Fox1

Re: Kill the PCs? In almost all my games, PCs have the threat of death hanging over them. Typically the risk is from poor play, sometimes from exceedly poor luck. The one exception is my Superhero games. There death is about on the same level as the comics, it may happen- but it would a) take a lot and may not be all that final.

Re: Powers with Negative Cost Way over thought IMO. Just buy the lowest TK level allowed in the game together with whatever advantages you want and toss a limit on it: Only provides an effective STR value of X. The actual limit value could be determined by how far negative of a STR value you want. Done.

Re: The Most Unusual or Interesting Build You've Seen Not a bad concept. I'd likely throw a charges-1 limit on the power to represent the fact that such heroines typically didn't manage that trick more than once per fight. Not sure I'd do it with a transform, a EB with the limit of "To Stun only, does no damage" would be better I think unless I wanted the character to be able to stun even a brick with the attack. Worth a -1 1/2 limit I think. Would have to be enough dice to stun the types of targets I wanted it to affect.

Re: A grenade thought... That idea occurred to me. However it comes with a number of significant problems. 1. It doesn't represent the fact that grenade effectiveness greatly decreases with range. 2. It doesn't represent the the near impossiblity to avoid injury from modern designs if you're too close. 3. It doesn't represent the effect of cover. ...for starters. Which may or may not matter depending upon the game's need. But if you're going beyond a simple RKA Explosion, I'd think you'd want to cover those areas as well. Since you're not avoiding a house rule advantage in either case, I'd think the better option is to go with Firebird's old work.

Re: Stats for a Webley? To say the least

Re: A grenade thought... The chance of doing damage is based upon the OCV of the attacker and DCV of the defender. It also is constant for the entire radius of the AoE as I recall. Both factors is not how grenades actually work. Previous attempts in the older HERO system attempted to deal with this by means of a custom advantage. Pulling it out from memory... The Grenade would launch it's attacks at a DCV of zero for targets in range (being prone did give it's DCV bonus against this as I recall). The base OCV was 0 and it took a major range modifier per hex (this was back in the day of -1/3"). The base OCV and Range Modifier could be bought up to represent more dangerous designs. The system worked, however resolving an grenade attack took an excessive amount of time if there were a number of targets in the area- something that cause even me to blink. It will be some time before I can reach my books post full details. By then someone will beat me to it. Edit: Looks like no one beat me to it. The build was done like this: Buy Kill Attack at normal cost. Buy up the OCV (starts at 0) for 3 points per point. Buy up the Range Modifier (starts at -3/1") for 3 points per point (you can apply the point to either the left or right of the slash, but not both). Add that up, and apply a +1 Advantage. This total was added to the blast damage for the grenade, typically a low power Normal Explosion. Given the changes in range modifiers in 4th edition, the above will need some custom work. Some thing just did work better with the old range mods. Source for this was The Golden Age of Champions done by Firebird Limited for Hero Games. I don't think the rules ever appeared outside their addon books. They also show up in The Armory and Here there be Tigers. Three fine books from the old days.

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break? There is even more to it than that. The complete loss of a power generally IME causes more of a negative reaction in a player then a simple '50% rule' would indicate. Even one time in ten is enough to make players shy away from the limit. Players hate not being useful. That dislike is often of such strength that the impact of a limit (or disadvantage) need not even begin to approach the math value given in the rules. Point systems are not good scientific formulas; they are better viewed as economic values. What the market accepts and avoids is likely the best indication of balance you have.

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break? Very far apart in my case. As far as I'm concerned, the points don't matter in superhero games (i.e., the only games where someone would buy a focus). The characters are built to concept, not budget. So I 'enforce' such things only to the extent that I feel they should come up in the storyline. No more, no less.

Re: What we like about HERO Yes I know. But I want it to appear in the core rulebook. I thought the question wasn't what I could or could not do. I thought it was want I like or didn't like about published HERO.

Re: Psychological Limitation discussion: Casual Killer The Navy Seal more likely has a "Code of Duty" representing his oath to protect his nation and loyalty to the service and its members instead of any "Killer" description. It just so happens that Duty involves breaking things and killing people. IF he starts to kill outside that duty (something rare, and something he can be brought up on chargers for), then other limits may be applied.

Re: Weapon and Armor Sizing I take it you're looking for a way of determing damage and defense values along the sizing scale. I don't think the core book has anything on the subject directly, and I only own a few of the supplements. But I'll take a stab at working up some values. I would for example first create my larger/smaller creature. Determine it's BODY, STR and other values. From there you can determine the a weapon damage level that makes some degree of sense. Much depends on what you're wanting to represent. You have more freedom if you just what a Giant Weapon to put the hurt on someone than if you're trying to keep things in scale. Let's do an example of the latter, i.e. we want to scale the weapon such that it's close to the normal version in how dangerous it is to it's own user. Normal Sized: Str 12, Body 10, Con 10, Stun 20 man with 1d6+1 Broadsword with STR Min of 12. On average he does 4.5 body or a little less than half his own Body on a strike. Double Height Man: Str 27, Body 13, Con 10, Stun 36 Note to self: man that's wimpy for a 12' dude. But it's baseline for HERO if you do nothing but grow him With the same weapon, the additional STR takes him up to 2d6+1 or 8 points on average. A little over half his own body. But we're using the same weapon. We don't want that, so... Let's make the Giant Broadsword 2d6+1K and increase it's STR Min from 12 to a 27. It makes sense that if the Big Dude needs +15 Str to carry his own weight, he needs the same to carry his own weapon. With these numbers we keep the same average of 8 body. Let's drop the damage to 2d6K with a STR Min of 27. That's closer to half the owner's body on the average attack. So the 12' tall dude's weapon's average in the ballpark of being as dangerous to him as the normal guys broadsword is to the normal guy. The same basic process can be done with Armor. This may be close enough, if one doesn't pull too hard on it.

Re: Psychological Limitation discussion: Casual Killer I agree with you.

Re: House Rules: Optional Language Chart What type of campaign are you using this for?

Re: What we like about HERO I know. And they may well be right. Doesn't mean I have to like it does it?

Re: What we like about HERO A most liked/most disliked thread. It won't help martketing, if this goes for any length all it will show is that what some people like what others hate. One would need to do a real marketing study if they wanted something rational to act on But it's still fun Since I came to the game with the original boxed edition, part of my continued use of HERO is simply because it worked for me then and continues to work for me now. It would take a lot to make me move to another system. Likes: The split between body/stun, PD & ED split from resistant defenses and each other. Back in the day, this was big- and it was THE road to playing Superheroes. Other games of the time used the traditional damage approach with results of dead and dying characters at the end of each supposed comic book battle. Love the wargame like combat system. It handles Superheroes wonderfully and it's more than acceptable for heroic action in modern and sci-fi settings as well. While I do have to use house rules, none of them are major changes to the system. That is frankly amazing. The construction system allows one to create a vast array of characters tailored to the exact style of game you're going for. The 5th edition book containing almost all the rules in one place. Dislikes: These are minor compared to like, but do exist. HERO does Fantasy extremely poorly. Just as well, I have another fantasy game system I can use. Most of the additonal books (Ultimate Brick and Ultimate Martial Artist excepted). The rest have been a waste of money and I've stopped buying them. Most of the 5th edition changes. Ick. 5th Revised STILL not including Piercing in it's power list. Vehicles. Sorry, vehicles still suck. The lack of adventures modules.

Re: see below for sarcasm Obviously jokes should be on the list of things to avoid.

Re: Alternative Combat Orders for Combat I've played a lot of Deadlands. I'm with you on this, it was one of the things that cause me me to move on. I hate the idea of hanging around doing nothing because of bad luck. Missing and failing skills rolls I can handle, setting on my hands and being unable to work with my team- nope.

Re: Relinking Figured Characteristics

Re: The Stormtrooper Effect

Re: James’ rules for ‘realistic’ Hero gaming. Here's a point by point to the first post in the thread. Note that I haven't read anyone else's response in detail yet, so sorry if I dup someone. Also note, I'm making suggestions that I wouldn't use for my own game. This is going for something much grittier than my own campaigns. Note 1-3, 5: It's always good to know the limits starting out. Too many think they can do 'realism' perfectly, and to many other think there is no point in it. And of course I love the sources used Note 4: I've given some consideration to this same subject of weapon reliability myself. I haven't done any serious work on it due to the fact that it isn't really genre for my games. However here's some hints based upon my own knowledge of the subject: 1. Revolvers are significantly better than semi/full automatics. Unless something jams up the cylinder/barrel you just pull the trigger again. 2. Generally the more accurate the weapon, the less reliable it is. The reason for this is that the most basic element of reliability (the weapon fires and doesn't jam when exposed to harsh conditions) is dependent upon how close fitted the parts are. Loose parts- weapons works in a near sand storm. Loose parts however mean bad accuracy. The classic example is M-16 vs. AK-47. The M-16 will easily place a nice five pattern on a man-sized target at 200 yards. The AK-47 likely won't even touch paper. On the other hand, the M-16 requires much more field care to function. About the Rules: Rule 1: Dex should alter DCV in hand-to-hand combat, so don't alter it. Instead fix the DCV vs. firearms at a 3. Rule 2: Generally don't let people buy up Stun, lock it at the figured value. I think you already intended this, but just in case... New Point: Base Body upon character Mass (see my website). Rule 3: On the question of stunning... You could treat any hit as a PRE attack using the stun damage in place of a PRE roll. Add or subject dice for those psych factors you wanted to deal with. You may have to play with a base value addition or not- I leave it to you to work out the numbers. Rule 4: About SPD, this value is the prime characteristic in many ways for showing the difference between a guy with a gun and a true professional. I'd base it not upon dex or a question of how fast someone is- but rather high decisive and quick thinking they are in battle. Regulars should be a 2 SPD, the Man on street may only be a 1. Vets could be a 3, Top Flight elite Special Forces type should be a 4 or even a 5 in extreme cases. Rule 5: I like the basic idea of using the 1d6-1 stun in place of the stun muliplier on the hit locations. It's a simple solution to a complex problem. Perhaps a couple key areas could get a +1 bonus (like Head and Vitals). Rule 6 and 11: Feel free to use the weapon numbers on my site. All the tables and math is there in case you want to modify it (like giving everything a -1 to the Stun Mod listed there). Rule 7: Check the bleeding rules out on my webpage. I just put them up there (my website is always in progress, not everything is up yet). Rule 12: Dark Champions has CQB rules that modify your Dex in terms of who goes first. My website modifies (and shows how to determine) this to better detail the issue.

Re: James’ rules for ‘realistic’ Hero gaming. That works. Off the top of my head... GURPS has a lower power progression than HERO as a general rule and is more suited for that reason. It does however have other faults such as being heavily focused on very few stats. CORPS is a possiblity as is JAGS. Depending upon how detail you want, you can try to get hold of an old copy of Morrow Project or Phoenix Command. They used the RII for it's base numbers but that could be fixed. My idea was to pick a non-heroic game system to start with. Something already grim and streetlevel. That way you wouldn't have to fight against the system even in areas you didn't expect to.

Re: The Stormtrooper Effect Tactics. Doesn't represent Star Wars, but I have better things to do.

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what? I'm actually in the same boat as you here. I build characters signficiantly different from the published sources. But this goes beyond that. It goes into complex character builds (buying HA + STR, breaking the STR/Damage relationship plus being more complex) or redefining the concept of the average-man and the human range (something I don't) and thus moving the starting line of the system. Both these methods are more difficult than redoing the STR lift progession. Unlike using lower speed/higher attacks differences from Long as you and I do, things you can look at a sheet and tell- you actually have to explain major concept differences to people before they can even understand what your numbers mean now. Weird

Re: Alternative Combat Orders for Combat I understand the problem. SPD can be viewed as spotlight time in the game, resulting in high speed characters getting more attention paid to them. I don't use a different speed chart. I do however use average speeds (by a point) then HERO System typically does. Instead I approach the problem from a slightly different direction- you can be high SPD if you wish, but the real power in the group (higher DCs, special attacks, etc) go to characters of the typical SPD for the campaign. So the high SPD guys get to do a lot, but the average/slow guys get to do the really uber power stuff.