Christopher R Taylor

Quote

However, the 6e text of Telekinesis seems to forbid applying that STR per unit volume of a larger AoE

Yeah and while I basically understand the idea behind that ruling?  It negates a lot of builds from the comics and effects from movies, books etc. I mean, technically you can build them, but it takes a zillion points.  So its a violation of consistency between builds that greatly hampers simulating the genre which makes it... not a great rule.  Look at how many points it would take just to part a swimming pool, let alone the Red Sea.  It expensive enough already to do fancy stuff with TK without altering the area effect rules just in case Joey Munchkin finds a killer build.

Quote

Water is considerably less dense than stone and over the same volume would not have placed it at more than 1/2 the body of stone, if that high

Stone shatters pretty easily though, it fragments.  Softer things are harder to do permanent damage to in that way; water is noncompressible so I figured it should be somewhat near stone but not as high.  Water also tends to absorb impact rather than be damaged by it, so its not something that is going to be easy to wipe out.  I mean look at how much energy it takes just to get water to boil?  How many body is that?

God had a lot of points in TK to get the red sea to part; at the narrowest area where the Hebrews are said to have crossed is about 12 to 20 miles (19 to 32 km). Its 230 feet (about 37m) deep.  That's a pretty enormous AE (there is a point at which the area effect becomes cheaper than buying just STR because of doubling).

Thanks for the correction, I used a website to give volume and weight of water, and the 2000kg didn't feel right (because of cubing) but I was too tired to do the math personally.

Quote

So to create a spell that makes a 16 meter radius of water via Transform, you have to have a BODY Characteristic.

Remember again, you only have to affect a 2m area of water and that affects everything in the area the same way.  Just like a 6d6 blast does the 6d6 to everything identically in a radius effect to each 2m area.

I estimated a 2m area of water to have 16 body based on other substances, but I am open to debate on the subject.

You'll all get a real boot out of this one:
 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/sports-illustrated-found-publishing-ai-generated-stories-photos-and-authors

Quote

Doing it as transform into water just makes water that splashes away.

The nice thing about transform is that you can make the air into anything so it can be "water that defies gravity" if you want.

Quote

Currently I'm puzzling over the reverse of this: opening a gap in a body of water, a la Moses parting the Red Sea. Telekinesis to force the water apart is the simplest

The trick is to remember that area effect applies the same effect to the entire area, so you don't have to move all of the water, just however much 2 cubic meters of water weighs (2000 kg, I believe).  That's a pretty hefty telekinesis still (around 32 STR) and you just apply it to an area effect line of the chosen size.  Each and every 2m area in that line has 32 STR applied to it to push it to the side and hold it there.

Transform works: air into water; but its special water that stays in the area without being held by boundaries.  Probably a Major transform though that is a pretty radical change.

Create Object from the Advanced Player Guide works well for this also: it actually makes water in an area.  But it will behave exactly like normal water so if nothing is holding it in place, it will immediately spread out to the lowest parts of the area.

Honestly the pop culture acceptance and even embracing of geek culture annoys me.  It was our thing, our special thing we got to do and weren't bothered by anyone else.  We had our own language, we had our own references.  Now that Iron Man is cool, he's not... cool, if you know what I mean.  Losing our niche makes it less special and now we get it cheapened by modern advertising etc.

My brother was a big Chronopia fan, they had some great minis but I don't know if its even around any more

Toth was amazing, its sad how little of his design and style ended up in Space Ghost because its such a killer concept.

Its more than brand connection like Kleenex, its just the only RPG they know exists.  Its like Reggae, if you ask most people, to the extent they have even heard of the music, they only know Bob Marley.

Fafhrd and Gray Mouser as well as Elric, Nine Princes in Amber, and Conan all rejected the medieval serf-lord structure for their stories.  Lord of the Rings, Narnia, and other classic fantasy stories had no such culture.  I agree its very common and typical, but isn't the necessary benchplate.

Quote

D&D gets the players because they have the money for lots of adds, not because of the value of the game.

Having popular and famous people play the game in streaming helped a lot, too.  So do shows like Stranger Things that feature it.

Quote

So if it is more complex than Hero, something else is helping to bring people in

D&D has a reputation of being easy to play and learn.  To the extent people have even heard of Hero, it has a reputation of being horribly crunchy and difficult to learn.  The things I listed are where that myth comes from, which new players are told all about if it comes up.  I don't think D&D is more complicated than Hero, but easily as complicated.

Quote

mostly to it's complete lack of logic or reason-- excels at making magic feel like magic in a way that HERO just can't do with it's brick-by-brick Lego-style approach to building "powers."

Yeah part of what makes D*D magic feel special is the fire and forget and chaotic spell listing.  However, I think you can simulate that with Hero by hiding most of the guts, the build behind a wall where the players only see the effects and how to make it work, and not the sausage-making part.

Quote

I feel pretty certain that the correct definition and examples of "classic fantasy" is going to vary significantly from one human being to another.

Yeah each person has a specific idea in their head when they hear this but I think most people known what I mean when I say "not with a twist" like "My orcs are 9 feet all and use rocket packs!" or "My dragons are actually terrifying Cthulhuian monsters!" etc.  Its not a faux western, its not sci fi with swords, its not fantasy + steampunk.  Its just low tech some magic and some monsters.

Quote

I'm still not exactly sure how you're supposed to play in a roleplaying game where magic isn't explained

I know what you mean, and I don't think you're trying to be a jerk here. I'm not sure you're capable of being a jerk.   When I say "don't explain your magic too much" I don't mean "have no structure or system" I mean "leave some of it to imagination and mystery."  You don't need a scientific explanation for how every possible aspect of the spells work and how the exact mechanics behind the scenes function like its a nuclear reaction or a scientific formula.

You need the mechanics for how the game runs magic, and the limits (magic cannot do this, etc), but don't go too deep or it stops feeling magical.

I think the idea of classic fantasy has more to do with genre than age.  Winnie The Pooh was written over a century ago, and it has fantastical elements but nobody would consider it classical fantasy.  You can write classic fantasy today; its about the themes, concepts, setting, and events, not the date it was written. Classic fantasy is what you get when you don't try to put a "twist" on it like all the stuff in the original post, or focusing on humor and mockery of fantasy, etc.

Quote

And this is why my blood boils every time I hear someone complain that Hero is too complex.

Right.  People view D&D as simple for one of two reasons:

1) familiarity; its easy because you have been playing it for a long time and are very used to it

2) nostalgia to when it was actually a simple system back 40 years ago.

Hero is simple to play, if a bit crunchy to build a character.

It is my belief that mages, good ones, will be in good physical condition simply because of the physical demands of casting spells -- not END or physical exertion but stress and complex gestures, etc.  If you are feeble, you tire quickly and that will affect your ability to do anything.  And casting spells badly ends very badly.  So I don't think mages should be below normal stats. And that to me is the key.

10's are considered heroic: normals are 8's in primary stats.  A 13 STR is someone in very fine physical condition, it takes a lot of strength to lift just 100 kg over your head, even doing it once.  160 is quite impressive.  Superheroes laugh at 10's but normal people see that as better than average, gifted.  The perspective is tough to grab when you're used to building people with at LEAST 13 in everything, because +1 to rolls and so on.

Quote

That series got so much right about the Marvel Universe. I'm still bummed it got cancelled for an inferior replacement.

AEMH was one of the best animated series ever, and it had amazingly fine depictions of nearly every character.  I'd never liked the Wasp before and she was great in that show.  Even Kang was less crappy than he usually is.

I agree with all of the things in the original post.  All of them ruin fantasy for me.  Another is this:

Treating magic as just technology or science we don't yet understand instead of... magic.  Its not science its outside science.  If it loses that magical feel of the supernatural and the impossible brought to life, it stops feeling magical.  Don't explain it too much or the magic goes away.

It is an interesting discussion with good thoughts on all sides.  I haven't really decided one way or another: people are taller and bigger now, so innately greater strength, but usually soft and with little exercise.

I liked her Binary persona a lot more than her Captain Marvel one.  She was actually interesting with that powerset, if a bit OP.  But now she's OP with a boring power set.

Quote

I think you will find that investing in the primary stats does not actually reduce the points you have for your spells. 

Like I said, it varies campaign to campaign, but its cheaper even in 5th edition to buy up your END than buy up your CON to get END.  Assuming that's the system your GM uses, of course.

Quote

I've never really felt that wizards needed to be squishy or rickety or old.

Sure, they don't need to be, but as I said, you only have so many points so you can choose between "physically fit" and "has magic."  Warriors are buff and fit because that's what drives their main purpose and abilities, that's good point spending for that character.  Wizards have spells to buy, INT, magic skill rolls, maybe END if that's what fuels your magic, etc.  In Hero terms at least, that means you are going to tend to have lower physical stats in order to be good at your main purpose and abilities.

I like the idea of the Rust Monster, but its a daffy looking creature with a propeller on its tail.

Quote

If you are using 5th edition with figured stats wizards are going to buy up their CON to equal that of a warrior and if they are smart will also buy up their STR to at least 13.

I mean, everyone's campaign and experiences vary but I never bought a spellcaster huge CON and STR, because I needed those points for magic.  You CAN be a buff wizard but you're going to be a crappy spell caster.  If you buy each spell with points, all those physical stats just make you have fewer spells.