ideasmith

Re: Making Hero 6E More Dangerous (Skyrealms of Jorune Conversion) ?

Yes, the GM should sit down and talk with them if the game has the 1-point Bow familiarity, but if after the talk they still really want the -3 penalty when they use a bow that they haven't paid points for then, well, it's their character...

 

We need a helpless shrug smiley.

 

Virtually,

Bodkins Odds

I might play such a character someday, now that the idea is in my head.

Re: Making Hero 6E More Dangerous (Skyrealms of Jorune Conversion) ?

in 6e1 and 6e2 Lack of Weapon familiarity only has a -3 OCV when using the weapon. There is nothing about Skill levels which leads me to believe that you can still apply any applicable Skill levels. So your archer with 6 levels with Bows and only WF Shortbow can be up to +3 with the unfamiliar Longbow.

There seems to be general agreement on that point; the argument seems to be about what the rules should be, rather than what the rules are.

Re: Making Hero 6E More Dangerous (Skyrealms of Jorune Conversion) ?

But the post I was responding to specifically said the CSLs were bought with "only with X weapon Limitation". If someone buys CSLs "only with bows" and not the 1-point Weapon Familiarity with bows I think it might be time for the GM to sit down with them and point out the obvious or have someone else start making their characters for them...

I missed that nuance. My bad.

Re: Making Hero 6E More Dangerous (Skyrealms of Jorune Conversion) ?

Because he's not using a bow? If he is using a bow who suggested he couldn't use them?

Both IndianaJoe3 and Manic Typist, as quoted below:

However' date=' if I was the GM, I'd rule that CSLs couldn't be used unless the character has the appropriate WF.[/quote']

 

I'd allow it' date=' I think, for CSLs for "All Combat" or "All HtH," and the like, but probably not for less than that.[/quote']

Re: Making Hero 6E More Dangerous (Skyrealms of Jorune Conversion) ?

Another Option: Increase Weapon Damage. Adding 5 dice to Killing Damage and 15 dice to Normal Damage would have characters out for a while or worse from a single hit.

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

Gapsqueezing Power Stem (or better yet, gapsqueezing-only Limitation on Shrinking).

Adder for Teleport: Usable with Move-By, Grab-By, Move-Through.

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

if you were to buy Defenses limited vs special effect, It may be more logical (but a lot messier) to give each defense a separate SFX limitation.

e.g. Defense vs Fire;

PD (-2)

ED (-1/2)

MD (-2)

Flash (-1)

PowD (-2)

The Limitation value for Flash Defense would depend on Sense Group effected. While -1 is appropriate for Sight (blinding flare), and at least defensible for Hearing (crackling flames), and Smell/Taste (smoke up your nose), Radio and Mental would logically get a higher Limitation.

Re: Breakable vs. unbreakable Focus

Thanks all for your answers!

 

 

 

The problem is that then the focus is easier to get back, so the limitation is less limitating...

Paying points to make a limitation less limiting is appropriate. Whether the point cost fits is not clear, but the basic concept is fair enough.

Re: Mental Powers: Roll for Effect First

I like this, but would balance it by making mental attack powers have normal range modifiers.

Re: A dozen and onre Idea

Warning: After looking at these ideas, I decided not to worry about acceptability to hypothetical GMs, just about getting them accurately within the rules. GM (and player) discretion advised.

1) Reactive Mental Defense

The character has a Mental Defense power, that helps hims "shrug off" mind controll/mental illusions once he is affected (this can be simple + EGO, a different/alternate Form or duplicates "knocking him out of it").

However, the defense may be expensive (high active points in Multipower, Costs endurance or other negative impact, he becomes his heroic ID) so the defense isn't always on.

However it switches on and can't be turned of as soon as he is affected by a mental effect and as long as he is affected by one. Thus, not even on EGO+30 he could be forced to "turn it off", as he has indeed no controll.

What advantage would that be? What effect other than +x EGO can help you shrug off a mental attack?

Telepathy; Trigger (affected by mental power) automatically resets each time it activates; Only to break a victim free of mental powers; Self Only

4) a pre build/predefined Multisetting Weapon in a VPP.

I have the Idea for a Gadget VPP, and it would be possible to build a multi-setting gun inside that VPP.

The Problem is: switching the settings on the gun, is way easier (0-Phase) than switching a VPP slot (possibily 1 Minute and Required Roll) and Multisetting Gun mean usually Multipower. But Multipower in VPP is not allowed (for good reasons). Or does the Focus Limitation of the Gun changes anything on that matter?

If not, how else could I built a Multi Setting Gun in a Gadget VPP? Naked advantages for Blast? Using Martial Maneuvers(Killing Strike) for a Blast? How could I do things like Nr. 3 without a MP?

Buy the Multipower with “Counts against Power Pool’s Pool Limit”.

4) Analyze Attack:

I want a way to analyize exactly how an attack is build (dice, active points, adders, advantages, disadvanatges), after I could pervieve it.

The reason: a VPP that could be used to make the perfect defense against said attack...

Enhanced Senses: Detect Attack, Discriminatory, Analyze, 360 Degree Arc, Range, Sense

5) Analyze Defense:

Same idea, but for the defenses of a target. So I know that 2 times Armor piercing is just the right thing to get through that defense.

Enhanced Senses: Detect Defense, Discriminatory, Analyze, 360 Degree Arc, Range, Sense

6) Analyze Attack Pattern:

A little bit different from the earlier two. When I abort for a defensive action, I have no idea what is comming. I want a power that allows me to know exactly what attack or attacks (part of a Multiple/Combined Attack) my enemy is going to launch.

Does not need to be as complete as Nr. 4 for each, but every part that is important to how I get hit is interesting (so I know if dodge, block or Dive for Cover is better) and perhaps relative damage compared to my defenses (so I know when aborting to defense is a waste of phase).

Clairsentience with Detect Attack, Precognition; Only One Phase Ahead

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

2. Advanced rules for Foci, allowing you to vary their durability, size, and so on.

How about similar treatment for Physical Manifestation?

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

If you take away wealth' date=' players complain that you are taking points away from them or they simply reallocate the points to something else. I hate it when I hear a player says something like, well, you took the Presidency away from me just because I ordered the invasion of Canada because I hate Celion Dion. I'll just reallocate those points into a new multi-power slot[/font']

Personally, the way I look at things, perks are things which the GM can give or take away based on play. They should not be a way to store points. Maybe clarification is needed here.

The rules do say that you get the points back (6E1 page 98).

However, the rules do not seem to say when you get the points back. While it would vary by genre and playing style, some suggestions would be useful here.

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

couldn't you buy the attacks as indirect?

That would mimic One-Way Transparent to some attacks pretty effectively, but I don't see any way to make it mimic Two-Way Transparent.

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

How does a 2 way transparent barrier actually exist?

By being transparent to some, but not all attacks.

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

A sample set of everysuper powers.

Suggestions for simplifying Adjustment power wearoff. The 5 points per turn can be annoying, especially if different powers with different wearoff rates are involved.

Mind Scan/Telepathy Belongs to Different Sense Group

Modifier to make Growth or Shrinking that doesn’t affect mass. Modifier to make Shrinking that only affects mass.

Two-Way Transparent for Barrier (As One-Way Transparent, except both directions)

For Mind Control: Controlled Actions use Controller’s Phases

Making different dimensions effectively Desolid to one another, and Affects Physical World therefore be needed to benefit from Transdimensional.

Splitting Focus into its component parts.

Requires A Roll: Having the roll based on the target’s characteristic.

Rules for temporary death, for those campaigns in which such is appropriate.

Rules to discourage pushing; possibly STUN loss equal to the END cost.

Rules for sleep deprivation

Re: Critical and Altered Maths

I reccomend making triples a critical on a success and a fumble on a failure. In my experience with this system, checking whether a roll of 3d6 is triples is very easy.

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack"

As far as I know, there were never official 5E rules for this. Here are possible house rules:

1. If the defender ('player B') is unaware of the 'attack', then whether she considers it beneficial is irrelevent.

2. If the defender would like to be hit, she may either

2a. voluntarily lower her DCV (which also lowers it for all other attacks including hostile ones) or

2b. use the mechanics for Dive For Cover: Protecting Other Characters, but with the defender being both victim and interposer.

Re: House Rule Limitation: Latent -- Advice?

Thanks for all the advice and help in defining the purpose behind this Limitation. I will at minimum be making some changes (for example, that list of suggested Limitations has to go) but am not yet convinced that Latent is actually redundant.

Two points still concern me here:

Latent can be partially bought off, or bought off on some powers it was taken for but not others. The discussion so far is assuming the extremes (no points available at all, or enough to buy it off entirely) and ignoring this middle-ground

If some characters can spend points in mid-game more readily than others, the former characters have a significant benefit. I do not want all characters able to randomly buy off Limitations mid-game, nor do I want to provide this benefit at no point cost. So what should the point cost be, based on what factors?

The Limitation as I have it currently written up. Any possible problems I might have missed?

Latent

Value: See Text.

A power with this limitation is restricted (usually heavily) until this limitation is bought off. However, this limitation may be bought off in mid-game (at any time – restrictions on the character are irrelevant).

The temporary restrictions should be written up as Limitations. Any Limitation except ‘Latent’ is allowed, but particularly appropriate Limitations include 0 DCV Concentration, *10 Endurance Cost, Only When Improved By An Adjustment Power, Never On, No Conscious Control, 8- Jammed Activation which Must be rolled each Phase, and Extreme Side Effect.

The temporary restrictions need not all be bought off at once.

To determine the value of Latent, total the values of the component temporary restrictions as Limitations, and divide by 2.

When evaluating the game balance of a Latent power, don’t forget that the limit will be bought off in mid-game.

Re: THE HERO SYSTEM EQUIPMENT GUIDE -- What Would *You* Like To See?

Actually' date=' many posters on these boards (not myself, actually) do use Hero for cross-genre games.[/quote']

I am well aware that many posters use HERO for cross-genre games. I am not aware of cross genre games being any more cookie cutter than single-genre games.

 

Having the barbarian's axe or the rogue's sling suddenly do less damage because a character from a modern era has been added feels wrong to me.

The sudden arbitrary change in weapon damage you describe sounds like an arbitrary GM ruling. As such, the GM can prevent it by not making the arbitrary ruling.

 

If I should GM a game inspired by The Mouse That Roared, bows would certainly be more effective than guns. Because doing so would help with that “Mouse That Roared” feel. And someone from the future with a photon gun showed up, I wouldn’t consider that a reason for either bow or gun damage to change. Why would it be?

Re: Based on Constitution Discrepancy

I asked Steve Long some relevant questions:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/81918-Some-Questions-Related-to-Based-On-Con

Based on that and the above discussions, this is my new opinions:

Normal Range (-1/4) (6E1 page 154)

Alternate Combat Value (-0) (6E1 page 318)

Attack Versus Alternate Defense (-1) (6E1 page 325)

Perceivable (-1/2) (6E1 page 387)

Subject To Range Modifier ( -1/4) (6E1 page 388)

Works Against CON, Not EGO (-1/4) (Seems About Right)

Responds To First Person To Give Relevant Command/Statement (-1/4) (Seems About Right)

Total (-2 1/2)

Re: THE HERO SYSTEM EQUIPMENT GUIDE -- What Would *You* Like To See?

Unfortunately, there's no easy answer. We can only have so much granularity. If we set all the ancient weapons at between 1 pip and 1d6 KA, they become useless, and games relying on such weaponry rapidly become "no fun". We could enhance the range of more modern weapons, but that just makes the battlemat bigger. Making the more modern weapons fire faster doesn't mesh with the Speed system. And even +1 OCV is a big change - I doubt we want the sling to take a -3 OCV, and to have +4 OCV delivered from a rifle scope.

 

I suppose we could have weapons on a scale by genre (eg. that 1d6+1 KA, +1 Stun Multiple Sling in Fantasy Hero gets a doubled range penalty, a -2 OCV and becomes a 1/2d6 KA in Pulp Hero), but that seems to defeat the point of a universal system. Not playing a lot of other games, I'm not sure how other systems deal with similar issues (if they deal with them at all).

I don't see how using different builds for the same weapon would "defeat the point of a universal system". On the contrary, requiring a one-size-fits-all build -- for anything -- makes the system less useful as a tookit. Weapons, like magic, super-science, and psionics, should be build as they fit the character, setting and genre. Whether that results in identical phenomena having different builds in different campaigns should not be an issue. At all.

Re: THE HERO SYSTEM EQUIPMENT GUIDE -- What Would *You* Like To See?

I would like to see writeups of normal equipment, such as a camera, a cell phone, and a backpack.

1. Is commanding a Based on Con Mind Control target (for example) a ‘no time’ action, like a Presence Attack?

2. When a character with ‘Based On Con’ Mind Control (for example) get first chance to command the target, or are there DEX rolls to see who commands first?

3. Can a gagged or silenced character use a Based on Con Mind Control in hopes that an ally will command the target?

4. Is Based On Con Telepathy (for example) automatically blocked by Mental Sense Group Darkness (for example), or can some other Sense Group be specified?

5. Do Based On Con Mental Powers affect Desolid Characters?

6. Is an EGO+10 result on Mind Scan sufficient to attack with a Based On Con Mental Power thought that Mind Scan?

7. With regard to question 6 above, does it matter whether the Mind Scan is Based On Con or not?

Re: Based on Constitution Discrepancy

I've wondered the same thing. Mental Powers just get a lot of 'freebies' in the system' date=' and making a power not mental anymore drops them. Not fair really, but that is my guess as to what is going on. In most games I've played, EGO and CON are comparable stats, so I'd adjust the chart you wrote to say Works Against CON, not EGO -0.[/quote']

Likewise' date=' I'd say that "CON instead of EGO" is -0, or -1/4 at most. Con isn't usually that much higher. [/quote']

Actually doing the math on the Superhero Gallery (6th Edition Champions, pages 243-287) yields CON being an average of 8.409836066 points higher than EGO. An average of 8 points and change is a much smaller difference than I thought, and indeed not worth -3/4. It looks near the border between -1/4 and -1/2 to me.

"Responds To First Person To Give Relevant Command/Statement"' date=' is usually not that much of a limitation, given that you're usually going to be ready to capitalize on your own attack. [/quote']

I think it’s Dex rolls to see who talks first. I haven’t spotted anything in the rules that really nails this question down, however.

 

Still' date=' that's at least -2. Personally, I think "Based on CON" mental powers should go against Power Defense, not PD/ED. That would match the limitation value, and would be more logical for most uses (how exactly is your chainmail helping you resist those pheromones, again?).[/quote']

Based on CON is looking pretty redundant to me. Maybe just have characters take the component parts?