CUnknown

Re: About Detect Magic (FH)

This is what I do in my campaign. It's not based on active points but rather a subjective DM assessment.

I don't have any rules for hiding magic, but I suppose you could always take IPE: Detect if you really wanted to.

Re: Seeing through invisible

You want a story explanation for it, Sean? That would depend on the campaign in question and the way invisibility works there. I thought Clovis just wanted a game mechanics way to do it. The Detect could be "Detect Bending of Light" or something similar.

As far as 'Detect Invisibility' being unfair to the invisible character, I don't see that. Invisibility is only 20 active points. The Detect, once you add in Ranged and Targeting, is right around 20 active points as well. Also, I wouldn't allow the 'sense' adder here. So, you'd have to concentrate to detect an invisible intruder -- that means you'd already have to be suspicious in order for this to work. Invisible opponents could still spy on you, so long as they didn't give themselves away somehow.

Re: Seeing through invisible

Make it a special (Detect) Sense that is not part of the Sight Group' date=' but buy it all the modifiers needed to make it like sight (Targetting, Discriminatory--or a limited version thereof--Sense, Ranged, etc.). Then, if desired, give it limitations that says it can be flashed and darkened along with the Sight Group, but do NOT include Invisibility in the Limitation.[/quote']

 

This is absolutely the way to do it, imo. Detect Invisible, ranged, targeting, sense affected as another sense (sight). Bingo.

 

No wait, I like Sean's method better.

 

Edit: one thing to remember is that this method won't let you actually see the person who is invisible (as in, not their facial features), but you will detect the shimmering aura or whatever that surrounds them and you'll be able to target it perfectly well.

Re: Good resource for travel distances/day?

This is what I do, who knows how realistic it is.

• Force march allows travel up to 18 hours/day, requires an EGO roll, and gives a -1 to all actions on the following day, including EGO rolls. This carries over to the next day if force march continues.

  
  

• Trailblazing skill increases movement by 5% per point made by for the group, to a maximum of how quickly movement would be taking place on a trail.

  
  

• Movement values assume the appropriate TF, without it, movement is cut in half.

  
  

• Switching out mounts twice a day doubles movement.

  
  

• Forced movement is possible as well, instead of an EGO roll, use Animal Handling.

  
  

• Riding skill increases movement by 5% per point made by.

  
  

• Animals get one free level of encumbrance.

  
  

Re: Multiple Attacks

Multiple power attack seems cheaty to me and I normally wouldn't do it that way.

Sweep works well if you really want your dragon (or anyone, actually) to attack multiple times in a phase.

If you don't see the dragon as doing a sweep maneuver per se, I'd do Ghost Angels thing of giving the dragon extra speed, but I would limit it further: +1 Speed, only to attack with tail or wings, -1. This would give the dragon an opportunity to use its extra limbs in combat, but in a way that doesn't seem cheaty like multiple-power attack (i.e. You get to attack twice ... just because!) or odd for a large creature on a single opponent (sweep).

Generally, you should actually think about dropping the claw/claw/bite D&D mechanics completely when switching to Hero, although the +1 speed, only to attack with x seems like a good compromise. Edit: If you really want the two claws mechanics, perhaps the way closest to D&D to do that is a 2-shot autofire. Claws: 2d6 HKA, 2-shot autofire +1/4.

Re: EGO Rolls and PRE Attacks (2)

Well, it kind of has to be both PRE or EGO, whichever is greater, at least the way I do things. Certain types of creatures (giants, say) have a really high PRE but a low EGO, and they are of course brave. A giant wouldn't be scared by a little human most of the time, although I suppose elephants are scared of mice... I think they just have a Vulnerability to PRE attacks v mice, though.

Re: Stealth and Perception

Too many rolls, I think.

 

If super stealthy bad guy is sneaking past 10 people, are they all going to look his way? Won't at least some of those people be preoccupied with other tasks?

Sure, most of the group failed their roll and were looking elsewhere. But one guy saw him. One guy seems to -always- see him.

Are there -PER factors that haven't been taken into account, for example, if one is around a campfire at night, anything beyond the illumination of the campfire is essentially biologically impossible for a human to see.

Let's say in this example that there aren't any other factors.

Even if someone in the group senses something, will they interpret it as a threat? Would there be other more likely interpretations of the sensory data?

This is more of a role-playing thing, though. If the players want to respond as if it's a threat, how do I say "No, you don't think it's a threat?" If that's the case, then why even bother rolling perception at all? It seems that the GM decided ahead of time that no one would notice. The act of rolling at all shows that there is a chance that the players notice the bad guy.

It just seems like in order to stealth past a group that is actively searching for you, you have to be stealthy beyond belief, like maybe 20-. Although I suppose that is realistic. Maybe I am complaining for no good reason.

I agree with the "If no one is on watch, take the best PER roll guy and have him only roll" thing. But I was thinking of a case where everyone was on watch.

Hi,

So, let's say your super-stealthy bad guy is trying to sneak past the party. He's got a 15- stealth and range penalties for PER are maybe -2. He rolls an 11- and succeeds by 4, so that's -6 to the party's perceptions to notice him. Sounds fine so far... unless the party has 10 people or so in it (including pets and henchmen). In that case, isn't -someone- in the group very likely to notice the guy, given that most of them have 12- and 13- PER rolls? and if not this phase, probably next phase?

it just seems like someone always shouts out "I made mine by 5" or by 6 or whatever.

Is this a problem for stealthers, or perhaps just realistic in that its hard to get by a large group of people all looking for you. It just seems like "Mr. Super Stealthy" could even be invisible and its impossible to sneak by. Unless he was invisible to sight and hearing with no fringe, but that feels like cheating almost.

Does anyone else ever encounter this situation?

Re: Characteristic inflation

For NCM fantasy games at least, I feel that making DEX cost 4 is an important step to limiting the 'everyone has 20 DEX' syndrome. Even then it is still a bargain for many character types. STR should cost at least 1.5, if not 2. CON, although equally bad as far as points gained per points spent, is not much of a problem in my experience, so I normally keep it at 2. It doesn't do anything unless you get hit, so it seems less prone to abuse. Also, ED is generally less important than PD in the games I play.

I tend to only very rarely let people raise their stats with experience points.

About Tolkien v Gygax, Tolkien is a huge influence, definitely! But, unfortunately, he didn't record the stats for his creatures anywhere. He definitely gets the prize for "Biggest influence upon the gaming world by a non-gamer." Heck, maybe even "Biggest influence" period.

As a gaming system, 1st edition D&D is ... shall we say dated? And full of ... quirks? But as gaming resources go, those books are excellent, far better than later editions of the game. I can't imagine ever having a use for the 3rd edition books (haven't seen 4th yet), but the 1st edition ones are still useful to me sometimes.

Re: Characteristic inflation

IMO, and it is ever so humble, we will always have two problems:

 

1. Getting general agreement on what characteristics different races should have, and

2. Well, there is no 2., but 1. is such a big problem that it is going to fill at least a couple of bullet points.

Well, we only need this if we're playing in the same campaign. Seriously, though, it doesn't matter much to me how other people (or even Hero officially, for that matter) does their monsters and NPCs. I have my method. I base everything off the Monster Manual, 1st edition. Gygax is the man.

So, for me, giants have to be strong, tough, not too tough to hit, but able to hit easily themselves (due to high hit dice).

[...]

Giants need to be strong and tough, so increased STR and CON. They will have more BODY and PRE.

If the particular character is meant as a warrior, apply a warrior template (probably increased STR and DEX and, maybe, an extra point of SPEED).

On the question of giants and levels, well, we have to look at sfx. You might want to give them 5 point OCV levels, but limit them so that they can only be used for OCV or damage increase: they are not carefully placing blows but they do hit quite a lot because their attacks cover a lot of area.

Making attacks AoE brings in a set of new considerations, and probably requires a custom lim on the attack allowing it to be blocked by someone who at least has STR = the casual strength of the giant.

Ultimately we probably need to decide what sort of threat a giant is, or we want it to be, and build backwards from there, rather than building from scratch and hoping.

Re: Characteristic inflation

I completely agree, and I think the only way to solve this problem is to make your own monsters. Hero is the best game system out there, imo. It is what it says it is: "The Ultimate Gamer's Toolkit." But, that's all it is. It gives you the tools, and it's up to you to do a ton of work before you can actually play. The system is great, the source books are mostly useless, imo. I wouldn't use any monster that came out of a book.

Edit: For giants, the best thing to do is make them DEX 8 or lower, and give them a ton of combat levels, like 6-10 (like, +8 OCV with all attacks, 40 points). It doesn't matter if it's "point effective" or not, it's an NPC.

Re: Analysis: Attack Vs Limited Defense Energy Blast

AVLD should probably have 'Does Body' for free, unlike NND. I think that would solve the problem. So, the total advantage would just be +1.5.

Re: Killer Shrike's Increased Leathality System

I do a number of things to increase lethality: raising base weapon damage, adding critical hits, using bleeding and impairment. I also use a 'death by stun' rule that forces people to make CON checks or die when they reach -30 stun. I also have changed the impairment rule to cause impairment at 1/3 Body instead of 1/2 Body.

Re: How would you use a true name as a vulnerability?

A pysch lim as has been stated is not a bad idea.

Another idea is to make an anti-demon spell (I assume we are talking about demons here) with the limitation: "caster must know target's true name", -1.

Re: Critical Hits?

Well, my critical hit and fumble charts are weak compared to the way other people do them, so it's not so bad having them happen often. In order to get max damage, for example, you have to roll really well on the critical chart. +1 or +2 damage (up to max) is a more common roll.

I enjoy the random element, but I made the charts weak so they wouldn't unbalance combat too much.

Re: FH Gripes

Wow, RPMiller, that is crazy with the 0.1 experience point awards--crazy like a fox! I would incorporate it as a GM, but I wouldn't want the extra bookkeeping. Besides, I guess I don't mind giving away a lot of experience points, either. There is a long way to go in the power scale of my campaign.

Re: Critical Hits?

I have a critical hit and a fumble chart, House rules of course. You critical on a 3, 4, or 5 (3 being better criticals and 5 being worse criticals), and fumble on a 16, 17, or 18 (again, with 16 being not so bad fumbles and 18 being horrible fumbles).

This works out to roughly equivalent to the chance in d20 for critical hits and fumbles (1 in 20 for each).

Re: A seed

I would do an NND RKA (Does Body), with the defense being Immunity to Acid, or Chemical Resistant defenses, or Force Fields, or whatever. Also, throw on gradual effect like AmadanNaBriona suggested.

Re: Fantasy Hero Problems and advantages

I have a very good (at least in my opinion) system for converting D&D to Hero that keeps everything that makes Hero the best system out there, while incorporating the feel of D&D. I have most of the files posted on Hero Central.

I agree with the original poster about Fantasy Hero having some problems that need solving. I think my system solves some of these issues.

I disagree with the people who say "If you like D&D so much, why are you playing Hero?" Saying that is missing the point--Hero is an obviously superior system, mechanically, but it can be dry and soulless. In fact, it was intended to be that way. It's the "Ultimate Gamer's Toolkit" after all. Toolkits by their nature are pretty dry and in need of fleshing out. D&D has a feel that many people grew up with, and it just makes sense that when they discover Hero, they'd want to play D&D using Hero rules.

Sometimes, in order to get D&D to fit into the Hero structure, I just straight-up cheated. But, rules are obviously made to be broken, nothing bothers me more than a game system that makes certain rules "mandatory." Well, not nothing.. I'm sure nuclear war would bother me more than that. But, you know what I mean.

Re: Bullet Time?

Dodging bullets like in the Matrix would be the Evasive maneuver, imo. That's Desolidification, as a maneuver you have to abort to.

Re: Large Creatures Versus Head Shots

DCV can only ever be halved, regardless of penalties, right? So, it seems that the Dragon's DCV on a head shot should be: 7 - 6 = 4 (half) + 8 = 12.

Re: CSLs overpriced?

The problem isn't that combat skill levels are too expensive (they are actually too cheap, especially the 2 pt levels), it's that DEX is way underpriced. I use 4 pt DEX in my campaigns, and that seems to work out alright. I also restrict the use of 2-pt levels so you can't buy too many of them.

Re: Class systems -- is there no escape?

Oddhat wrote:

...a set of restrictions on what and how characters can do and learn, and on the roles they can play.

ghost-angel wrote:

A Class is "This is how a Mage is constructed, you may not deviate from this template called Mage when constructing a Mage. You may not forgoe some Mage Like Abilities to diversify your skill set"

So, these are two different definitions. When a speak of class, I've been using the first one, not the second. Maybe that's where the confusion is coming from.

The first definition is a simple description of what a class is and what it does. The second is really just a more extreme version of the first. Not only are you restricted by class, but now you absolutely "may not deviate" from it. So, according to the second, it is indeed true that the restrictions placed on magic in the vast majority of Fantasy Hero campaigns does not constitute a rudamentary class system. But, according to the more inclusive first definition, I still believe that it does.

Re: Class systems -- is there no escape?

A) Of course you don't have to! I thought you wanted to participate in this discussion.. I apoligize if you thought I was trying to force you to do something.

I'm saying I agree with OddHat about the definition. Perhaps you misunderstand me?

Anyway.. we don't have to be continuing this conversation, it's really a minor issue.. I don't mean to be making anyone upset.

Re: Class systems -- is there no escape?

Quote:

Originally Posted by CUnknown

The difference is that the game system itself requires that someone who wants to fight effectively take combat levels and WFs, but it does not require KSs, perks, or magic skill to use the powers listed in the power section. If we require that for our games, we are imposing some sort of structure on the game--which is the same a class structure. A very limited class structure, but a class structure nonetheless.

 

Killer Shrike wrote:

By your interpretation. Obviously, other people's interpretations vary.

I am using Oddhat's definition of a "class system", which is: "is a set of restrictions on what and how characters can do and learn, and on the roles they can play."

According to that definition, it's difficult to have a different interpretation, Killer Shrike. You would have to explain how you thought that the structure we are imposing on the game is different from a class system, admittedly one which was extremely limited in scope.