watch Sky High...Just saying

Watching Santa Claus Conquers the Martians...

Always heard it as "Lightbringer" so thank you for that...

The timeline is really being used only to give references to which Fox is talking in the notes left behind...

He wishes...I am the great and mighty Jedi Master of Oz

All wrong answers stem from disagreeing with my wisdom.. 😛

This is closer to the first, with a lot of adoption involved...

Was also the basic point of Superman and Batman Generations

So many great things to unpack here... First the character is a combination of Zorro, Batman, The Phantom, and Katana. Primarily a fencer but the more recent one use "Combat Discs" as well However, it is the last paragraph that made me chuckle. See, in the original post I mentioned that I had made a "style" decision. It was to change the prose of what I was working on to be notes kept by the Fox. The project is actually about my universes space cops called the Star Knights. It will be being written by the current Fox...

The skills transfer via a IAF or OAF have not decided the build yet. The skill bonus is not obvious, but the fact that you want to take the swor din his hand away from him is...

Ahh got ya, I do plan on going more the long time frame than the short (but not TO long)

The how it is transferred is already known. I'm looking more at a "How long" each would serve issue. So working on a spreadsheet... Right now most are just numbers with a few decided by important years of inspiration, tonal shifts, etc... but durations seem to be between 3-17 years with a lot around the 15 year mark...

So, been working on my second Hall of Champions project. I made a style decision which has called in question an issue I have kind of been ignoring on my Centurion Earth. What I plan on doing involves a line of heroes dating back to the last days of the 18th century or the first days of the 19th century (approximately the year 1800). So anyways, I want to create a time line, but I am not sure how long is genre realistic to have each one "serve". Some will die, in service others will retire. So thoughts: what is a reasonable expectation for the career of each? If curious the character's name is Fox The hero in question is primarily a skilled normal, however they do magically inherent a bit of the skill of each of their predecessors (think combat luck and CSL's)

Ironically in my games I do softly enforce something I call HCM (1.5*NCM) on trained humans. I will however allow someone to buy more as super skills, might seem odd but want to see it that way on the sheet that way...

Fair enough. The problem is that I thing the premise is inherently flawed. There is no such thing as "Power gaming", what exists is players playing under different norms, when that norm is at a more efficient level people call it power gaming. The problem is that what is called power gaming in group A might be actually underpowered in group B. So who is right? Group A or Group B. Recently on these boards I posted a character for my generic heroes...One poster questioned to a global limitation on the character (unified power). Now, I will not put words in that poster's mouth (being lazy, can't remember who it was BTW)....However a motivation for this attitude CAN be that they feel it is a power gamer move because of their POV, however in another game it would be perfectly normal, and in another game underpowered. So a couple takeaways from this. First is the idea that we must look at how the character is actually being used. One preference I have for instance is to give a "power" on the character to represent vehicles that are intended to primarily get a character from point A to Point B instead of using the vehicle rules (So a motorcycle is an OIF: Bulky on Running). At the end of the day here is that how does having this power affect the game, especially if, as with "The Belt" it is placed in a MP when compared to the other characters. In my experience the build is not destructive to game balance, actually helping as it is used during cut scenes to justify getting to point B from point A and not used in combats, as it is helpful to me as a GM I don't mind that it cost the character 1 CP. However if this was a game where the characters ability to get to Point B was a main focus (Race car Hero?) then I would have a major problem with the 1 CP build Second is the issue of how are the other characters built. If one character is using a different level of efficiency it would cause issues (For the record one character less powerful is IMO more destructive)

Yah, that's what I get for posting when I am half asleep. combined the names of X and the chief...

Professor Xavier and Charles Niles (The Chief from Doom Patrol)...I would not be surprised if Oracle had some to, but don't know of any story where she used the info...

I agree, I think NCM as a disadvantage for Supers was a bad idea. However, what I was referring to was in the various genre books when it talked about attributes there was always (I think every genre book had it) a paragraph talking about 20+ attributes comparing it to the COM of Helen of Troy or the STR of Hercules etc...

So this thread has brought up a lot of feelings for me, and more than a few thoughts that could be projections. I have been around this system for a very long time. I have made hundreds of characters, some originals, a lot of homages, and a a number of adaptations. I have debated rules particulars about a variety of issues. I am personally attracted to the system because of the rules of F/X or more specifically how f/x is not tied to the mechanic of an ability, so a blast could be fire or electricity or ice, etc... I say these things to explain my Bias. One argument that has been repeated is in regard to NCM, What Assualt called the Batman Fallacy. This has always been one of the bigger ones, and it is founded on a couple misconceptions. 1) NCM is the maximum a human (non augmented) character can have. 4th edition books (and later editions) made it VERY clear that legendary characters can go above it. If Batman does not qualify as a legendary character... 2) The characteristic is what it says on the tin. This ties into what I said about f/x not being tied into a game mechanic. This misconception makes it so that people try to force a worst build based on a concept. In essence punish a player for playing Batman instead of Mutant batman... 3) Points matter. Two characters who spend similar points on similar abilities should be able to do similar stuff Just as an example, I decide to run a campaign where everyone is based on a version of Superboy. Superboy 1 is based on the original Clark Kent Superboy. He buys his strength as a characteristic Superboy 2 is based on the Reign of the Supermen Superboy. Because of this mentality he NEEDS to buy Telekinesis with no range. This of course costs him more endurance and 10 less strength for the same points, making him objectively worse character. However for all practical purposes it is the same super strength. This also fails point 3. So back to Batman, Batman is a character with many skills way above the norm. He is tougher, smarter, scarier, etc...than a normal human (based on what he DOES). Even though we are told OFTEN that he is a normal man who has trained hard, he is also often called "The Bat God" and for good reason. Now if we restrict the Batman player to making him under NCM, he will need to spend more points to meet the goals of the character concept. This is unfair to the player. You are at this point PUNISHING him for his concept. IMO skill levels are really more for heroic characters, especially the more expensive ones...Some will say that it's fine because that is the "cost" of the concept, I say that is unfair. So how do we make Batman so that he is as capable as a paranormal with powers based on being a "better human", simple, allow him to buy higher characteristics. Now, what does this all illustrate. The fact is that what we really need is to be "fair". Characters should be a similar level, built with the same basic theory on design...

Image chased (and I assume still does) the current fad. Unfortunately the other 2 big companies have more and more done the same. I like my simple, clean, line art. Like Duke was saying...

early 90's were an odd time...a lot of sub par artists were very popular, lots broke off and formed Image...Compared to George Perez, I'll take Perez