Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Vassoom's Achievements

  1. Re: Cool Guns for your Games Indeed it is. It's actually one of the first things I noticed, since my wife has an identical little Hello Kitty chotchke that hangs from her purse... Personally, I think that kind of detail really makes the image.
  2. Re: Cool Guns for your Games Awesome. Thanks for sharing this. The recoil compensation system in these is extremely clever, and I'm glad to see they've made it to market. I've shot a Tommy Gun (M-1928) chambered in .45 ACP, and the lift was quite pronounced. I'd love to try one of these Kriss SMGs and see if it stays on target like they claim... EDIT: Forgot to add that I've had these incorporated in my cyberpunk game since I first heard of them back in 2006 or 2007, using the following stats: STR PER A/R Name Cal OCV RMod Dam STUNx Shots Min Mod Cost Mass Notes ------------- ------- --- ---- ----- ----- ----- --- --- ----- ---- --------- PDI Super X 10mm +1 +1 2d6-1 1d6-1 32 10 +4 61/19 1.90 AF5, iRC3 PDI Super V .45 ACP +1 +1 2d6-1 1d6 28 10 +4 67/20 2.00 AF5, iRC3 Looks like I'll need to modify the magazine capacity down to 25 since I was guessing at the final max capacity.
  3. Re: Cool Guns for your Games The +1 OCV from "Set" will help, but that 1/2 DCV from "Braced" is a killer. Although I suppose he'll get the advantage of partial cover from the drum...
  4. Re: Cool Guns for your Games For my gritty cyberpunk campaign, I like to keep it as realistic as possible for the players while also adding futuristic touches. One of the ways I try to do this is by providing images for the various weapons they come across...since, as they say, style is always in style. So I'll find existing weapons and through the magic of Photoshop, I'll tweak them to try and make them fit the campaign a little better. In my attempt to add to this excellent thread, here's one such firearm, complete with game stats: [ATTACH=CONFIG]42656[/ATTACH] Heckler & Koch MP24 (10mm x 24mm Ca) Submachine Gun [2d6-1 RKA, +1 OCV, +1 RMod, AF5, RC1, Rail, Threaded/QC Lugs, Clear Mag, 40 chgs, 10 STR, +3 PER] A slightly modified version of the highly successful MP5, the MP24 was initially developed to become a less expensive version of the venerable Maschinenpistole Model 5. During redesigns, however, it took on several unique traits of its own, ending up a peer of the still-favorable MP5 rather than its replacement. The MP24 was eventually chambered with the 10x24mm Caseless round that HK was developing at the same time. Even though it was a larger caliber, the caseless round was smaller overall and packed more punch than the 9mm, which was falling out of favor with law enforcement and militaries alike at the time. The MP24 was designed to meet additional special forces requirements for top-of-the-line suppression, which also benefited from the larger caliber round. It supports both threaded and lugged suppressors, and has a unique bolt locking device to silence even the cycling of the bolt from a single silenced round, making the MP24 one of the quietest suppressed firearms in existence. The owner can fine-tune the gas cylinder to dynamically support custom +P or –P rounds as well as turn supersonic rounds subsonic, and it even allows the operator to silently cycle the bolt with manual controls. Although shown here with the larger 40 round extended clear magazine, it also has a smaller 20 round mag which is popular for concealed carry situations. The MP24 supports up to 3 accessory rails, although many owners often keep the default lower receiver foregrip/laser/flashlight combo and only use the top rail for reflex sights or SmartLink units. The weapon actually stems from an amalgam of several HK prototype SMGs that never made it to production: the SMG-I, SMG-II and the MP 2000. All of which, btw, were eventually scuttled with the extremely effective redesign that became the UMP platform (e.g., UMP-9, UMP-40, and UMP-45). I really liked the compact look of the SMG-II along with its outstanding suppression features...something that is fairly important for runners in a cyberpunk campaign in which sneaking through a hostile megacorp's campus undetected might mean the difference between mission success and getting the team pinned down by corporate security forces, for example. So I made a few Photoshop modifications to one of the few SMG-II images I could find by upgrading the ammo from 9x19 to my mythical 10mm x 24mm Caseless (electronic firing) rounds, and I threw in the clear magazine from the G36 for good measure. I also modded the select fire switch from 0,1,3,30 to 0,1,5,40 options to match the AF5 game specs, and thus was the MP24 born. Edit: Not listed in the game specs, btw, is the fact that since it fires caseless ammo, there are no brass casings left behind, so it also technically qualifies for a limited "Invisible Power Effects" advantage. But weapons are "equipment" in my game, so the Active/Real points are immaterial...which is why I didn't bother listing that in the stats.
  5. Re: Fast combat? Well, as Fate would have it, the 5th Edition (Revised) Sourcebook has a handy sidebar starting on page 380: NINE WAYS TO SPEED UP COMBAT 1. Restrict SPDs: The more Actions the participants can take, the longer combats last. Limiting characters to relatively low SPDs (such as a maximum of 4 or 5) can help to speed combats up some. 2. Abolish The Speed Chart: Another approach is to abandon the Speed Chart altogether and allow each character to take, for example, three Actions per Turn (or “one action per round,” with each round defined as being, say, four seconds long). This may require the GM to create some “house rules” to handle Holding an Action, speedster characters, and the like. 3. Be Prepared: The GM should come to the game with a chart for his use listing the DEXs, SPDs, and other relevant combat information for the PCs and their enemies. This allows him to read off the order of combat quickly. Sometimes putting this chart up for everyone to see (by writing it on a chalkboard, for example) helps to keep the players focused on the game (albeit at the expense of letting them see the NPCs’ combat information). 4. Let Players Roll In Advance: If you trust your players, let them make their Attack Rolls and other rolls before you call their DEX in a Phase. That way, instead of having to wait for Fred to roll to hit, then roll damage, then count the damage, you can just have him tell you, “I missed” or “I hit DCV 8 for 38 STUN, 7 BODY.” You could even have each player make twenty or thirty Attack Rolls and damage rolls in advance and write them down on a piece of paper for you. For each one of their attacks, you cross the next entry off the list and describe what happens. 5. Require VPP Preparation: If any PC has a Variable Power Pool, only let him use powers he’s prepared in advance — don’t let him stop in mid-game to create a new gadget, spell, or ability he hasn’t already written up. 6. Use Average Damage: To save time rolling and counting damage, assume all attacks do average damage. If that becomes too predictable, roll 1d6 for damage — on a 1-2, the attack does 25% less damage, on a 5-6 33% more damage. Or, for every point by which a character makes his Attack Roll, increase the average damage of his attack by 10%. 7. Ignore STUN Damage: For some genres, such as Fantasy, you can ignore STUN damage from ordinary attacks without negatively affecting the game. If an attacker wants to Stun (instead of kill) his target, or uses an attack that only does STUN, keep track of STUN damage, but otherwise don’t bother. This also saves the characters from having to engage in the highly unheroic act of administering a coup de grace to every unconscious opponent when the fight ends. 8. Don’t Let NPCs Take Recoveries: For all but the most powerful or important enemies and NPCs, don’t apply Recoveries (even the Post-Segment 12 Recovery). Once they go down, they stay down. 9. Treat Minor NPCs Differently: When the characters are facing “thugs” or other lowpowered, low-quality enemies, don’t calculate every point of damage precisely. One good, solid hit (perhaps any attack, or an attack succeeding by 3 or more on the Attack Roll) takes any thug out of the combat. I, for one, can vouch for numbers 3, 5, 8 and 9. They help a lot just by themselves. Others (above) mentioned #4, and I hear that helps (but, personally, I've always enjoyed the dice rolling part of combat, and doing it beforehand just seems wrong to me.) That said, I don't really see much difference in the speed of combat between 4E and 5E. I guess, though, that if you are looking for a system that, as you describe it, "can handle combat quickly and keep things cinematic, with car chases, two guns blazing firefights, and furious martial arts action, all without slowing to a crawl", and want to know if HERO can handle that, the answer is a resounding "possibly". It really all depends on the GM. I've played HERO campaigns where the GM would instantly "hand-wave" all of the extra rolls (by determining Hit Location himself, for example), and since he knew all of the rules inside out, he could keep the action moving very swiftly. Other GMs, on the other hand, don't seem to mind the "meticulousness" and "granularity" of some HERO combat mechanics, and they tend to mosey along at a much slower pace. My recommendation: Use many or all of the above 9 suggestions, and then add a couple more of your own. For example, if you are playing "Dark Champions", but your characters are "good guys" who rarely kill anyone, then ignore BODY damage, and "hand wave" the bleeding stuff as you see fit. If you are looking for a darker, grittier campaign...then keep the BODY damage, but skip "extra" steps that require more dice rolls such as Hit Location, Knockdown, EGO rolls, etc. As the primary storyteller, the GM should always have license to creatively fill in those details as they see fit anyway, rather than simply relying on dice rolls. The GM sets the tone. If you want "fast and furious", you can always get it there by simply using the HERO rules as a guide, rather than an instruction manual. - Vassoom
  6. Re: Firing Into Melee, a rules quandary Fair enough. I just don't think that when you miss your initial target, it's fair to have those characters with higher DEX be much more likely to hit the unintended target than the shooters with lower DEX. I guess it's just me. *shrug* - Vassoom
  7. Re: Firing Into Melee, a rules quandary Yes, that's a very cogent rationalization for the ruling, I suppose...but it still doesn't get at the core of the ruling's problem, which is that it penalizes the more gifted combatant, which is counter-intuitive. I considered the idea of using a flat OCV, but that also struck me as somewhat arbitrary. What should I set the baseline OCV equal to? Do I keep bumping up the baseline OCV used as the characters gain XP to keep the percentages the same? Or do I let their XP (and presumably, therefore, DEX gains) slowly diminish the likelihood of hitting an unintended target? And this still wouldn't really address careful shots into melee versus reckless shots into the scrum. Hmm. Right after I posted the above conundrum, I started tossing around a few ideas on how I might possibly resolve it...and I think I've hit upon something pretty good. I'd be interested in hearing what you think. Here it is: Instead of using the purely DEX-based OCV or using an arbitrarily assigned base OCV, what if the attacker's OCV was set to however much they missed their initial target by? Here's the example: NPC and the Villain are in HTH combat, with the Hero and the Mook on the sidelines. Hero: Dex 20 (OCV 7), +2 OCV w/ firearm from CSLs Mook: Dex 10 (OCV 3), No CSLs, but at least a weapon familiarity HTH Villain: DCV 6 HTH NPC: DCV 6 Scenario #1: Hero fires at the villain with a single, careful shot. He has a 9 OCV. Attack Roll is 15, missing by 1. Therefore, his OCV to accidentally hit the NPC is a 1, which versus a 6 DCV means he would only hit the NPC on a 6 or less (9.3% chance). Scenario #2: Hero fires at the villain using a more reckless 3-shot Rapid Fire (-4 OCV). He has a 5 OCV. Attack Roll is 15, missing by 5. Therefore, his OCV to accidentally hit the NPC is a 5, which versus a 6 DCV means he would hit the NPC on a 10 or less (50.0% chance). Scenario #3: Mook unwisely fires at the NPC with a single shot. He has a 3 OCV. Attack Roll is 15, missing by 7. Therefore, his OCV to accidentally hit the Villain is a 7, which versus a 6 DCV means he would hit the Villain on a 12 or less (74.1% chance). This method rewards those with a higher DEX and more CSLs since those are always going to factor into how much the attacker initially misses by. It also penalizes those making reckless attacks into melee, since doing so would automatically increase the likelihood of missing by a lot, thereby increasing their OCV versus the unintended target(s). This method would also allow you to easily keep the book's DC "Combat Shooting" Talent's defined +5 OCV for purposes of not hitting an unintended target. As a house rule replacement for "Firing Into Melee", I think it may be a winner. Let me know what you think... - Vassoom
  8. I'd like to solicit some more advice from the Dark Champions gurus out there. In my hero-level near-future Dark Champions game, nearly everyone uses firearms, although there are still times when either one of the characters or a bad guy moves in for good ol' hand-to-hand combat. The problem arises when the characters (or villains) elect to shoot at someone who is in the midst of a HTH melee. What happens when the attacker with the firearm (or missile weapon) misses, and how often might an unintended target be struck? Putting aside for the moment the "Combat Shooting" Talent (DC, page 90), let's look at what the book says happens. Page 179 of Dark Champions addresses this issue, but the official ruling bothers me for two reasons. The ruling states that the GM can use the Concealment rules to help determine the likelihood of striking someone other than the target. I don't have a problem with this aspect of the ruling. However, it then goes on to state that if the attack is deemed to miss but is less than or equal to the Concealment penalty applied, the GM should determine the likely candidate among the unintended targets, and then the following second attack roll is made: I have emphasized the portions of the ruling that gives me trouble, namely:The OCV used to determine whether or not the unintended target is struck is the base OCV from DEX, and The attacker gets no adjustments for Combat Skill Levels or Combat Maneuvers, etc. These two parts strikes me as antithetical for two reasons. The first is that according to this framework, the more Dexterous you are (e.g., the higher your base OCV is), the more likely you are to hit an unintended target whenever you miss! Secondly, (barring the use of the Combat Shooting Talent), an expertly trained marksman is just as likely as a completely unskilled shooter to strike the unintended target, i.e., there is no "reward" for practice/skill levels here. (As a corollary, by excluding maneuvers, a carefully lined up shot is no less likely to hit the wrong target than a reckless hipshot.) The best way to exemplify my problem with this ruling is by example. Let's assume that an important NPC and the nefarious Villain are duking it out in HTH combat. On the sidelines we have both our overeager Hero as well as one of the villain's overzealous henchman Mooks. For the purposes of this example, both the NPC and the Villain (the HTH combatants) are DCV 6. Also for the purposes of this scenario, let's say our Hero is a gifted and highly trained marksman, with a DEX of 20 and 2 Combat Skill Levels with his firearm. The untrained Mook, on the other hand, has a DEX of 10 and doesn't even have proficiency with the gun he just picked up off the floor. Now, let's assume both our overeager Hero and the overzealous Mook decide to shoot into the melee, and that both of them manage to just miss, thereby enabling the official "firing into melee" ruling. Based upon the ruling as stated, our expert marksman with a base OCV of 7 is nearly three times as likely to hit the DCV 6 unintended target (12-, 74.1% of the time) as the unskilled Mook with an OCV of 3 (8-, 25.9% of the time)! How in the world does this make any sense?!? God forbid the Hero be a gifted superhuman with a DEX of 28 and a base OCV of 9...he'll hit the poor NPC 91% of the time! Granted, I understand that a more skilled marksman may initially miss their target less often, but even if all else is equal, the more Dexterous shooter is still penalized, and that doesn't sit well with me. [As a second example, assume the Hero is merely gifted but not an expert marksman, and his 7 OCV is based solely on his 20 DEX, while the "average" 10 DEX Mook is a former military marksman who has 4 CSLs with firearms that raises his final OCV to 7, as well. So now both of them have the exact same chance of missing initially, but the Hero (with the higher DEX) is still 3x more likely to strike the unintended target! Huh?] You wanna know how broken this rule is? The Hero is actually better off using a weapon that he is completely unfamiliar with and taking the -3 OCV penalty to his OCV, not applying any CSLs, then Hurrying (another -2 OCV) his 3-shot Rapid Fire attack (another -4 OCV), but all the while initially aiming at the NPC, since he's virtually assured of MISSING HIM with all 3 shots (needs a Natural 3 to hit, for a mere 0.5% chance of "accidentally" hitting the good guy) but knowing that he then gets his base OCV of 7 against the other guy in melee and is therefore 74% likely to hit the VILLAIN! Am I missing something, or does anyone else also have a problem with this ruling? I'm thinking of scrapping this Bizarro-World ruling and coming up with a house rule that is the opposite, wherein the more gifted you are (higher DEX), the more skilled you are (appropriate training and CSLs), and the more proficient you are (other OCV modifiers like, say...Weapon Familiarity), the LESS likely you are to hit that innocent bystander or unintended target. That being said, I'm not sure exactly how to design that rule yet. Has anyone out there already done so? And if not, got any ideas? I already use an optional critical/fumble system that takes into account the *really* bad "Oops!" scenarios...but I need to create a ruling that handles misses when firing into melee that aren't catastrophically bad Attack Rolls. No matter how I eventually define the new rule about shooting into melee, the following three things should always be kept in mind: It should help reinforce that it's rarely a really good idea to shoot into melee It should easily allow for something like the Combat Shooting Talent to be applied in a beneficial way (in order to encourage its use) It should penalize the less dexterous, less skilled, and less proficient shooters, not the other way around With that said, let's open the floor to comments and suggestions... - Vassoom
  9. Re: Rocket-propelled Chainsaw Ah. Wanted to confirm whether or not we had another artist in our midst... Neat panel. - Vassoom
  10. Re: Rocket-propelled Chainsaw Look at the diagram again. There's already a start button on the side. - Vassoom
  11. Re: Rocket-propelled Chainsaw OMG...that's awesome, fw! Did you draw that?!? - Vassoom
  12. Re: Seeking MA Info/Help Very good, but you forgot: 5 Off-Topic Post -1 +2 2d6 NND, Target Falls And let's not forget: 4 Flame Poster -2 +0 HKA ½d6 (2 DC), 10 STR(Rep Power) Min, +1 DC per +10 Rep Power - Vassoom
  • Create New...