unclevlad

"Don't you know it's NEVER polite to discuss a feline's age?"

On the point of high-end guidelines... Just for grins, built a 5E "character" called Kiloton...because that's about what he can lift. 75 STR, listed as 800 tons. Push 2 points and you get a kiloton, so why not. No ECs. Actually NO limitations whatsoever right now that aren't mandatory (5E Regen). 940 points. 28d6 attack (11 DCs HTH, because IMO STR damage scales ridiculously too slowly) 40 DEF, 30 resistant, and 75% DR, resistant. (28d6 punches can mean well over 100 STUN. 9d6 Killing can easily approach 40 BODY.) 37 points in martial maneuvers, with some overlap, cuz I'm thinking he's learned 3 different styles 30 points of Combat Master: Defense Maneuver IV, Rapid Attack, Defensive Attack, and Two Weapon Fighting 38 DEX, 28 INT, 9 SPD...some might push the SPD even higher. Base CV is 13, but there's about 5 levels to play with, between martial maneuvers and CSLs. Flight at about 900 mph (17", x16 NC) 25 points Power Def, 15 points Mental Def Left 60 points for other skills that I don't feel like bothering with, as this is just a thought experiment. What's missing? The biggest potential holes would be contributing to a base, and followers/contacts. That could get decently pricey. And that's an issue for the guidelines...at these levels, what SHOULD a character spend on these aspects? And, while this is using 5E, and tanks are just insanely inexpensive...there's NO attempt to shave points, either. A high-end blaster could have a *rather* large EC. And of course, 28d6 is getting pretty bloody absurd, but that's not really the point. It's what you can do...cleanly, without any rules manipulation, unless you consider the Martial Arts DCs manipulative. I'd disagree, as there's lots of ways to do that...and you could just buy more STR, which might end up CHEAPER in 5E.

Sprint ending on the stage was a bit contentious, as it looked like Philipsen squeezed Van Aert almost into the barrier, forcing Van Aert to decelerate. Race judges said it was OK; in part, Philipsen was taking the shortest line, and Van Aert was on the wrong side to be on the tail...he was to the right.

And note that even -5 DCV is huge, unless it's a total mismatch. If my base DCV is +3 to your OCV, you're at 8- to hit, basically 1 in 4. -5 would give you a 13-, basically 5 out of 6. If my DCV was +7, then a -5 would take you from 1 in 50 to hit, to 3 out of 8. If it's more, well, ok, it stops mattering, really, but even a 7 point base CV difference is crazy huge most of the time. So if the high-powered character is trained? They'll train so those massive OCV and DCV penalties that can be avoided, are avoided. 1000 points is a LOT!!! of points. Haymaker has the -5 DCV...well, DON'T HAYMAKER. EVER. At these levels. With 1000 points you can put 20-30 in martial maneuvers. It doesn't mean you're a martial artist, it can mean you simply have experience in HTH. You know how to move, how to throw an effective punch. OK, fine, if you're running an Incredible Hulk, well, that isn't there; Hulk gets by on raw power and defenses that are beyond insane. Worst penalties in standard maneuvers: Haymaker, -5 DCV Grab By, -4 DCV Move Through, -3 DCV and -v/10 OCV Strafe, -v/6 OCV I'm just referencing 6E2 56 here. Multiple Attack has the really big ones...but as I mentioned, APG I, page 38, has Defensive Attack...you're only -2 DCV, instead of 1/2 DCV, when making a multiple attack. With 1000+ points? Build the serious Master of Combat. Defense Maneuver. Rapid Attack. Defensive Attack. Two Weapons Fighting...I strongly suggest blowing off the limit about using it with unarmed HTH and innate powers, but then, I also buy full Ambidexterity at even a 23 DEX. For the rest, Offensive Strike replaces Haymaker. Grab By and Move By/Through...there may not be martial maneuvers to replace these, within the 2 standard books, but there are in Hero System Martial Arts.

Some absolute jackass threw a bunch of carpet tacks onto the course at the Tour yesterday, at the start of the last climb. Report is, 15-20 riders picked some up. And more today, at least a few riders have picked them up. It's unlikely the perp(s) will get caught but we can hope....

I certainly recall some chains have, for example, particularly strong/sweet drinks...but I tended to prefer them. And the counter argument? Keeping a lean syrup-water ratio is *cheaper.*

First...20? Is there really a reason to go that high? Average, reasonably powerful super is in the 8-10 range; 16 OCV vs. 10 DCV is only miss on an 18, and 10 OCV vs. 16 DCV only hits on a 5-, which is 1 in 20. I don't have a problem with it, cuz the 1/2 DCV is a major issue at even a 12. Just sayin' that scaling VERY high power games is tricky. Really, really high CVs tends to be expensive overkill. As far as the rules go... Non-combat movement? Check out Velocity-based DCV. When your Velo DCV is 40 or so, half DCV isn't a big deal. Multiple Attack? APG I, IIRC...Defensive Attack. Multiple attacks give -2 instead of 1/2 DCV. Have the characters take martial maneuvers to replace the standard, free combat maneuvers that halve DCV. Personal bias? NO advanced, high power character should EVER use a bare standard maneuver. Basic maneuvers are for rookies. I'm heavily, HEAVILY biased to saying they've got training...sometimes that's as little as 15 points in martial maneuvers, but rarely it's been closer to 40, when the build has both HTH and ranged martial maneuvers. Look at workarounds. Not that many situations impose 1/2 DCV; it IS a severe penalty. Multiple Attack...addressed. Brace...don't use it. Ever. Penalty skill levels for Range Mods. Stunned? The obvious solution: don't *get* stunned. 50% damage reduction is pricey, sure, but it can *seriously* help avoid the problem. The higher the average attack dice, the more sense DR makes. 50% *tends* to be the cost effective level. 25% is largely useless, 75% is not cost-effective. A *possible* workaround for STUN...there's bizarre wording in DR, where it works against certain Drains and AVADs...even without the standard defense. The rules are bloody incomplete, IMO...WHEN can you apply them? If you have 50% energy but 75% physical, which applies??? Fine. Toss that BS out. And cut the costs because they're horrible, mathematically and structurally. They've never fit. 10, 20, and 30 for 25, 50, 75%. And toss the options like Nonresistant and STUN Only out the window; trust me, STUN Only is for points mongering.

Picky, picky, picky....................... <whaps self> OK. The Tin Man. Jack Haley. Kind of amusing to see how much times have changed. From Time: I knew the Ebsen part, but not the rest. But stuff this nasty wouldn't fly for several decades now.

Jester himself.....Michael Ironside

I'll always start with the simplest explanation: the bean counters are making the decisions. They probably expect they can replace most of em with people who cost 1/3 as much. Of course, that begs the question of signing Pat McAfee...at, IIRC, $17M a year. Of course, one can construct an argument for why...that couldn't be posted here. Won't argue that the MNF contract is part of it, but it's possible they're planning to use that as a cornerstone to transition to streaming.

Are we sure DeSantis is even smart enough to realize what the problem with phosphogypsum might be?

Charlie Chaplin

Side thought about ESPN. It has seemed to me that they've shrunk their event broadcasters, in 2 ways...first, that I seemed to see a smaller collection of regular staff, and second...when they do need multiple people, like the CWS, quite often they're using what looked to be contract personnel...broadcasters with regular gigs outside ESPN. Pay them a nice fee for the game, and done with em. No overhead. That is HIGHLY subjective, of course, and may be a messy, distorted perspective on my part..........

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/disney-stock-nabs-a-downgrade-we-have-our-doubts-about-espn-and-more-9c7863d8?mod=search_headline&mod=article_inline And now this? Yeah, Disney is destroying them. I'd expect many of these to show up elsewhere, of course. Steve Young...Sunday Night Football? Heck, that might pay him more.

And we're going to have to live with the Court being like this for far too long. If anything, while Thomas and Alito are the 2 oldest, and most extreme, members, what we've seen is that the Republicans have no reservation about ensuring the Court remains firmly in their grasp by manipulating the nomination/confirmation process to suit their goals. Simon's plan to go ex-pat is gaining more appeal. Going back to that...the Albertson's I was at today, not my usual, and often a bit of a step down from it...did have Angel's Envy Port Cask, in the locked cabinet. I passed. I'll be at the usual one Monday, I'll see what they have.

The falsehood there is at the end of the statement. Some people DO care...a very great deal. I get what you're saying, tho. I try to avoid those people, but it's not always possible.

Just in my inbox, from NYT: Fox News settles with Abby Grossberg over her hostile workplace suit. $12 million.

Well, can't say we didn't expect it, but still... SCOTUS backs a business saying "go somewhere else" rather than back a message they disagree with, meaning laws barring discrimination against gay people are nullified. It's nuanced...from NYT: Even if it's narrowly applicable now, tho, we know the religious right will make every effort to expand it.

Only if he wrote everything out in Latin, and used Roman numerals. The git better HOPE he gets out of the country before they catch him. I suspect the sentence will lean to the max; the Italians take their monuments very, very seriously.

And high school baseball is baseball, it's America's Pastime!

Looks like Russell Wilson had another sterling performance, as the Chargers take down the Broncos 14-3 this evening. Oh....this was a baseball game.......... Well, dissing the Rockies pitching staff is just playing Captain Obvious, so......move along, nothing to see......

Wow. Threshold stat of the year. Pirates beat Padres 5-4 today. Puts the Padres at 37-44. MLB Network crawl, during the Yankees-A's game, gives the score and points out.... 47th time the Padres have scored 4 runs or less. They're 7-40. Which means scoring 5+, they're 30-4. Got me to looking. Padres are 37-44, but +19 run differential. Cubs are 37-41, +25 run diff. Twins are 40-42, +24 run diff. I read that as those teams find ways to give up leads late, and thus lose too many close games. And...yeah, there's a story on MLB.com from June 24th. Padres blew out Nats in 2 straight games, scoring 10, then 13. But the story notes they were 5-13 in 1 run games, and 0-6 in extra inning games, at that point. 5-14 now, which is also the worst record in 1 run games in the league. The Rockies are 13-9. The A's are 13-16. The Royals are 11-10. That's the 3 worst records in the league.

What, at best a 2nd-rate league with little or no TV exposure, and with lower net worths than a single year of Aaron Rodgers' salary?

No joke about the bonuses, as it can change the percentage of the cap, on a max deal contract. 65 games still allows some rest, and what we might see is simply "ok, start the game, then you're on the bench for the last 3 quarters." In-season tournament? Why? I think it's not merely a terrible idea, it's a self-defeating one. My first take is, oh, our regular season isn't interesting enough to keep fan interest, so we'll invent this hokum and pray they like it. Alternately, another plausible message is yeah, we know the season's way too long, so here's maybe a way to make it seem shorter...or to make some of those early games more interesting. And the rich will get richer. And we can safely assume who's gonna get those. There's a tension here, too, with this part: Will it cut spending by the big spenders...or just redirect that mid-level exception money to the max contract extensions? Also, how will this interact with the 65 game requirement for awards? A secondary effect: I think these terms will only exacerbate the alienation between the players and those parts of the fan base that think the NBA's filled with rich, spoiled brats.

https://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/69911-combined-attack/#comment-1790437 That said, there's a LOT of Steve's writing on this subject, and wading through a lot of it is tricky. It appears to be contradictory on the surface but that may be looking at partial answers, or answers to narrower questions. Given this level of confusion, throwing out Combined Attack altogether, *except* when it's set up as a Combined Power, would likely make life much easier.