massey

No I was having a weird moment where I was wondering why the Avengers thread had started to move off topic and I was actually beginning a response when I realized that I had not entered the Avengers thread and merely allowed myself to get distracted  

Special effects not granting bonuses makes perfect sense to me.
 
In a generic system, potentially covering all genres and all settings, powers will inherently function differently, and so they must be purchased to do what you want them to do.
 
I remember a guy at our local game store who was convinced that telekinesis was the greatest power in the world, because you could just reach into your opponent's brain and give him an aneurism with the tiniest amount of force. I don't know why he decided TK worked that way, but that was his vision of the power. My view of the power was far far more limited. Which of us is right? Both of us are right -- we can each have the power we want when we build our characters. We just have to pay to see our particular vision in the game.

^^^
 
I'm thinking there's probably a growing market for that exact kind of thing, in your car.  A few small cameras could be set up to record in front of you, behind you, to the sides, etc.  It saves it to a hard drive and there's a panic button to start streaming it somewhere else.

There are a lot of people who are police officers who should not be.
 
As angry as some of these videos make us, we should be pleased that they are coming out. In the past, police did this sort of thing with no repercussions at all. At least it is beginning to change.

Too soon:
 
"I was arrested for killing a black man...
 
 
 

Speaking of D* cops: a Texas Cop decided to step over the bounds of reasonable action and put a young lady into a choke hold. Why? Because she knew her rights and wasn't "Respectin' his Authoritah!"
 

 
-In case you are curious, the prosecutor in that area even stated that the young woman was within her rights and of course the cops tried to make her delete the video but she didn't.
 
Seriously I am typically pro-cop. I have taken the opposite sides of these discussions when they have come on these boards in the past. But I can't count the number of times I have read / watched a story like this or worse and can only walk away with the classic "F* the police" chant. To be honest, I don't trust a single cop. I am getting to the point where I just assume the cop must be in the wrong because it isn't a "small few" but "a majority" who are either belligerent jerks, thieves, or straight up murderers.
 
Body cam ever single one of the jerks. Never let them work alone. Never let them do "internal investigations" and always demand truly outside investigators and prosecutions for when police cross the line.
 
La Rose.

It is this bully "cop culture" that needs to be squashed ASAP.

"Kent. This is God. Have you been touching yourself again?"

Well, sorry dude, but nobody can help you.  When you basically come out and say that you don't consider 3 of the 4 movies "canon", and you changed a bunch of things you didn't like and rewrote some of the novels and edited some of the movies to be closer to your liking, then you are no longer dealing with the same "canon" that the rest of the universe is.  Do what you want, but nobody is going to see things the way you do.

The wizard of O...the signature song by the Tin Man..."If I only had a Pen**"  

Well, sorry dude, but nobody can help you.  When you basically come out and say that you don't consider 3 of the 4 movies "canon", and you changed a bunch of things you didn't like and rewrote some of the novels and edited some of the movies to be closer to your liking, then you are no longer dealing with the same "canon" that the rest of the universe is.  Do what you want, but nobody is going to see things the way you do.

Well, sorry dude, but nobody can help you.  When you basically come out and say that you don't consider 3 of the 4 movies "canon", and you changed a bunch of things you didn't like and rewrote some of the novels and edited some of the movies to be closer to your liking, then you are no longer dealing with the same "canon" that the rest of the universe is.  Do what you want, but nobody is going to see things the way you do.

The Ark was also supposed to be a divine weapon of antiquity. I'm not familiar with any works by Lovecraft in which an Elder God was carried around in a vessel and used by kings and generals to lay waste to armies on the battlefield. Moreover, I don't believe that the final scene with the Ark was intended to be interpreted as the unleashing of a Nameless Cosmic Horror From Beyond. If anything it was the Vengeance of Yaweh unleashed upon evil Men (the virtuous "heroes" at the scene, like Indy and Marian, were simply collateral damage).
 
But more important than any of that, the tone of the Indiana Jones series is utterly non-Lovecraftian.

Indeed. So how did the game go from being one in which creating characters could become an addicting activity after just one read-through of the rulebook to one in which "newbies" can't even begin to wrap their heads around it? As you say, basic process hasn't changed. But what has changed is the way the rules are written/presented. And therein lies the problem, I believe.
 
Maybe the more streamlined Complete edition(s) of the rules will help bring the presentation of the rules to something more manageable for newbies.

Grrk.  Sorry but that description makes my brain malfunction.  I would never ever understand that.  I mean, clearly it works for your group, but I've heard of people doing it that way and I just can't wrap my head around it.
 
I think of it the following way:
 
If you roll an 11, you hit a DCV equal to your OCV.  For every point you roll under 11, you hit one better DCV.  For every point you roll higher than 11, you hit one worse DCV.

It looks like an abuse of DMCA to stop what is "Fair use."
 
That said, I think media depicts both men and women in unrealistic ways. There is a male gaze and a female gaze and objectification is a two way street. How many guys have 14 inch biceps, popping pecs, and a deep cut six pack without roids? Or tear their shirts off and pour water over their ripped body and long hair Renegade style?
 
Or just happen to be fully naked or have their shirts off as they embrace the elegantly clad plucky heroine on the cover of the romance novel. Heck, my wife was reading one a few weeks back where it was just the dudes abs and pecs writ large behind the heroine whose face was pressed into them -- he apparently didn't need a face. All of that said, I don't object to a little cheesecake or beefcake in entertainment insofar as its leaven rather than content.
 
But, its a two way street. Media treats men as objects and presents them with weird body image issues, too.

Personally, artists / business people are entitled to express political, religious, and social views both inside and outside of their work / product. The consumers and market are entitled to react to those views with their wallets and opinions. That's a personal decision an artist, entrepreneur, musician, writer, game-designer has to make -- and live with the consequences of. I do think, if the expression is outside of the work, that one might enjoy the work-product itself, but not every artists is able to separate the two -- and neither is every consumer. For instance, I detest Jack Nicholson yet enjoy watching him on film, but Tom Cruise -- the guy just creeps me out. I can't watch him without visions of him bouncing on Oprah's couch and screeching conjuring up while the word "clear" echoes in the recesses of my brain. If you put it out there, you own it.

Templates should be tools, not straitjackets.
 
They are good for setting benchmarks, and quick and dirty character creation, but they are no substitute for actually thinking about characters.

Which is why I don't believe trying to build templates and then shoehorn in the characters to try to fit them. You end up losing granularity and nuances of specific characters by trying to get them to conform.

...Use sparingly. If the players get the idea that no matter how much ass they kick, you're going to just "cheat" and throw something heavier at them, the conclusion they're likely to draw is "Wow, this guy is a dick!" and find a new GM.  
To a point, yes. Letting the players know they can earn as many (or more) XP by avoiding a fight is great - and is something that D&D/Pathfinder-school gamers may need to be reminded of. But giving out 0 XP because the players didn't do things the way you wanted them to? I'd be looking for another GM.  
Sorry to be so blunt; maybe that's not what you meant. But this comes across as exactly the sort of heavy-handed, adversarial "It's MY game and the players are my chess pieces" style of GMing that I freakin HATE. Roleplaying is supposed to be a collaborate experience.

Amen! I always use simplified character sheets that focus on playability and leave out most of the math. (You need to know AP cost for Adjustment Powers, but most of the other numbers are irrelevant once play starts.) If I need to reference the mechanics in mid-session, I can always pull up the HD file for reference.
 
Yeah, that's always a challenge when introducing players that are used to D&D/Pathfinder/et.al.  A few thoughts:
One advantage of most class/level systems is that combat and noncombat abilities are segregated to an extent and don't really "compete" with each other: you go up a level and your combat stats go up by "x" and you have "y" points for skills, etc. But in Hero, every point you put into, say, languages is literally one less point you have for combat skills. That can really encourage min-maxing if the players get focused on that rather than on building three dimensional character. One way to counter that is to start with the "tell me about your character concept" discussion before anyone goes near actual mechanics; get them thinking about their character as a character first, rather than a collection of stats. Be absolutely clear that the maximums include skill levels & bonuses, not just the base, and that you will be very stingy about granting exceptions. In fact, you may want to call them "parameters" or something instead, since guidelines implies optional adherence. One trick I've seen is to ask each player "what is your character the best at?" and allow them to exceed the guidelines in that one area only. So if the character's concept is "strongest man in the room" then he's allowed a STR that maxes out or exceeds the guidelines, but he couldn't also buy his OCV or INT above the guidelines. Then if another player wants a STR above the guidelines (initially or with later XP) you can play the "I'm concerned you're going to step on Bob's Strongest Man schtick" card. I have sometimes required that PCs put a minimum number of points (typically 10) into Background Skills. I don't have to worry about this with my current group of players (Thanks guys!), but for some players it really forces them to think about their character as a person. And they don't have to worry about putting themselves at a disadvantage by "wasting" those points, because everyone has to do the same thing. Don't forget the "min" half of min-maxing: occasionally put the characters in situations where they're put at a disadvantage for having below-average abilities. You don't have to be a dick about it - in fact, you can sometimes play it for laughs to the players don't feel you're picking on them. And you don't want to overdo it, unless you really want all your PCs to trend toward the middle of the bell curve. But at least once in awhile, highlight the fact that choosing to minimize certain areas will put them at a disadvantage. Lastly, few things are more frustrating as a player than to have your combat monkey sitting on the sidelines for 2 hours watching the more well-rounded characters handle the interact-and-investigate phase. So when a player drafts an all combat PC, say "I see this game as including a fair amount of investigation and interacting with NPCs outside of combat. I'm not sure what this character will have to do during those scenes, and I don't want you to be bored. How do you see your character contributing in between fights?" The catch here is, are they playing that way because that's all they know? Or because that really is what they like to play? Part of the GM-Player contract is that you'll do your best to run a game that everyone will enjoy (including yourself of course). It may be they're used to games where points in noncombat skills are essentially wasted, in which case you need to reiterate that not all problems in your campaign will be solvable by fighting, and then reward them when they use those skills.
 
On the other hand, it may be that they really just want to play a series of combats and regard everything in between as filler. If that's the game they really want to play, trying to change their style of play can be an exercise in frustration for everyone! I point to the comic Full Frontal Nerdity, where the GM is always trying to run these thematic, role-play heavy games with lots of character interaction and drama...but his players just want to kill things and get more powerful. And after every game, he's surprised and disappointed that the players didn't play it the way he wanted them to. That's a fundamental disconnect that in real life will kill a game group quicker than anything. So have that conversation up front and find a middle ground that everyone can live with.

My biggest epiphany in teaching people to play HERO has been treating the provided character sheet simply as a building sheet and designing a sheet that hides most of the numbers not needed often in gameplay, that uses words to describe powers rather than game terms, and has some design features that tie the sheet into the genre being played (even if that was simply a decent font).
 
This is a long-standing rant of mine.  game designers spend forever thinking of the mechanics and getting the rule book right and then seem to ruch out whatever black and white set of boxes with numbers in it that will suffice to hold the details the GM requires.
 
The character sheet is the players window to the system and the game.  The character sheet is the primary way in which the game designers must hook the players with the system and genre they are peddling.  We deserve better!  
 
I would say the first sheet that put me on this loop was Justice Inc - it screamed pulp to me.  That was pre-cheap printing and PC design tools...so much could be done now.