Warp9

Re: A Thread for Random Videos Some Lovecraft themed stuff (some of it also Christmas themed as well).

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression

Re: PRE and EGO

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression But I'm not sure that is an answer I want to see implemented.

Re: PRE and EGO When did this happen? DC Heroes always had Physical Mental and Spiritual with the following stats. . . . Strength Dexterity Body Will Power Intelligence Mind Aura Influence Spirit But I was not aware that HERO ever had any explicitly spiritual stats.

Re: A Storeowner's First Impression I disagree with the above statement, in that I prefer the more generic approach of the modern editions to the old editions where the game was actually "Champions." And I think it would be backward to come out with Champions:HERO, and then create (and re-release all the rules) for Generic:HERO.

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e)

Re: PRE and EGO In Shadowrun (at least pre-4th edition SR), they did that kind of thing for Astral Combat: Intelligence was Astral Dexterity, Will Power was Astral Resistance, and Charisma was Astral Strength.

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e) But how much do you pay for the knb on each DC? That is included in the five points you pay for each DC of your attack. And if we are talking about defense being cheaper, then that should refer to the whole of the attack, including knb. For me, that random variation is actually the issue. For what we are doing here, you could almost look at this process as the reverse of putting standard effect on your own power. Instead you are putting standard effect on your opponent's power. When you put standard effect on your own power, you get the trade off of not worrying about low rolls vs the price of not being able to get the high rolls. Here you are getting the reverse, you may not get the benefit of having your opponent roll low, but you don't have to worry about those high rolls either. To defend against each standard effect DC you'd want: 3 PD 3 points 1 PD resistant 1/2 points 2 meters kbr 2 points Here you'd get the full negation of a DC of a normal attack for 5 points, and for 5.5 you could cover 1 DC of killing attack. And, if you wanted to dump the knb defense (which doesn't really fit most of the uses I'd have anyway), you could go for 3 and 3.5 pts per DC. Armor Piercing would cut this type of negation in half; although, I don't really have a problem with that either, for many of the uses I have for DN, that result makes sense too.

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e) I still don't have 6th edition yet, so it is easier for me to think in 5th ed terms. However, since some relevant rules have changed, I agree with you. That is the basic model incorporated into Champions, and it makes sense for a comic book based game. But Hero, being a universal system, needs tools that allow for the simulation of other types of combat. And personally, I don't run traditional comic book style games, that is why this DN option is very important to me.

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e) I notice that we are at a place where it costs 5 points per each DC, but according to your reasoning above, it should really cost 8 points to negate that DC. That sounds like a decent advantage given to offense. Although we could fit this in with the philosophy that defenses should cost more than attacks. . . .

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e) That 90 defense level assumes 5th ed rules on a 3d6 RKA. I do agree that the new rules make things a bit better, in that it you can get total coverage with less insane levels of defense (although I still think that the necessary defense levels to cover all the STUN from an attack are too high). If you did not make it "Stun only" you'd end up with a character who'd generally take no BODY from a 36d6 EB.

Re: Another view of Damage Negation (6e) It is about more than affordability. A character with 90 defense has a lot more than simple immunity to a .50 BMG. IMO those kind of MEGA defenses represent the sort of characters who would take no BODY from world breaking attacks.

Re: Thoughts on Damage Negation (6e) I haven't got 6th Ed yet, but I definitely approve of this Damage Negation concept. In the comics, it seems that it is much easier to knock somebody out than kill them. However, a universal system shouldn't be forcing that kind of Stan Lee "paradigm" on my games. And the beauty of it is that it doesn't have to, that is what this mechanic does for us. This mechanic allows for each character to be designed differently according to concept. If you want a character who is easy to KO, but nigh impossible to kill, you can do that. But you can also build a character who bounces pistol bullets off like pop-corn, but who can be killed by heavy artillery.

Re: A Complete Overhaul of the Hero System Combat and Skill System I thought I should probably add that, while I'm not sure I agree with all your ideas, it is cool to hear about new concepts. I appreciate the fact that you think about these things then post them here.