phoenix240

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings Our Wyldstrike Universe games have a pretty inclusive mindset. There are several prominent gay and lesbian NPCs, Free Spirit is openly bisexual and poly-amorous and a few PCs. Brickhouse is openly bisexual Fisticuffs is gay and hoping to marry his long term partner Impact is unsure of her sexuality but thinks she may be a lesbian Omega is openly gay but single Tao is a hermaphrodite so technically bisexual though shi has yet to display any drive towards romantic or sexual relationship at all. Edit: How did I leave out Null. He was the first gay character in the game.

Homosexual characters came up in an earlier thread (discussing the Vandeleur Twin, IIRC) and someone mentioned that there were several in the Champions Universe. Does anyone know who they are off hand? Also, do alternate sexualities come up much in your supers games? Are any of the major characters PC or NPC GBLT?

Re: [Character] Behemoth....not for the point squeamish That Behemoth's one Bad Mutha- SHUT YO MOUTH! Jus' talking 'bout Behemoth! We can dig it! Sorry, that seemed appropriate for some reason. Cool character, definitely a terror!

Re: How can mutants be discriminated against while other "supers" get a pass?

Re: How can mutants be discriminated against while other "supers" get a pass? That's an interesting idea and given Magneto's background a solid one, IMO.

Re: What defines a Superhuman?

Re: What is MIGHTY? Was anyone else secretly hoping the OP would pick Yiddish?

Re: How can mutants be discriminated against while other "supers" get a pass? Very true

Re: How can mutants be discriminated against while other "supers" get a pass?

Re: What defines a Superhuman? Hawkeye. Edit: Scooped.

Re: What defines a Superhuman? I try to define Superhuman by the setting as well. Captain America is the pinnicale of human possbility for the Marvel Universe, Batman is a "normal" man in the DC universe. Theoretically, other humans in the setting could reach their level but in the real world they both might be called Superhuman. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any major comic book hero or villain that hadn't done something generally considererd impossible in the real world. Rwo more extreme examples are Krillin and Master Roshi from the Dragonball franchise. Their both ostensibly human, normal but extremely talented. Both are capable of feats like, flying at mach speeds under their own power, shattering mountains, and, in Master Roshi's case, blowing up the moon* with an energy blast. Technically, neither is "superhuman" by the settibgs standards. Humans can learn these skills, they're just at an extremely good/legendary level. But in the real world? Definitely superhuman. *more like a larger asteroid, the moon is much smaller in the DBZ universe.

Re: How can mutants be discriminated against while other "supers" get a pass? Maybe some incident in the setting's history could start the hate and distrust, maybe a tragic incident that kills allot of people or a spree of mutant related (or believed to be related) crimes and terrorism. There might be a movement among mutants that puts fourth they are a separate race and so beyond humanity's laws. The Teragen from White Wolf's Aberrant setting are a good example. Even if all (or even most) mutants that subscribe to that they could all be smeared with the same brush.

Re: What defines a Superhuman? Well, no but that wasn't my point. The idea was what Cap went through could be seen as an ehanced version of these incidents just like everyone else he does is "human" but dailed up to 11. It's one way to justify it under the he's the ultimate in human potential idea. I generally feel its just a handwave to comic book science like how Mr Freeze can freeze people solid but they're fine when Batman melts them out sometimes hours later.

Re: What defines a Superhuman? Well, there's the link RexMundi provided and there's a been a few other accounts. I was rather impressed with that one myself. The one's I've heard have been matters of minutes, maybe an hour not days.

Re: What defines a Superhuman?

Re: What defines a Superhuman? I wouldn't say getting Powers (in the Hero System mechanics sense) automatically makes a character superhuman. Like allot of things its boils down to special effects. Power can represent everything from perfectly mundane equipment to exceptional (but mundane in the sense any human could theoretically learn them) talents.

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things Very well put.

Re: "We're just here to help -- honest!" Out of curiosity, what was this inspired by?

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things

Re: THE BOOK OF THE EMPRESS -- What Do *You* Want To See? Does this count as a preview?

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things Well, I'm sorry you feel that I am poor GM. The people I play with seem to be enjoying themselves so its all good.

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things We've lowered the Disadvantage total required for quite awhile so its really not that different.

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things I've been rolling around an idea about trying to get the best of both worlds and splitting flaws into two categories, call them Soft and Hard (for lack of a better term). "Hard" flaws would be mechanical, things like Vulnerabilities, Susceptibilities, etc. Generally in the hands of the GM. "Soft" Flaws would be more RP based, Psych Lims, Social problems, Hunted, phsyical handicaps, etc. Hard flaws would give points up front, Soft flaws would be rewarded if/when they come up in play as a hinderance. The player could forgo the bennie and ignore them if they wished. But that's getting off topic

Re: Ok GM's weigh in. We've been talking players CvK...how do you handle these things I have no doubts but I didn't question abilities as a GM because I don't agree with how you'd handle something. FYI: I'm using 5th edition. Just in case I've drastically misunderstood something. If you take no Complications your character has the same amount of points as those that start with their allotment of Complication? They're entirely optional? But you can role play a character without something written down. I feel that if you get a mechanical reward for it there should be some repercussions for ignoring it. As for the example stated we actually don't know what happened aside from he violated his CvK "without hesitation" but was "traumatized" by it. If the was satisfactory for the GM's game, good for them. I would have handled it differently in my games. But I don't think any minds are going to be changed here and I'd rather let it drop.