Lucius

Re: How do construct the ability to activate others' powers? You mean....a "naked" advantage of "usable by others" and then you put "usable as attack" on the naked advantage....let's see.... that puts the advantage on someone's power, whether they wanted it or not, but it still doesn't FORCE them to use it... but it's a brilliant idea.... Lucius Alexander The palindromedary thinks Lucius Alexander took 3d6 NND from that idea....

Re: Best bit Actually, both Runequest and Melee/Wizard had that. In fact, I strongly suspect Melee/Wizard AKA The Fantasy Trip (By Steve Jackson, Legendery Game Designer) had a lot of influence on the original Champions, as Champions & Hero System had a lot of influence on GURPS (Also by Steve Jackson.) But this is getting into history and analysis in a thread that's supposed to be a simple love-fest. Feel free to move my post. Lucius Alexander Or feed it to the palindromedary

Re: orichalcum I know that's a Russian folklore character....got any more details? Lucius Alexander The palindromedary watches the thread drifting away on the breeze....

Re: Orichalcum

Re: Swashbuckling Fencers and the "Target Falls" Effect I'm glad someone asked this - I remember wondering about it myself. LA p

Re: Change Environment vs Images (light only) That's my take on it. I'd build a flashlight as a heavily limited flash attack, and oh, as a special effect, you can use it to illuminate too. If a character can glow as a special effect of a power, or even as Distinctive Features, I can't see spending lots of points or going through rules contortions just to be able to illuminate. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary advises that if you want to illuminate, you need to lighten up.

Re: Medium Buy "Contact: Spirit Guide" And then assume the Contact has the skills or whatever to locate other spirits. Of course, that works only if you want your medium to be the kind that has a specific Spirit Guide. For a Shaman, it could be Totem Animal, etc. Lucius Alexander Insert funny palindromedary tagline here.

There's So Much To Love.... There really is so much to love about the Hero System. It's hard to seperate out a "best bit." Nonrandom character generation - and the flexibility of the system, the ability to "have it your way" and get just the ability you want. The disadvantage and limitation idea - rewarding a player for making a character "imperfect" in some ways. One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet....the Variable Power Pool. When I first saw it - as Gadgeteering in Champions II - I said "this is THE best system for simulating magick I have ever seen." Lucius Alexander Return of the Palindromedary

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Good point. I could probably stand to learn to be more courteous. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary points out that I'm multi-posting and probably ought to stop doing that.....

Skills System - Out of Synch? Okay, I think you may be on to something here. LA p

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Here I go again, responding before reading to the end of the posts. But I just had to respond to this one. An if three characters roll 55 Stun with their attacks, who performed better? If one character has fewer dice but rolled better, is his "performance" better or worse than that of someone with more dice who happenned not to roll so well? And if one character makes a Skill roll by 2 and another by 4, do we clearly know who performed better? To answer the first question directly - all 3 characters (all other things being equal) performed equally well. Just as comparing two characters who rolled 55 Stun, both did equally well. Of course, they probably won't NEXT time they use that skill; just as the person with fewer dice of attack probably won't equal the guy with more dice the next time they both make an attack. No. Rolling under a certain number on a set of dice is exactly what attack rolls, perception rolls, characteristic rolls, and activations rolls do - it is not "counter" to the Hero System, it is absolutely basic and intrinsic to the Hero System. Gotta love it when someone says the system is "broken" and proposes to "fix" it by introducing elements that are already there in the system. What you're describing as how the system works, isn't. Not unless there's something wrong with my copy of FRED. What you're describing as how it should work, is pretty close (okay, not exact) to how it DOES work. If anything, the player has MORE leeway with skills than with powers. You can freely invent your own skill and make it as narrow or as broad as you like. Many years ago, when all we had was the very first Champions, I even had a character who had "Weather Control" as a skill - becuase that was the only thing I could see at the time to get what I wanted. We didn't have "Change Environment" for instance. I STILL sometimes think that simulated what I wanted better than when I rewrote it later....I was NOT going for something like the X-Men character Storm, "I want a fogbank here in this room right now," it was "Hey, can you get us a sunny day next Saturday for the picnic?" Now, maybe you're right that it should be explicitly permitted to create subtly different versions of skills already in the book. But mostly this looks to me like trying to put "Costs no END" on your Life Support; i.e. going to great lengths to get what you already have. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary thinks I'm going to regret getting involved.....

Re: Naked Modifier Cost. How does this work, and does it make sense?

Costing out a 'Hero Point' multipower I think you are trying to create a power when what you need is possibly a disadvantage. Instead of trying to give some bonus to Humans to represent that they are not "Fated" as the Elves are, give the Elves the disadvantage "Bound by Fate." Now, what that MEANS and therefore how much it costs, is up to you. You could also consider putting more restrictions on Humans than on Elves on how many disadvantage points they get....especially if the Elves have a lot of required disadvantages. That keeps the points equal, but lets the Elves be more, I think the word you used is "kick-***." On the other hand, when they meet the Balrog and the player says "I call upon Elbereth, select my enchanted arrow, and take a called shot at his heart, using all my penalty skill levels...." you can say "No, you don't. You call upon Elbereth and just stand there and tremble. You are not fated to kill this creature as easily as you killed the Great Goblin's Great Grandson, and you know it. That's why you got all those disad points for Bound by Fate." Lucius Alexander Insert inappropriate palindromedary tagline here

Base with Disguise, but not Concealment Okay, thinking this through..... Base has NO concealment, but has disguise. No concealment means that if you are looking for it, you find it. But disguise means that once you find it, you don't recognize it. Reminds me of the House Absolute - "It is the place where it is." Just because you found it, doesn't mean you KNOW you found it. Or what you found. It could be like the hidden torture chamber in The Princess Bride - they had no problem finding the right clearing (just follow the Sound of Ultimate Suffering) but finding the right tree, and then finding how to open the secret door in the tree, was a challenge. Or it could be like what's been described - you KNOW the secret hidden Viper base is in this neighborhood, but you can't go searching the basement of every one of a hundred private residences.... Ideally, the way to do this would involve the players coming to the right place more than once, and thinking they had been misdirected and confused, because they "didn't find it there." Lucius Alexander Distinctive Features - always accompanied by a palindromedary.

The Last Word My favorite "Last words" were those of Dominique Bonhomme, a hagiographer and grammarian (and above all, a pedant.) "I am going to - or am about to - die. Either expression is used." Lucius Alexander Everyone knows the last word is palindromedary

Re: Psychic Wars I definitely reccomend the non-fiction book Real Magic by Isaac Bonewits - specifically, he has a whole chapter discussing psionics, EXTREMELY well thought out and logically presented. The chapter on the Laws of Magic may give some good ideas about how psi plays, too. Much of the book may not be relevant to what you are interested in here, but I strongly suggest that chapter discussing categories of psi abilities. I know you mentioned wanting to avoid roleplaying sources, but if you can find Authentic Thaumaturgy by the same author, I think it will give you most if not all of the same relevant materiel, and less extraneous matter, specifically written for use in RPGs. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary wants to go look at that puppeteer thread again for some reason.....

Re: God of the Machines If you have not yet read "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid" I urge you to do so. Someone mentioned that Humans need religion to deal with the phenomena we cannot control or explain....things like the weather, sickness, death. What would machines be unable to control or explain? What would baffle them? To my thinking - Humans! and/or other sentient organics, if we assume they would be more like us than like the machines.

Orichalcum Hmm....anyone know how electrum is pronounced? I remember being surprised to learn that, like orichalcum, electrum is actually an ancient word. Then again, I was really surprised when I found an ancient Roman source stating the manticore shoots iron spines from its tail....sometimes it seems D&D doesn't play as "fast and loose" with the source materiel as I usually think. But I really want to ask about liches. I have a vague idea that there was a Persian belief in a kind of undead wizard who could not be killed because he had preserved his internal organs and kept them in a safe place, and could only be destroyed if you found that hiding place and attacked his naked heart, brains, etc. (Perhaps an idea derived ultimately from Egyptian funereal practice??) Of course this is also just a special case of the fairy tale motif found everywhere of the giant/wizard/whatever whose heart/life/soul is not in his body. But if any of you impressive scholars can give me more information, or can direct me to good sources, I would appreciate it. Oh, and does anyone know what Lewis Carroll MEANT by the word "vorpal?" Lucius Alexander The first part of palindromedary is pronounsed as in "palindrome" and from the "d" forwards is pronounced like "dromedary."

Hurtful Powers? Try turning it around - can Powers actually be harmful? Supposing a villainous organization builds killer robots with Detect Mutant Powers ability. Those powers you paid points for are now hurting you by making you easily locatable by a powerful foe. Is THAT kosher? In my opinion, it is, and if you agree, maybe you'll see why I also don't mind disadvantages being occasionally helpful. More examples: We all know that sometimes a Dependent NPC can be helpful - in fact, it's explicitly part of the way it can be bought, if I recall correctly. It's then LESS of a disadvantage, but you still get points for it. Another example is "Berserk if Mind Controlled." It makes it very difficult to successfully Mind Control the berserker.....but then again, all it takes is to exceed the character's Ego to trigger a Berserk...you don't HAVE to command him to attack his teammates, just trigger the Berserk when his teammate is the closest target! Then there is "Berserk if Surprised" which is very appropriate for trained martial artists, combat veterans, etc. You can probably see where this can be either good or bad. Possibly, if a disadvantage is sometimes helpful, you can make it worth less (but not worthless) after the model of DNPC. Lucius Alexander Yes the palindromedary and I have returned. For a while anyway.

BDSM Haiku Dominant Haiku Don't question the syllable count Kneel and kiss my feet. Submissive Haiku Syllables scrupulously Counted like whipstrokes. Lucius Alexander Almost one hundred fifty years ago, Nikaolaus Otto invented the four phase compresssion cycle that powers the engine of your car. So the palindromedary wonders why it is not called an "ottomobile?"

Spent an Hour Cutting, Pasting, Composing... Back to cutting and pasting. I should come here more often. Before responding to specific posts, I would like to comment that no one even addressed certain points I made about using NCM and Age….so, to quote myself """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" It ensures that a 20 yr old man and a 40 yr old man have different rules for characteristics, but a Pixie and an Ogre have the same rules It ensures that my Ogre pays double for exceptional STR, CON, and perhaps BOD, but your Half-Elf with the Age disad and lots of perception Skills and Powers and EGO based Glamour magick does not pay double for an EGO and INT up to 30 It ensures that my alien from a high gravity planet pays double for high STR , PD, and ED and your psionic with an Age disad does not pay double for high EGO, INT, and PRE It ensures that my wizard's energy blast spell, his main attack, costs the same amount per die no matter how many dice I buy it up to, but my gladiator character who specializes in unarmed combat, after buying some martial arts and STR up to 20, must pay twice as much for more dice of HIS main attack, even if his damage classes are still short of the campaign limit """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Cutsleeve "you say that an ogre should get a break on str con and pd and ed because he is an ogre." Who, exactly, has said that? "Hero system lets you play any character in any place, time, universe, ect. some people just have a habit of trying to get those few extra points for something (-1/4 cannot be used while asleep) As far as ncm not making sense for seperate races/species it does because all races are build from the same point base and the same amount of points are spent by each on the same thing that doesnt mean a Dorkian cant have a strength 30 he just has to pay for it like all the other races pay for their high stuff thats how you balance it by making it all equal. going out and raising maxima does not equalize the races more it causes problems in balancing." I’m in favor of making all races equal. I oppose NCM for all of them. Phil Fleischman "Perhaps this is where I don't understand you" Perhaps not. "I am suspicious of vague notions like "good reason." What exactly is a good reason? Anyone can come up with a reason why their character should have a 30 STR. It's easy: "I'm an ogre." "I drank an Ent potion." "I'm Conan." "I'm half-giant." "I've been blessed by the gods." " Well, yes, anyone can come up with a reason why their character should have 30 STR. But it’s harder to justify for a Hobbit than for an Ogre. Frankly, I can’t think of ANY good reason a Hobbit should have a STR that high. Now, suppose we dispense with reasons and just have NCM. If you think it’s easy to come up with a good reason for a high char, it’s even easier to not have to come up with a reason, just spend the points. If you use NCM and have no "good reason rule" then NOTHING prevents florist friars. I’ll run right over to your game with my Brother Rose character and his sidekick Brother Orchid (remember them?) I have a question. WOULD you permit those characters? If not - why not? They don’t break any rules, and they are built under NCM. And to address the issue someone else has raised, that you may want certain high characteristics to be "common" for some "races," "rare" for others, "unheard of" for still others. Under NCM rules (the current official rules anyway), nothing makes it harder for a Hobbit to have a STR 25 than for an Ogre. If you require justification, the Ogre has it by virtue of being an Ogre, the Human needs some kind of backstory or disadvantage or the like, and the Hobbit is probably out of luck (exceptional things happen in fantasy, but can you really think of ANY reasonable justification to let a Hobbit START with STR 25?) "And I see the same principle applying to races. You don't have to pay for being an ogre, you only pay for what being an ogre allows you to do. And of course the converse it true as well: You don't get anything free, just because of a special effect, personality, character history, etc., and that includes race. Just because you add the character detail "ogre" doesn't mean you should be allowed to buy STR for less than what other players have to pay. This is the way I see it and the way I handle NCM and races. It seems the fairest to me. I go back to the central idea of the system: You Get What You Pay For, and You Pay For What You Get" I am quite in agreement here. Unfortunately, under NCM, if I want a base characteristic over 20, I literally "pay two prices" to use my mother’s colorful phrase, rather than Getting What I Pay For and Paying For What I Get. James Gillen "Boy, this is getting complicated "I’m starting to agree with Lucius; the NCM concept is getting to be too much math, and too much inconsistency, to be worth it. Odd, since cleaning up inconsistency and math seems to be Steve's rationale in making the NCM rule uniform" Yes, I only came to this conclusion after seeing a LOT of threads come and go. Old Man "I've seen several campaigns where evey non-wizard wound up with 20 for the first four stats." I think I mentioned that…in particular I have seen every warrior player character with a STR of 20. Markdoc "not sure that dumping NCM and letting players buy 40 STR fighters is a great idea (and the only other option is fixed caps)" Except it’s not. Not the only other option that is. All I’m saying is, treat Characteristics like everything else in the game that would be subject to Campaign Limits. I believe the rules specifically say that it is possible to exceed the Limits on a case-by-case basis, for either good justification and character concept, or because the G.O.D. decides that this or that power is not unbalancing despite, say, a high active point total. Phil Fleishman . "Numah, the Human has 30 STR (quite rare for a human) Ergo, the Ogre has 30 STR (common for an ogre) Gnilflah, the Halfling has 30 STR (really wierd for a halfling . "They can all do the same thing with their STR, in terms of game effect, therefore they should all pay the same amount for their STR" Again, I am in full agreement. Except that I am not sure I’d allow a Hobbit ("Don’t call me a Halfling - I’m not half of anything!" Human looks down and says "My height." Hobbit looks up and responds "I’m not half your height - you’re twice my height!") with a STR of 30….unless I’m running a really really weird game. Agent X Originally posted by Old Man Fine then, but what do you do to discourage the Halfling player from buying 30 STR in the first place? I personally am not interested in playing the wild fantasy genre. "Just say no to the guy who wants a 30 strength halfling unless there is a good reason for it" Thank you, thank you, Agent X. And finally - what’s wrong with beautiful stories about Faeries and Ents? I thought that was supposed to be the POINT of the game, telling beautiful stories…. One must count points, else Pointless the rules: but know that Points are not the point. Lucius Alexander Markdoc "the idea that NCM applies to with the same levels to pixies and ogres, nut not to horses, elephants and palindromedaries is, well, just silly"

And Eskimos use Arctic Magick, and Aliens use Arcturan Magick..... If a character is going to spend a lot of time underwater, AND a lot of time in space, a sonic attack might still cost normally. But in this case, it looks like Arcane magicians will have a consistent disadvantage. That's worth points somewhere. Give them Susceptibility, 3 dice of Dispel/Suppress/Drain, and 1 die triggers if an Arcadian Dispel is cast at them, and maybe all 3 if it happens in an Elven forest. Or maybe 2, and all 3 if DEEP in the woods. Lucius Alexander A palindromedary is its own reward.

Just a Thought... Just some off the cuff ideas.... Require a Perk as well as the skill. The more spent on the Perk, the more active points can be accessed. Possibly require different perks for different "schools" or types of magick. Using a skill often requires tools, not to mention such things as concentration, etc. In order to use a sword skill, the warrior needs a sword. In order to pick a lock, a character needs lockpicks and some time to work. I imagine magick is more flexible - maybe you DON'T need the Talisman of Gabriel and an hour's uninterrupted meditation to cast this spell, but without it you take a minus to the roll and risk some kind of backlash. Also, it's worth remembering that for an attack spell for instance, the warrior just rolls to hit with a sword, the mage rolls skill AND to hit with a spell. It MIGHT not be as unbalanced as I fear it would be. Lucius Alexander (-: :-)

Re: Re: The Perennial Topic of Characteristic Maxima Well for one thing - it's not one simple sentence to describe the rule. It's not "all Chars over 20 cost double." It's all Primary Characteristics over 20 cost double, all figured characteristics over certain defined points, and also double cost for the Powers of Running and Swimming over a certain point. You are also overlooking "except when your character takes the Age disadvantage, in which case some maxima go up and somee go down." Its also complicated by the "Characteristics as Powers" issue, although admittedly perhaps less complicated than it used to be (see below.) And finally, it is complicated by the fact that some people, at least, would like to play fantasy or science fiction games with rules that make some kind of rational sense for nonhuman characters. In every other case of something that should be restricted for the same of a campaign - for Active Points of powers, Damage Class of attacks, Defenses, Offensive or Defensive Combat Value, etc - the rulesbook ___suggests____ certain ___guidelines____ and gives advice about how they work together - allow too much Defense as compared to Damage and you can get "untouchable" characters, for example - but leaves it up the Game Operations Director to decide exactly where to set limits and how to enforce them for any given game. On the other hand, the Characteristic Maxima rule is like an on/off switch - it is assumed that if it applies, it applies the same in any game to which it does apply. Even a superhero game, assuming the character took the disadvantage. That's why I call it "inflexible." It is certainly less flexible than any of the alternatives I suggested, especially the one I consider ideal - "These are the recommended limits for various species/races/whatever, don't exceed them without a good reason." When is a Characteristic a Power? When the guy running the game says it is. Has it occurred to you that without the NCM rule, the question would almost never arise? Hmm. SO if I use the quote function, it does not include YOU quoting ME originally. I should just go back to cutting/pasting into Word to compose, and transfering back here. This IS an example. Nor is this the first time this particular aspect has been raised. And I remember a LOT of discussion about the "Characteristics as Powers" issue before the Current Dispensation clarified that particular issue, at least in terms of officially saying "Characteristics as Powers always cost normally." But again, if Characteristics ALWAYS cost normally, there wouldn't be an issue here. Right. One rule for all nonsuperheroic games ensures the consistency of all genres. It ensures that a 20 yr old man and a 40 yr old man have different rules for characteristics, but a Pixie and an Ogre have the same rules. It ensures that my Ogre pays double for exceptional STR, CON, and perhaps BOD, but your Half-Elf with the Age disad and lots of perception Skills and Powers and EGO based Glamour magick does not pay double for an EGO and INT up to 30. It ensures that my alien from a high gravity planet pays double for high STR , PD, and ED and your psionic with an Age disad does not pay double for high EGO, INT, and PRE. It ensures that my PI character in a lowlevel crimefighting campaign where the most imressive thug he faces probably has PD 6, CON 18, STUN 30, has the same rules for Max STR as my barbarian character in a Hyborian Age game where he regularly fights monsters with PD 10 or 12, CON 25+, and STUN of maybe 50. It ensures that my wizard's energy blast spell, his main attack, costs the same amount per die no matter how many dice I buy it up to, but my gladiator character who specializes in unarmed combat, after buying some martial arts and STR up to 20, must pay twice as much for more dice of HIS main attack, even if his damage classes are still short of the campaign limit. It ensures that the "I have superhuman CON and PRE because I wear the enchanted Sash of Endurance and the Royal Helm" (Focus limitations, in game terms) character pays half as much as the "I have superhuman STR and PRE because I'm a 4 meter tall Giant" character. Actually less than half, with the limitation. Of course, a Giant COULD take the limitation "Visible" since he is OBVIOUSLY gigantic... You want your game to be flexible. So do we all, I'm sure. But the Normal Characteristic Max rule does not help you have a more flexible game. What you want, of course, is for the game to be flexible but not too flexible - as you put it, you want that "only the ones that really want it wil buy it," you want superior Characteristics to be rare but not impossible. That is easily done - "These are the limits, you can exceed them only with justification." Someone who "really wants" the high Characteristic, or a character concept that implies high Characteristics, will have or invent a justification, adding some depth to the character and/or the game with little effort on your part. Somone who wants a DEX 21 just to get the OCV break, doesn't get to do that - whereas he COULD just by paying an extra 3 pts under the NCM rule. At the risk of repeating myself - eliminating the Normal Characteristic Max rule will streamline and simplify the rules, make them fairer, and takes absolutely ZIP from the game. YOU DON'T LOSE ANYTHING. Where you set the limit and how you enforce it becomes just like the campaign limit on active points - you either say "That's the limit, that's it" or "That's the limit, exceptions judged on a case by case basis." Like I said before, if it were such a good idea, why wouldn't it be applied to everything else? Yes, I have read the posts - all the posts in this threads, and all the posts in previous threads touching on the topic. THAT is WHY I have come to this position - which is not the position I started with. I have never seen anyone show a single purpose served by this rule that is not just as well served without it. Lucius Alexander As the palindromedary would put it, this cud's been well-chewed.

The Perennial Topic of Characteristic Maxima First of all - complicated and inflexible? How can anything seem "complicated and inflexible" compared to the Characteristic Max rules? And under the Current Dispensation, it is more inflexible than ever. In spite of what we have been saying about treating species characteristics as "powers" and doing an end run around the rule, that is very much a "house rules" thing and Mr. Long has specifically stated that, officially, "Racial Characteristics" are not powers for the purpose of ignoring the Characteristic Max. And complicated - Gods, this rule gives rise to ENDLESS complications. Anyone who has been around these boards as long as I have knows that. I don't know how many times some aspect of the problem has come up for discussion - it is that very fact that finally convinced me to apply Occam's razor and say we are just plain better off without this needless complication in an already very complicated game. It accomplishes nothing that could not be better and more simply done without it. Uh, I can't see how. Why do you say that? Fafhrd and Conan are barbarians, and large men. Saying "thief" does not begin to sum up their whole characters - nor does it completely sum up any decent character. My point is that a "rogue" (to use the term I actually used) should not have a STR of 25 "just because." If he is a barbarian like Fafhrd (a character I love by the way, pity he is not as popular as Conan) or a giant of a bandit like Little John, that is one thing. But if the STR seems to bear no relevance to the character concept, that is another. Naturally. As opposed to say, the arbitrary "Every point of characteristic over 20 costs double" which has nothing whatsoever to do with any campaign-defining reasons. Yes. Assuming Ents and Entwine are acceptable parts of the campaign, which they often would be if there are Hobbits. Were you thinking for some reason it wouldn't be? It would be a great reason, one giving some depth to the character and his background. Even something I could make use of in the game. "But why does it have to be ME? Can't the Pixies find someone else they trust for this quest?" The Druid looks bemused and says "I don't understand it either. They say they trust you because you smell like a tree." OR "Hrnm, yes, hmm, I remember you. Not long ago. I took you for an orc. " "Uh...that was my father sir, he ...told me about you...but I didn't think you'd be so BIG" "hmm, I remember...your father, you say? But how can that be? It has not been long, at all, at all...." But if a Hobbit's reason for having a STR of 13 is just to get an extra damage class with a weapon, that doesn't add much to the campaign. Great, wonderful, terrific. I sincerely approve. And this is something you can do, and should do, with or without a Normal Characteristic Maxima - so what does the Normal Characteristic Max get you? Excellent advice. A "get around the rules" mentality. Like the end-run we have been describing about defining racial characteristics as "powers." I still maintain, the simplest and best solution is to set certain limits for specific species and say "no going over, without a good justification." That DISCOURAGES excessively high scores without FORBIDDING them. And even if a powergamer's real motive is to squeeze out more CV or another damage class, he is being made to contribute something else to the game besides numbers crunching when he thinks up the justification. Lucius Alexander What do you mean, I have to justify having Palindromedary Riding skill?