Jump to content

Duke Bushido

HERO Member
  • Posts

    6,299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    78

Everything posted by Duke Bushido

  1. Nice to see you're still alive! We'd started to murmur things.....
  2. Hunh. I thought I was the only person who did that.
  3. That's where I went for a year or two myself. It isnt that I have any animosity towards the new editions; it's just that I have no interest in them.
  4. For what it's worth, most of my "caps" are starting caps. Players are expected to meet and eventually exceed them (if they opt to deepen skills instead of broaden them) with XP: that's what it's for. No one hoards XP (at least, not so far as I know). Story arcs and campaigns are pre-determined and designed to resolve before the Player Characters become actual deities. I don't know if that's what you're looking for, but that's how I do it. I don't do "campaign caps" in general because the campaign is designed to escalate as the Players increase their abilities, and there is a definite conclusion in mind.
  5. Good. I _hate_ that they can infect sensible people, but the fact that stupid lunatic whackos are opting to put themselves in mortal peril sits well with me. There. I said it. I hate the resources they consume, but look forward to it being temporary.
  6. For what its worth, she died in 1968 at the ripe old age of 92.
  7. You could dig really deep and resurrect the characters Archie Comics bought and cant quite make catch on.
  8. Eh- I think a middle ground can be reached where Spirits / souls continue to use the BOD stat, but rename it to something more appropriate (as they don't actually have bodies to damage). After that, when designing an attack, as part of declailring SFX, the character building the power declares if this spell /weapon /special Kung Fu attacts BODY or Spirit. That's assuming the need for either type of attack is relatively similar in the campaign, of course. Beyond that, devise an appropriate DEF (recommending EGO Defense made into a characteristic and- again, assuming roughly similar applicability, ciwted to match current defenses. This would allow the option to purchase Killing Spirit Attacks that would apply to Resistant Spirit Defense, etc. Moreover, with 6e and the equal pricing across the biard and abokition of figureds, no one suffers any undue cost burden or "bonus" for not havibg to buy BODY, etc. They are buying it, but it's "Soul" now. They atent buying PD, but they are buying "Spirit Defense," etc. For my money-again, assuming a roughly equal in-game demand for "kills flesh" and "kills spirit"- this is just the simplest way to go: everything is already in the system; you just rename a couple of things for flavor. However, it should be noted that I am a complete idiot and may have misunderstood this from the get-go. (nite: you _may_ consider soubling the cost of Spirit Defense relative to PD/ED, as a Spirit will not need to buy either. If you are in the "all points are equal" camp, anyway.)
  9. There may be more recent rules about this; I don't know. But so far as I know, the most recent rules about these things are the supplemental rules in 4e's Horror HERO. Prior to that there is a brief discussion in AC and I _think_ in the 4e rules themselves (but I am not certain on that last one) specifying both the creation of things and characters completely lacking in certain characteristics, and that spirits one-hundred percent have no BODY score. It's essentially what the Automaton "Takes No STUN" thing grew out of. Of course, 5 and 6e, I have no idea-- that may not be around anymore.
  10. Problematically, Spirits, Souls, etc-- don't actually have a BODY score. I believe the OP is looking for a way to "kill" those things that mimics the traditional damage-dealing of the in-place damage v BODY system.
  11. I am the most anti-piracy person I know. But as more and more IP owners stop sharing amongst streaming services and start theie own streaming services at premium peices, all the while making it more and more difficult to watch the tiny handful of things you are actually interested in-- I went from being able to watch anything I wanted on pretty much any not-netflix service to having to subscribe to a couole of hubdred dollars worth of different services (which I am not doing; screw 'em) to watch _exactly_ what I used to watch through one service.... Well, I am still anti-piracy, but damned if I dont understand the motivation better and better every day.
  12. It's weird. Even when I was younger, I was a "big guy," but I've never been in the sort of shape that John Cena was at the height of his career. In spite of his clear advantages over my physically and financially, I still find myself feeling incredibly sorry for him. I first noticed this in that Transformers movie he was in, but the older he gets, the more he looks like my grandmother....
  13. Honestly, all you really need to do is to come up with a mechanic and Characteristic to "heal" this Spirit Characteristic (or EGO; whichever it is that suits you). From that point on, damaging and recovering is the same as Body and Recovery. You might also consider a DEF of some sort akin to PD and ED (I use MD in my games-- essentially turning the Power "EGO Defense" into a Characteristic). These are essentially campaign-specific rules / mechanics, and for what it's worth, I enjoy them immensely as part of "selling the feel" of the game at hand. Once you have that mechanic in place, simply declare "vs Body" or "vs EGO / Spirit" as part of the SFX of the power. Don't overlook the importance of having some sort of DEF Characteristic and some sort of Recovery Characteristic for this! If you don't, then you can bet that your Players will quickly figure out the huge leg-up they can get from this option. I still use an older edition, with Primary and Figured Characteristics, and creating these sorts of new Characteristics and mechanics is something that I rather enjoy (to the point of making EGO Defense and Presence Defense actual Base-Zero Characteristics), and ultimately, it's just a lot cleaner than creating Advantages, Limitations, etc to apply to a Power. Alternatively, you could use some sort of variation of Based on ECV-- with the damage going to EGO as opposed to BODY. Your call, of course.
  14. To be fair, there is one minor advantage to the inverted Attack Roll: As the GM, one is responsible for a broad selection of actions on behalf of a large number of Characters, and the bulk of those actions (thanks to combat) are directed at the Player Characters. No one is perfect; no one is going to remember _all_ the numbers in play at any given moment. When I am GM'ing, I put the bulk of responsibility for tracking a Player Character's numbers on the Player of that Character. It seems fair: I've got to keep up with thirty of them; you can keep up with the one, I think. Every now and again, Villain #7 will roll his attack at Hero #4, and I will completely blank out on Hero #4's current DCV-- what was that last maneuver he declared? Where'd he put those Skill Levels....? Instead of stopping and asking "What's your current DCV?" and then doing a (very trivial) bit of mental math, rolling the dice, etc, I can roll the dice anyway, glance at the result and ask "what was your current DCV? Okay, he missed." Again, it's a _trivial_ bit of math, so the "advantage" of this method is extremely minor, but I cannot in good conscience say that it doesn't exist at all. It works the other way around, as well, what with Players announcing things such as "I got a four..." and all I need to remember is the current DCV for the villains in play. Again: it's still pretty minor, but it's present. Now all that being said, I don't do it-- use the inverted attack roll. No; I can't tell you why, except that we learned it one way, and we have always played it that way, and there is also an advantage in having a table full of Players of who can help the new guy because we have always done it one particular way. This, too, is a very minor advantage, and probably only applies to those groups who habitualized the original To-Hit formula, but as above, it's slightly advantageous when the planets are aligned just so.
  15. Based on that book and its sequel (101 More Uses for a Dead Cat), there are only two-hundred-and-two things a dead cat _can_ do.....
  16. Man, I love you, Derek. No; that's not sarcasm (I don't do sarcasm); that's not smarm. That's a warm compliment of the highest order. From the time you first pointed me to this board I-can't-remember-how-long-ago (and Red October before that), even during your absences, I would tell people just what a great guy you are, how enthusiastic and how helpful and friendly-- you're just a wonderful person, from everything I can tell, even though I can't actually say in any real sense of the word that I actually know you at all. Even then, I mean it when I say that I hold you in the highest regard, and have rarely missed acknowledging your help in my ending up here, and thanking you for it even when you weren't here. (Granted, from your end, I am probably just another person who never quite made a blip on the screen, which is why I have never asked you how the rabbits are doing or if they are still around: don't want to seem all creepy ). That being said, I also have to say that you are not the first person to use that argument in support of the optional to-hit roll: things akin to "this way, the Player doesn't know the opponent's DCV." That particular argument doesn't hold water if the combat runs for three or more attacks: while maneuvers change things up, and Skill Levels can be applied, after three back-and-forths, even the inexperienced Players will have a within-3 idea of the opponents DCV; if the combat goes on for three turns, they've had it figured out for some time now: the know the maneuver penalties and bonuses-- for most official sheets, they are right on the sheet. We all enjoy the refrain "the math isn't that hard" in Character construction, but it's even easier when it's "add three" or "subtract 2." Going just a bit further, it really doesn't matter if the Player _does_ know the opponent's DCV from the get-go: he can either hit him or he can't. He can allocate his own Skill Levels and pick his own maneuvers, but the dice are the randomizers that determine yes or no. There are lots of reasons to choose the optional method-- it's easier for some folks; it makes tracking hits and misses in high-participant-count combats a bit faster and easier, maybe. "It just feels better to me" or "I find it easier" are all perfectly valid reasons that do hold up-- but "the Player remains in the dark" works for just a few dice throws. After that, he either knows, or he knows enough, no matter what method you're using.
  17. I dont know hiw to rate it, but I am currently at the point of "periodically gets stuck under my seatbelt."
  18. My search-fu has grown weak-- likely from lack of use. It took me a ridiculous length of time to find this thread. At any rate, someone on Imgur has posted a lengthy series of photos of some of the enclosures in Zimbabwe, including several of the Great Enclosure. Yes; yes; I am sure you've seen pictures of this place before. _However_, only two of these photos have modern-looking people in them; the rest are completely people-free. If you're the sort that likes actual pictures as props for a location, snap them up before the poster does a house cleaning. https://imgur.com/gallery/jqMMqtw
  19. I am really not trying to raise this thread from the dead (I got a bad result from a Search that led me back here). But as I was scrolling through, I noticed this comment and laughed a bit: I have the _opposite_ problem: it's my general dislike of my work that leads to constant self-editing.
  20. It was that blonde girl with no face, wasn't it? (you're welcome )
  21. Then we are going to need about 80 more rockets.
×
×
  • Create New...