bigdamnhero

Re: Firearms granularity

Re: Firearms granularity 1) Part of it is style and personal preference. 2) Not everyone agrees on what is "best." 3) What's best for one person may not be best for another person. 4) What's best for one mission may not be best for a different mission. Last but not least, 5) Cost is definitely a big factor. Most armies and police departments can't afford "the best" in mass quantities. bigdamnhero "Life. Don't talk to me about life."

Re: Damage Reduction hit by Armor Piercing Why would it only get used in a multipower slot? I agree I'd have a hard time justifying it in most circumstances. But I can think of a few (admittedly obscure) situations where I could see it working. For example, in my fantasy game all demons have some amount of DR; I could see a demon-killer sword that bypasses demons' DR. Or some type of weapon that attacks the entire body, rather than a part of it, so size doesn't really help. It could make an interesting alternative to NND attacks against characters whose main defense comes from DR rather than from armor. But I'd certainly be VERY careful about when and how I allowed it. bigdamnhero "Is this gonna be a standup fight, sir, or another bughunt?"

Re: Firearms granularity

Re: Firearms granularity Gee, if caliber doesn't matter I guess I'll take my .22LR bear hunting... Of course a shot to the face will always beat one to the tree. And if your PCs have enough CSLs that they can always guarantee a face-shot, then caliber is probably irrelevant to them. But for most shot placements, caliber can make a big difference. It's not everything; it's not even the most important thing. But it's not nothing, if you'll pardon the double-negative. For an example, most US law enforcement agencies have switched from 9mm to the .40 because it has significantly greater penetration and stopping power. Among other things, this means the .40 round is much less likely to be deflected by ribs and the like, which means you're more likely to hit the important parts you're aiming at. Are those differences significant enough in game terms to make it worth statting out? As tesuji points out, it depends on the game you're playing and who you're playing it with. If treating a .40 and a 9mm as equivilent is really going to dampen your player's enjoyment factor, then yeah it's probably worth it. OTOH, to accurately simulate modern firearms would require a number of rules mods that would, among other things, greatly slow down game play; so the concerns of your other players has to be a factor as well. Give your GNP (Gun Nut Player) the range of how much damage you want firearms to do in your world, from .22 pistols up to .50 rifles. If he can figure out a way to differentiate between all the different calibers within that range, more power to him. bigdamnhero "Mercy is the mark of a great man. [stab] Guess I'm just a good man. [stab] Well, I'm okay."

Re: Help With Some Builds I'd go with either delayed effect or trigger, depending on how you see it working. Define the trigger as "next hit" for a sword or "next shot" for an arrow, give it one charge and a limitation "must be triggered within 24 hours" - not sure how much I'd give for that - and you're there. bigdamnhero "insert clever quote here"

Re: Experience points question It depends on the disads. They should limit the character/creature in some way, or the ref shouldn't have given any points for them. The problem is, not all of them will limit the creature IN COMBAT. So if your 125-pt disad creature has 125 points from social limitations, illiteracy and the like, then yes it’ll fight the same as if it all those points had come from experience. OTOH, if the disad points come from vulnerability to water, or severe physical limitations and the like, then it would obviously make a difference. One trick you can try to help balance your beasties (and other NPCs) is to calculate a combat-only version, ignoring the cost of everything (skills, perks, powers, disads, whatever) that is not likely to be a help/hindrance in combat. I refer to this as the “wargame cost†and it should give you a general idea of how tough he/she/it should be to take down. But the most important thing is how powerful the creature's attacks and defenses are compared to your PCs' defenses and attacks. Sorry, it’s an art not a science. bigdamnhero “Don't give me any of that 'Star Trek' crap. It's too early in the morning.â€

Re: Purely Positive Thread Until last year, when I moved to a new city and had trouble finding Hero gamers, I've played Hero almost exclusively for all RPG genres since the mid-eighties. I think the system is light-years ahead of the competition. I recently bought Champions Battlegrounds even tho I hadn't played supers in years - had so much fun just reading it that I ran out to get Champs 5ed, and now I'm jonesing for a supers game. And as long as we're in a happy place: the flu bug that I picked up seems to be fading! bigdamnhero "Raise the defensive shields!" "An excellent idea sir but with just two minor drawbacks. One, we don't have any defensive shields and two we don't have any defensive shields. I know that is technically one reason but it was so glaring that it is worth mentioning twice."

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds I think you've nailed it, at least from my POV. That would also attract more of the do it yourself-ers, like me, because even if the overall setting is not something you're going to run, there are still pieces you can use in your own setting. FH Battlegrounds and Champions Battlegrounds are my two favorite recent Hero purchases for exactly those reasons: they're full of bits I can use in my own campaign when I don't have time to draw up my own castle, or the PCs take a sudden left turn in a direction I'm not prepared for. I know those aren't adventures, per se, but they're the closest DOJ has done lately. And if I'm not mistaken, they both made money, right? I've never understood DOJ's aversion to publishing adventures. Maybe they have a perfectly valid reason, but I don't get it. bigdamnhero "Hell I dunno, if I wanted schoolin' I'd have gone to school."

Re: Creating Our Own World I'm definitely in! I've done some freelance writing, editing and story consulting over the years, and would be happy to help out. I've never played Galactic Champions, but it sounds like a good possibility. Here are a couple other ideas that appeal to me. (Of course, I'm actually home sick today, so it could be the flu virus talking... ) 1) I like the suggestion of a rifts-style meta-genre project, because that could really showcase the versatility of the system and it's something you can't do (or at least, not well or not easily) in most other game systems. Hero has already put all this time & energy into their meta-setting; let's run with that! And the specific genre episodes can be tied firmly to existing setting books, so we encourage people to give DOJ their money. 2) What about doing something for Pulp Hero? Since the "world" is already known to a large extent, we can just go ahead and people it without drawing away from any published (or soon-to-be-published) material. Plus it's an area where there isn't much competition right now. And if we do a decent job, it's free advertising for DOJ's newest product. What do you think? Or should I go back to bed? bigdamnhero "What's the fun of being a grownup if you can't be childish?"

Re: New HG book concept - opinions requested An excellent idea. In most groups I've played with, I was the only one with all (or most) of the rules books. In my last group, only the other Ref had anything other than the cole book, and several players still had the 4ed core rules (no matter how much I cajoled...). And I've certainly seen people run away screaming after looking at the size of 5eR! Hero seems to have a reputation as a rules-lawyer game, based primarily on the size of the books, and the focus on stat-ing out every flashlight and video camera. For many people, it just looks too much like work. This could go a long way toward addressing that. bigdamnhero "Is this gonna be a standup fight, sir, or another bughunt?"

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds Thanks, sbarron, that's what I've been trying to say, except much better said. I think the idea of Sidekick genre books is also a great one, and from a business standpoint is probably less risky and easier to implement. Higher priority? Probably. But I still think that more-interesting settings ought to be part of the solution. Give us something we haven't seen before, rather than just "here's how to do _____ in Hero" which is what the current books seem to be designed to do. bigdamnhero "This is the kind of conversation that can only end in a gunshot."

Re: Gravity Trap Right, I just took 100kg as the "average" body size to start with. Hmm...Hadn't really thought about it that way. The intent is for everyone to have to struggle to get out, whether they burn personal END or END Reserve or whatever. People with device-based movement (magic surfboards, etc) should probably be able to use their movement to try and get out. Sounds like maybe suppress STR and movement? Thanks! bigdamnhero "Rasputin, bring in the bucket of soapy frogs and remove his trousers!"

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds Sure, total newbies are almost always going to go for 1) easiest rules, 2) well-established lines, or 3) flashiest packaging. Hero isn't for novices, nor should it try to be. But I'm thinking of the majority of gamers out there, who may have outgrown their current game, are looking for something new, or are at least willing to try something else. Seems to me those are the folks DOJ should be targetting. And yes, I understand that costs money and involves risk. But, art aside, does it really cost more money to publish an interesting, original setting than it does to publish a generic setting? The problem isn't lack of money, and it certainly isn't lack of talent or imagination -- DOJ has plenty of that on staff! As I see it, it's more one of focus and intent. Certainly there is resistance to learning a new game system. So yes, those that have players tend to get (and keep) them. If we accept that and stop there, then Hero is doomed in the long run. But if the goal is to draw new players to Hero, then in my experience the easiest way to do that is with an interesting setting -- one which makes it worth the time & effort of learning new rules. bigdamnhero "One swift knee in the happy sacks and it'll go down like anyone else."

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds Fair point. But again we go back to why the settings themselves aren’t popular. And I'm forced to agree with those who feel the problem is that the settings are too generic. TE is more an example of how to make an SH world than an original SH world in its own right. True, and I didn’t mean to suggest they should throw money at additional material for an already-unpopular setting. My point was that if the settings themselves were more original they might attract more people, who might then go on to buy splat books, the core rules, scenario books, etc. I was sucked into Hero, as I suspect you were, because the rules are so good. But most gamers are sucked into settings and take whatever rules are offered unless they’re just really wretched. (Even Twilight 2000 was quite popular for awhile, and it had IMO some of the worst rules I'd ever seen.) Now that’s an excellent idea! Something that the players can buy, give them enough info to get started, and only the ref needs to make the big investment. bigdamnhero "Have you ever considered piracy? You'd make a wonderful Dred Pirate Roberts."

Need a second opinon or three... I'm trying to build an area-effect gravity trap for a Champions scenario, and am having trouble getting the effect I want. The idea is simple: the villain cranks up the gravity in a hex or two, and the heroes become too heavy to move, `tho they may still be able to use some powers/foci. Strong characters have a chance of fighting it, or at least crawling out of the hex. The obvious choice is to use Telekinesis (only to pull objects to the floor) as discussed in SH and other places. But making it a simple STR-vs-STR roll to break free seemed too simple and too all-or-nothing for how I see this working. Ideally, it should be based on encumberance, simulating the hero's body & gear getting too heavy to move. But because of the linear increase in lifting capacity -- and I have no desire to reopen the whole linear-vs-exponential argument here! -- even a force of 10 Gs (50 STR) will only inflict 63% encumberance on a 30-STR character, slowing their movement by all of 2"! To actually get a 30-STR character to 100% encumberance, you have to go up to 16Gs! (Math note: I ran the numbers based on a 100kg character carrying 10kg of gear.) I also tried creating it as an entangle that takes no damage from attacks, but that doesn't work quite the way I want either. I thought about using change environment, but that seemed too munchkiney. Any other suggestions? bigdamnhero “Cancelled TV shows don’t usually get made into major studio pictures... We have done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.†– Joss Whedon Serenity premieres 9/30

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds Personally, I agree 100%. But I think we’re in the minority. (Even if we’re the majority on this forum.) The vast majority of gamers I have known over the years could care less about rules; they’re in it for a fun and interesting setting. So while there’s nothing stopping people from converting other interesting settings to Hero, most gamers aren’t going to bother – they’ve already got the cool setting and don’t see anything to be gained by converting it to a different set of rules. Well put! There’s plenty of interesting stuff in the DOJ settings, but they mostly come across as “stat books†in the words of one friend I’ve been trying to lure to Hero. Ask yourself: if (insert name of any DOJ setting book here) was published for another setting, how eager would you be to buy it and convert it to Hero? But just because they make “concrete definitions†about a particular setting – or even a particular genre – doesn’t mean you can’t still change it if you want to, right? As an analogy: my second favorite game in the universe is Full Thrust, a sci-fi miniatures game. Like Hero, the core rules are fairly simple, generic, and easily adaptable to any setting. There is an “official†setting – called the “Tuffleyverse†by fans, after creator Jon Tuffley – which is original, interesting, and rather detailed (from a wargaming perspective). But the “official†setting is completely optional, and Jon always encourages people to make whatever changes they want to play the game the way they want to. I know I’m comparing apples to oranges here, but why couldn’t DOJ do something similar? Would publishing “splat books†for Terran Empire in any way prevent you from playing SH the way you want to? I mean, these are the guys who dedicated 11 pages of their rulesbook to how to *change* the rules. (One of the things I respect most about DOJ!) My point is I don’t see this as an either-or proposition. Having detailed original world settings doesn’t eliminate flexibility for those who want it, but it provides structure for those who prefer it. bigdamnhero "Well, my days of not taking you serious are certainly coming to a middle."

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds

Re: Lack of Fully Developed Worlds OK, mark me down with the "I play Hero because I like making up my own world" camp. To me, that's at least half the fun of gaming. But I also know that I am NOT the typical gamer. (I also could care less about artwork, but I'm clearly in the minority there as well.) Since moving to Denver last year, most of the gamers I've met play *** fairly exclusively, with exceptions only for TV/movie-based games like Buffy or Trek. The vast majority of them hate the *** system itself, but they play it because they like the settings that are available. (Arcanis and Greyhawk seem to be very popular around here.) And they like modules. Not just well-developed worlds, but modules. Crack-'em-open-read-it-through-twice-and-you're-ready-to-DM modules. Personally, I hate modules: always have, always will. But as pointed out, a lot of people have neither the time nor the inclination to spend hours writing up their own scenarios. (And even I have to admit I've run some great adventures from modules - after heavy doctoring, of course.) Now, having never worked in the gaming industry I have no idea what the economics are, ie - how many modules you have to sell to make money. But they sure seem to be making money - and buzz - for a lot of other companies. (I'm thinking mostly of the Living _____ campaigns.) Anyway, my bottom line? I agree that having inventive, well-developed worlds with ready-made adventures could potentially be a great selling point for Hero, especially with new gamers. I think Bill's idea of putting together a fan-created world is a great idea that won't cost DOJ a nickel. So definitely count me in! My only concern is that design-by-committee isn't usually a recipe for originality. But if we're agreed that we're going to take Bill's world and build on it, we can hopefully avoid this 10' pit. bigdamnhero "I've always felt that if people can't communicate, they least they can do is to shut up."

Re: hit location I always use hit location except when running demos and con games or otherwise introducing new players. As for called shots, we use a house rule that allows players to "pull" their hit location by 1 for every 2 they make their roll by. So if you made your roll by 4, but rolled an 8 (arm) for location, you could pull it to either the chest (10) or the hand (6). Makes location a tad less random. I acknowledge that there are probably players out there who would abuse this, but my group never had a problem with it.

Re: Knockback and Bullets

Re: The Quintessential BODY Of the top of my head, I'd have to say...not very.

Re: Adult themes in gaming, a rant of sorts For the record, I should probably state that "effect on the character's psyche" did NOT mean turning her into 1) a nymphomaniac, 2) a subservient sex slave, or 3) a man-hating lesbian. But she did develop a few "issues."

Re: Adult themes in gaming, a rant of sorts I confess when I first started gaming back in grade school, some of our games were fairly juvenile, especially in how they handled sex. What can I say? We *were* juveniles. Since then, I've only seen that type of behavior a handful of times, mostly committed by NPCs, mostly against other NPCs, mostly off-camera, always portrayed as something evil, not something erotic. A female PC of mine was once captured by a demon and subjected to some pretty demonic torture, including sexual torture. But again, it all happened off-camera. The DM went into about as much detail as I did just now, and that was really all that was needed. There was nothing erotic about it, and the focus was much more on the event's effect on the character's psyche. Only once have I seen a rape committed by a PC: the PC was evil and the victim was an NPC. While it was arguably "in character" for the PC, it was still the last time I gamed with that player - I think he enjoyed it too much. On a brighter note, one of the funniest lines I ever heard was from a gadgeteer in a pulp game who, upon being seduced by some Femme Fatalle asked "What do I need to roll to invent a condom?"