Erkenfresh

Re: Different ID, Different Focus So, something like this perhaps: High-Tech collapsable Kendo: (Total: 69 Active Cost, 33 Real Cost) Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 3d6 (3 1/2d6 w/STR) (45 Active Points); OAF (-1) (Real Cost: 22) plus Armor (6 PD/0 ED), Only in heroic identity (+0) (9 Active Points); OAF (-1), Only against melee weapons (-1/2) (Real Cost: 4) plus +5 DEX, Only in Heroic Identity (+0) (15 Active Points); OAF (-1) (Real Cost: 7)

Re: Different ID, Different Focus Oh, and I also agree that having two distinct swords shouldn't make you pay extra points for the one that's not so good. Maybe you just purchase the one "super sword" as a compound power and those effects that don't work with the regular sword could have the OIHID limitation. But, considering you're already getting OAF or OIF with the sword, the OIHID might only be worth a -0.

Re: Different ID, Different Focus It seems most reasonable for the armor to be an OIF. The fact that you can't instantly put it on is a special effect of the armor, not really worth additional points. Besides, OIF is worth -1/2 and OIHID is -1/4, and it doesn't make much sense to get both so you're better off taking the OIF -1/2. As for your idea of buying Armor to represent blocking with the sword, it seems to me that you should just buy Martial Block to simulate this effect. But, I sort of see what you're saying though that you minimize the damage without using up one of your phases by deflecting the incoming weapon to make a glancing blow too. In that case, perhaps you should get Armor with OAF and "Only against melee weapons". So, you can only use the sword to redirect hand weapons but not Cyclop's eye beam or a bullet or the heat from a burning house.

OK, so characteristic "powers" are bought for 1 point per characteristic point. Aid costs 10 points per 1d6 (roughly 3.5 characteristic points). Aid comes with some advantages built in, like you can give it to others. Characteristics come with the persistent advantage. Let's say I want to make a spell to give a friend +10 STR. I could use Aid or Characterisitc. Super Strength I - Aid 3d6 to STR (Real Cost: 30 points), fades at 5 points per turn Super Strength II - STR +10, Usable by others (+1/4), Persistant (+1/2) (Real Cost: 17 points), lasts forever? I think I'm missing something fundamental here. What am I doing wrong? Super Strength II costs a lot less than Super Strength I. I realize Super Strength I could go up to 18 STR but it could also be as small as 3 STR. And, Super Strength I fades in a couple of minutes whereas Super Strength II doesn't appear to ever fade.

Re: Magic system opinions Another question, let's say I want a spell to create a force field around one of my allies. Am I right in saying I should use Usable On Others (+1/4), Persistent (+1/2), Costs END only to activate (-1/4)? And, if this is in a framework then it eats up points in the framework to lockout other spells right? Is there an option to use lingering/uncontrollable instead? (This is still a bit confusing to me.)

Re: Combat Skill Levels Mmmmm, I love popcorn! That's OK though, I'll take your word for it. You don't get to a 5th edition without putting some thought into the rules.

Re: Combat Skill Levels You're forgetting about the NCM. But still, your argument is valid. Why then are HKA's not 10 points per d6? I'm sure that raises some issues too.

Re: Magic system opinions Ahh, also, I might add an endurance reserve. It has many benefits pointed out by Thia such as a way to limit spells per day. But maybe the LTE side effect is enough for this?

Re: Magic system opinions That's quite a long post there Thia! Throughout the day, I was thinking some more about it. I might go something like this: 1. Magic-users buy a Cosmic VPP. The control cost has: Cosmic (+2), Variable Limits (-1 worth, -1/2), Concentration (-1/4), Delayed Phase (-1/4), Slightly Limited Class of powers (Magic, -1/4), Side effects (LTE, -1/2), Only from a list of known spells (-1/4). How convenient, the limitations and advantages are equal. So, 10 points of pool = 15 character points. 2. All spells must cost endurance. 3. The LTE side effect is as from KS's web site: http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/Adeptology.shtml 4. Magic-users get the amount of VPP points divided by 5 in spells in the "known list" (perhaps this could be based on stats instead, EGO/5 + INT/5 or some such thing). They can add additional spells at the cost of 2 points each, regardless of it's active or real cost. 5. Magic-users must practice learning the new spell before they can add it to their "known list". This would be based on a Magic skill roll, a seperate one for each school of magic. Failure means they have to try again, success means they can add it. Bonuses/penalties apply like a -1 penalty for each 10 points of Real Cost, +1 if they already have a similar spell, +1 if they make an appropriate complimentary skill roll (like PS:Blacksmithing for a spell to summon a sword). Just because the VPP increases in size doesn't mean all the spells within do as well. The Magic-user will have to practice upgrades for them but will be much faster than starting from scratch. Perhaps 1 day per 10 Real Cost of practice would be fitting. How's it sounding so far?

Re: Magic system opinions Bullseye, I'm also leaning towards END over Charges. It will be a refreshing difference from D&D style magic. The main benefit I see is that the player can choose a few big spells or lots of little spells every day. He'll have to think about loosing his most powerful spells too early and losing all his little ones. Killer Shrike, the Volomancy thingy is just about right. That's looking pretty good. I'm gonna let this stew while I'm at work tomorrow. Sometimes a break is all you need (especially when you have an awesome book called Feast for Crows to read).

Re: Magic system opinions Err, I think I read the "Set Spell List" wrong initially. What I meant was, the player would have to research new spells to add to the VPP. Each spell might cost a few points just to prevent someone from covering all possible powers too quickly. So, it's like a combination of adeptology and wizardry. I don't like the idea of my players coming up with powers on the fly, I could see that slowing play down quite a bit.

Re: Magic system opinions Ahh, that is another excellent idea. I'll pick #2! You could even say the "Variable SFX" advantage would be acceptable so you could choose at the time of casting. This keeps getting better and better.

Re: Magic system opinions I like the idea of a spell possibly fizzling. I am thinking of magic being a force of will. The harder you push yourself, the more chance of it not working the way you want it to, unless you've mastered the ability to control it. But, at the same time, it may slow the game down or be less fun for everybody. I'm thinking of a couple of possible options here. One would be the Turakian Age method of the player paying Real Cost/3 points per spell. In this case, I'd need to keep endurance in play as a Frequency Control. It's a bit rough, a player could easily dump all their points into just a few spells which leaves little room for anything else. Looking at your adeptology system seems promising too. LTE and END provide good Frequency Control. The "Set Spell List" option would probably be in effect for my campaign providing Acquisition Control with required research, maybe even spending a few character points per spell even though they are part of the VPP. I can still have my schools of magic idea by requiring a seperate research roll for each school. It's sounding so good, I might just dump the whole RSR idea. This system seems really expensive but I think it will allow the character to get many different spells without going overboard. One more question, how do you encourage players to take "Conditional Power" limitations without providing a spell list that they have to choose from? I can probably do it on a case by case basis as the player makes them up but a general rule would be helpful. Thanks again, you guys are very helpful. Getting the brain juices flowing.

Re: Combat Skill Levels Ahhh. It seems like normal hand attacks get a lot of perks doesn't it? Why does HA have an inherent -1/2 limitation (hand attack) and HKA does not?

Re: Magic system opinions The tiered approach you just linked is very interesting. One main thing I want is splitting up schools of magic to prevent too much versatility. If a player wants to dip into several schools of magic, it's gonna get costly. Perhaps I could do something similar but add a RSR to it with a seperate roll for each school. Charges gets rid of worrying about endurance reserves and having a seperate set of charges on each "spell level" guarantees that a player will have a large set of spells at various active point levels. I'll have to think about this some more. This is all very helpful info.

Re: Character ideas for a new player Hey, it's Master Roshi! Good stuff. I'm curious, why does everyone stop at 15 STR?

Re: Magic system opinions "Meditation to gain mana" sounds like UO. Did you ever play it? I played mainly on Siege Perilous.

Re: Combat Skill Levels I thought DC's were subject to the advantages of the power being used. It works that way with strength I know. So a sword loaded up with +20 in advantages would require 105 STR per DC!

Re: Magic system opinions All very good suggestions so far! I like the idea of using LTE to limit spells per day over just capping their REC. Considering REC is really cheap (especially at the -3 or so granted by Extra Time 6 hours), it might not be very limiting at all. Captain Obvious: I may try making a spellcaster without the MPP's to see what happens. I think I'd need a divisor for the real cost in this case but it definitely gives a huge reason to take conditional power limitations. Ghost-Angel: Yes, I see what you mean with the flexible slots. Still, the difference is something on the order of 3 or 4 points. Thia: I think you've got a good suggestion there. As a ground rule, every spell should have at least -1 worth of "Conditional Power" limitations. You can't build a Protection from everything spell under these conditions and the player would have to be creative to make spells like Force Field (only in sunlight). I'm worried that this might be too limiting for certain powers. Like, if I want to "Heal BODY", it really should work. So, perhaps the required Conditional limitations could vary from school to school. I'm not quite sure yet. Now the tiered system you mention, this is where you have a VPP and the spells inside take Charges 1? This is a great system but I want to avoid preparation. I'm going for a more D&D "sorceror" like feel. Killer Shrike: I read the Metier system earlier and it is cool. So, basically the more limitations you take, the more advantages you can take too. That could work very well here. Basically, you can have your Force-Field-against-everything but if you want a Reduced Endurance Force Field, you'll have to find a Conditional Power limitation to balance it. Not too shabby. The Thanomancy idea is awesome, perhaps the magic-users in my world are dependent on some substance like "magic water" (cheesy sounding yes but I'm sure I can come up with a better name). Perhaps it could be in limited supply... This would be an interesting point in my campaign's story where some magic users are rejected as being evil (even though they really aren't).

Alright, I'm coming up with a magic system for my campaign. I've looked over Killer Shrike's awesome web site and read his posts here and it's all very helpful. My first idea was this: 1. Each spellcaster must purchase an Endurance Reserve and the Recovery must take (Extra Time: 6 hours). All spells must cost endurance either naturally or by taking the limitation. 2. Magic is split up into 6 schools. Each school is purchased as a multipower pool and has a separate RSR limitation such as RSR Magic:Restoration, RSR: Protection, etc. 3. Limitations can be loaded up on the multipower, I found it fairly easy to get -1 1/2 since RSR is -1/2. 4. Spells are then purchased into the multipower and can have their own advantages/limitations in addition to the multipower's. 5. Players can make up any spells they want as long as it fits the theme of the school of magic. My goal is magic shouldn't get too powerful. If the character wants a 80 point EB, I want him to put a lot of points to get there. I also like the idea that a character shouldn't be able to dabble in too many schools of magic. But, I've already met with a couple of concerns. New spells are extremely cheap. 60 active point spells cost a mere 3 points in the multipower. This is both good and bad. It makes diversification more attractive to the player which is good. What's bad is that limitations like "Only works against fire" are completely worthless. Why purchase "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED), Only against fire" for 1 point when you can have "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED) for 2 points? I imagine I can create spell lists that the players have to choose from but I really want them to be creative on their own. It's much more interesting to have the player have to think "Hmm, I wonder if that dragon's breath is fire or if it's cold so maybe I should cast Protection from Ice" as opposed to "Yeah, I know the dragon is dangerous so just put up the invinci-shield". Any thoughts on this?

Re: Character ideas for a new player If your GM allows Combat Luck, take a level of that.

Re: converting Wow (world of warcraft) to hero I play WoW and the class/level systems are very restrictive. I'm just not sure it would translate very well into HERO. But, if you really must do it... I think you'd have to start off making class packages for each of the WoW classes. So the hunter package would include an animal companion and some 5 point ranged CSLs for example. The rogue class would have PS:Brew Poison and perhaps a Deadly Blow that only works from behind or on surprised targets to simulate Ambush/Backstab. Now, if you really wanna be WoW-like, you'd have to make your players take nothing outside of these packages. So, the packages would have to be huge, big enough that the players won't be able to buy everything throughout your entire campaign. Granted, you might allow two professional skills such as PS: Blacksmithing, PS: Mining, PS: Tailoring, etc. In order to give the level feel, you could simply put limits on what your players are allowed to buy. KillerShrike uses this method for example to say "You may only get one general Deadly Blow per 100 character points and one limited Deadly Blow per 50 character points." You can put similar limits on CSLs to prevent a player buying +30 OCV with daggers for just 60 points and NEVER missing ever. I think this is a good thing and I will probably use a similar method in my campaign to give a guideline. Also, there's magic items galore in WoW. If you've read Fantasy Hero, you should know how to construct magic items. To simulate the "soulbound" quality of magic items, you might have the independent limitation disappear when the item is first used by the character (like it becomes a part of the character). Or simply put, transfer the item from the equipment list to the powers list upon first use. You can't trade powers (not very easily anyway)!

Re: Combat Skill Levels 2 CSLs for 1 DC is a ripoff but 1 CSL for 1 DC is too good. ;P Maybe a 3 CSLs for 2 DC would be nice.

Re: Combat Skill Levels Ahhh OK, I see it now in the book. For some reason, this is a lot to take in with just one reading. Now, I just have to convey it to my players. That should be a good time.

Re: Combat Skill Levels OK, so this is mainly to facilitate CSL's taken to represent DCV bonuses due to size? Or should those be 8 point CSL's taken with "only for DCV (-1/2)"?