Jump to content

tesuji

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    2,023
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tesuji

  • Rank
    Double Millennial Master
  • Birthday 12/05/1961

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    IT Specialist

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Re: Dummies Guide to Rule of X for 6th Ed i dont use rox because it is simply nottrue that a high dice low accuracy attack is equivalently effective to a low dice accurate attack in many cases. miss miss miis ko is not the same as plink plink plink plink plink p,ink plink plink unless the system also sets upper and lower ranges for the dcs. Also, there are tons of circumstantial effects, some possible in control of the player, that make "accuracy" less of an issue. for example - assume a dc+ocv of 24. 20d6 plus ocv 4 is a lot better than dc 4 ocv 20 especially if in a superheroic game not using hit locations. this gets even more true is the 20 dc guy has a mp slot with a target hex aoe entangle which can drop the dcv he is shooting at to 0. I design the dirty dozen - twelve sample npc villains. usual spread is three brick, three blaster, two speedster/ma, and four exotics. I give them to the players at chargen start with guidelines for "how many phases will it take you to take them each out as well as how many phasers will it take them to each take you out. for example, for a quick combat game the numbers might be 2-5 with an average of 3 but for a longer game it might be 5-10 with an average of 8. Its ok for one or two to be out of the bounds, everyone has a good matchup or a bad matchup now and again. IMX with rox you need a lot of extra boundaries beyond the rox itself to keep the results appropriate.
  2. Re: 6E Telekinetic Strength i tend to use dc limits not ap limits. so a tk character and a brick character can get to 60 strength. the tk guy simply pays more because he has his as 90 ap tk. but he also has advantages in ranges etc. then again the brick has 30 pts to spend elsewhere.
  3. Re: moving Darkness iirc +1 advantage useable as attack was needed
  4. Re: What is a MP and what is not ? A MP exists to answer the following issue. FIREGUY has the ability to throw three different attacks using his massive firepower - a blast 12d6 eb fire, a hotter, narrower bolt 4d6 rka, OR an even wider stream 6d6 cone fire. he can throw any one of these attacks at any one time but cannot do all three at once. These are all separated by OR. Choose one. (I tend to think of them as different flavors of his basic 60 pt fire attack.) he pays X for those three attacks. Now this other fire type, firestorm, has the same three attack but he can throw them all at once. he can throw a 12d6 fire eb AND the 4d6 fire rka at the same time at the same target. He might even be able to throw the fire cone too, but i have to look up whether you can use combi9ned attack to throw aoe and single target. He pays Y for this ability. BY THE BOOK y is 180 pts, full price 60 pts for each of the powers. Thats what firestorm pays for the ability to throw all three 60 pt attacks at once or singly or in pairs as he chooses. Now it seems very obvious that fireguy should pay less than that because he is limited to only one at a time, right? he should not pay 180 like firestorm because he is only able to use 1/3 as much at any time, 60 vs 180. So thats whwere the mp comes in. He lumps the three into a 60 pt pool mp paying 60 plus 18 (6 each for three fixed slots) and so he pays 78. Fire guy pays 78 for three 60 pt attacks one at a time and firestorm pays 180 for three 60 pt attacks at the same time. that feels right to me. in practice mp work great when used this way. They let a character like a fireguy have several different flavors of attacks or a vrick to have severla different "strength tricks, for a reasonable cost since its not adding MORE POWER but adding DIFFERENT POWERS along the same lines. Where i think Mp start to have problems and need gm policing (and this is echoed to a degree in a cautionary column in 6e1) ios when you start throwing diverse powers into the pool - to 6e1 they caution about lots of non-combat powers - i caution more precisely about allowing powers in the pool that are never going to be used together anyway. For example - a mp with a 12d6 eb, a 20/20 force field and 60m flight would be fine under either my or 6e1 standards since in combat you want all three of these and so you are forcing the guy to choose between them - he suffers a drawback in exchange for the cost savings. But add in say a slot for clairvoyance and a slot for mind scan and a slot for megascale teleport and you start to run into trouble because these are usually non-combat powers and also unlikely to ever be needed at the same time... so they may start to amount to free savings for no real drawback. I am myself going to take the 6e1 advice and pay particluar attention to mp and police them fairly tightly. I will likely be reducing them to a narrow "different flavors of a given power" type of restriction. but i would not consider eliminating them. To do so will drive - thru economics of a point driven game- everyone towrds one power one attack characters. Were i to consider dropping mp seriously, i would also look at empowering the POWER SKILL - so that with a minor investment in that skill a character with ONE FIRE POWER - say 12d6 eb - he could then use the power skill to create altered effects such as the cone or the rka. Many comic character do seem to have one power but several ways to use it... and the mp or the power skill provide methods for making such much more accurate in cost to just buying them all separate.
  5. Curious as to the release date of the PDFs for HERO 6?
  6. Re: Odd Situation Haven't read the whole thread so maybe repeating some things... What genre is this? Assuming superheroes.... MISSES GO SOMEWHERE: One trick i tend to use in crowded settings is to describe what happens when the misses miss. That eye beam is dangerous in a china shop. So if the hero is just dodging and the villain keeps blazing away, what or WHO gets to take the hit. Start slow, with a couple "sound of crunching metal and glass breaking followed by car alarms" and then maybe move into "followed by a scream". A HERO tries to stop the villain, not to survive him at the expense of everything else. ANECDOTE: Once had Pulsar in a museum trying to kill people and superhero interposed himself between Pulsar and kids. Then pulsat\r grinned and openned up with a wild full auto plasma busrt. First time i ever had a PC dive for cover into full autofire to prevent the misses from striking the kids. :-) WHATS MY MOTIVATION?: Well, the villain is there for what? If the hero isn't attacking and stopping him, have an intelligent villain get down to business and do his stuff and then go home. A common staple of comics is when the hero cannot stop the villain by beating on him but CAN thwart the villains plan by grabbing the whatnot or doodad he was after. CLEVER VILLAIN TRICKS: Spreading an attack gives the villain bonuses to hit and many attacks can be spread in 5er not just EBs. Grabbing large objects as clus or projectiles makes them AOE and thus easy to hit dodgey guys with. Thrown hostages the hero will try and catch takes the hero from dodge mode to grab mode which is a big dcv change in the villain's favor. Finally, after the fight, revisit your character design to see if you have a good villain to hero matchup. Maybe the player has a point and maybe also your villain is too inaccurate for this hero to play as a good challenge. learn from the event and something good comes of it. Above all remember, this isn't YOU fighting or competing with the PLAYER but you running a scene in which this character is challenged and the player had a good time.
  7. Re: Accumulating points the basic problem is not cumulative... it reduces the power to "out of combat use" due to the many different shots you have to take. its not "wrong" to have a non-combat power be a lott less costwise than the combat effective version. consider by comparison the difference between 12d6 telepathic mind control and a 2d6 cumulative one... one can get you enemies stopped in a fight and the other can let you slowly work people's mind's over out of combat. the basic issue with the build as presented is the long existing multipower skew... where you put two powers that have no reason to ever be used together and save bunches over them being in a multipower because "they cannot be used together". is it worse than having a magic spells MP with you firebolt, then adding a clairvoyance, a desolid ghost form, and an extra dimensional travel? i do concur that imo it would have been more consistent to have cumulative make an instant effect work like adjustment powers, able to accumulate up to max dice and then buy +2 per +1 ap. but then, why expect such?
  8. Re: EGO as DEX in Combat Order There is an obvious flaw in this reasoning. Right now with what they both do, ego and dex cost the same. But they do different things. If you take "when do i move" from Dex and move it to EGO, you have lessened the value of dex and raised the value of EGO. Take a similar line of reasoning and use INT and PRE. Both cost 1 cp each. if i decide as my house rule "smart people are harder to impress" and so i decide to allow INt to be used against presence attacks, then i can "justify it" by pointing out that the guy with 23 int for +13 cp is just as resistant as the guy with Pre 23 for the same cost. but what i have really just done is made high int better. Now, if one thinks "INT is too expensive compared to PRE" this is likely a ood idea. But if one thinks they were balanced before... not so good. or put another way, Just because Int and str cost the same, doesn't mean ts Ok for me to have strength determine my per rolls or skill bonuses for computers. All that said, I personally dont see a problem with having a mentalist who uses mental powers for his movement, and in having these scores reflect his ego instead of his dex, but IMo the way to represent this is by buying the traits with the right SFX. If i have Ego 23 and Dex 14 and I want to have CV based off my "ego score" i buy either Cv levels or even buy "more dex" with SFX of "ego based reactions. if i want my initiative order for all things including moves to reflect my ego 23 not my dex 13, i buy lightning reflexes with the appropriate SFX. the inconsistency in the rules, IMO, comes from approaching the "when do i go" with the "use ego for init for free for mental powers." This leads, IMO, to very honest and worthy questions of "what else can i get ego based for free?" or put another way "how many other functions of dexterity can i swipe and add to EGO for free?" had the sentence under Mental combat been to use mental powers on your ego, not your dex, buy lightning reflexes as mental rflexes" this wouldn't be a question or series of questions. ymmv...
  9. Re: EGO as DEX in Combat Order If your movement and your reaction speed or initiative are all based on EGO, not Dexterity, shouldn't then your DCV be figured off of EGO instead of Dexterity. Wouldn't the TK-Ladd mentioned above need to have his DCV based off EGO/3? Ego rolls for Dive for cover? Agility skills based off EGO? etc...
  10. Re: Thoughts on Autofire - what am I Missing? First key... when simulating, don't fret over damage caps. Take a semi-auto rifle, remove the stop and turn it autofire and it doesn't suddenly do less damage per bullet that hits. The world doesn't have Ap limits that make the gun do less damage if its autofire. Second kep, even in your example, the guy would take stun damage from each bullet. So even thoug they just wear the heck out of his armor vest and do no body, the rounds will do plenty of stun and Ko his bad self. but, your best bet is to refigure the armor and gun values to suit your setting. if the bullets do bodydamage then chose a damage value and armor value that makes this likely to occur, even if that means its different from the HERO rulebook generic use guns and armor. change HERo to fit your setting, not the other way 'round. but in general, you are right.
  11. Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule Ok heres a question, who do you think falls within the category of "only thinking about them for damaging attacks"??? thats certainly the issue most in discussion in this thread, but i think its a matter of "this is where we are seeing a problem, or a potential one." For us in 4e, it was "obvious", and partly from the MP rules of all places, that you could build 10d6 Eb with 3d6 Flash as a single power and throw it as a single power with one attack rolls and so forth. It also went along with Eb+drain and so forth. but, those were noted as part of the same power, sometimes by linked or sometimes by sharing the same Ec/MP slot. Also, typically, the Gm would judge balance for these by adding DCs, and the fact that the tag-on power was usually against special defense made this not grossly wrong. A 10d6 eb 1d6 drain would count as much the same as 12 dcs unless it was a higher than most PowD game. it was never "i have these two totally separate powers listed on my sheet and the Gm better catch that i can fire both simultaneously." I think thats part of why the 5e "non-change" caught so many people off guard. But i really cannot see the number of people who only think of MPAs as stacking straight damage attacks instead of normal attack+oddball attack as that much of a number as to be relevent.
  12. Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule My impression is a little different. My impression is its one of surprise and "sudden" realization that "this doesn't work anymore like it used to." In the old days, before anyone knew that MPA was "the way it was supposed to be" a primary balancing tool among Gms was to look at "DAMAGE DONE" and the most direct way was DCs. If you kept your main attacks within a certain Dc range, you had handled many balance issues. Its an easy look to see if "normal defense" shots stays within 10-15 DCs and "abnornal defense" shots stays within 5-7 Dcs. Oddball ways around this like combat levels applying to "sweep", "rapid fire", "move thrus" and such as spotlights which draw these to the attention of the GM, so he knows to look at things other than the base dc for the attack. So would be linked power combos. But, "suddenly" in 5e, the DCs don't tell you the story as much. A guy can have three 12 dc attacks abd be fine or be woefully overgunned if he can MPA them all. Moreover, there are not "watch out, here's trouble" tags like "+ 6 CSLs with imbalancing maneuvers i am trying to slip thru." When i saw MPAs, i saw right away that this meant i needed to change my balance assessments a bit. i also saw how, for many Gms, this might be more of a shock. At least with sweep rapid fire, its a trade off. you cut your DCV in half to say triple tap the enemy. Your reduced DCV now leabes you just as vulnerable to the same tactic, they can shoot you rapid fire and their OCV penalties still leaves them with a fine shot at your 1/2 DCV bad self. As for "the way it always was" and linked and what not, they could just as easily have made it... +1/4 if powers can be fired together as one attack +0 if powers can be used separately but not at the same time. -1/4 to -1/2 if they must be used at the same time you do not need FREE MPAs to have linked be a disad.
  13. Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule or 16c each for no reduction in attack or a 21 pts 200 end 1 rec end reserve for not much overall. END usage IMX is only an issue IF the character was deliberately built to highlight that achilles heel.
  14. Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule Sweep and Rapid Fire still have DCV listed as x1/2 on pg 384 Under twf on pg 73, it depends on whether the campaign allows RF/Sweep normally . if the campaign doesn't allow RF/Sweep, then TWf gives the character the ability to use them. if the campaign does allow anyone to use RF/Sweep, then characters with TWF get -2 DCV instead of x1/2, but maybe only -1 DCV if their DCV is so low normally that the -2 is no better than x1/2.
  15. Re: Cost of strength vs. benefit if this conclusion is based on (hinges on) gary's statement about EBs built into a framework compared to strength, then in campaigns where those frameworks are less common and less an automatic thing (such as IMX heroic level games) then the conclusion that strength is not too cheap or too powerful would not necessarily stand up. Which of course brings us full circle back to post 1... where it was said:
×
×
  • Create New...