mallet

This is why I generally don't allow Wealth in Fantasy campaigns where "big treasure" gains are not only possible, but kind of part of the genre (thanks to D&D). The issue I have with using wealth like you described is that the "jump" between Destitute and Poor is far less then between Wealthy and Filthy Rich. Yes, they are both a 5 point jump, but Destitute ( less then $3000 per year) to Poor (Less then $10,000 per year) is a lot different then Wealthy(10) (Less then $5,000,000 per year) to Filthy Rich (Unlimited income, more money then they can spend). Yes, both are a 5 point jump, but because of doubling effect the 5 points at the high end has a much great in game effect. In a "normal" Fantasy Games (adventuring, questing, etc...) if a character should be Wealthy (the Noble fringe benefit or the like) I generally treat it as a background perk, meaning they don't spend points on it, and they also don't get direct access to that money either. Yes, they are rich, but all that gold is back in the family castle or lands, and it is not like they can just make a phone call and have the money deposited in their bank account. If they aren't carrying it on them, then it might as well not exist for the most part. They would need to somehow send a message by courier across the continent (taking weeks or months to get there (if ever)) then the gold would need to be delivered by armed guards also back across the continent back to them (taking more weeks or months) with the hope that bandits don't capture it. So if the Perk of being Wealthy doesn't have any in-game effect, then they shouldn't need to pay character points for it. If the characters do buy the Fringe Benefit of being a noble or business ranks or the like, then I do give them better gear and extra gold at the start of the campaign (based on how high they bought the Perk) because they have spent points on having that as their background, but once the campaign starts and they are far away from their home or business then they are on their own and at the mercy of what they can acquire in game.

A little late to the conversation, but this is how it is described in Fantasy Hero 6th ED: I personally feel that if you do a Change Environment build like you have shown, it should be a PRE roll to resist not EGO, as PRE is the characteristic used for Fear, Awe, etc... and by changing it to EGO any Player who has built a Character believing their PRE score would help against Fear attacks will be annoyed that it is EGO instead that they have to role (unless you tell them right at the begnning of the campaign when they are building their characters that it will be an EGO check in your game, not PRE)

For the Campaign Life & Advancement I think there are a lot of factors that you should fully consider before the campaign (or even char gen) begins. Most importantly how powerful do you want the characters to be at the beginning of the campaign, and how powerful by the time they reach the end. This will give you a general idea of how the progress should go. According to 6th Ed rules 175cp is a "standard" heroic character and considered the starting point for beginning characters. I personally feel this is more powerful then what I like starting out in a FH campaign, but maybe it is what you like. Most (all?) sample characters (from Fantasy Hero) and most of the creatures in the Bestiary seems to work based off of this starting point, so you have to factor that in when designing adventures using any of that source material. Someone once posted that a starting "standard hero" in FH is the equivalent of a 6th level character in D&D, I don't know how that calculation was made but it seems reasonable from what I remember from my D&D days. If you you use that as a base, and decide to start your players at a lower point total, say built with 75cp, then if they eventually earn 100 xp, that would make them only 175cp characters which is actually what the base starting FH character is recommend to be and (as stated above) about 6th level in D&D. Is that how powerful you'd like them to be at the end of the campaign? If so, and you plan of playing roughly once every two weeks for for 4 years then the players should get about 1.25 xp a session (20 sessions a year * 4 years = 80 sessions/100 xp = 1.25). But if you want them to end up more powerful then 175cp, maybe at 275 cp then you would double the xp given per session to 2.5 xp. But you also have to decide if the players will need to spend xp on magic items or not (both ways have advantages and disadvantages) and how much stuff like learning new spells costs the magic using characters. With hero some spell effects can be very expensive (The Turakian Age setting got around this by apply a solid "divide spell real cost 3 to get the cost the players pay". That does help keep things in alignment with other non-magic using characters, but rubs some people the wrong way and can still be very expensive. All these things have to be considered before the players make their characters and the campaign begins, if you really want to evenly spread out the xp you are giving out over the course of the campaign.

I see the reasoning for using PRE as the base stat for this kind of thing, and as per the characteristic descriptions, that is probably what would be used in any official rules on the subject if they are ever made, but personally I think EGO should be the way to go. Or actually a combination of the two. Maybe it is a PRE attack the character has to resist, and if he fails he gets a temporary Psych Lim complication (cowardice) that he then needs to overcome with an EGO roll. Just like if a character had a permanent complication Psych Lim: Timid, Frequent, Strong, or something similar that he or she would always have to use EGO to overcome. PRE should be used to resist the effect of dangerous combat situations, but once you are effected, then EGO should be used to recover and move on. The Resistance talent could be used to help in the roll, or an alternate form of Resistance (like the examples given in the 6th ed vol 1 rule book).

There is a precedent in the rules for an attacker using Mental Powers to have problems with LOS, outside of the target being behind cover, etc... As per 6th Ed. volume 1: Unfortunately it doesn't go on to give examples of when this particular rule might be used. But it does imply that LOS can be fuzzy in some circumstances and still needs to "lock on" to a target. So maybe when a character is using a mental attack with Haymaker the target does become "fuzzy" enough that if he moves the attacker is no longer "locked on", and the attack will miss. This topic also makes me wonder what DMCV actually is. Mental Defence is fairly easy to describe, it is having a strong or tough mind that can take punishment/damage and is able to fend off attempts to control it, but what is DMCV actually. Is it having a "fuzzy" mind, making it harder for an attacker to target? Is it having some sort of mental power to "dodge" part of his mind from an attack? Is it just training to trick an incoming mental attack to somehow miss? Is it instantaneous, unconscious, mental battle between both parties that takes place at the speed of thought and that results in an attack hitting or missing? Much like the way one combat phase is sometimes described as being a series of attacks and parries with the final result of a major "hit" doing damage, or a "miss", meaning all the attacks and parries missed? Deciding on how DMCV works, might shed some light on how a mental haymaker might work and why the target moving may effect that, LOS or not.

It took me a couple of reads to get it, but I think I did. But I think any power that makes the player spend xp to create items is honestly a waste of your time (beyond a thought exercise) and a waste of pages in any book you might publish. I know that might sound harsh, but it is not meant to. I can not ever see a campaign where a player would do that, not unless xp was flowing fast and furiously. XP is one of the main things players are working for, why would they want to spend it on something they would then sell or give away? And since this is Hero why wouldn't the player just spend that xp on spells, powers or abilities that give them the same effect as the magic item that was being created? This seems like a power that would only be used by NPC's at the GM's discretion, and if that is the case, then rules might not be needed, as it is GM controlled. I think it might be better to build the power as a spell/ritual that a player can learn (by spending xp) that would allow them to place any spell they already know (which they have also already spent xp on) into an item suitable for enchantment. This would take time, and especially special ingredients, expendable foci, etc... This makes creating an item, not only possible, but also adds to the game because the players must locate or buy or discover the stuff needed to make the item. For example, Bob the Fire Mage wants to enchant a flaming Long Sword to do fire damage. He already knows a 1d6KA Flaming Touch spell, so first he needs to learn the spell/ritual to make magic items, then he and his party must find a a blacksmith who can make them a mastercraft silver long sword (and give him the silver to make it with) and then they also need to locate some Phoenix Feathers and a vial of Liquid Flame. Once they have all of that then Bob can do the ritual and spend a week to make the magic long sword that does +1d6KA fire damage. This makes crafting a magic item something that creates adventures and social interactions, etc... rather then just number crunching. Some of this is also campaign dependant as well. If it is a High or medium fantasy setting, where magic items are fairly common, then it doesn't make a lot of sense that people are spending XP to make them, as where would all of these enchanters find the time to gain xp by adventuring, etc... in order to have enough to keep making more magic items? 5xp is roughly 2 sessions maybe, in a normal campaign, so that is a lot of adventuring needed to turnaround and spend that xp on making an item, unless they can sell it for a huge sum. But then, if they can make so much money for it, why do they need to keep adventuring? So once again, it ends up being something more for NPC's to use, rather then player characters.

I agree, if there is ever a 7th edition, I would recommend that subcategories for skills like Animal Handler, Survival & Riding be the optional rule for campaigns that focus on those types of elements, but in general campaigns just having the base skill should be enough and the standard. If I remember correctly, it is much like System Operations was a subcategory skill in 5th edition, that was turned into a "general" skill in 6th. Otherwise, most skills could be built with subcategories. Security Systems (physical, electronic), the same for lockpicking. Acrobatics (tumbling, bouncing, etc...) and that is just getting too crunchy and expensive for most games.

All good points, Lucius. I guess it does depend on the campaign the game is set in. I was thinking more along the lines of what is mentioned in the Skill book: (It also mentions that Charm can sometimes be used as a complimentary skill to Animal Handler, so that implies other Interaction skills could also be relevant in some circumstances) I do feel that in most campaigns not putting Animal Handler into subcategories would work best, and instead just adding additional difficult modifiers for more unusual animals (like dragons(which I don't even know if they should count as they are generally intelligent creatures)) would be best. And getting back to the cost of Animal Friendship, since the talent doesn't actually give you the Animal Handler skill (or any of the subcategories) to gain its full benefit the character would also need to have already spent 14 points in purchasing all of the Animal handler subcategories, making the full Skill/talent combo of being an expert with animals cost a crazy 34 character points. Unless the campaign is very animal focused (a party of Druids maybe) that seems prohibitively expensive. At 34 points, it is probably getting to the point where it would be more cost efficient to build the ability as a power (mind control: Animals) or something similar.

I've always thought so, but never paid it too much attention until now when a player wants to get it in our fantasy hero campaign and was also questioning the cost. In the talent explanation section at the end of 6th Ed vol.1, it says it is built as providing +3 to all PRE rolls for all categories of the Animal Handler skill. But even then, 20 points doesn't seem correct. You can get skills level with "all interaction" skills, which would include Animal Handler, for just 4 points. So a +3 roll would only cost 12 cp and that would cover every interaction (PRE) skill, not just Animal Handler. In my mind something like: Animal Friendship: +3 with all Interaction skills (only with Animals, -1) AP:12, RC: 6 And that is being generous that it is only a -1 limitation to have the skill levels only work with animals. It should probably be worth -2 given how often it would generally come up in most games. Heck, you could even build it like: Animal Friendship II: +15 PRE (Only with Animals,-1) AP: 15 RC: 7 Which would actually be even more effective/powerful then the 20 pt. as written rule book version. Heck, 3 levels of Striking Appearance (+3/+3d6) only costs 9 points and that is against all human characters, or just 6 pts. when against one specific group of characters. So I could also see it built like: Animal Friendship III: Striking Appearance (+3/+3d6) (animals only) Cost: 6pts. Can anyone point out why any of these wouldn't be correct or "legal"? The difference between a 20pts and 6pts is major in a standard level fantasy game. heck, it is major in a super hero level game. Is there something I am missing as to why Animal Friendship costs so much as RAW?

Well, it is really a matter of how the magic system works in your game. In this example, are all Wands built as Foci or as Personal Foci? From what I remember of Harry Potter anyone wizard can use any wand, so that means they are just general OAF (like a gun or a knife), but in their build there would be some sort of AID magic power only for someone attuned (the true owner) to the Wand. Then since Wands are such an important part of the magic system in the Harry Potter universe, the GM would have built rules, powers or talents that would allow a powerful wizard to use someone else's wand to full effect (gaining the AID bonus) but at the risk of destroying the wand permanently. On the other hand, since Wands are such a major part of the Magic System, maybe they aren't built as Foci. Maybe they are built as Followers or Computers. Maybe they have an EGO score that any wizard who is not the true owner of the wand has to dominate in order to use the wand effectively. There are probably dozens of builds, of various costs, that could be created to mimic the effect from the movie, but it all comes down to what are the guidelines for the campaign (starting points, AP cap, etc...) and how the magic system is built.

Is the burn out permanent? or maybe semi-permanent (like would take months to recover and use magic again)? If it is permanent then I think it might be best to handle it as a GM/story event, as no character would want to be permanently deprived of all his magic powers in an on-going campaign. For semi-permanent, maybe some form of Long Term Endurance modified to applying to magic (Long Term Magical END), with a longer recovery time once you reach zero. So that if a character ever spends all his Long Term Magic END, then it will take him a month or longer to slowly start getting it back, but if he rests and recovers after casting a few spells then it will go back up as normal. So if he is every truly desperate and burns through all his Long Term END in one or two very difficult sessions, then he is "burnt out" for the next few weeks or months.

If you will pardon the pun, why not get the rules straight from the horse's mouth? From The Ultimate Skill:

Instead of a power, make it a spell. According to the text: It also seems to imply that you do not have to worry about the max point total of the animal form you take, since it is a spell and not a power. The example in the book is for a 250 pt. form. here is another example: Bearform (115 Character Points in the most expensive form) (23 Active Points); OAF (-1), Spell (-1/2), Costs Endurance (Only To Change; -1/2), Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2), Requires A Magic Roll (Skill roll; -1/2), Gestures (Requires both hands; -1/2), Incantations (-1/4), 2 Continuing Charges lasting 1 Hour each (-0) Total Cost: 5 And here is the bear form: VAL...CHA...Cost...Total...Roll......Notes 30....STR.....20...30......15-.......HTH Damage 6d6 END [6] 10....DEX.....0...10......11-....... 20....CON.....10...20......13- 15....BODY....5...15...... 10....INT.....0...10......11-.......PER Roll 11-/14- 10....EGO.....0...10......11-....... 10....PRE.....0...10......11-.......PRE Attack: 2d6 9....PD......3...9.............9 PD (4 rPD) 9....ED......3...9.............9 ED (4 rED) 3....SPD.....10...3.................Phases: 4, 8, 12 5....REC.....1...5 30....END.....2...30 30....STUN....5...30 12....RUN......0...12m................END [1] 2....SWIM.....-1...2m................END [1] 2....LEAP.....-1...2m................2m forward, 1m upward CHA Cost: 62 Cost...POWERS 12.....Claws HKA 1d6 (3d6 w/STR) (15 Active Points); Reduced Penetration (-1/4) - END=1 4.....Bite HKA 1 point (2d6+1 w/STR) (5 Active Points); Reduced Penetration (-1/4) - END=1 12..... Thick Fur Resistant Protection (4 PD/4 ED) - END=0 10.....Powerful Double Knockback (+1/2) for up to 30 Active Points of STR (15 Active Points); Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2) - END=1 6.....+3 PER with Normal Hearing and Normal Smell - END=0 5.....Tracking with Normal Smell - END=0 4.....Charge Running 8m (8 Active Points); Increased Endurance Cost (x3 END; -1) - END=3 POWERS Cost: 53 Base Pts: 115 Exp Required: 0 Total Exp Available: 0 Exp Unspent: 0 Total Character Cost: 115

Maybe build them all with the complication: Vulnerability to Laser Fire x2 STUN

Yeah, stormtrooper armor should have 0 rED to match the films, but some rPD as it did seem to offer some protection vs the Ewoks primitive weapons. Or just give Stormtroopers very low BOD scores (maybe because they are clones) so the armor does protect them, but it only takes 4-5 BOD damage to kill them. Or maybe they just have very low STUN so they pretty much fall unconscious after one hit. We don't know for sure that every Stormtrooper shot dies, just that they fall down out of the fight. Maybe most of them get back up a few minutes later?

This might be a long post, but please bare with me. I've been playing the Hero System for years now. Many years. I've seen these conversations and threads come up again and again, and they are always good and always enlightening, but also always eventually fade away only to be restarted 6 months or a year later. I agree with pretty much everything people are saying on here, in fact I even started writing a Fantasy campaign book a year or so back that would take new players from low points to standard heroic level characters over a a few mini adventures, much like what has been described here (and reading this thread makes me want to go back and finish it!) but one thing all of these threads that talk about how to make the Hero System more newbie friendly, get more players, etc... and it always seems to end up with these few main points: -The Hero System owners need to spend more money on new products and advertising: Which we know is not really viable at this time. -Hero needs to be more user friendly to starting players wanting to make characters with out crushing them under all the math and rules and options of character generation and combat, etc... -Hero needs a way that players can make a unique character and start playing right away with out learning the full system. It seems that everyone gets gung-ho on trying to write and publish something like this but I feel we always forget the greatest tool in the Hero System, no I am not talking about the rules. I'm not talking about the community of these boards. I am talking about the one thing that makes the Hero System viable for pretty much everyone who plays. The one thing that makes everything easier. I'm talking about Hero Designer. This program makes everything work. I doubt I would still be playing & GMing hero if I had to write out every character by hand and calculate all the advantages and limitations and do all the math. it just wouldn't happen. And I think pretty much everyone on here would agree. I know for 100% none of my players would play if they had to do all of it by hand. And I think that is one thing a lot of people forget. Even with a stripped down, simplified version of Hero for newbies, there is still a lot of writing to do. A lot of math. But this is the digital age. Computers and programs are how it should all be done. What is also so great is that Hero Designer is so versatile and re-programmable, I have almost no coding experience, but back in the day I was able to modify it to remove stats and skills and rename things to math the campaign I was creating. Someone that actually knew what they were doing could make some incredible builds with it. So all that brings me to what I think Hero should consider doing (this is Fantasy Hero based, but could be done for other genres). Hero should get/pay someone (Dan) to build a "stripped down" and very specific version of Hero Designer, that takes out everything unessential to the Fantasy Hero setting and the rules and options used in it, maybe even down to just the Basic Rules options. -It should allow max 175 pt. characters -It should remove all the powers and just have 20-30 Prefab powers, spells and abilities listed. -Under Perks it should also have Racial prefabs. -Under skills it should also have "career" prefabs. -Martial arts should only have the basic options. -The define button and notes options should be used to describe what abilities, spells, powers, talents, etc... do so a newbie would understand. -Warnings could pop up to explain why something can't be chosen. -General weapons, armor and gear from Prefab builds. What's great about this, is that most, if not all of these prefabs already exist from past Fantasy Hero sourcebooks. Sure some of them might need to be updated to 6th Ed (or FHC) but that is a minimal amount of work compared to writing a whole new book. The most time consuming part would be the stripping out of all the other stuff from Hero Designer, and even that might not be too hard as all that need to be done is deleting stuff from the lists and then adding in all the Prefabs, which Hero Designer is already built to do. Heck, I add in all the Turakian Age prefabs whenever I start making characters for a new campaign, races, careers, equipment, spells, etc... It all already exists. It's all there waiting to be combined and used. A small PDF taking images and write-ups from existing Hero sourcebooks for the races, careers, abilities, etc... could be cut and pasted together from existing books. The Hero-in-two-pages doc could be attached at the end of the PDF. The with this stripped down and genre specific version of Hero Designer newbie players would be able to play around and build their own characters and get a feel for the system and how it works in a general way with points, total, etc... and have a legal, playable character printed out within a very limited amount of time. Plus they will know what their character can do, what other character builds can do, etc... Then Hero should give away this stripped down, very basic, very genre specific version of Hero Designer away for free. Yes, you read that right. For free. This will draw players and GM's in. It will get them to try something new and different. It will allow them to play entry "level" characters and get a feel for the system. Once they learn how much else can be done with the system, how much they can build and create their own powers and abilities and spells and expand their characters (and advance them past 175 pts). Once they know they don't have to use prefabs, but can design their own abilities. Once they like it and get into it, then they will buy the books and the full version of Hero Designer. Sometimes you have to not make money to make money. This would build the fan base and introduce Hero to many more players then a new rule book or setting or sourcebook would, no matter how stripped down or simplified. Free is the very best and most effective advertising anyone can do. And, like I said before, what makes this so great and simple, is that everything needed already exists. It has all been built and is sitting digitally around waiting to be used, modified and adapted. Hero Designer is, in my opinion, the greatest selling tool to draw people into the Hero System and it should be leveraged to do so. If that means giving away a stripped down, very specific and simplified version to generate interest and future sales, then every effort should be made to do so. Anyways, that's my opinion. Now I'm off to find those old beginer campaign/adventure files and start working on that sourcebook again.

Here is a link to a random insanity chart: http://letsgetweird.info/?page_id=127 or this one (the list is further down the page, table 6-9) http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/sanity.htm For just a "one off" adventure I don't know if I would go all out with a transform build, it just seems like a lot of work for something that will not be ongoing (I assume since this doesn't sound like its a Lovecraftian campaign). EGO rolls (with possible modifiers) might work best and keep things simple. Or give all the PC's a temporary SANITY score at the beginning of the adventure (even if you keep it secret from them) and then have them make EGO checks to avoid losing SAN each time when dealing with the monsters, if they fail the check they lose X amount of SAN. If they reach zero, then give them a temporary insanity. I guess a lot of it might also depend on what genre you are already playing, in a Champions game it would be different then a Fantasy, Star Hero or Urban Fantasy campaign.

Hi all, just wondering if anyone has ever built an alternate method for the Turn Undead talent? I actually like the current Turn Undead method for the most part, but I do bump on a couple of aspects of it. First, at its base RAW ability, it is already over the recommended Active Point limit for a Standard Heroic game. I don't have too much of an issue with this as I don't mind if starting players go over slightly the limit with one or two abilities, but given that it only cost 2 xp to get an additional +10 PRE to your Turn Undead check, I can see this "quickly" escalating well above the Active Point limit. With a 4 xp spend it already becomes an 80 Active Point ability which is the upper end of Standard Superheroic powers. Yet, if the GM restricts the spending of XP to raise it, then the Priest/Cleric of the party will have one of their main "traditional" abilities quashed so that it never grows in power, or at least not until possibly very late in the campaign. Assuming the character has a PRE of 15, at base ability, this would give him/her a PRE of 65 to Turn Undead, or 15D6. An average roll would be about 52. That is just under what would be needed to destroy one skeleton or zombie, but could cause 2 skeletons to run away, or 4 skeletons to freeze in fear and lose one phase. That is pretty good, but even the book says this is a relatively low level of power, yet to boost it up to being considered even a medium level of power, would blow out any Active Point cap in most games. Also, the sheer number of dice needing to be rolled gets pretty crazy. 15D6? dang. that might not be a lot in a Super Hero game, but in a Standard heroic game that's a lot of time spent rolling and counting. Also, I feel like something like a Turn Undead ability should cost at least some END to use, but 6 END seems maybe a tad high in a Standard Heroic game, but going by RAW you can't add the Costs END limitation to a power, then add Reduced END to it as well (at least I can't get Hero Designer to allow me to do that). I've thought about maybe splitting it up into 2 abilities, a bit of a cheat and work around, I know, but maybe something like a Faith power that give X number of +PRE that uses the Standard Effect rule, which could then be used for not only Turn Undead, but also other Faith based effects (what those are defined as I'm not sure of just yet, maybe Oratory skill rolls, Aid to Healing spells, etc...). So for example our 15 PRE priest in question would have: Faith (+30 PRE for Faith based abilities, must use Standard Effect for any bonus dice provided) and Turn Undead (+30 PRE, as defined in the book) So when Turning Undead he would roll 9D6+18, which would give an average roll of about 49, slightly less then the base and probably cost a bit more (I haven't costed out the Faith power with lims and advantages yet), vs the RAW ability, but it would also not break the Active Point limit (a cheat, I know) and could potentially have more use with some other abilities. Then the player can chose to use XP to raise either the Faith power, or the Turn Undead ability. Any thoughts on this, or has anyone built another version of Turn Undead that they found works better for them then what is given in the books?

Starting work on a new Turakian Age game (its been a few years since I last GM'd a Fantasy Hero game and that was more of a mini-campaign) and an "issue" I had thought of back then, but then forgotten, has come back to vex me, so any thoughts or input would be welcome. Given the magic system of the setting where the final cost of spells is divided by 3, do you think that Special Abilities of non-magic users should also get a similar discount? I do understand why spells get the discount, powers can be very/prohibitively expensive in a generally low point game like most fantasy hero campaigns, and by reducing the cost it allows the mages to have access to a wider variety of spells, but if a non-mage character wants to have a similar ability that is not magic based, should he/she be made to pay full cost? By the rules spells only need to have the Spell Limitation (-1/2) with other limitations being advised, but still optional. And from what I can tell the Spell limitation really only amounts to being the same as the Requires a Skill Roll limitation, as in the Turakian Age magic system you need to have the magic skill that matches the arcana of the spell you are casting. Limitations like Gestures, Incantations, Focus, are all optional in the magic system, but even if they are "enforced", if a non-mage character put a similar amount of limitations (if not exactly the same ones) on their ability they still wouldn't "qualify" for the super reduced cost. So a very base and basic spell might be: Spell of Spider Climb: Clinging (20 STR) (14 Active Points); Spell (-1/2); real cost: 9 (Cost to character: 3) But is that so different from a Thief character who wants to be super skilled at climbing walls and buys the power: Spider Climb: Clinging (20 STR) (14 Active Points); Requires A Climbing Roll (-1/2); real Cost: 9 You could say that the mage had to spend 3 points to learn the proper magic skills to cast the spell, but the Thief had to spend 3 cp to learn climbing. Even if you factor in the action it takes the mage to cast the spell by making the Thieves ability have a Delayed Phase limitation (1/4), the thieve's ability still costs 8 points. So I dislike how the same ability is so much cheaper for a spell caster. And since hero doesn't have a "class" system that restricts any character from learning spells, I feel that this will eventually lead all players to start learning magic as a way of "keeping up" with the mages. Has anyone else had this issue in long running Turakian Age campaigns? Any thoughts, pro or con, on giving a cost break to non-mages wanting to learn super skills or special abilities?

Some general thoughts and ideas. If a worry for a GM is a jedi character overpowering the other PC's in combat situations, maybe looks for other ways to "limit" them, for example, maybe all force powers have to have the extra Time (full phase) limitation, or maybe if you consider the Speed characteristic to be more of a "screen time" concept then actual speed, maybe put restrictions on the SPD characteristic for Jedi characters, so while when jedi's do their thing it kicks-ass, but other non-Jedi players maybe get more actions in a turn. There are scenes in the original trilogy where Luke, Leia and Han are together and fighting, and Leia and Han hold their own with blasters and such taking out just as many bad guys as Luke does, sure Luke is more flashy with the lightsaber and force powers, but Leia and Han probably kill just as many stormtroopers or bad guys as he does. Also, like the old fantasy trope of gacking the mage first, in a fight most of the npc's will focus their attention on the the jedi character to take him or her out first. So, just like in the movies, the jedi character spends more time defending and deflecting/reflecting attacks, then out right attacking, so the other characters get to be more offensive in combat. Also maybe there are other limitations that all Force Powers have (like Concentration 1/2 DCV) that the players will have to buy off with XP in order to use them effectively in combat. This is also shown in the movies when Luke really has to concentrate (sometime it looks like he'd even be at 0 DCV) when moving objects but then later on he when he is more powerful he can do them without concentrating, just like Vader can. It even looks like "starting" jedi's might have to use Gestures on some of their physical powers, as well as Concentration, which is another limitation that would need to be bought off with xp to be fully effective in combat. ie) moving objects, force choke, and even mind control (Luke waves his hand about when trying to mind control Jabba, and so did Obi Wan with the Stormtroopers in A New Hope, and Qui Gon when cheating at dice in Phantom Menace. ) These types of automatic limitations on Force Powers, then can be bought off over time, also allow for some differences to develop between jedi characters, like Qui Gon was really powerful, but still needed to wave his hand to move objects (because he never bought off that limitation) while Vader bought off all the limitations on that power and could move and throw stuff around while still in lightsaber combat with Luke in Empire. As for the darkside of the force, an idea could be that all force users automatically have to have (or buy) the power: Draw On The Darkside: (AID)Boost 3d6, Force Powers (+1/2) (36 Active Points); Only to Aid Self (-1), Side Effects, Major Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-1), Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2) With the Side effect being something like must make a successful EGO roll or become Enraged, plus some sort of tracking of how many times the character becomes enraged then if it happens too often he either is considered to be a darkside character, or gains a Complication of Addiction (to the Darkside) and must make an Ego roll NOT to use the darkside when using the force. Or maybe, have all force using characters also start with a custom complication like: Lure of the Darkside: The character starts with 10 "Lightside" points. Whenever the character uses the Draw of the Darkside power they must make an Ego roll (at -1 per 10 AP in the power used), if they fail they become Engraged and lose one "Lightside" point. If the character ever loses all his "Lightside" points he automatically become Enraged in all combat unless the make an Ego roll and may also gain the Negative Reputation complication as well as negative modifiers to all Social Skill rolls. Add a way to spend XP to regain "lightside" points, to reflect time spent meditating and finding inner peace, etc... this allows the players to draw on the darkside when really desperate, but also to regain their calm, at the cost of spending xp. Which would also further be a boon for non-jedi characters as they will be spending all their XP on skills and stats, etc... while a jedi who keeps using the darkside will have to spend XP to keep their character in play and not go fully evil. Or something like that. Then if you are really building a full Force Power system, including for the NPC's, you could have Force Powers that are only available if the character has zero "lightside" points, this might include Force Lightning attacks, and other powers shown that only the Sith have.

Maybe have wealthy player characters have 2-3 "unassigned" points in the Favour perk that can be spent when/if needed or desired to represent paying off a badguy mook or npc to turn sides, betray their boss, etc... Once they have spent those points they either have to pay XP to get more, or have to start "spending" their Wealth points to do it. So if they have Wealth at 15, but really need to get a bad-guy's henchmen to turn against him they would need to spend a point of Wealth (dropping them down to 14) in order to make it happen. Because I do agree that in a lot of games (that I have played or GM'd) the current Wealth system raises some issues. For example, if you have Wealth at 15 points you are a billionaire like Tony Stark, Dr. Doom, Bruce Wayne or Reed Richards. So, does a write up of Tony or Reed or Doom include 20, 50 or 100 points also spent in Bases & vehicles for all their houses, buildings, labs and car, planes, boats, spaceships, etc..? Or is it rolled into Wealth of 15? Because if it is, then Wealth is a massive point saver, but if it isn't then Wealth doesn't really do much except add flavour to the character. It becomes more of a SFX then anything actually useful in game. Poor Peter Parker eats a McDonalds, while Tony Stark eats at 5-star restaurants, but both of them still eat. Tony Stark has a massive lab to build his armor, while Peter parker built his (super amazing, sci-fi tech) webshooters in his bedroom from salvaged gear, but both of them still have advanced super technology. It becomes just color for the characters and game, not something that points should be spent on. Points should be spent of things that have tangible effects in game. In fact most of the benefits of Wealth seem to be achievable through other perks. Like Favours, Contacts, Bases, Vehicles, etc... So maybe Wealth should be dumped or reduced in cost, and instead ask the players what effect they want their wealth to have. They want to have skyscrapers and flying cars? Then put points into bases and vehicles, they want to be able to bribe people then spend points in Favours. Be able to call the mayor and get information then buy Contacts or Followers. If they just want to wear nice suits, drive fancy cars and date supermodels? No charge, as it has no in game effect. Maybe Wealth should instead be bought like a Skill Enhancer such as Jack of All Trades, etc... So rather then have a vague effect, it reduces the cost of other things like Bases or Vehicles, Contacts, Followers & Favours (Well Contected already exists, and could be used and just called "Rich enough to get people to do what he wants"). Maybe this type of system could be discussed in a 3rd APG.

I think it will depend on the "combat" effect you would like it to have. At first thought it seems like a Presence attack, so +PRE (only to confuse/anger, maybe with a requires a Conversation roll) could work. But you could also build it as +X OCV (also with Requires a roll or incantations) to simulate that he distracts his opponents giving him a better chance to hit. Or +X DCV (also with Requires a roll or incantations) to simulate that he distracts his opponents making it harder for them to hit him. There are probably a lot more ways to do this kind of thing, it really depends on the effect to want to have in combat. Once you know that then the build shouldn't be too hard.

Well bows (and their strings) would have a maximum tension (STR) that could be used to use them, anything greater would/might cause them to break or snap, so I am fine with STR not adding to the damage as any extra STR above the STR Minimum to use could cause them to break. So in a sense the build already incorporates the "max damage" a bow could do when used to its maximum effect (ie, meeting the STR minimum). But building a Bow with extra damage to simulate it being stronger and allowing the user to add STR to the damage done might work. Maybe something like: Strong Bow: +1 damage (5pts); Only if user STR is +5 over the STR minimum for the weapon (-1/2) (real cost:3) or something like that. Of course this question also opens another kettle of worms like, should Bows also be built with the Range Based On Strength or a variation of that.

Like other people have mentioned I think there should be a very stripped down, setting specific version of the rules put out. For example you are playing a game and your character wants to buy a gun. It should be as simple as: GUN: 2d6 RKA, Ammo: 6; cost: 10pts OPTIONS: +1d6 damage, cost :7pts Armor Piercing, cost: 3pts per level Auto Fire (2 shots per round), cost: 3pts. +1 OCV to hit, cost: 3pts. So I final write up on the sheet could be: GUN 2d6 RKA, Armor Piercing, Autofire, Ammo: 6; total cost: 16 pts. and that is it. That's all that is needed to play. Someone who has the Tool Kit rules would know that is is actually built like: Gun: RKA 2d6, Autofire (2 shots; +1/4), Armor Piercing (+1/4) (45 Active Points); OAF (-1), 6 Charges(-3/4); Real Weapon (-1/4) Actual Cost: 15pts But whatever. No need for all that extra crunch and the 1 pt difference (from rounding in hero designer) is nothing, especially if you aren't super crunchy or min/maxing. And if you want that, then use the tool kit rules, but for the rest of the RPG world clean and simple is the way to go. I know that a gun is an obvious, accessible focus. I know that it needs to be maintained and needs ammo to shoot. I don't need all that spelled out on the sheet when it is already in the book and just common sense.

I remember reading about how in World War Two in the Northern African battles US Troops placed a bunch of dead animals around some oasis and wells and put up fake warning "Poisoned" signs around them when they were retreating (or leaving an area). After the war the German government complained that the US had poisoned all of the water supply causing the death's of lots of German soldier from dehydration which was against the Geneva Convention. And the US response was, yes it is illegal to poison the water supply, but it wasn't illegal to post signs and leave dead animals lying around. If the German troops believed that the water was poisoned then that was their fault. So I guess the point is, your characters don't have to actually poison the wells, they just have to convince the soldiers that the wells are poisoned so no one will risk drinking from them. A dehydrated army is just as ineffective as a poisoned one. Maybe very high Long Term END loss? A lot easier to poison a few of the soldier's canteens/water sacks and place a few dead animals around, etc... to start a panic, throw in some acting. Maybe arrange to have the Alchemist and Herbalist "test the water" and proclaim it to be poisoned/contaminated for everyone to hear? After that rumours and panic will spread through troops.