tesuji

Re: Omcv 1? here is perhaps ur core difference. to me, hero isn't a game at all. its a game building toolkit. tere is no inherent similarity between my game, the campaign on thursday, and your game, and my other game, the one o saturdays, even if they all use hero. the value for "only vs magic" WILL BE VERY LIKELY different between my fantasy game as my supers game as my shadowrun game - even though magic exists in all three. thats why i stick to the principles, and assess frequency and severity with all eyes open and no blinders on as best i can. were i to instead say "well only vsmagic is supposed to be at -1/4 so..." regardless of the actual game i am playing then i am letting the syswtem run the game, not using the system to reflect the game. to be universal the system has t be able to run a wide variety of genres, not run them the same. from one game to the next from one genre to the next, the value for "only vs magic" should vary based on the frequencies commonly encountered in that genre. to insist the values remain neutral from one game to the next is to homogenize the genre, to homogenize the source, which is not imo what a universal system, a good one, does. absolutely and get this - they both may be right for their own games. there is nothing wrong with that. the problems occur when one assings a value and then has the value prove wrong. it is just as bad to stick with "book value" when thats not appropriate to the campaign as to assign your own if they both prove wrong. so rather tha assign a cost appropriate to the campaign actualities ou will alter the campaign actualities so you can keep the book value. that is imo letting the system use you. its like deciding to put a 1/8 inch screw in the 1/4 inch hole because you dont want to have to put down the smaller screw and get the right sized one. i have no problem with treating hero as a toolkit and that means not just limiting my games to ones which meet its defaults but bending folding spindling and doing whatever it takes to make system and toolkit reflect my game. each hero powered game is unique in my experience.

Re: Omcv 1? sean you seem to be operating on the assumptopn that while i DO adjust the cost of the comp for the lessened frequency i then charge an inappropriate value for the compensatory sense? "doubly weakened" is only true if my costs are wrong when compared to effect seen in game. sean this is a red herring. ANYTIME a new character is added, for many different reasons the addition has to be evaluated and problems looked at. easiest example is adding a total code vs killer to casual killers. the interactions between those traits create many ptential problems which have to be assessed. it is NOT unfair to charge a character for abilities based on their impact and severity. If circumstances change and those impacts and severity change then the costs might also. it is equally unfair but to everyone else to allow a guy to keep saving -2 lim on "only in strong mag fields now that strong mags fields are common, for instance. i do not see charging a character based on frequency of utility and impact as sticking anyone. i think thats a key difference between us. sean, i certainly dont claim inflibility, but if i am supposed to ignore whether or not someone has fire powers when assessing the value of "only works on fire powers" then you have gone just as far into the land of folly on your side. there is no single magic formula that works every time absolutely but what matters is the practice and consistency. if i say "i will not count "your other powers" when assessing freq and severity for lims and comps and values in general, then i feel i have lost a critical element practically any meaningful criteria on which to assign cost. i may not be able to fine tune this down to the "what impact does dex have on strength" and thats true, but going as far as you suggest the other way is imo too crippling. i cannot stick my hand in shower water and get the temp to the single degree but i can tell if its warm or hot or cold... and thats better than just jumping right in blind. imo. ymmv etc...

Re: Omcv 1? FWIW why isn;t this just sfx? why isn't "instead of sight i have flugazle awareness which in all ways exactly mimics normal sight" not an issue of points at all and not just sfx? do i have to sellback running and rebuy running because my character is a robot with treads vs legs? so my way of handling blind but exactly countered would be to charge you exactly 0 cp for the new sense and call it sfx. now if there are real issues making this not the exact mimic you describe then they get a comp for the problems and pay for the advantages the sense gives.

Re: Omcv 1? teleport flight - using 5e ,ath, simply because i am too lazy to double check 6e movement costs thats 20 inche so buying teleport cost an additional 8 or so points, turning the flight into a flight and teleport multipower. see even another example where cost is not an absolute, where the system recognizes the difference between treating powers independently and not. a character can only use so much movement at one time, even though he may have 3-4 or more types of movement so the system doesn't cost it the same... having two 40m movement powers is not as effective as having one 80m one and so you can reduce the cost. blind for compensating sense - not full price. look thats as simple as the core mechanics - frequency and severity. if i am blind with no compensating sense, i will have more frequent problems. thats worth more than if i have say targetting hearing... if for no other reason than sometimes i will not be as adversely impacted. less frequency and less severity means less points. but the basic idea is this - if i have to pretend the character's traits dont affect the frequency and severity of other traits, then i have very little to go on for estimating frequency and severity in a consistent manner. if i have to tell one guy his "only vs fire powers" aid gets treated the same value as another character's, when one of them actually has fire powers and the other one doesn't, then i sound pretty silly telling them "yeah but i have to ignore the effects those fire powers would have on the frequency because he bought them. so oto me the premise fails at the start. we disagree, for sure.

Re: Independent limitation in 6E Well i have also seen the reverse in play. Ran a fantasy game once using FHero. In it the gang encounted a mysterious vault with some mcguffin they wanted surrounded by a "life draining field". it was made clear by legend that those violating the tomb suffered for the rest of their life from weakness and sickness etc. So the first guy started into the effect and lost some con and body and end etc. When he realized this was not going to be resolved quickly he got out. the impact was there and most of the people started to try and firue a way to beat the trap. Except one guy said no problem and went in and took his time and got the stuff out losing a butload of con and body and end. Everyone was shocked at how cavalierly he did so. "hey its not problem, i just get the points back to spend anyway." that brought the game to a halt as i explined his character wouldn't be recovering soon and that lost points were lost points. he did not just get to respend the points - on replacement stats or elsewhere. he was not pleased but it really explained the disconnect between him and everyone else. They saw the trap as a loss - he saw it as "i get to respend"

Re: Omcv 1? we clearly disagree on this.. everything is relative. another example value for 10d6 Eb "only in high radiation areas for a normal pc and for one who also has force field with side effects "high radiation" the former might be only worth 25 or down to 17 cp depending on the frequency while the latter might well be worth 35-40 since he basically carries his radiation as side effect. the value of something is intrinsically linked to its value in the game, the costs are not magical absolutely.

Re: Omcv 1? is anyone saying "make them keep it? I for one am saying allow the sellback, let them be omcv 1, but only give them points for the sellback if it is an actual loss in effectiveness. Take a typical brick with omcv 3 take an equivalent brick with OMCV 1 and +6 strength are they going to be seen as "equivalent"? if not then the sellback has not helped your game. Would you allow the same value for complication "no legs" for a character with flight and a character without flight? the rulebook iirc recommends against doing so. if not then why would you allow the same payback for "selling back omcv" for a character with powers that use omcv as you would for one without any such abilities? basic hero principle -you pay for and get paid for IMPACT. if it doesn't matter - it aint worth points, and that rule shouldn't be tossed out the window when we are talking sell back any more than if we were talking KS lithuanian poets or "no legs flying". imo of course. if it matters then its points but if it doesn't matter it aint points - for good and for ill. cuts both ways. in 6e right?

Re: Surely You're Joking, Mr Long.

Re: Surely You're Joking, Mr Long. i am not sure where you are being insulted.

Re: Surely You're Joking, Mr Long. I dont think anything is THE anything. They have defined ego as the default. if your sfx require some other stats be used, you can apply lim or adv if necessary. EGo however is the default the baseline. Nothing more. a low ego high power summon IS a trade off vs a lower power but high ego summon. The former has more crunch but requires more work from you and rarely gives you any extras. The latter is more reliable when acting in your stead and requires less effort but is also more prone to do his own thing. The former you just order. the second you work with. If in your game you dont feel you as gm can play off these differences adequately, then you should feel free to change the mechanics to match more accurately how you will play it.

Re: Omcv 1? Actually for me this is why i am worrying about it. Now at the start understand that my ruling which wont allow points back unless there is a clear detriment that will occur at least equal to rare solves the issue entirely. But here is why I will go that route instead of saying "its just six points who cares?" A newbie player has plenty of hurdles to be "on par" with similar pcs built by experienced players. this is a high learning curve game system where novice vs expert isn't really an even matchup or even close. The experienced guys stuff will have better synergy and better "efficiency" as well as basic system tactics on his side. I dont want to make that hurdle any higher. A novice wont be thinking "can i seel back mental stuff" the same way a veteran might. So i am faced with one of two approaches. say "its only six pts" and let them all do it AND tell the novices to be sure and consider it. or "dont give nay more pts than its worth - 0 - and move on knowing none will bother. The second option produces slightly simpler chargen. so i go with the simpler, more novice friendly approach to the issue.

Re: Surely You're Joking, Mr Long. also keep in kind these numbers have some actual meaning. As gm a golem with low ego would have extremely little ability to make choices, so whenever anything occurs that requires deciwsionmaking, anything beyond "doing exactly what you sai and no more" the golem would be rather hindered. on the other hand when the willful imp did decide to act on your behalf his decision making would be swift and well decisive. EGO in summoned beings is not just a detriment, or should not be played as such by a Gm playing "fair" since he is requiring the character pony up points to get the higher ego. if in your game ego for summons is soley a negative trait, or mostly a negative trait, you should consider not counting it as positive points, p ossibly even costingit as "complications".

Re: Omcv 1? i allow pcs to selll back anything but they only get actual points back if they show both a reasonable rationale for it AND the penalties in play will easily play a role at least with frequency equal to rare or better. this is along the same principles as not giving points or full points for no legs if they can fly. so a brick with omcv 1 is fine but it costs the same as omcv 3.

Re: Independent limitation in 6E yeah the mechanical difference between independent and focus was that when your focus got gone or broken you REPLACED IT FREE no more points needed, but with an INDEPENDENT item you had to respend the points. I always described independent as "you are renting points" in that at the beginning you had an edge in points since it was so much for so cheap but eventually you will lose the item and permanently lose the points. As such pcs rarely used it in my games. I did however employ it for "items you cannot replace" like alien tech that you dont have manuals for etc. Still i used it rarely. the disagreements often came in terms of people who wanted to use the "special quest" options to effectiveley make independent meaningless. Instead of just "replacing my focus in my lab" the wanted independent to "give me a special quest after which i get my item back" and save me points too. for -2? not hardly. Personally my approach would have been to define some dfefault "it takes this long and this effort" parameters for standard focus replacement and then have some time chart adjustment for "takes longer" for replacement. then something like "takes a month of special rituals in the shadow of mount doom" to replace the focus just becames as calculable as "go to the local gun shp" etc.

Re: 6th Edition Question: New Powers? the example powers used for cumulative are dispel and mental powers. both of these are pretty much "instant" kind of effect, roll once and take result, not cumulative at all to begin with.

Re: 6th Edition Question: New Powers?

Re: 6th Edition Question: New Powers? so as we wait patiently for the pdfs to become available online somewhere, what were the significant changes to adjustment powers?

Re: Slowing down Character advancement would you think this even in a game where your Gm and you were on the same page about the campaigns appropriate guidelines and concepts? IE one in which you did get enough points at start to "hae the character you want" instead oe being forced to play a sub-par character and work towards the thing you wanted to play? how much dissatisfaction is actual boredom at not changing enough vs dissatisfaction brought on by wanting to play, for instance, a 500 pt character envisioned concept for a 350 pt game?

Re: PI or Not? since NND is an advantage, and one which already has a built in kill switch as part of its cost, i have very little problem with it providing some small synergistic benefits. This is a far cry from "i take -0" providing some small synergistic benefits.

Re: PI or Not?

Re: PI or Not? Well the core rules have examples of limitations which do indeed give good benefits - charges is the most obvious example. But for my money, for custom lims, I prefer for lims to be lims and advantages to be advantages and not to have a single element modifer that goes both ways. there is a very nasty opening there when you start allowing custom lims to grant capabilities that are not purchased, advantageous ones. As for the iguana example, this has two aspects which put it into a differnt category for me. First there is a huge difference between rendering yourself immune and having others be immune. having yourself immune is going to come up more often in all likelihood and is always desirable. After mind controlling from Professor Lizard, you might want to have them affected by your aoe. In other words, as Gm i can make "the iguanas are safe" an actual problem for you, a limiting factor now and again, whereas it has to be a very contrived example for me to make "you cannot hurt yourself" a problem worthy of the term "limitation". Thats why PI is an advantage all its own. Second, you raise a very noticeable issue far broader in scope than PI - what does adding new characters do to existing characters scores - particularly if those scores have expected frequencies. This is no different than "power only works when strong mag fields are present" powers scored at VERY CHEAP but then a character with SFX strong magnetic joins. What do we do? Do we recost the limited powers now that they can be used every day charging the existing guy a lot of xp? Do we just say "hey you get a lot more powerful for free" and give up on the whole cost = effectiveness? Do we charge the incoming character a price for his sfx? The issue of "adding new character" throwing off the expected values of pre-existing ones is a tricky issue. Some GMs might just rule the incoming haracter "must not break" already existing characters and thus disallow the iguana guy since it breaks the current model for the existing pc. This is much akin to restricting new pcs from coming into a game if they would "step on the toes" of the other. But regardless, i am not usually in the camp of "so what give them the free powers" especially when it comes to interactions of powers of a single character. I ought not to be able to buy "for free" advantages like PI by just coming up with a clever lim. imo that is. I mean that would be like buying flight that works underwater by saying "i buy flight and take a lim for "half speed underwater" even though without any sort of advantage Normal flight wont work underwater.

Re: PI or Not? I take a more hardline approach. if someone wanted to take a "limitation" at -0 "doesn't work vs guys named Sapphire" i would not then allow them to take the name Sapphire and avoid the cost of PI. Similarly I would not allow "doesn't work vs this trait i have" to allow them to skirt the cost of PI. By the same practice i would not allow you to gain free PI for your eb or chill by taking the -0 limitation "not against this thing i happen to have". This is regardless of whether or not the limitation is actually worth points - a limitation CANNOT give you good effects - at least no custom limitation should. Now if you wanna buy your PI as "linked to LS" to show that losing LS turns off the PI, thats fine, but NO i would not give you free PI by dint of you taking a limitation.

Re: Hero/Fate/Karma points for Hero System FATE DICE !d6 luck -2 (never recovers) ap=5 rp=2 basically i gave one use dice of luck and allowed many of the various uses under the luck power. I used these instead of the XP award for the various roleplaying stuff so everyone got the same XP but they got differing amounts of FATE based on what and how they did.

Curious as to the release date of the PDFs for HERO 6?

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. The pudding argument falls short because of this. YES game have played without the cost breaking them - but that merely means other restrictions keep it from getting too far out of hand. Most games i have seen set limits on PD/ED and often see those limits used - ie many are at those limits. there usually tends to be a fairly narrow range of "effective defenses" as frankly the difference between "takes noticeable effect from a hit" and "took too much and is con stunned" isn't broad in many cases. But costs in hero are there for consistency not for balance... so the basic premise which seems to be an expectation of BALANCE fron COST is the issue. But then the main flaw in the op analysis to me is assuming the defense vs attack only when the limited defense is up. to compare a 15 cp spell you must include all the following cases 1. spell up an functioning 2. hands tied so no spell 3. silence field so no spell 4. spell dropped due to low end 5. spell dropped due to being stunned calculate average damage effects in each case apply a multiplier for "how often is this case in play" then calculate average damage vs defense