Ki-rin

Re: Character: Bêlit She's too short. Conan is a reasonably big guy (6'4" to 6'6" in the books and comics) and Be'lit is clearly closer in height to him than a 5'5" woman would be. We're talking 5'10" to 6' of _woman_ with Amazon-like physical stats here. She also has Amazon-like martial skills. Given how she got command of her first ship (1on1 HTH challenge of captain) and the stories, I'd boost her Dex to 18 and her Con to some extent as well and maybe even a SPD of 4 as well (Conan beat her in unarmed HTH because he overpowered her, not because he was faster or more skilled. Give Conan that 2hd pig sticker he's an expert with and almost no one in that world can match his skill. Unarmed, he's mediocre skill-wise, but he's god-awful strong, fast, and tough.). I'd also make her better at unarmed combat and +way+ better with a sword (cutlass in particular). At also make her a very good tactician but a mediocre or even poor strategist. This is one tough, opportunistic, and greedy woman. And that is both the secret of her success and the seed of her failure.

Re: Character For Review: The Beast (not the Marvel one) Nice. Of course, if you are allowed to be this "efficient", then so is everything else that Swims+Runs+Leaps in the Game World. Thus is Balance preserved. ...and _that_ AlHazred is how I keep minor effciency tweaks like this from trashing the campaign. As soon as "evolution" discovers a better, more efficient way to do something (IOW, meta game construct tweaks) I make sure the entire gameverse benefits from it. People get to play what they want and the game stays balanced...

Re: What's the most ridiculous PC you've ever been subjected to? Ummm, errr, ...whoever submitted that has... ...issues.

Re: I Give Up!!!!!!!!!!!!! I know _people_ like that character ITRW. The programmer w/o any furniture , TV, or even bed but has a $10K computer next to his bedroll and is using the keyboard just about every waking moment. The MA (and yes, this is ITRW) who does nothing but train, workout, and teach MA (among top caliber athletes this seems to be a typical level of focus). The financial guy who watches the market every waking moment and does nothing but play it or work deals to be able to play it more effectively. Etc, Etc. Each of these folks have _NO_ life outside their chosen "obsession". They tend to be _very_ good at what they do. They are _utterly_ boring outside of their narrow focus and clueless in many other ways (to the point of not knowing major current events or commonly known facts.) IMHO, this is a Dis Ad, "Driven", with multiple levels of severity. In literature, Bruce Wayne certainly fits this mold and both the pros and cons are pretty well spelled out in both Art and Life. If this is what the player really wants to play (rather than simply not knowing how to play anything else- that's a different problem with a different solution), then as a GM I'd try to help them do it as long as I and my campaign can stand doing it to the level the character wants to. But I'd force them to take _ALL_ the consequences, good and bad. No one trusts you. No one wants to "hang out". Forget any relationships. Forget ever getting good at anything else. Etc, Etc. Everyone will treat you like a Tool because that's all you've made yourself into. And you will be ignored and/or discarded just like any other tool. Fair Enough. Then that player gets to do a massive amount of reading regarding the ancient Greeks, their Pantheon in general, and Hermes in particular. He also gets to role play, as accurately as possible with as much GM intervention as needed, what it's like to be an ancient Greek who does not understand any known language and who's suddenly in the 21st century. As a GM, I'd be utterly implacable about this. Like or not, this player will deal with the logical consequences of his PC's existence and choices. (TBF, under such circumstances I suspect _I'd_ be focusing on my skills, languages, and world background knowledge to the exclusion of all else. So maybe the Driven aspect of the PC isn't so far off after all.) I'd just keep calmly saying "No" to any Power Gaming or Rules Rapist "meta-gaming" behavior and/or constructs and force the player to "reap what they sow". Either an acceptable ecological niche will evolve, the player will change , or the player will leave.

Re: Quick Enraged Questions Ummm, the "official" write-ups on Berserk and Enraged were _quite_ clear that a Berserk or Enraged character =has= lost his wits and tactical sense.

Re: I Give Up!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just read this whole thread and noticed... ...The character generation in Squirrel's seems to be "tail wagging the dog"? Doesn't it make more sense for players to be forced to come up with a _GM approved concept first_ that suits the "feel" and power level of the campaign and _do game mechanics design afterwards_? This allows the GM to enforce that CBs be +very+ true to character concept. IME that fixes most munchkin problems. It also forces players to think more about their characters as acting roles rather than a war gaming abstraction. Above and beyond the blatant Rules Rapist stuff that others have already commented on (and that MUST go unless it's a "GM Special"), the biggest thing that stands out to me about both of the abusive CBs is that neither has a decent character conception to back up their game design choices. "The Plow" or "Indendent Girl" might actually be interesting characters with a decent concept backing them and less abusive game design choices.

Re: Character for review: Grifter Not sure why the character concept of a thief/rogue leads to needing such a high Pre? I'm not sure I've ever seen a 30 Pre on a 350 CP base... The 29 Dex fits well with the concept, but having only average movement powers (6" of Running, etc) doesn't seem to. Depending on the campaign, 6 SPD may not be enough to model this character concept either. Resistant Def of 20 and a reasonably high CV imply your opponents will have avg attacks in the 10-13 DC range? If the avg DC of attack is greater than this (since higher Def seem contrary to character concept), you will need to be harder to hit or take damage better. Hope this is useful feedback.

Re: Higher-point-level Fantasy The short answer is "Of course you can." Let's not forget that the "reality" the first FRPGs like DND and the Arduin Grimore were designed to simulate was that of Epic Fantasy like that of JRR Tolkien. There Morgoth AKA Melkor was one of the Valar, a god, defeated by a Human (Beren Half-Hand) and an Elf (his wife Luthien (sp?)), then his successor was a transformed Balrog named Sauron who inherited most of Morgoth's power and become even more powerful than the demi-god that he already was. (All the Balrogs and at least some of the wizards, including Gandalf and Saruman, were originally members of the demi-god race Maiar. Some, including Sauron, defected to join Morgoth in the First Age and became the Balrogs. Sauron was the most powerful of these and Morgoths chief lieutenant.) Then +another+ union of "only mortal" races defeated pumped-up demigod Sauron after a _long_ campaign (10's of thousands of years from the Fall of Morgoth to the Fall of Sauron). "Named" characters in Fantasy like this ARE superheroic. Aragorn lived ~650 years and was capable of feats of Str, Con+END, and skill far beyond anything that makes rational sense (Helm's Deep, etc). "One such fighter is worth 100 lesser Men". And so were many lesser characters of the books. In such a "reality", the equivalent of HERO "agent" characters are less than useless exercises in dice rolling. When fighting such as Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, etc such "kobolds and orcs" only purpose was to exhaust Our Heros and _maybe_ get lucky and actually do some damage. "Accurately" modeling this is why high level DnD characters have such outrageous abilities and hit points. In HERO terms, such fighters definitely will kill a "normal" with one average blow, have Str in the 25-30 range (the _monster's_ OTOH can be +way+ stronger), and/or have outrageous CVs, and/or Dex's, and/or SPDs, and/or skills such that low level Brick, high level MA, and low level Speedster, Arch Types all definitely fit the genre. ...And in Tolkien, bitter experience had taught that magic was so powerful that to overuse it risked destroying Middle Earth and possibly even Valinor (the home of the gods) so both the Bad and Good magic users were very circumspect in its use. (RoleMaster Law's adaptation of LoTR made Sauron a 35th level Sorcerer with specials added.) Etc, etc. "Accurately" modeling such a magic system is why Lesser Wish and Wish are stables of the DnD world even if the vast majority of PC mages will never be powerful enough to cast one. Etc, etc. In HERO terms, such mages have _big_ VPP and high degrees of skill with them. Like in Tolkien, other forces have to hold them in check. 12th level wasn't so "stuff of legends". It was ~20th level when things started to look like Tolkien IME. Look at how Tolkien did it. Then look at the ways characters like _Astro City_ 's Samaritan and Wing Victory, or _The Watchers_ Doc Manhattan are held in check campaign-wise. Then look at how DC -can't- hold Superman in check, even after "rewriting" him three times or so. Might provide some ideas...

Re: Need Help With a Character Concept (yep, thumbs up for Surbrook's site. It's been one of my bookmarks for awhile.) Hmmm. I find it... interesting... that the character concept based on "hard" Sci Fi (reasonably careful and accurate extrapolations of physics, etc) gets a reference to _DBZ_ (probably one of the most outrageously high powered and unrealistic Manga ever written) for design hints?! That's HERO for you (Or I wasn't careful enough with my description in my posting... ) Unlike Saiyajins, Modesitt's demi's are very human despite their extra abilities and -much- lower powered (None of the EB, flying, teleporting, > 30 Str, etc stuff from DBZ). The moral code underlying all of their powers (they can't be demi's w/o it, it's fatal to violate it, it's in their very DNA) is a unique twist IME. Figure it's at least a (-1) Dis Ad / Limitation on the entire character Side Note: Demi's are omniverous and can even hunt. They can kill other sentients with brutal efficiency and absolutely no remorse. They just can't start a fight nor escalate one. These folks should be buildable on the standard 250 or 350 CP budget and not need the ~1000 CP budget of the surviving Saiyajins... The problem with using Aid to model Step Up or The Boost is that it's variable while these effects are constant. I was thinking about an psychic END Reserve that recovers at their REC rate and is large enough to support the required Transfers from it to the appropriate characteristics and abilities. However, that gets expensive when we talk about +10 Str, +15 Dex (at least. Bottom line is that Stepped Up demi's go _first_ compared to anything not a Stepped Up demi.), +10 Con, +10 Bod, 2x SPD (say 4 to 8. Bottom line is that demi's go more often than anything not a Stepped Up demi), with significant boosts to PD, ED (both resistant), and STUN and/or Damage Reduction (main character and other demi's in street clothes fight cyborgs in combat armor HTH hitting and breaking metal weapons and punching through metal armor with their bare hands. And make the supposedly soup-ed up combat 'borgs look slow while in Step Up.) Rereading the book, demi's definitely have an extensive MA package including +DC so they can do 2x their Stepped Up Str's damage dice as well as a large suite of skills. Talents include Danger Sense (not mystical but it does utilize their telepathy and clairsentience as well as their physical senses), as well as the Talents of Time Sense, Direction Sense, Combat Sense, Defense Maneuver, Eidetic Memory, Fast Draw, Find Weakness, Lightning Calculator, Lightsleep, Luck (?maybe?), and Speed Reading. Powers include Characteristics (only in Step Up or Boost), Clairsentience, Damage Reduction (?maybe?), Damage Resistance, Ego Attack, END Reserve (?IF this is how we model Step Up and Boost?), Enhanced Senses, Flash Defense, Life Support (immunity to a large class of diseases and poisons, higher radiation tolerance, long lived), Mental Defense, Mind Control (only beings less sentient), Mind Link (other demi's and demi computer net), Mind Scan, Missile Deflection, Power Defense, Regeneration (mild!), Running, Suppress (computer phenonmena), Telepathy, Transfer (?IF this is how we model Step Up and Boost?).

I'm trying to make some characters based on L.E. Modesitt Jr's _Adiamante_, particularly the concept known as a "demi". These are biologically and psionically enhanced humans with three distinct classes of abilities: A) The standard super fare of higher characteristics (Think NCM with a maximum of 25 or 30 instead of 20) + linked telepathy to all other demi's + clairsentience + a wide range of skills "Step Up" a temporary dramatic boost to most of the demi's physical stats (something like 2x in Str, Dex, Con, PD, ED, SPD, and STUN; but -not- REC or END). This state is marked by 10x END usage per turn. C) "The Boost" a temporary dramatic boost to any or all of demi's non physical stats and psionic skills. Again, 10x END per unit time. All these abilities, and the demi's very life, are tied to a moral code called "The Construct" that forbids them to initiate violence or act in such a way as to entice others to initiate violence. They also must practice "measured response" and not overreact to violence or the threat of violence. Violations of this Code, or even doubts as to whether they may have violated The Construct in some way, is likely to lead to a devastating mental and physical backlash when using or C) that often results in the demi's mind literally tearing itself apart and killing them. In addition, demi's can "burn themselves out" with the same lethal results if they overreach themselves while using C). Ideas on efficient construction techniques and ways to do all this?

Re: Minor Magicks: VPP 20 + 20 control cost Anyone got an opion as to what the lowest AP cost where a VPP stops being "minor" and becomes "medium" or "major"?

Re: Flipped Die Rolls As both a GM and a player, it's always been my opinion that anything we can do that increases the ease with which people can RP and the fun they have doing it is A Good Thing . IME, simplifying game mechanics is often one way to help accomplish these goals. Having "high" OR "low" consistently be always == "good" or "bad" does help some players think -less- about game mechanics and +more+ about gaming. As for cheaters, _any_ kind of cheaters, there's plenty of ways of dealing with this. If someone's dice seem overly non-random (which means too BAD OR too GOOD), I will give them other dice that I know pass chi-square testing. And/or provide dice cups. And/or have someone else roll for them. In the extreme (for a player who ROLLED HORRIBLY ALL THE TIME), I provided a pregenerated list of 1000+ rolls for them. Botton line, I want to DE-emphasize mechanics as much as possible during game play so that everyone concentrates as much as possible on GAMING.

Re: Drain To some extent, I think a lot depends on how the Drain works. If a "Drain Str" pulls energy out of the muscles ("My arms are so tired I can't lift them."), or is actually a mental effect ("I believe my muscles are so tired I can't lift them."), then I could easily see the target still having "abs of iron" and a high PD. Aren't most Drains that actually cause muscles to physically waste away better modeled as "Drain Body"?

Re: A Modest Proposal: an approach to character balancing

Re: A Modest Proposal: an approach to character balancing Thanks! Yep. This was the other standard use for it. This is mostly an artifact of HERO being originally designed "Brick Centric". Str and Con are just outrageously efficient/effective (anyone remember the old references to "The Str and Con Pump"?). It's taken 20+ years of work to get other character conceptions (EB, MA, Speedster, etc) even as close to equality to the Brick as they have, and we still haven't completely achieved parity. Which is part of what I was trying to help fix when I came up with this (see my posts on SPD and Str for some of the other attempts I've made in this direction). As much as play test has shown this to be an improvement over other methods, as Tesuji has been pointing out HERO is still a system that needs a good GM making good decisions. Hopefully, this can make GMing to the correct decision easier in some circumstances and therefore make HERO more accessible to a wider skill/experience range of people. OTOH, I have no problem with characters defeating others by using superior tactics and/or superior teamwork. That's not a "game breaker" from my POV, but a justly earned reward for cooperation and role playing. "Meta-gaming" a'la The Rules Rapist _always_ bothers me. "In-gaming" to a better result means the players are more engaged and having more fun

Re: A Modest Proposal: an approach to character balancing As you say, there is NO substitute for a good GM making the right decisions. Nor can any one formula (Except perhaps the Master Game Balance Equation of +5 AP= +(1d6)= +1 Body= 2x the effect on the same amount of mass= the same effect on 2x the mass) assure overall game balance. As you imply even equivalent characters can be more or less effective in a given situation depending on how closely they and the situation are suited to each other (The Torch is NOT happy on the Elemental Plane of Water, but Water Elemental Lad...). However, combat balance is usually the place where The Pain exists. All the artificial heuristics, GM planning, GM "tweaks", etc regarding keeping characters and situations combat balanced pretty much bear this out. The goal here was to present a more effective methodology for keeping characters combat balanced than some might have seen before, and one that would require less artificial heuristics, GM interference, etc. An objective standard that players know is as objective (and therefore fair) as the GM can make it. This beats the heck out of "case-by-case" subjective decision making on the part of the GM since there's _always_ the chance under such circumstances that _this_ time you've made a mistake. In the Brick vs Speedster example, the SPD 4 Brick gets his combat effectiveness from rolling lot's of damage dice. The Speedster get his combat effectiveness from being able to do far more per turn and from making his smaller number of damage dice more effective (higher CV, higher STUN multiples, Armor Piercing, Penetrating, etc). The Brick swats you once and you _feel_ it. The Speedster out-manuvers you and Pennies and Nickels you to death. Are there opponents better suited to one vs the other? Of course. But both are balanced with respect to each other, which was the goal, and I can allow a wider range of character conceptions on the same team than using "standard heuristics" =knowing= that. When is the last time you saw a PC balanced superteam that had each of a SPD 3, a SPD 6, and a SPD 12 character on it? Particularly where all the players and the GM were happy? And that's the point.

Re: A Modest Proposal: an approach to character balancing Of course. I even said so However, a similar formula can be used to evaluate _defensive_ capabilities of a character as well. Therefore we can at least make sure all characters are "combat balanced". This helps keep The Rules Rapist , The Mad Slasher , and The Combat Monster in check enough that everyone else gets to have fun as well. If SPD 8 Guy and SPD 4 Guy have the same chance to hit, then SPD 4 Guy very likely does much more damage per hit. Remember, the CV of the character figures into this as well. Ever watch Quicksilver or Flash try and take on a Brick? After making this change, our combats looked _far_ more like these under such circumstances. In short, it worked at making our game more genre-true while keeping play balance across a wider range of character concepts. Of Course. OTOH, that doesn't help the problem this was meant to help solve: widening the variation of acceptably balanced characters I could allow in game. You say "P-ah-tato", I say "P-oh-tato". I'm in no way advocating "all the PCs must be built to a single formula". I'm merely pointing out a way we could make a wider range of characters combat balanced. As you rightly point out, there is far more to RPGs than combat.

Re: A Modest Proposal: an approach to character balancing One of the big things I was trying to capture with my formula (and did) was the actual combat effect of having a greater or lesser CV than "average" since that had been a cause of game balance problems in the past. The number crunching becomes much easier with practice.

We all know the standard old guidelines: A) Average Defence should be 2x the average attack, with a maxmium of 2.5x the average attack. PC SPDs should be within 4 points of each other (3-6. 4-7, 5-8, etc) C) CVs should be within 5 points of each other (5-9, 6-10, and 7-11 are typical) D) The "average" Champions game has a 11d6 main attack, avg ED or PD of 25, avg Dex of 23 (AKA "The Goodman Nunber"), and an avg SPD of 5.5. This always felt like it led to some artificial feeling GM and/or play restrictions as well as making it very difficult to create certain in-genre characters. After all, a "Speedster" 's primary characteristic should be, errr, _speed_. The Flash's or even Qucksilver's SPD isn't just 6, 7, or 8 (using the limits from above). It's either 12 or very close to it... So I started experimenting with "damage per unit time" as a way of balancing PC vs each other and their opponents. (Hit%)*(Damage per Hit)*(number of possible hits per turn)= Expected Damage per Turn If we use the old "the standard Champions game has" numbers, we get (135/216)*(11 - 25, 38.5 - 25, 66 -25)*(5.5)= (135/216)*(0, 13.5, 41)*(5.5)= (0, 46 13/32, 140 15/16) respectivly for min, avg, and max expected damage per turn. From some POV all characters that do this amount of expected damage per turn are equivalent offensively in combat. Those who do more than this are more effective, those who do less are less effective. As long as characters "solve" this equation equivalently or close to equivalently, now we can allow a larger variation in character concepts without breaking game balance. This allowed me to allow the SPD 12 character as well as others that in the past I could not.

Re: Mental Elemental Control I also agree with Dust Raven and add something else to my rulings on ECs: one biological or whatever mechanism is "the source" of all the powers in an EC. Take "classic Psionics" (Telepathy, Empathy, Clairsentience, Telekinesis, Psychometry, Psychic Healing) for instance. Supposedly there is one region of the brain that if damaged or removed will damage or remove ALL "classic Psionic" powers. Same goes for most EBs, particularly those that are essentially Elementals. Thus one of the ways you "pay" for the efficiency of an EC is that there is a common underlying mechanism that can be attacked and threaten the entire EC. By this logic, "Jedi Powers" are too diverse to fit into one EC. Some are physical, some mental, and some (like being able to turn into a Spirit at death or shooting lightning bolts from one's hands) are unique enough not to fit cleanly into the same mechanism as anything else.

Re: Psychological Limitation discussion: Casual Killer

Re: Psychological Limitation discussion: Casual Killer IMHO, it might be better to use more precise terms and definitions if said terms and definitions are going to be so important to character concepts, game balance, and game play. Dis Ads like "Casual Killer" probably should not exist. "Psychopath", "Sociopath", "Psychotic" (of which "Schizophrenic" is a sub catagory), "Sadist", etc with varying levels of Dis Ad would allow for more precise character concepts and role playing while increases the ability to Keep Things Balanced and Fun .

Re: Do Lower Powered Player Characters Lead To More Roleplaying? ROTFLMAO... nice!

Re: Alternative Combat Orders for Combat Whether it works well or not, that's a very imaginative way of approaching the problem! Cool! Since ITRW ties do occur, I'd treat the all cards of the same rank as equal, but that's a minor tweak.

Re: Alternative Combat Orders for Combat My biggest gripe with HERO is the flawed movement system in general, the unbalanced impulse chart in specific, and the resultant high cost of SPD in specific. Because of the flawed movment system, SPD is a "special case": It costs _far_ more than any other characteristic and it can't be rounded. These are blemishes on an otherwise superior system. We have tried a trick learned from Star Fleet Battles to help fix this and it seems to work better than HERO "as written": A) We use a SPD chart whose maximum number of phases is equal to that of the fastest character in the tactical situation. We use what seems under playtest to be more balanced phase chart(s): 1 x x x x x x 1 1 1 1 1 2 x x x 1 1 1 x x 2 2 2 3 x x 1 x x x 2 2 x 3 3 4 x 1 x x 2 2 x 3 3 x 4 5 x x x 2 x x 3 x 4 4 5 6 x x x x x 3 4 4 5 5 6 7 1 x 2 x 3 x x 5 x 6 x 8 x x x 3 x 4 5 x 6 7 7 9 x 2 x x 4 x x 6 7 x 8 A x x x x x 5 6 7 8 8 9 B x x 3 4 x x 7 x x 9 A C x x x x 5 6 x 8 9 A B 1 x x x 1 1 2 x 1 1 x 2 3 x x x 2 3 4 1 x 2 3 x 5 x 2 x x 4 6 x x 3 4 5 Are the House impulse charts with a maximum SPD of 12 and 6 respectively. These impulse charts being more "balanced" allowed us to experiment with lowering the cost for SPD to +5 CP= +1 SPD. We've also experimented both with allowing the rounding of SPD and in different ways of treating am "x.3" SPD as being different from a "x.4" SPD.