Duke Bushido

Was that the one where he was voiced by Hoss Delgato from Billy and Mandy? All that show ever did was make me really miss Hoss Delgato from Billy and Mandy.....

Dude! I _love_ ECs! They got a bad wrap over the years as being super-gimme (and honestly, in 4e, they may have; I really don't remember as I haven't done much in 4e save Sci-Fi and Western over the years. Not a lot of EC opportunities there), but if you really pay attention the costing and the rules on minimums, overflows, etc-- it works out that you are not getting the same discount you could get with a multipower, but you get a broader utility. Frankly, that seems reasonable to me.

Dude: Seaplanes. That is all. Though I have a soft spot for the particular PT Cruiser in your link. Chevy: Let's make an electric Corvette! Ford: Let's make an Electric family car, and maybe look at an electric Mustang! Chrysler: Let's stick a rocket engine in a micro van! (the engine that van was originally equipped with; not the hellcat conversion the current owner did) There is little doubt that Iococa's alleged cocaine parties are still a thing at Chrysler.....

It has. I recall noting the change when my original GM got the 4e book. None of us liked it, simply because it kind of flew in the face of separating SFX from mechanics: if you already have a mechanic for doing damage at range, then you use that mechanic; you don't need to create a new mechanic that does that thing _plus_ some other thing. Disclaimer: I don't mean this to be any kind of malicious, hateful, insulting, snide, purist or anything else: it is stating a personal opinion. Like all opinions, it's based on perceived facts, but filtered through personal experience and emotion. That being said: It's why I don't like the Long editions. While on the one hand there is splitting out some things that I agree-- one mechanic should do one thing, period-- but then turns around and folds different things together: the exact opposite thing. Like "Growth Momentum" (used only as a well-discussed, and therefore well-known, example; as before: no malice.) I recognize that a lot of folks believe that a lot of problems were resolved (and the changes to Characteristics in 6e really did fix a lot of problems; even a curmudgeon like me can see that), the end result-- again, _in my opinion_, period-- is that the mechanics problems ultimately weren't solved; they were just rearranged and shuffled. Second disclaimer: I don't say that to start a discussion about the changes; that's just going to lead to an argument, hurt feelings, etc. Right now, I'm the only guy at risk because I'm the only guy who has posted an unpopular opinion. As a person who has endured a suspension or two, I highly encourage anyone thinking about turning this into a discussion to re-think it until it doesn't seem like a good idea anymore. I said it for one purpose: to explain this next statement: I really think that some of the minor changes in 4e and the increasingly larger ones in the subsequent editions have made learning the system more difficult for the new player simply by maintaining the idea of the SFX / mechanics split while increasingly blurring the lines between what is a mechanic and what is a special effect. I selected Growth Momentum simply because this idea being folded into part of Growth or Shrinking _mandates_ a special effect whereby a Character grows-- physically goes through a process of increasing enlargement, and does so at such a rate as to inflict physical damage caused by the kinetic speed imparted to his outer surface. Yes: You can take a Limitation: No Growth Momentum, which removes this aspect. However, it doesn't change the fact that there is a default SFX assigned to this power as of 5e. The power is Growth; the mechanic is "becomes bigger," and there are a few Characteristics necessary to support the increased size, etc. I have had four Growth characters over the years (I tend to go all-in on Growth, making those characters grossly overpowered, if only briefly, so I don't do them often). None of them have had this effect. Tree was a plant / man (actually an homage to the Thing, but everyone assumed "Swamp Thing" because "Tree." His Growth power was literally walking into a tree. He would merge with it and it would form itself to a larger version of him. He shrank back down the same way: he would re-root the tree (or trees) he was bonded with, then simply walk back out of the last one. Fakir was a mystic (whose secret ID was a con-man fake mystic at an amusement park. Yeah; for some reason, I thought that was a great idea thirty-odd years ago). His Growth was summoning an astral version of himself-- essentially his spiritual strength made physical, a man inside, for lack of a better word, a gigantic "suit of armor" made entirely of his aura. To un-Grow (sorry), he simply dispelled the the physical aspect of his aura. Fracture was a multi-dimensional alien being whose Growth was simply unfolding himself-- twisting and turning those aspects of himself that were in higher dimensions until they were three dimensional, which caused them to fold out of his many dimensional creases (looking at him was like looking into a mirror with several cracks: there was a guy there, but none of his bits fit together just right, and when he moved, people got queasy). He didn't have any way to grow fist-first; he didn't even get bigger per se; he just shifted more of himself to the place it was needed. Feral (yes: the one from the youth campaign: the kids started the game with old characters from a campaign in the 80s) has Growth, but the SFX there is becoming a large animal. It's not really American Werewolf in London style, bones cracking and stretching, etc, so much as he rushes forward, becoming briefly amorphous and re-solidifying in the chose shape. I had a Shrinking character once, way back when. He had the "Growth Momentum" punch. It was bought as extra dice of damage and labeled "Grow-Up Punch." It wasn't just assumed to be folded into Growth or Shrinking because that would imply a specific Special Effect as being the "acceptable" or "Desirable" effect over all others, and that just flew in the face of SFX =/= mechanic; mechanic =/= SFX. I am terribly sorry..... I no longer know where I was going with this-- the flood of memories, you see. Sorry about that. 😕 At any rate, it's something I've wanted to get off of my chest since 4e..... Thank you for your patience. :oops:

Dean has good points, but I tend to approach it from the Scott angle: Magic is another tool. Why did we develop tools? Start there. Fiert for hunting, most likely, then to defend against others of our ilk who were armed with hunting tools. Then to help provide safety and security. Eventually to restore and then after to maintain health, and then as our societies became larger and more complex, to preserve food, increase protection, and enhance prosperity. We probably start with wards of protection and warp those into curses for our enemies. As everything else, they get more complex as time goes by. But we still have to take care of ourselves. To that end: Snare: magical means of catching tasty game. Fire: means of starting fires to cook game, stay warm, and frighten large animals Bait: magical way to draw game towards capture. Spear: for taking game on the hoof. Stealth spells of various stripe, all for hunting originally, now for whatever needs be. Barriers: defend against weather, large predators, and other folks with spears (or magic). Dowsing: locating water where there seems to be none. Spring: summoning water from dowsed sources without all the digging. Eventually it can grow to spells for creating water seemingly from thin air. Sometime in the middle,of all this, we will have devised spells,to increase the chance of rain or to chase excessive rains away. Heal self. Starts simple and gets better and more powerful as we gain the luxury of study time. Heal others. Same as above. Various new things that could be used as attacks come along, leading to a need to see them coming: Detect magic. Once we can detect things (water, magic). Why shouldn't we look for the good stuff? Detect precious items and materials, potential mates, etc. Now we are very social, having become a thousand tribes, and we still either want to breed or at least spy on potential spear wielders, so we get translation spells, etc. As we begin to travel, ways to preserve and transport sufficient food is reasonable- magic for that. Ways to keep our wagons rolling, our mules strong, and our ships afloat would really come into their own, as would ways to do the opposite for our rivals (because humans are like that). Ultimately, its like Scott said: magic is a tool. If it is something that has always been available, it makes sense that the ways it was used developed along similar lines.

Any time; the old stuff is really the only place I _can_ help, rules-wise, Juat for kicks, though: is it not that way any longer? Dont get me wrong: I have always allowed TK to be built as X STR: Ranged, which alowed essentially doing anything you normally xould do with X STR, but at Range. anyway, does 6e build an EB into TK the way 5e built a ln Hth attack into size powers?

It's the rule. If you want to punch someone, that is not TK. That is a PD Energy Blast. "Telekinetic punch" is the SFX for the blast.

What the hell, Activision?! You used to be _cool_.....! Not that I doubted you, but I had to check a couple of other sources. I haven't trusted PC gamer since their part in spreading the Polybius myth....

I've enjoyed this thread immensely, but I have to say-- cowboys, trenchcoats, mobsters in pinstripes and fedoras.... Nothing-- and I mean _nothing_ _screams_ pulp adventure like a Cord:

I have no one to add. I just want to thank everyone who contributed to this for starting me down a wikipedia rabbit hole that took _days_ to get out of. Thanks. Heaps.

Nah; room with me. The padding in my room tastes _way_ better than the padding in my last room.

I am not being flippant when I say "them's the breaks;" I promise you I'm not. That's the exact same real-world predicament we face when we choose to run around a corner, or walk through a shopping center with our eyes glued to a cellphone screen (Man... I _love_ those security cam videos... ) The key is in what Derrick said already: he didn't say "your movement distance," but your movement _speed_. You determine your movement speed by determining how many hexes you are going to _attempt_ to move in this action (Phase or Half-Phase). You will be traveling at a speed sufficient to carry you the exact number of hexes you wish to travel in the exact amount of time you wish to get there, assuming both are within your limits. While the case can be made that Half Moves should be considered half-speed because you will only move that distance the entire Phase, it doesn't work that way because, while the System doesn't _mandate_ that you must move, then stop, then take your second Half-Phase (after all, you can declare a Half Move _while_ straffing the room on your way through, right?), it _does_ model it that way when you put figures on maps, so to speak. Because of that, the distance you have opted to move is your Movement Speed. Yes; it is also your Movement Distance, but because we know exactly how long it is going to take you to move that distance, it is also your actual speed, since it is the rate you will have to travel to move the distance you have announced in the time required (your Phase). That speed is your speed, even if something goes wrong. If you opt to make a 20" dash around a corner just 6" away, only to find that as you round the bend, you have run face-first into a brick wall hidden behind the lovely details of the facade, well your movement speed is still 20". In this case, it determines how badly you hurt face when you roll for damage. A Character in the game need not see his entire path: if I decide to ride to the grocery store on the edge of my neighborhood, I am doing it knowing that there are a number of twists and turns I have to follow, and the only part of the path I can see when I leave are my driveway in my rearview mirror. That's why I declare a "movement speed" for that Phase that will only take me to the end of the driveway, where I can check for traffic, stray dogs, or whatever. I still _totally_ have the option to back down the driveway at 35 mph, make a hard reversed right into the street before beginning my deceleration and stop, throw it in first and floor it to eighty or so, ignore the stop sign and blindly slide around the first hard right--- If I shoot off the side of that curve and hit a tree, we can all accept that I was running 85. If I miraculously don't slide off the road at that hard right and plow dead on into a garbage truck-- well, my motorcycle is _going_ to stop, ending my movement _way_ before I planned when I decided my movement speed, but that speed is still 85 mph; I just don't get the distance I was planning on, and a lot of damage I wasn't planning on. As for your other question: do I need to make one or two 60-degree turns before I can be considered to be at 90 degrees to my original trajectory? (I am not putting words in your mouth; I am rephrasing for clarity . ) Per the rules, you turn 60 degrees at a time. That hard limit is set by examples of Turn Mode and Turning given in the rules. What is not even mentioned is a minimum required Turn (unless this has changed for 6e, of course). Because of this, and because it fits into the general sensibilities of the HERO System-- three levels of growth mean that you can be "up to this big," but you don't have to be _all_ of that big, for example. Even in the case of movement: if you have 60" of running, you can run _up to_ 60", but you can certainly run slower if you want-- At any rate, I tend to rule that you must enter your second turn before you can be considered to be moving at 90 degrees to your original path. There is a corollary to this: if you are pulling a 180 or an Immelmann or a Split S or whatever and change your mind-- you have entered into your second turn and decide "you know what? I am going to head in this direction for a few hexes-- even if you have _not_ outrun your turn mode-mandated minimum inches, you will have to make two Turns again: your first one is free (as always), and you will have to travel your mandated speed-based minimum to enter your second turn and finish the 90 degree maneuver. Why do I do this? Why do I do it even when you change you mind right after you entered your second turn? Because the modeling -- the figures, the maps, the minimum inches, the 60 degree turns are only broken up so that they can be represented on paper at speeds relative to the speeds and actions of other things going on in the scene. On paper, it's turn-straight-turn-straight-turn, but this is _representing_ a continuous, smooth arc. Once you declare that you have left that arc-- "I think I'm just going to straighten out here," you have announced that you have completed your maneuver and are now moving straight, even if it looks identical on paper. You will have to begin another maneuver to get back to your original plan. But that's just me; I have wargaming roots, as does the mapping system used in the HERO System. My wargaming roots don't run as deeply or as strongly as Scott's or likely many others on this board, but they run deeply enough that if you declare that you have completed or broken a maneuver, then that is what has happened. Other GMs may rule completely differently or allow "backsies" or whatever. Maybe they require you to keep your finger on your pawn or something; I don't know. I do know that they aren't wrong, either: it's just a decision regarding how you are going to handle modeling and how attentive you want your players to be when they make decisions. It's all a bit long winded, but I was trying to be as clear as possible, with an example or two. I hope something in there helped

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. I don't really have a lot of hate for anyone, personally (before anyone jumps to that conclusion. _Again_. ) Still, it bears pointing out. I do have a serious mocking disdain for antivax people, as do many others in my personal circle. It doesn't change the fact that we are surrounded by them daily, though, because those two facts are not mutually exclusive.

Almost forgot-- but I suppose it's self-evident, really, that a Split-S is the same thing, reversed: roll upside down, then pull up on the stick to reverse direction and level out below your original altitude.

The Immelmann turn is several turns, actually, and a temporary drop in forward momentum. The first turn is not left or right, but _up_. As Derek pointed out, this one's free. The second turn is up again. The third turn completes the pattern: you turn up. You have now "turned" three hex faces, but in a direction that is only available to you because you are in the air. You will be upside down, of course, but you have effectively done a 180. Your GM (unless that's you) will have to determine if rolling back over counts against adjusting your facing or if it is in fact another turn of a different sort (note: I am not familiar with 6e; it may well that barrel rolls are now covered under the rules; if so, then do that). Regarding the tightness of the "turn": The machine or its pilot may have special "immelmann turn" Skill levels. Technically, you can allow a drop in forward momentum after the first turn-- actually, you can drop it before your first turn, if you want-- which will drop your inches / Phase, reducing your turn mode. You can continue to drop your speed (up to whatever your max decel happens to be), tightening the turn more. Typically, when mapping dog fight combat (man I hate doing that-- oh: we are playing space ships; not biplanes. The greater speeds, etc.... Kind of a pain), my players figure out rather quickly how much they can pick up with a burst of speed coming _out_ of the final turn, and drop their speed that much prior to the first turn. It's an awkward conservation of motion, but if you're okay with coming out of the flip slower than you went into it, keep dropping speed every chance you get.

From what little I have been given to understand, he asked his government for 500 million eurof or something or other last year or so, then found a billion under his sofa cushions later.

Who needs Goodman? We've got a perfectly good Hugh.

I think for our first ever fantasy campaign using the Champions rules (it would be _years_ before we could find a copy of Fantasy HERO in the wild), we use the Volturnus map for the first Star Frontiers module....

I have collected Champions-compatible maps for years; and I thank you for these, Sir. There is a constant repeating issue with Champions-compatible floor plans, though. Maybe-- just maybe-- I have been spoiled by the book of Star Trek ship plans I had when I was younger, but I can't help but notice that there are _hundreds_ --if not _thousands_!-- of people living in superhero universes, all going about their daily lives, forever, with absolutely no bathrooms at all, period. (seriously: I think the best one I saw featured a three-story, twelve-or-so bedroom mansion with _one_ bathroom listed on the entire floor plan. Yikes!)

I can think of no more fitting punishment than letting you two talk to each other.

For anyone wondering, it's an hour and forty-eight minutes long. Our own Scott Ruggels is in it, but he is forever hidden behind the drop-down list of those participating via remote call, denying us all the beauty of his world-traveler hair. I also learned that he is, apparently the fastest man in the world with a Sharpie. Neat!

I have to admit, where I doing something pulpish, and in possession of a time machine, I think I'd spend every nickel I had on Walter Malino..... Sorry for the delay; I was googling up some examples of his work. Found a nice selection here: https://designyoutrust.com/2018/05/the-supercharged-art-of-walter-molino/ Such an incredible amount of energy in everything he did.....

Wow. First time I've seen Derrick's image. My wife pointed at him and elbowed me: "Look! I know where your hair went!" The she looked a bit harder. "Your youth, too!" It's also quite a relief, for some reason, to find out that the character on the cover of the first two editions was absolutely no one; we can stop looking. Great video, though! So much information; so much fun. Thank you for this.

Thanks to both of you. Clearly 36 hours without sleep is not good for my memory.

I know this, but I can't bring it to the forefront of my mind. Can anyone recall where Damage Shield first showed up? Yeah; it seems an odd thing to be bugged about, but I'm working on something and not being able to remember it or find it (and man, that was a _lot_ of looking....) is driving me nuts. Thanks to anyone who can help.