JmOz

agreed

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

If the person taken over actually becomes a new being, with a new soul/lifeforce/whatever inhabiting the host body -- like the Goa'uld from Stargate, or the CU's Slug transforming humans into Elder Worms -- Spiritual Transform might be appropriate. If the victim is only being compelled to obey by this "overmind," Mental Transform seems sufficient.

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...

On 6/22/2020 at 8:22 PM, Lord Liaden said:

Oh, just in case anyone missed it, "light bearer" is a common English translation for, "lucifer." 😈

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

38 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

Is it desirable to give a timeline specifying everyone who took the role of the Fox? Make it easy for GMs to interpolate their own in case, I don't know, an adventure they have in mind requires that a Fox have died while investigating the terrifying secret events behind the Boer War or the first public showing of Thomas Edison's kinetoscope -- a menace that now menaces the world once more!

 

It's tricky. You want to give GMs enough detail they can use as-is, without blocking them from making more of their own.

 

Dean Shomshak

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

3 hours ago, Greywind said:

 

So, you finally admit you are Old Man in disguise...

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

13 minutes ago, Greywind said:

 

Because there is no wrong answer. Just answers that some won't/don't agree with.

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

46 minutes ago, steriaca said:

There are two thoughts on Heritage Heroes.

 

1) Characters who share the same heroic identity. They need not be blood related, othoe they could be. Our own Black Mask, the Phantom, and even Batman comes to mind (more like Batman having a 'family' of assistants which would eventually take over his mantle for him, like Terry Mcginnis).

 

2) Characters who are in the same family and have superpowers. Like The Blood, the Silvestan Clan, some other mystical family. 

 

There is room in the Champions Universe for both.

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

8 minutes ago, death tribble said:

There was a story in Batman that covered this. It is included in the Batman Treasury a large purple covered collection of many Batman stories from the beginning to the 70s. It had Batman retiring and Robin taking his place with If I Recall Correctly another Batman waiting to come in afterwards. So Batman is known as Batman II etc

Was also the basic point of Superman and Batman Generations

5 hours ago, archer said:

If someone takes over the mask at age 15, he could in theory adventure for 40 years without pushing into old age.

 

If he wanted to ride it out as far as humanly possible, he could perhaps have a 50 year long career. Allan Quatermain's career in the books lasted from age 18 to 68.

 

It really depends on a lot of factors as others have pointed out.

 

If he's having one or two adventures a year, that's a much different pace than 2 adventures a month.

 

Are the adventures horrific things which would give him PTSD (Call of Cthulhu or war)? Or are they light-hearted romps like Brendan Frasier's Mummy movies? 

 

If he's a martial artist or a boxer, his body is going to take more punishment than a cat burglar would.

 

Does he have powers or his friends have powers which keep him young or which heal him after adventures? 

 

How bloody is the game world? If the players are adventuring in a world where death is easy and staying alive is hard, it makes sense for the heroes of the past to have had short bloody careers rather than living to ripe old ages.

 

 

If I were the one setting up such a character without knowing any more details than those we've been given, I'd shoot for a 30 year career on average for those whose career haven't been cut short. In many ways, retirement is a modern concept and the vast majority of people in the past expected to keep working until physically unable to continue (and "physically unable to continue" used to mean something more debilitating than it does today).

 

I'd also tend toward longer life spans after the US Civil War era since that seems to be when Ignaz Semmelweis promoting surgeons cleaning their hands and instruments and the germ theory of disease in general started to widely catch on as something doctors should do something about rather than just being a curiosity. 

 

I'd also expect if the Fox was an educated man at all that he would keep a journal or diary. And that if he was a hero that he would try to prepare things to make the careers of his successors easier (whether wealth, bases, friends lists, enemies lists, or advice). I wouldn't be shocked if the Fox's son or daughter (at least a couple of times throughout history) sought out and/or became romantically involved with the next Fox. 

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...

2 hours ago, BoloOfEarth said:

JmOz, I don't know what you have in mind for how the skills magically transfer from one Fox to the next, but have you considered having it be a fixed amount of time?  Say 15 years, 10 weeks, 6 days, or 5555 days total.  (Or you can use whatever number has some significance to you - I just picked that out of thin air.)  At that point, the skills automatically transfer to the next qualified recipient whether or not the current Fox wants them to go.  He can keep adventuring if he wants, but it's without that magical boost. 

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)

4 minutes ago, Tjack said:

    I can offer you two inspirations to choose from. 
   First would be the Slayer line from Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  Even though the tag line is “In each generation a Slayer is born.” The way it worked it the series was that most Slayers from Pre-Babylon to now only lived two to three years before being killed and the power moving into the next girl. Some only lasted a few months or even days. These girls have no connection to either their predecessors or followers.

  The second is the Wold-Newton family tree. Writer Phillip Jose Farmer took the real world event of a meteor landing in Wold-Newton England in the 17somethings and supposed it landed near the road being traveled by three coaches full of nobles and their servants.  The radiation subtly altered the genes of all to improve the health and intelligence of their descendants. He then created a family tree reaching from then until the 1940’s that included the Scarlett Pimpernel, Tarzan, Doc Savage, both Sherlock Holmes and Prof. Moriarity, Fu Manchu, Sam Spade and many others. 
  Either option magical or genetic gives reason for generational lines of both heroes and villains.

      Good luck on your creations.

The how it is transferred is already known.  I'm looking more at a "How long" each would serve issue.    

10 minutes ago, HeroGM said:

Honestly I'd go with pro athletes and even the military to a degree. 15-20 years fully "active" the body will wear out fast pushing it to the point some if them might.

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)

28 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I figure as such but the way you phrased it though. A fwiw, I got sucked up into the “well NCM means this  for Heroic so for Supers it means...”. I do like the idea though of them being soft guidelines though. 

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... 

12 minutes ago, assault said:

I think we've put the Batman Fallacy to bed. Maybe we should address the rest of the issue?

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)

18 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

"The Chief" from the Doom Patrol is Niles Caulder.

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

11 hours ago, drunkonduty said:

 

I did not. So... Professor X?

 

Another thought for things to include in the files: Oddly personal comments. 

 

eg: "Wears too much antiperspirant."

"Fond of classical music. Why?"

"Eats a lot of donuts."

"Did they know what they wanted when they got that haircut?"

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...

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Sorry Jmoz but I’m going to have to disagree. 4th ed probably muddled NCM more than anything. What’s normal human for Heroic is a different assumption than for Superheroic.

 

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