Jaxom

Re: Question about the "spirit" of an EC

Re: Question about the "spirit" of an EC Well, it was, for the most part a philosophical question which arose while reading the rulebook. Because I specifically want some SFX that fit better with the Multipower I figure all the subsystems of the suit are going to wind up in Multipowers instead. The proposed campaign is High Powered Superheroic. 300 + up to 150. Active caps at 90 points. There were a couple of systems that seemed obvious to me... The main weapon system (a laser built into the right gauntlet) is a multipower (90 point base) with variable applications. All are no visible power effect. It's either RKA or HKA (laser claws) or a cutting torch. The sensor package is a multipower (probably 15 point base) which includes the ability to turn on, in various combinations, IR, UV, Radar, Hearing as a targetting sense, magnification and flash defenses on both sight and hearing. The one that made me wonder was the suit defenses. Actually, I'm redefining that to be "field effects generated by the suit". This is mostly defenses (forcefields) but also includes a point blank field taser (EB explosion), and invisibility. The question specifically struck me when I was thinking about putting things like Mental and Power defenses into this construct. In hindsight I think a multipower is the right way to do this, but the question was enough to make me ask here.

Re: Ship travel times: speed-of-light vs. speed-of-plot We're pretty well behaved and accept the suspension of disbelief premise most of the time. The issue comes up when you get to adding flavor and you mention how your space travel works while adding flavor... Then you tell me I can't get there from here... Wait a minute, that contradicts what you said over here! That gets *most* players bummed out so we avoid it by the means mentioned above... Know your universe before you put your foot in something stinky. Obsession is not the answer since that just leads to wasting time looking things up (or risking misremembering and offending someone). The "tactics" don't apply might make sense but I'd just go with a "the physics don't apply and that may require changes to your tactics" and "the enemy has not studied standard tank tactics so don't expect them to do what you would". It's a different way of wording most of the same thing but it seems more palatable to the folks I tend to game with. One of the conversations over lunch today went, "So, since it's comics I was going to give this character an x-ray laser... That going to bother you immensely? It's just a 4d6 RKA with no visible power effects... I can make it infrared if it bugs you but X-ray is what struck me first and I liked the sound." "No, I know current physics says that requires a building the size of this one (a major downtown mall) and roughly the same power consumption as all of Seattle for an hour, but it's comic books. I'll live with it being hand-mounted in the power armor and we won't worry about the power source." The fun discussions come in the threads here where INT is overpriced because you can't use it to do anything... If you want to see someone blow up over that one, poke Cancer a few times.

Re: Question about the "spirit" of an EC I also forgot to ask something I didn't see addressed in 5E... Can you add an END reserve to an EC (I thought that I had seen this mentioned) and if you do then is it taken external to the ED (i.e. without the point break) as a battery for the EC?

Re: Ship travel times: speed-of-light vs. speed-of-plot This is gonna depend on your players in my book. It'll also depend on your system. If you're playing Champions or Pulp then most players will agree on what methods of transport are available and when the GM tells players how they show up they can argue if they want with reasonably sound questions. When you're talking StarHero a lot is going to depend on how you've defined travel in your universe. It's one of the reasons that writing good sci-fi is so bloody hard. If your version of FTL travel is popping out of the universe and then back in, ships in the way doesn't mean anything. Unless you can have encounters in hyperspace... Then you have to answer a whole different set of questions. Maybe hyperspace is just a parallel universe where all imensions shrink by a factor or 3 time 10 ^ 12 (i.e. 1 light year is reduced to one km effectively) and all other physics holds. I game with a couple of astrophysicists (myself being one) and a couple of engineers. When we play sci-fi campaigns the GM usually sits down ahead of time and defines the physics for the campaign to provide a framework for answering such questions ahead of time. Then anyone running in that universe sits down and asks "why can't they just short-circuit this by doing x". IMO, you should be doing that every time you run anyway. It helps to know your players as well. If you expect your players to ask something like that then you durn well better know *an* answer. Doesn't hurt to ask yourself in advance in any case in case one of your players surprises you.

I'm playing with developing a suit of power armor. I think that the mechanism I am going to use is a Multipower but I was looking at the rules for both MPs and ECs last night and a question hit me. Sadly, this is a metaphysical question so I am not sure that there will be a clear-cut answer so I was hesitant to ask... That said, I will don my fireproof Superman underoos now... What is the spirit of the statement that all powers in an EC should cost endurence? My goal was to model all the "auras" that the power armor could present... A Forcefield, an Invisibility Field, a point-blank Electrical Burst (probably an EB plus a Change Environment although I need to chat with my GM about what he really wants for the desired effect). It dawned on me that some of the things I might eventually list would probably be constant powers under normal circumstances and that what I would really want to do is buy them with Costs Endurence... Would going that route violate the spirit of the EC construct or is that specifically the intent of the requirement?

Re: Talk about toxic Gas! Is this a new varient on Dragonbreath Chili? New! Green Dragonbreath Chili at Taco Time! Gives a whole new meaning to the concept of a toxic belch. I think I concur with many of the others (depending on the character's SFx for the immunity, of course)... He should be at no danger but methinks that the government officials on site are likely to rush the character into quarantine alone with a few gallons of industrial pepto.

Re: Dodging perceived threats Ok, I have a better picture now of what you're after. My response was based on an opening attack (i.e. whether or not you're caught flatfooted) which would limit your ability to use Skill Levels. As I understand the example you give with FlyBoy you also want this "penalty" to occur when he is in combat and already using those Skill Levels on DCV (because of an attack from some other source, perhaps). After a few minutes of thought I am not pulling up anything that would be standard out-of-the-box type options. I'm gonna have to agree with Tiree that you're gonna have to create a generic limitation that looks like the one for Combat Luck. Maybe you lower the limitation a bit because the SLs are not Persistent but if you're buying it on DCV-only skill levels anyway you might be able to get the full limitation value (since I'd assume that they'd always be used and for DCV in combat, hence persistent for all rounds when you aren't flatfooted).

Re: Dodging perceived threats I thought that what you're asking was kinda the definition of DCV Skill Levels. As a GM I sure as heck ain't giving you skill levels against a threat you can't perceive. Without getting into the questiosn of what you can and cannot perceive, I would think that simple DCV-only skill levels is exactly what you'd be after. Is there some reason you think that sounds like a bad idea?

Re: Diceless damage

Re: Diceless damage The ability to target a hex is an interesting point. That'd also become a very valuable tactic in any system like this because of the resulting low effective DCV. I assume that you'd do AE damage by simply lowering the DC in your damage distribution calculation... So if I hit a target hex with an AE with a roll of 18 would I do maximal damage to everyone in the blast radius?

Re: Diceless damage

Re: Diceless damage Actually, Sean's system rewards higher OCV in any system where OCV and DCV are comparable after modifiers. The reason is subtle but different shapes of the damage distribution. If you use the difference then you are always going to be 1 in 216 of getting your best result. Only a 3 gives you maximum damage. If you use Sean's distribution then your odds of max damage are significantly higher almost all the time. If you are going to hit on an 11- then you are something like 27 in 216 to get max damage and only 1 in 216 to get minimum damage. Only when you get into the realm of 18- or better to hit will you see this change. And as a target I will be doing everything I can to max out my DCV. I will be at the campaign CV max, I will be in a martial dodge and I will be prone or have cover if they provide me an advantage because that will be more cost-effective than bothering to buy armor, STUN and BODY. **************************** Here's an example of what I mean. on 3 dice: 1 in 216 of getting a 3 3 in 216 of getting a 4 6 in 216 of getting a 5 10 in 216 of getting a 6 16 in 216 of getting a 7 21 in 216 of getting a 8 25 in 216 of getting a 9 27 in 216 of getting a 10 The upper end is a mirror of the lower. If you are a 4- to hit, then In Sean's System you are 1 in 216 of minimum damage and 3 in 216 of slightly higher damage.. In a difference system those numbers are reversed. If you get a +1 to OCV from there In Sean' system you are gaining 6 in 216 of doing even more damage (other numbers unchanged) In a difference system you are gaining 3 chances at minimum damage, 2 at slightly higher damage and 1 at even more damage. If you were 9- to hit and gained a +1 OCV the difference is Sean's System -> 27 in 216 of finally doing average damage for your DC Difference System -> 27 in 216 of doing minimum damage and 1 in 216 of finally doing average damage.

Re: Diceless damage

Re: Diceless damage The only difference in the two is which results are more likely. If you use Sean's suggestion, then when you hit on less than 11- (i.e. you have lower modified CV than your target) then your most likely result is the highest possible hit roll and hence your highest possible damage. If you actually reward based on the difference in CVs (i.e. your max damage is by rolling as low as possible and creating the largest possible difference) then your most likely result is your minimum damage (because you just barely hit). The difference is the shape of the distribution curve. That's also the thing I am warning against because it will distinctly alter the damage output in the universe and you need to understand how before you chase it.

Re: Diceless damage I don't see how prestidigitator's proposal rewards OCV at all, actually. Based on my reading it simply flattens the damage distribution creating more results in the high and low damage extremes. (The number of dice he rolls doesn't depend in any way on the hit roll or the OCV/DCV, it is just arbitrarily chosen. The odds of rolling 3 6s, and hence max damage, on 3 dice is 1 in 6^3 = 1 in 216. The odds of rolling max damage on a 10d6 is 1 in 6^10 = 1 in over 60 million. Same odds for minimum damage, all 1s.)

Re: Diceless damage Higher DCV GUARANTEES you take less damage because it eliminates the high end of your damage curve irrecoverably. Guess where I am putting my SLs every fricking round. By the way, I am going High SPD and I am going to be in permanent Martial Dodge. It'll be cheaper than Armor + BODY + CON + defenses. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that this is inherently bad. It's just going to seriously reward the defensively minded in your campaign and if that is what you want, then fine. Just be aware of it before you pursue this.

Re: Diceless damage Interesting concept and since you are using the actual dice-roll instead of the final difference between CVs it encourages tactics and choices that give you a higher OCV. There are some things that I don't like about it because of flavor and house rules from our campaign... This makes the "3 always succeeds/18 always fails" go away. Can't do it with this format. Because of the way you have shaped the distribution you are also eliminating one "successful" result (in this case, 3 which is only 1 in 216 of the possible results, but all the same). I'd have to play with it a bit to get a solid feel for the flavor it brings before I could say whether or not I'd be in favor of using it in a campaign. It *does* mean a serious change in average PC interaction which means that skill values would change... All of a sudden OCV and DCV become more valuable (ick) because they enter more directly into the average damage and damage per turn figures. One thing I think you could do would be to turn the distribution around. If my OCV matches my target's DCV (so I'm hitting on 11-) then set 0/0 at a roll of 12 and start increasing damage as the roll gets lower. Use the same distribution and simply cut it off at 3 or make 3 a couple of additional shifts up the distribution (equating to a critical hit). This would still give the reward for tactics that give better OCV but would mean not changing the "3 always hits/18 always fails" situation. Are you aiming for rewarding tactics which raise OCV or is there some other intent here?

Re: Exponential "Cost" System Since I know Cancer I have to tease him for getting the sum right but the range wrong. 90/5=18 -> range is 0 to 17 -> 1,310,715 points for a 90 point power (with a cost of 2^17=131072 points per active point for the last 5). It gets better if you come to a 10 point or 20 point range... 90 active points doubling every 10 points -> 5,110 points (and 2550 of that is the last 10 active points). doubling every 20 points is better still -> 460 points (16 points per active point for each of 81 to 90). If you want the "more experience to go to higher levels" effect then you want to go linear and you probably want larger ranges. 10 or 20 active points and then increase the cost linearly for the next range... 1 point per active point to 20, 2 points to 40, 3 points to 60. The net result in any case is going to be to favor skills, perks and diversity over signature powers. Note that this is *not* equivalent to MMORPGs where your original powers get better and you also get new, bigger powers for reaching the next level. Besides, the only purpose this serves is to create a complex, sliding reward system that attempts to reward players for dealing with bigger baddies earlier in their lives. Making it mathematically complex is fine if you are a computer (or a wannabe computer). If you are a GM, you directly control the player's advancement rate anyway. "How much experience for tonight, boss?" All you are doing by monkeying with the costs is telling players how you want them to spend points. By making the first 5, 10 or 20 points cheaper than higher active point costs all you do is tell the players that you favor diversity.

Re: Medium ** Sorry, you guys forged ahead while I was typing, more below ** So, I see no advantage to the PC in this passive portion. I can't see charging points for it then. Build it as a pair of disads. Disadvantage: Distinctive Features (Known Medium, +10 or +15), cannot be concealed, minor inconvenience, only in some cultures (spirits). Disadvantage: Enraged (i.e. out of control but not a threat to teammates), how often and how easily can the PC break the possession? This will allow you (or the GM) to abstract all the spirits and interactions. The frequency and the suceptibility can be determined up front and abstracted as well. Building it as an open Mind Link will make it more difficult for the PC to do anything to turn it off. You might also want to explore simpler weaknesses as well. What's the difference between a spirit and a mentalist who is astrally projecting or any mentalist for that matter? Maybe the character is simply suceptible to EGO combat and takes Mental Defense with the limitation costs END (so he could fight things off by expending the effort). Heck, you could take the limitation "only from disembodied minds" on the weakness to limit it more closely to spirits. ************************************************************************ As a PC I am going to resent the GM asking me to spend points so he has a plot hook. As for the helpful portion, that's why he has the active portion. He's already paid for that. The passive is not doing anything but hindering the PC or giving the GM a toy. I still say it's a disad of some kind.

Re: Medium Well, you've got a specific SFX in mind, but it is not clear at the moment what it is. Following the same logic as "A limitation which is not limiting is worth no points" you have to ask how the PC is going to use this. "I open myself to possession. What happens?" "Nothing, no spirits seem to take notice." Ok, that's very different from "I open myself up hoping that the spirit of this dead body will come through and vent about how they were killed." My retrocog was designed quite specifically because I was "asking the spirit what they saw and compeling an answer from it". As a result, I got to see what it saw. If your PC is just going to say, "Any spirit in the neighborhood can possess me and speak through me," then I'd call it a disad and give them points because I'd have them wandering down the street waving at invisible phantoms and speaking in tongues sometimes. It's the same reasoning behind asking, "I have a player who wants to throw a cone of ice over there. How do I build it?" The answer could be Energy Blast, Entangle, Environment Control or some combination depending on what you intend to do with "ice over there".

Re: Medium I did a variant on this that might work for you. Try Clairsentience (precog, retrocog, clairvoyance, whatever) only through the senses of the spirit. In my particular case it was for speaking with the dead and was a retrocog power. Tack on the advantages and limitations you think appropriate (I think the NCC, concentration pair that Squirrel suggested are probably right). You could also do the same thing with Telepathy or Mind Link depending on the exact SFX you want. The question I would ask as the GM would be "What is the spirit going to say?" Is this intended to give me a hook for campaign stuff so the only time it comes into play is when I as the GM want to pass along information? Is this just precog/retrocog as per the character in the TV show of the same name? Are you going to allow the other characters to hold a meaningful dialog with the spirit while it is possessing you?

Re: Looking for a specific life-transfer SFX and need suggestions. The Transfer was one of the things I thought about but it becomes comparably expensive when you buy the return rate up to a meaningful level. My recollection (without a rulebook handy) is that it suffers the same stacking issues as Aid and Healing too. The attraction of that particular design is the fact that it means that the healing effect is directly in proportion to the damage done (including accounting for defenses). The other problem with Transfer is that you either take two of them (BODY and STUN) to simulate a sword or you take the BODY transfer in addition to the HKA. I have the points for either construction but have some doubts about convincing my GM that a combined effect in the neighborhood of DC 24-30 is a good idea. Which also leads to the question, how many of you guys are using active point caps or any other caps for starting characters? (10d6 Heal usable per Turn is 250 Active Points! Even if you bring down the real cost using limitations I don't know any GMs in our gaming group who are going to let you get away with that.)

Re: Looking for a specific life-transfer SFX and need suggestions. Thank you, thank you. I am still living within the darkness of 5E. I will borrow a copy of 5ER from a friend and take a look. With that option my goal should be simple.

I'm not sure if this is possible in Hero because of the nature of Healing, Aid and Transfer but I will ask anyway. If this has been covered in the past, feel free to point me at a link or an author but I was unable to pull it up in search with any parameters I thought to use. The goal is to have a sword which can "drain life" when used. The initial thought was 3d6 HKA with 6d6 Healing linked to HKA There are other modifiers involved, focus, charges, etc. The problem is that all adders are finite so a 6d6 Heal can never result in more than 36 points restored by use (unlike, say, a Drain). Aids have a similar limitation and the return time on Aids and Transfers is kinda prohibitive when compared to time for natural healing to occur (meaning you probably pass out or die soon after combat if not during). Any other suggestions for a way to build this with a minor but unlimited healing effect (a few points per swing in some direct proportion to the amount of damage done)?