薔薇語

Kill off half of them and you instantly double the available screen time. ^^ Soar.

That trailer really didn't do it for me. It wasn't bad per se just not quite as catchy as I had hoped. That said, though, I will likely still watch it when it comes out over here. Soar.

If by epic bad idea you actually mean "Epicly awesome idea that has yielded one of the best shows on TV now", then I would agree with you. If not, then you are wrong. ^^ Yeah, but that was just stealing from Goku and Journey to the West. Why mix in ancient Chinese tales into your Greek ones? Besides Zeus did like to get around. ^^ No, no we don't. One Cinematic Universe has nearly a dozen films while the other has one. It would be extremely premature to indicate anything about which style is or isn't better - heck, just defining "success" here is a tough nut to crack. So, your comment was more premature than a 16 year old boy. Soar.

Time to fire some (most?) cops. Soar.

The problem with that is that the 'greatly' impairing part is way over the top for most games. Normally people have alternate means of gaining back body not constained by their basic healing. The only time this would really become a severe and immediate threat in a Champion's game would be if someone is bleeding out and can not stop that due to this lim. But that tends to be quite rare in my experience. Soar.

I think Surrealone nailed it. 100% agreed that unless this appears as a truly noticeable defect in the campaign, a five point disad is fine. As to making it a power lim, I think that is a bad idea. I generally think permanent physical limitations on normal functions should be complications. Soar.

Cap v Bat. https://youtu.be/mIyB6B0uYHg Soar.

And then Cisco talks about how he wants to do Hawkgirl in an uncomfortable place. Soar.

Beautiful quote! While I already knew the information to follow, it still gave me a great chuckle! "There's mounting evidence that our primitive ancestors would hunt large prey simply by following it at a walking pace, without sleep or rest, until it died of exhaustion; it's called pursuit predation. Basically, we're the Terminator." Soar.

I was just watching this show on youtube and realized that it parallels quite well with some character creation sessions I have seen / been part of. Does it remind you all of any personal tails? Maybe I should pull up a random wiki article and see if I can get a good story out of it now. ^^ Soar.

When we start thinking about the great expanse of space and what kind of beings might inhabit it, one thing we tend to do is think of how dangerous 'the other' could be. We do this on earth, of course, when we discuss how humans aren't the fastest, strongest, most poisoness, etc. But what if we have it all wrong? What if we are just about he pentacle of dangerous beings? The following is a joking short of an alien anthropologist discussing humans. Enjoy! Soar.

It states that you can't buy CSL "specifically" with multiattack, does that refer to just the two point CSL?

Nothing I proposed is violating the RAW. There are already explicit rules for creating foci and breaking them. There also exist rules regarding damage assignment across writeups with Multiform and such lims as "takes proportional damage" appear in a variety of guardian golem builds and is part of the vehicle rules. Again, solving explicitly for the altering sense of size on the Tardis I think is just best done by divorcing the box and the vehicle. If all you want is a time traveling box, then a simple vehicle build works perfectly. Soar.

I didn't answer that very well in my follow up but there is no rrason you can't just handle that the same way you would handle the destruction of a normal focus. Assign it a defense and body related to the base/vehicle design. As the focus takes damage you can see the effects on the base. Of note, it is a rare instance in the show that the TARDIS suffera attacks directly. It is normally a rare and thematically intense moment, thus having a design that tries to capture all rare possibilities is unadvised. For example, as the TARDIS ages, its ability to maintain its size fails and it balloons up to real size. Should we thus also build it so that the Tardis shinks everything and self grows? What about when it self shrinks the Blue Box to parcel size but leaves all the inhabitants the same size so that when they reach out their arms can't even fit out the door? There are just too many one offs to account for everyone. That should be left to the GM to decide on appropriate outcomes as they arise without needing to prebuild them into a more generic McGuffin. Soar.

Hyperman, I think you are misunderstanding my point. You build a static base - one that does not move in time, space, nor dimension. This base is locked away in an alternate dimension that generally can't be interacted with. The only way to enter this dimension is through the EDM door that the TARDIS creates. The TARDIS is capable of 'moving through time and space' by simply choosing a new point for its EDM doorway to reside in but IT, the Base itself, isn't actually moving. There is no mechanical need for the Base to ever move or interacted with in any way from the outside except via the Box. So, I would build the base with all the bells and whistles that would be normally desired PLUS: EDM - Travel to any place or time, 77 base points with UBO, OIF (The Blue Box) and Limited power "Travelers may only travel TO the TARDIS Base (if not already inside) or TO the current location of The Blue Box (if already inside). No need to build strange build arounds to shrink or grow everything. The Mechanical function of the TARDIS is to allow travel through time. So the most salient build should be one that focuses on that. Everything else is just an afterthought (sensors, equipment, beds). Soar.

When it comes to the TARDIS, why build it with shrinking at all? Just build it with the size as normally defined (the inside) and then a EMD gate for an entrance. The Gate is the Blue Box. Soar.

The solution to both of your problems is the same: don't. There is a big difference between Media and Game acceptability. McGuffins in TV like the TARDIS and the Death Note are okay because they don't have to consider more than a single protagonist nor worry about game play enjoyment. The TARDIS would allow an even half way decent player to overcome any issue with no issue. The Deathnote, especially if paired with the TARDIS means that they could kill anyone - even Dr. Destroyer level threats with a single pen stroke. Thus they would really curb your ability to put forth an enjoyable game. Since you said you didn't know about Death Note, allow me to explain the basic premise. There exists literal Gods of Death who can kill essentially anyone at a whim. Part of this is that they keep a notebook in which they inscribe the names of their victims. The principal God of Death (Shinigami) gave his Death Note to a person named Light Yagami. Light is now invested with the full power to cause someone to die, his only requirement being that he needs to know the name and face of his victim. By writing their name in his book and thinking of them while doing so, the victim falls dead of some mundane natural cause within a minute. Yagami can also compel his victim to do other actions leading up to their death, too: stab someone else, call someone, wire all their money somewhere, etc. He may also choose the method of their death if he wants: heart attack, suicide by CO2 poisoning, car accident, etc. The only additional limitation he actually has is also a protection of him: Shinigami death notes do not work on Shinigami nor people vested with a death note - so Light Yagami can not kill or be Killed by other Death note users. There are of course ways to build all of those things (TARDIS and DN) but each would be rather expensive and game breaking. If you desire them to have modified versions of them, perhaps that would be more acceptable but I still think even limited versions of those things would be terribly game breaking. Soar.

On this issue I think there should be two categories: "non-practical" and "pure fluff". The former being things that might have some in game use that the player would like to put on stage and the latter being a power or such that serves no mechanical purpose in the game but is there for flavor. I make this divide because I think that the former should be paid for and the later should not cost anything. I think Superman's X-Ray vision is actually fits in neither of those categories but if I were to put it into one, it would be the former. It has an actual useful purpose even if not always in use. One that I think fits more into this category would be Bruce Wayne's handsomeness. It is rarely explored or used in the comics but I could easily see the player paying a point or two for striking appearance since it could have an effect - Bruce Wayne does mingle with other people. Taking the same example, though, and changing the game setting so that the whole or vast majority of screen time is dedicated to the Batman personality, I would see the fact that Bruce is handsome to be an afterthought and not worth the cost of points. It really isn't doing anything mechanical in the game world. As far as enjoying things like this, I am in that camp. I can still recall that my previous namesake, The Rose, had a power that did exactly that. Being a bit of a "Tuxedo Mask" (Sailormoon Anime character) knockoff, he always had a rose in hand for appropriate dramatic effect. The in-game design was that he could magically-esc create them from thin air. I was perfectly happy to pay points for that ability since I thought it jived quite well with my concept of the character. That said, it was my first character and the actual designing of the character was left to the GM; I just gave him the guidlines and such with my fellow first time hero players and he completed the builds for us. The problem with that is that he didn't always take a practical approach to building things. So instead of doing something like "+5 COM. w/ Gestures, IIF (creates a rose from thin air)" for one point, he went about it using a Major Transform. Since those days I have become much more cognizant of how to build things under the HERO philosophy of mechanics before effects. Soar.

Bullet train? Are you in Japan? As for a "good milkshake", I am perfectly happy with a McDonald's one. Sure, I have had better but I can easily survive with that. Actually, other than a McDonald's one, I haven't had a milkshake in many years. Soar.

So, I kind of gave up reading everything in detail around the time I made my joke post and follow up joke build but I think I will just restate what seemed to be Lucius's point from earlier: we are likely arguing over inches not miles. Most players want the freedom to express their ideas - most GMs want to bring forth a vivid and expressive world in which to operate. To achieve these two goals, some natural limitations are set so that there can be maximum enjoyment from the maximum number of participants (GM, players, observers if any). One of the obvious limitations is in character creation where the GM sets rules for number of points and such. One that isn't stated in that process but comes in more clearly when leveling or using experience is the limitation put on the GM and their ability to meddle with the development of the character. This can be a difficult road to navigate. To navigate that road we should take notice of some of the strategies put in place during character creation. Is the character spending too many points? I.e., have I, the GM, given them too many and will this put them on uneven standing with the others? Is there an issue with difficulty that I haven't noticed but the player is feeling they need to fix with this point buy? This comes in to clear focus when a player feels the need to spend lots of points on CVs. Does the purchasing of X,Y, or Z trample on the niche of another character? While the plus 5 DcV might not unbalance the game, does it mean that THE BLOB! is stepping on THE CAT's design as the nimble dodger? Is this appropriate for the character? This is the hard one because it deals with the balance of player control and GM input into a character. When a person brings to me a Mage character with an Ironman style suit of armor, I have to stop and ask them "does this make sense to you? Why does your Gandolf style mage have a Tony Stark-esc power armor suit?" Of course there could be a reason and the expressing of that backstory is all part of character creation process. And it is here that we are running into issues with character progression. Just as I would want, as GM, for there to be a reason why this player has a Pyromancer, I want there to be a reason why the pyromancer has developed new powers or abilities or skills. This could be as simple as "freak accident off camera" to "she has been brushing up on her programming skills at the local community college on the weekends" to actually roleplaying of those changes. But this is where I bring in one of the basic golden rules of HERO: Nothing should cost points if it is never used***. If a character is buying some MD and their MD isn't breaking the first three rules, then ask yourself "why would this character develop MD all of a sudden?" If the player can't generate an answer for that other than "I want it" then perhaps the player should reconsider the purchase or have it denied. If the player can give a cogent reason like "Been dealing with a mentalist villain recently and I have finally had the chance to brush up on my mind muscles" and you know they have since you have been using MindBlasts and such against them recently, then go with it. But if the player stated that with no in-game RP of such events, then I can easily see why the GM would either say no outright or, preferably, allow the player the chance to work through a situation and develop those powers. To comeback to Lucius's sentiments on the matter - being forced to roleplay each individual point expense on PS: Housewife is too much. The Indian Jones stand in character developing teleportation out of the blue with no RP is perhaps too lenient. There is a middle ground to be reach. Everyone's exact comfortable medium is perhaps a bit different but for the most part we are all likely inches away from perfect alignment, not miles. Soar. PS - I actually want a milkshake... I haven't had one in a long time. ***On my second reading I noticed this didn't flow the way I wanted and I am not going to change the post drastically after submission to fix it. The thing here is that if the player is enhancing a skill, for example, then they have probably used that skill already in game - otherwise the player probably wouldn't have given it a second thought. To me that is justification enough as the skill as been put on display in game. The only concerns left are with the first three points I made. If the player is buying a new power, like MD or a new skill like PS: housewife, then they must be wanting these to be used in game. If those purchases won't show up in game (no Mental attacks are used in the game world or there will never been a scenario in which PS: housewife will be a legitimate roll), then be straight with the player and tell them to not buy it for that reason. If they will show up in the game but by buying MD or PS:HW they are stepping on a niche, deny it because of THAT reason. If it is not stepping on someone's niche, then it is just an issue of justification - I found a b/f, fell in love, got engaged and married and now do lots of housework, etc. But does it make sense for such a major event to have happened off camera? If not, then maybe require some on-camera.

I personally think the evolution of a private security force being given actual police powers (ability to legally detain or arrest, maintain an armed presence on public property and enter private property, ability to request and receive warrants, etc) would not be a reasonable transition. While I do fully understand the Private Security forces that guard warehouses, R&D labs, etc. of a MegaCorp, I just don't see the normal police becoming fully sponsored and subservient goons of any particular corp. There is a leap of disbelief there that is too great for me. It is in response to that issue that I proposed this 'local guard' scenario in which there still exists a distopian police force that presides over locally organized groups that grew out of a general disdain for inept, racist, sexist, and/or ineffectual police units. Of course what started as a good and perhaps reasonable counter to corruption and such has fallen as so many other institutions have due to genre mandates but still within the bounds of reason. Everyone is free to think as they will and accept what they will, but once again, I personally have always found the idea of the Shadowrun-esc privatization of all local police and other arms of the judiciary a bit suspect and even more so with the rise in authority of private security forces. Soar.

For all of those out there who do not know what I am referencing: Soar.

"My Milkshake Brings all the Boys to the Yard" : 4d6 Mind Control: 1 continuing and recoverable charge with cumulative, area of effect 1 hex + megascale & only verse boys, set command (come to the yard with the milkshake), OAF (Milkshake), gestures (mixing the milkshake). That should be more than strong enough to lure any standard "boy" to the yard. ^^ I hope that helps. Soar.

Ya know what: My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard and they're like its better than yours. Damn right its better than yours. I could teach you but I'd have to write a very long post about it and delve into tons of overly critical responses. So I wont. But my milkshake does bring all the boys to the yard. Soar.

Hyper-man's quote is spot on. The only real issue is if the player rolls each attack separately or uses one single roll. That is up to the GM to decide but both ways have advantages and disadvantages. Soar.