Jump to content

Cantriped

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    1,737
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Cantriped last won the day on April 15 2017

Cantriped had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Cantriped

  • Rank
    Heroic Magicat
  • Birthday 12/11/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. In my last campaign a player could use their Phone to hack other devices. Since it was a minor element of a champions character (and based on her justification), we simply bought her Computer Programming, Security Systems, and a 3-point Computer Link to "phones sold to criminals by my boss". Whether or not the target had a linked phone was entirely up to GM fiat (aka me deciding where he'd bought it). Otherwise she had to go through more realistic hacking steps (it was champions though... so "realistic comic book hacking" is still unrealistic at best). Smart Phones were everyman equipment
  2. IIRC you combine all relevent CV modifiers as appropriate. In that regard, Multiple Attack functions more like a Combat Modifier (like Spreading An Attack) than a Combat Maneuver in that you are always performing another Combat Maneuver with it; even if that maneuver is just a simple Strike using Strength or Blast. With a Multiple Move By using Strength and a CV of 6 to attack twice; the CV modifiers should be: [OCV] + [Move-By] + [Multiple-Attack] = 6 + (-2) + (-2 × 1) = OCV 2. ([DCV] + [Move-by]) ÷ [Multiple Attack] = (6 + (-2)) ÷ 2 = DCV 2.
  3. That is his official line yes, and I still say its hooey (a presumptous opinion I admit). I think he just doesn't like that they cut out all his 'carefully crafted' examples, corner-cases, optional rulings, etc... I'm not sure if either would have been made such an offer, when Derek wrote CC my understanding was that it really was intended be just a shorter version of 6e. So why have them also answer questions (and risk them not matching) when in theory all of Steve's 6e1&2 answers should have been universally applicable... Also not sure they would have accepted, neither po
  4. It should be the preogative of those who wrote CC/FHC, or at least they should have an opportunity... But Hero Games doesn't put them up on a golden pedestal like it has Steve Long. Derek and Michael should have a similarly exclusive Rules Thread for questions related specifically to CC/FHC... or if Steve is the only one willing/able to answer FAQs in an official capacity; he should start supporting the most recent edition (and providing citations for it where available) and the company's flagship products before his refusal to adapt bankrupts the company even further. Presumptuous maybe.
  5. Note: Avatar was a kids show... so people didn't usually suffer lethal injuries on screen. In a campaign simulating that trope, Killing Attacks might be prohibited. In campaigns simply taking place in that world... Killing Attacks would be exceptionally common; especially amongst Earth Benders, but also Fire and Water. Martial weapons are extremely prevelant, though largely ineffective because the nature of the show prohibited them from being used effectively. The fact that Airbending techniques don't provide very many lethal maneuvers would also be so much more meaningful. I sugges
  6. You'll need a fairly large suite of powers for Earth Bending. At its highest levels of mastery you can justify a VPP... But the basic techniques I would require as GM are: Geokinesis + Martial Maneuvers: This is Fine Manipulation Telekinesis Limited to Only Affect Earth And Stone (or sometimes Earth, Stone, and Metal)* with a Martial Art bought for/through it (both to enhance damage and provide additional versatility). I suggest Martial Maneuvers such as Defensive Strike, Martial Block, Martial Grab and Martial Throw. Given the SFX, source material, and the fact th
  7. I don't think such was ever explicitly stated. What has been stated is that CC/FHC are still considered part of the 6th edition ruleset*, and that you should be able to use 6th edition supplements largely unmodified. with 6e1&2 being more exhaustive in its treatment of optional game elements. * Making them the most recent printings of that edition. Despite sufficient purposeful changes to constitute a new edition. Either CC/FHC are the most recent printings of the HERO System 6th edition (and therefore are the most up-to-date), or they are a seperate edition (rendering all coun
  8. It is correct in the most recent printing of the rules. Your quote is out of date (or context): "Alternate forms must be regular characters (not Vehicles, Bases, Computers, Automatons, or the like), and are built on the same Total CP (including Matching Complications) as the true form (or fewer CP, if desired)" (CC 81). Considering that CC/FHC only purposfully omit optional rules, that must have been considered one too.
  9. We are mostly in agreement. I was talking about the "unmodified characteristic roll" optional rules in the second paragraph above. Which my impression of is that it is still essentially a characteristic based roll, not an activation roll. You merely use your innate characteristic roll to determine the value as if it were an activation roll* * Which technically bottoms out at -1/4 at a 12-, showing 13- and 14- just served to establish that the pattern continued past the point where you recieved diminished discounts for raising the roll... I'd argue 15- and above were only ommited to
  10. You misunderstand the core concept... the idea isn't to just turn yourself into a gargoyle like some odd lycanthrope. The concept is a spell cast that turns "Anybody" into a "Gargoyle" (by adding the abilities and complications of being a gargoyle semi-permenently to the target). This is literally the 6e1 example of Adding Or Removing abilities (see page 307), although I mistakenly said it was Arkelos and not Kasdreven casting the spell. My arguement is that there is no RAW reason he cannot cast it on himself (if he wants)*... however I doubt he would want to use the version I
  11. That cannot fly... literally cannot (as opposed to does not or should not). Neither Shape-Shift nor Images can grant any of the abilities of a Gargoyle, so it really hurts the credibility of your following statements when you lead with something so utterly wrong. False. The section on Transform And Other Powers does contradict itself in 6e1 (but thankfully not in CC/FHC). The only part the RAW is clear on is that Transform shouldn't be built or used to simulate other powers. I presume because as written it easily could, producing countless corner cases in the process. Never
  12. Actually, all of the Growth levels should be priced by starting with "the appropriate Size Template, and applying Costs Endurance (-½), Unified Power (-¼), and Side Effects (-½) to" the elements it contains (CC 69 and elsewhere), ignoring Complications (which are imposed by the side effect). In other words, if you divide the total costs of the various size templates by 2.25 (and round) you get their Active Point cost as a Growth level... loosely speaking... this doesn't have to be a size template per say. You could use the principle to create all sorts of fairly priced custom Body-Affecti
  13. Nothing, the prohibition is an arbitrary rule related to HAs pricing structure compared to STR and TK... mostly I blame it on STR and TK not being expensive enough. STR should cost 2 points (and TK 3), or else always cost twice as much END (Per Heroic rules)... if either were the case we could have had a Normal Attack power just like Killing Attack but priced at 1d6 per 5 points. As a semantic note, it can be argued that HA is only prohibited from having standard Ranged in CC/FHC (given that the various range affecting modifiers are now described seperately, but HA only prohibits R
  14. Which looks really supportive of your point when quoted out of context... like when I quote from the exact same section: "Transform And Other Powers" where its opening thesis is "Characters should not use Transform to simulate other Powers." Making every statement that follows a supporting statement for that core principle. Semi-permenently changing yourself or others (mostly others) into horrific Gargoyles (granting them some powers, but also imposing significant Complications) is not a breach of the spirit of that guideline because: Multiform and Shape Shift would be terribl
  15. Likewise the table in CC/FHC doesn't give values for above 14-. However if your GM is allowing you to base a Required Roll on a Characteristic (something the core rules do talk about doing) you price it as though it were an Activation Roll equal to your Characteristic Roll. If you are heavily invested in a Characteristic, a character with Requires A STR Roll could easily have a Roll of 15- or better for such powers, and as I mentioned above, Requires A STR Roll should still be worth -1/4 no matter how high it climbed; mostly because Drain/Suppress, and Change Environment can always
×
×
  • Create New...