Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About KA.

  • Rank
    Back in Black

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Spence, Thanks for the comments. Back when we used to play it that way, it definitely worked both ways, it a hero made a full move at a mook, the mook got his shot. If a villain made a full move at a hero, the hero got his shot. It worked the same for everyone. Again, I accept the rules as written, I just didn't get it back then. I think part of the problem was thinking about it in terms of time. The way we played it, again this was based on a limited understanding of the rules, was that if you had a SPD of 4 and there were 12 seconds in a Round, then each of your Phases took 3 seconds. So, if you made a full move, that took three seconds. (Again, I am not in any way saying this is correct, this is how we thought it worked.) So, assuming that combat has already started (not Phase 12, later on in the combat) the Prime Mover (Half man, Half bull 800 lbs of angry prime beef) gives a battle snort at you and, since his Dex is one point higher than yours, gets to complete his full move for a Move-by (ole'). Based on how we were figuring how time works, his full move took three seconds. Which left you standing there, blaster in hand, counting One One-Thousand, Two One-Thousand, Three One-thousand waiting for him to get there and run you over. Then, if you were still standing, not stunned, etc. you got your chance to take your shot. I think the time/movement part is what gave us trouble. It I am standing in the street at high noon, and Billy the Young has a higher DEX, meaning he gets to draw and fire before I draw and fire because his DEX is one point higher than mine, I am okay with that, it makes sense. It was the idea that if he wanted to walk all the way down the street and punch me in the nose, I would stand there and wait for it because his DEX was one point higher that I had a problem with. Doing something instantly (shoot), faster than I do something instantly (shoot), because your DEX is a little bit higher makes sense. Doing something that takes 3 seconds (the full move) faster than I can do something instantly (shoot) is what did not seem to make sense. I understand it now. It is a game, not a perfect simulation of reality. As long as the rules are fair in the overall sense and work together to form a cohesive whole everything is fine. It just seemed weird to us. KA.
  2. Just off the top of my head, it seems like you would need to do more than one BODY for the target to be hooked. Thinking of the harpoon as a real object, it seems possible that only one or two BODY would just be a "nick", not an impalement. I don't know how many BODY makes sense, but more than one or two. For the pulling I would go with a limited form of TK "Only to pull toward", etc The damage for pulling out the Harpoon would be a Triggered KA attached to the initial attack. It would even make sense to have the Triggered attack do more damage based on the damage the initial attack did. After all, the more firmly "planted" the harpoon was, the more damage it would do when you removed it. Just some thoughts, KA.
  3. Thank you both for the input. Again, I wasn't trying to say it was wrong, just that it was very counterintuitive for me. The idea of holding an action also helps a lot. I think that in my mind I have been merging "able to shoot" and "ready to shoot". Especially at the start of combat, you may be trying to figure out what is going on, who the threat is, and what your response should be. If, at that time, you have a weapon or attack power ready, you are at that point "able to shoot", but not "ready to shoot". It will take a certain amount of time to decide on your target and what you are going to do. Which would explain the person with higher DEX getting to attack you first. However, if you are using a Held Action, you are at that point "ready to shoot". "That guy in the Skull Costume looks like trouble, if comes at me in a threatening way, I am going to blast him!" So if the Skull guy uses his Phase 12 to take a shot at someone with his Skull Blaster, and you hold your action, then on his next phase you don't have to stand there flat footed while he runs across the football field and smacks you. You can use your held action to blast him.
  4. I have been playing Champions, on and off, since the boxed set. I own almost every single thing from 4th Ed. I own the majority of the 5th Ed.books, but never really played that version, and have not looked at 6th due to a lack of players and finances. I was mostly self-taught in the early days, and since I had bought the books, I was the most "experienced" player in the game, usually the GM. Years later, on this very board I found out that I had been doing something wrong for years. You and your opponent are a distance away from each other. For the sake of argument, you are a Full Move away from each other (whatever that distance might be, let's say 30"). You and your opponent have the same SPD, and his DEX is one point higher than yours, so he acts first. He chooses to do a Full Move and attack (Move Through, Move By, whatever.) I want to attack him with a Ranged Attack (Energy Blast). Because his DEX is higher he goes first. I don't know if I misread the rule in the early edition, skipped over it completely, or just blocked it out because it would not process, but in our games we always played that. My opponent starts running at me, from 30" away. Based on what he is doing (running in a straight line, bobbing and weaving, using cover, whatever) I take my shot with appropriate modifiers for speed and distance. Then, assuming he is not Stunned or KO'ed, he makes his attack on me at the end of his move. I am not saying this is right, this is just how we did it. I also understand now, that doing it this way could potentially rob my opponent of his attack, because he could get Stunned or KO'ed on the way, even though he has the right to attack first because of his higher DEX. However, when I first was told about the correct way,according to the rules, it sounded so strange. I know Champions is a super hero game, but not every character is The Flash! So the idea that Character A stands like a statue with a blaster drawn (eyebeams at the ready, character-rang in hand, etc.) while his opponent runs the entire length of a football field and smacks him, at which point Character A gets to take his shot, just seemed crazy.. I know that is the rule as written. I know that it works with the other rules. I accept that it is fair to all participants. It just feels weird. Has anyone else ever done this any other way, or did everyone else in the world "get it" the first time they saw it? KA.
  5. Okay, I am not a fan of the Patriots. That has nothing to do with this observation. Just now, watching the game, I saw Bill Belichick's son, who is the coach for the Safetys, for the first time. Bill is not what I would consider a handsome man, mainly because he looks very weathered and always seems to be squinting or scowling. But his son is downright scary. Bill always reminded me of Darkseid, maybe in part because of the hoodies he always used to wear, and, again the kind of weathered, stony face he has. His son Steve looks like one of the "less humanoid" inhabitants of Apokolips , possibly DeSaad. Just saying . . .
  6. Just finished baking pies. Ready to go to sleep, so I can wake up and do more cooking, and eating! Hope everyone is having a good Thanksgiving. KA.
  7. The message I got is: "Football will be very boring this year, don't bother to watch." Oh well. Coincidentally, I heard a discussion on sports radio today concerning the decreasing importance of the Running Back in the NFL. However, if the new rules have the results it appears they are going to have, it could lend a whole new importance to the running game. If every pass play becomes a risky crapshoot, with a 50/50 chance of a turnover depending on who the officials think interfered with whom, running may look like a safer option. ka.
  8. Trying to enjoy some pre-season football, only to find it unwatchable due to the new "restraining order" pass interference rules. It seems that if any two players are within fifty feet of each other during a passing play, someone must be called for interference. They even made a few calls against some backup quarterbacks who were playing catch on the sidelines, and one against a vendor that tossed a hotdog to a fan that was too close to another fan that was thinking about buying a hotdog for himself. How many of these calls will retroactively put the Saints into last years Superbowl? Oh well, if I quit watching the season now, I can skip the Patriots next trip to the Superbowl against the Washington Senators. ka.
  9. I am pretty sure that if Texans were exposed to Dinosaurs, their first move would be to grab their buns and go hunting! Why? Two words . . . Dino Burgers!
  10. Just turned off the Super Bowl. I have been playing a lot of EA NCAA Football 2010 lately, and one of the most common, and frustrating problems with that game is that, if you are doing too well, the AI begins calling ridiculous penalties to stop you. You will tackle someone around the knees and get called for a facemask. You will be break a 50 yard run for a touchdown, with no opposing player within 20 yards of you, and right before you cross the goal line you will see the yellow "FLAG" indicator and get hit with a clipping penalty because supposedly one of your players who is 30 yards behind you must have decided to cut out the legs of a defensive player who is also 30 yards behind you. That is just a video game, and I suppose the AI wants to prevent the game getting boring because of human players blowing out the computer opponents. However, in a little over a quarter of play, in what should be the most important pro football game of the year, I have seen: The Patriots offsides penalty being turned into a delay of game on the Rams. The Rams given a 15 yard penalty for tackling a Patriot who caught a pass. (didn't know that was illegal now) A blatant clothesline/horse-collar tackle by the Patriots turned into a false start on the Rams. After the egregious non-call in the Saints game ( a team I could not care less about, but a bad call is a bad call ) you would think there would be at least an effort to appear to do a better job. Aparrently not. If the NFL was a GM we would call it railroading. The narrative is that the Patriots are going to win, and nothing that the players do is going to change that. I am not really much of a pro football fan, so If the NFL wants to just put the trophy on permanent display in Tom Brady's locker, that is their right. But I would rather watch pro-wrestling if the outcome is pre-determined. They may as well bring in Bill Alfonso and let him call it "right down the middle". He already has a whistle. KA.
  11. Thanks so much for the links, and the reminder. I knew I had seen a news story about a similar occurence, but I could not remember the name or where it happened. KA.
  12. Currently watching Season One of The Wild WIld West. Recently bought the DVD's for 3 dollars. The show still holds up. This is the 40th Anniversary Edition and has lots of extras. Good stuff. KA.
  13. Thanks for the replies. The one time I had to travel in an actual snowstorm we were overprepared. Tire Chains, hand warmers, full ski-type mittens to go over our gloves, a few days worth of food (beef jerky, dried fruit, nuts, candy, lots of water packed in an insulated cooler so it wouldn't freeze), ski masks, snow boots, extra heavy socks, flares, a fully charged jump box for the car battery, you name it.) I had to travel to Green Bay Wisconsin from Louisville KY in a snowstorm so bad that they closed the airport, and come back in a worse one. We had no trouble at all.(Snow chains work great, by the way.) One of the first survival books I read was How to Stay Alive in The Woods by Bradford Angier, and one of the topics he brought up was that if you are in a survival situation, Be Careful! If you sprain your ankle playing touch football, it may mean a trip to the Immediate Care Center. If you sprain your ankle when you are alone in the woods with no way to get help, it could mean that you don't make it out. Hiking in a snowstorm over unkown terrain just seems like a recipe for disaster unless you have absolutely no alternative. The odds of getting hurt, lost, or actually killed vs the chance of running across Tom Bombadil out it the woods, seem to make it a losing proposition. Unless you are a very experienced orienteer or cross-county skier (and have the all the proper equipment with you), it always seemed to me that your best chance was staying put. Also, if it comes to the point where people are searching for you, it is a lot easier to find a car than a person. Anyway, thanks again, and if anyone thinks hiking for help is the best way to go, please join in. KA.
  14. There was a huge snowstorm predicted for my area last night. As usual it turned out to be nothing, but it brought to mind a discussion my wife and I have had on several occasions. Here is the situation: You are driving in a snowstorm, and you are off the beaten path, not on a major highway with constant traffic. (Perhaps you were heading over the river and through the woods to Grandmother's house and you got lost.) We are assuming that you do not have a cell phone, or that it has no signal where you are, so you cannot simply call for help and give out your GPS coordinates. In any case the road becomes inpassible and you are stuck where you are, at least until the storm is over. Assuming that you have wisely packed your vehicle with food and water (stored in coolers without ice to prevent freezing), and you have warm clothes, blankets, perhaps even sleeping bags to keep you warm, what is the best course of action? A. Everyone stay in the car. You are at least out of the wind and if you have proper clothing and blankets you should be able to stay alive until someone finds you, even if it takes a day or so. B. Someone should "Go for help", leaving the other people in the car. That way no one will be stuck in the car until they freeze to death. Having done quite a bit of reading on wilderness survival, I am a firm believer in staying with the car. If you were just dropped out of an airplane into a snowstorm, the first thing you would do is seek shelter. Since you are already in shelter, why wouldn't you stay there? Obviously if you passed a gas station or a house five minutes ago, you would walk back there for help, but I am talking about the middle of nowhere. I have read several tragic reports of people who "went for help" got lost in the snow, or injured themselves trying to hike through the snowstorm, and died. Usually the people they went hiking off to save are found safe and sound in the vehicle, while their frozen corpse turns up at the start of the spring thaw. My wife is a firm believer that a car in a snowstorm is a deathtrap, and that you will freeze solid within hours no matter what kind of clothing, blankets, or sleeping bags you have have. She is convinced that hypothermia will begin to set in the moment you turn the car off. Therefore she believes you should always "go for help" even if you are hiking into a blizzard with no idea of your destination. Obviously, I have exaggerated just a bit, but what I am actually looking for is some real information on surviving a storm in a car vs. taking your chances outside looking for help. How long could a person last at say 20 degrees F in a car with warm clothes and a sleeping bag vs. how long you would last in the same conditions outdoors, assuming a fairly heavy snow and a brisk wind, say 10-15 mph? In my opinion if you are in a sleeping bag rated for 0 degrees, and you are out of the wind, say in a car, you should be fine for quite some time assuming adequate food and water. But, I have been wrong before, does anyone, especially someone who has done some cold weather camping and/or survival training have a strong opinion? After all, I would hate to have the last words spoken by my wife's frostbitten lips be "I told you so . . ." Just kidding, I actually love my wife too much to take her out in those conditions in the first place, but I do wonder which one of us is closer to being correct. KA.
  • Create New...