Steve Long

Well, it’s been 10 years, so I can’t say for certain, but I don’t recall using any specific formula (or anything of the sort) to determine the mass of shields listed in the Shield Table on 6E2 211. I might have looked up some figures in my arms and armor books to get a “realistic” average, but that’s probably all I did. As long as the DCV and STR Minimum follow the Table (which is the primary game balance consideration), the GM can assign whatever mass he wants to a shield. I think that covers your question, but if there are some implications of the issue that I've missed, feel free to PM me and we'll figure it out.

Interesting question — I’m surprised it hasn’t come up before. If a character has had his END increased by an Adjustment Power, and is then Knocked Out, the Adjustment Power continues to fade at its normal rate. When the character wakes up (i.e., takes enough Recoveries to get back to positive STUN, or is otherwise enabled to do so), upon awakening he has an amount of END equal to the amount remaining from the Adjustment Power, or an amount equal to his current STUN total (as discussed on 6E2 106), whichever is greater. (One note: because END is considered a "defensive" ability, Adjustment Powers' effects on it are halved, as discussed on 6E1 135. So in your example, the Aid only provides 25 points of END, not 50.)

I would use Flight 1m, Usable By Nearby (so others can use it as you describe), Only To Float (-2). You might want to buy more Flight so that you could use it to enhance your ability to "lift" (6E2 25-26), or you could buy extra STR with the -2 Limitation, Only To Float. But that's only one suggestion; I'm sure other folx here on the boards have some other cool ideas too. What do you have to say, Herophiles?

You're not missing something completely obvious. I'm the one guilty of that (see 2-4, below). 1. A character can Abort to resist being Shoved (unless, of course, the GM rules otherwise). After all, 6E2 117 specifically notes characters can Abort to resist KB, and protecting one’s self from Shove is basically the same sort of thing. 2. APG 170 is in error due to a mistake on my part. I was adapting earlier rules for Shove from 4E/5E, but forgot to adapt them for the new 6E Shove Combat Maneuver. Everything works fine until the rolling of BODY. Ignore that and just use STRs as discussed on 6E2 79 (and 6E1 41 for “combined STR”). 3. Again, the example is in error due to my not properly updating old 4E/5E text, where STR Versus STR Rolls were involved. The example needs to be rewritten to state that they’re Holding an Action, or were Aborting. 4. Again, the example is in error due to my not properly updating old 4E/5E text. Instead of STR Rolls being involved, the two STRs would in this case cancel each other out, as you note. Thanks for bringing this to my attention! The next time I update the APG errata, I will update this example to clarify things.

I think what’s causing confusion here is that you’re calculating the Range Modifier on a “personal” scale for a MegaScaled power. As noted on 6E1 340, “the MegaScaling affects the Range Modifier as well.” So if your power has MegaRange (1m = 1 km), Range Modifier penalties begin to accrue at 9 kilometers, not 9 meters as it would with a personal-scale attack. So placing your Gate a mile (approx. 1,600 m) from you entails a Range Modifier penalty of -0. However, if you can’t perceive the target location with a Targeting Sense (and that’s likely, since few characters can see that far), then the second paragraph you cited above comes into play. Now you’re suffering a -5 penalty to your Attack Roll — which is significantly worse than the -0 you’d ordinarily have. I think that covers your question, but if I’ve overlooked something, please PM me or post a follow-up question. Thanks!

Only I can answer in this forum, so I'm going to move this to the Discussion board, where anyone can chime in -- and hopefully someone can help you out. :)

It's in Dark Champions.

I think what happened here is that the line you quoted was accidentally left in (or at least, left in unedited). In the 5E mass combat rules, there was a "Range Divisor" that units used to determine the Range Modifier. I don't remember specifically (it's been 10 years since I wrote FH for 6E, after all ), but I think I removed the Range Divisor rules in favor of the simpler method described on FH 232. I just forgot to go back and remove the references to "Range scale." Just ignore those references. Sorry for the confusion!

Hey! Just to make sure you're clear, there's no "everyone" who can respond here (though they can read your question, of course). On this board only I can reply. So in a situation where you want to have anyone on the boards respond, post in the Discussion forum, or wherever else is appropriate. Another quick caveat: I'm not sure why, in your example, the Human Torch has Shape Shift. He doesn't need that power to activate his fire powers, or anything like that. He would only need it if he literally wants to change shape into something else -- a mailbox, a gorilla, or what have you -- while retaining his same powers. I'm sticking with it to answer the questions, but I wanted to make sure you weren't mistakenly paying points for a Power you don't need to use. Feel free to PM me with more questions about this if my caveat has confused you. And now, here's Reed Ri... err, me, with the answers. Where necessary I will restate questions to make sure I understand what you're asking, and hopefully that everyone understands my answer. 1. Linked And Powers’ Duration Q: If a character is using a Constant Power and that power is somehow “turned off” (he’s Stunned or Knocked Out, it’s Drained to zero points, he runs out of END to keep it functioning, or what have you), what happens to powers that are either Linked to, or Jointly Linked with, that power? A: Any lesser powers Linked to, or Jointly Linked with, a greater power which is Constant but somehow gets “turned off” in any manner, those lesser powers also “turn off” themselves at the same time (unless the GM rules otherwise). (In the case of Persistent Powers Linked to a Constant Power, such as Resistant Protection or Life Support, note that they become Constant Powers themselves as a result of being Linked, as discussed on 6E1 384.) If the greater power is itself Persistent, then it remains active if the character is Stunned, unconscious, or the like, and any lesser Persistent powers Linked to, or Jointly Linked with, it remain active as well. If the greater power is actually “turned off” — for example, by being Drained to zero points — then any powers Linked to, or Jointly Linked with, it stop functioning at the same time. (Again, the GM can rule otherwise on any of this if he wants to.) If the greater power is itself Persistent, and the lesser powers are Constant, then they deactivate at the end of the Segment if the character is Stunned or Knocked Out (even though the Persistent greater power doesn’t turn off). The same applies if the greater Persistent power is”turned off” in other ways (such as a Drain). I think that addresses all the situations you described, but if I missed something, please PM me or post a follow-up question in the Rules forum. (It will have to be in a separate thread, since as I said above, only I can respond to threads here.) 2. Active Points In The Greater And Lesser Powers See 6E1 383-84 regarding what happens (or may, at the GM’s option, happen) when the lesser power has more Active Points than the greater power. Anything beyond what’s covered there I leave up to the judgment of the GM. 3. Further Questions “If the Shape Shift receives a -0 Limitation and it is Jointly Linked to Resistant Protection, would the Shape Shift need to take the “Greater Power is Constant or in use most of the time (+1/4)” offset, making it a positive Advantage to have them linked?” Linked can’t become an Advantage this way; at the worst its value becomes -0. “If the Resistant Protection is drained, then his Shape Shift would stop working as well (and all of his other powers), right?” Any powers Linked to the Resistant Protection would stop in that situation. The same holds true if they’re all Unified Powers. “Also, is it possible to apply the “Lesser Power can only be used when character uses greater Power at full value (-1/4)” effect? If so, which power should this apply?” That’s all up to the GM. “Do Persistent powers need to take the “Greater Power is Constant or in use most of the time (+1/4)” offset like Constant powers?” The rules on 6E1 384 state: “At the GM’s option, Linked may be worth 1/4 less if the greater power is Constant or is otherwise likely to be in use most or all of the time.” Persistent Powers by definition are “in use most or all of the time,” so Linking to a Persistent Power entails the ¼ reduction in the Limitation’s value (again, unless the GM rules otherwise). I think that covers everything you asked, but if I missed something, feel free to PM me or post a follow-up.

It's a fascinating thought -- seeing how each side would react to the other's latest tactic. Sort of like ECM, then ECCM, then ECCCM, ad infinitum. I'm tempted to try to build a Fantasy setting with magic developed to this extent -- individual "styles" and what have you of combat spellcasting in an effort to maximize your impact and minimize your enemy's. Either that, or maybe work it into my Chaos Blades setting, which is already heavily focused on certain types of combat magic. In any event, you're certainly making me think, so take 2 XP out of petty cash as your reward.

Yes, the 6E rules talk about that on 6E2 97-98 and 100-102. Do you think I left out some text from 5E that makes this question unclear in 6E? Addendum: After talking with LL, I think I see the source of the problem, so let me expand and clarify. 6E2 102 has a section on adding STR to Advantages HAs/HKAs, with an example. After that example should be this text: "For purposes of using this rule with melee weapons, ignore the Reduced Endurance Advantage (which all melee weapons must have). STR adds to a weapon with Reduced Endurance as if the weapon were un-Advantaged (or only has whatever other Advantages are applied)." That's the same text that appears in 5ER. I don't recall what was going through my head ten years ago when I wrote 6E (ten years!), but my guess is that as I was re-organizing and rewriting the text, I simply forgot it. It was certainly never my intent to require characters to have to account for Reduced Endurance (since all melee weapons must have it); it was just an oversight. Mea and/or culpa. Addendum #2: Per my ongoing discussion with LL, there still seems to be some confusion on this issue, so I want to post again in an effort to make things clear: under the 6E rules, when a character determines how much damage he adds to an Advantaged attack with STR, Maneuvers, velocity, or any other appropriate source, he only has to consider the Advantages that directly affect how the target takes damage, as discussed on 6E2 97. He doesn’t have to account for Reduced Endurance, Indirect, Personal Immunity, or other Advantages that don’t affect how the target takes damage. To put it another way, when determining how much STR, velocity, Maneuvers, CSLs, or the like add to an Advantaged attack, a character does not have to take into account any Advantages that do not directly affect how the target takes damage. As usual, this is all subject to the GM’s oversight. If he wants characters to take all Advantages into account when adding damage, that’s within his awe-inspiring powers. Furthermore, I gather from LL that his question may have risen in the context of questions about how Hero Designer functions. I normally pay no attention to HD issues (for a whole variety of good reasons), but in this case I will leave my bunker for a second and say that if it’s easier for Dan Simon to program HD to account for all Advantages, that’s OK with me. Going through the entire book and trying to figure out which Advantages to consider and which to ignore sounds like a lot more work than anyone should have to take on. ::ducks back into bunker::

Intriguing question! I’d rather not establish any hard and fast rules for how much time Incantations (or Gestures) require to use (absent Extra Time or some other rule that provides a precise time requirement in a specific case). I don’t think it would be helpful, and might in fact cause more problems than it would solve. This is just one of those situations that no RPG handles well, because you can’t always model a dynamic situation (like combat or vehicle chases) with precise rules about who acts first. So in this case, the answer is, “That’s up to the GM.” Personally, I would be reluctant to let the knife-throwing rogue always interrupt spellcasters; that could easily render a lot of enemies more or less powerless. But by the same token, the character has come up with an intriguing and clever ability, so I’d like to include it in the campaign somehow. So here’s what I’d do: if the rogue character is likely to hit and do damage to spellcasters with this ability more than 50% of the time, I would consider requiring some sort of DEX Roll Versus DEX Roll Contest: if he wins, he hits before the spellcaster finishes, and has a chance to derail the spell; if he loses, the spellcaster finishes first (but may still suffer damage from the thrown knife). If the chance of the rogue successfully interrupting spellcasters is 50% or less, then the requirements of (a) hitting the target, and (b) doing damage to him past his defenses are probably enough to keep the power from unbalancing the campaign. And of course, as the campaign goes on, if necessary the player and GM can work together to adjust things to keep the knife-throwing power useful, but not unbalancingly powerful. I hope that helps! As always, if I haven't answered all your questions, PM me or post a follow-up.

Good question! To begin with, I think we need to consider whether this power is, in fact, best represented with Stretching. The definition of Stretching is, “A character with Stretching can stretch his body [emphasis mine][.]” While it’s true that there are forms of Stretching that don’t strictly involve the body (e.g., weapons that increase the character’s Reach, or a lasso that lets him Grab at a distance), those both fall clearly within the functions of Stretching as outlined in the first paragraph on 6E1 284. And they both involve a Focus. So, while the rules don’t require that Stretching involve either the character’s body or a Focus, the fact is that’s what’s involved in the vast majority of cases in which a character buys Stretching. Since what you describe doesn’t fall within those parameters, I’m not sure Stretching is the best way to build this power. Instead, I would probably build this as Telekinesis with the Limitation Physical Manifestation (which represents the fact that the power can be attacked, Grabbed, or what have you). Physical Manifestation has rules for the damage required to “break” the power, and so on. If you prefer to stick with Stretching, then I think Physical Manifestation (6E1 387) is still your answer. I hope that helps! If you still have questions, please PM me or post a follow-up.

You're correct that you assign what type of penalty a PSL applies to is defined when you buy them -- e.g., Ranged Skill Levels or Targeting Skill Levels. In most cases there isn't any question of "assigning" PSLs the way you do with CSLs, since PSLs just apply to offset one specific penalty. I left that language in just to be clear that if any issue about assigning them does come up, in some rare situation I can't conceive of right now, the same rule applies as for CSLs: you can't allocate them more than once per Phase. Just me being cautious, that's all.

If a character performs a Multiple Attack, this affects his OCV and DCV as discussed on 6E2 75-77. In addition to the various other modifiers that apply, those rules note that if a character uses two or more Maneuvers that provide an OCV or DCV modifier, the character uses the worst of the modifiers. So in the case of Martial Throw (+0 OCV, +1 DCV) + Defensive Strike (+1 OCV, +3 DCV) Multiple Attack, the character's OCV would be +0 and his DCV +1 (though as I noted above, there are other factors that also apply, including the penalties for performing a Multiple Attack).

There will be a section on building gods in the HERO System, which covers common divine powers and how to build them, and other such subjects. I'll probably touch on the optional Deity Perk there. It's not something I'm using to build the gods in MH, but in a campaign where the PCs are deities, it could come in handy to determine the pecking order.

The Advantage you cite on CC 211 — it’s titled Increased Maximum Effect — isn’t something I can find in any of the official 6E rulebooks. Unless someone can point me to a source I’m overlooking (which is entirely possible ), I can’t consider that an official 6E Advantage. There is an Increased Maximum (+¼) Advantage (see 6E 165-66), but it applies specifically to Absorption only. Therefore, the correct way to do what you describe is (1), buy more Aid dice with a Limitation. Of course, you can ask your GM to adopt Increased Maximum Effect for your campaign as well. I will also consider putting something like it in APG3, but caveat: even if I think that’s a good idea, what I come up with may not match IME from CC. Or it might. I’m mysterious thataway.

A character in that situation can certainly try to hit the target if he wants -- but even though he can see through whatever obstacle is between them, that doesn't mean his attack passes right through it. Unless the attack is Indirect (in a form that would allow the attack to bypass the obstacle), he has to do enough damage to break through the obstacle. Then, any remaining damage applies to the target (assuming the attack hits). So even though it's possible, the odds are it won't be very effective.

The Advantage Resistant (+1/2), which is discussed in the Defense Powers section.

I'm not sure I understand your question, so I want to start by clarifying a few things for everyone's benefit. 1. There are no Skills that rely on the OCV or DCV Characteristics for rolls. OCV and DCV are only used for Attack Rolls. 2. A character with OCV 6 has virtually no chance to hit a character with DCV 17. He'd have to roll a 3; otherwise he'll always miss. If you mean that the attacker's OCV 6 + 11 = 17, and he then subtracts his 3d6 roll from that (the standard way of determining what DCV the attacker can hit), then the maximum DCV he could hit would be 14 (except that a 3 always hits), but he's more likely to hit DCV 5-7. 3. I don't understand your question about a defender using "skill points" (by which I think you mean Combat Skill Levels, though I'm not sure) to lower his DCV. The last thing a defender wants to do is reduce his DCV, since DCV makes it more difficult for the attacker to hit him. Did you mean the defender is somehow reducing the attacker's chance to hit him? 4. I don't understand your question about "combat modifiers" being "tied to combat skills." HERO has plenty of Combat Modifiers (like Target Size, Surprise, various environmental situations, and Encumbrace) that may affect OCV and/or DCV in various ways, but they don't have any relation to the various Combat Skills.

See 6E1 190.

As stated on 6E1 376: “If a Focus is Obvious, it’s clear to anyone looking at the character that the power comes from the Focus — no PER Roll is necessary.” As you can see (no pun intended ), there’s no mention of whether the Obvious Focus is currently in use. However, the GM might rule that until the Obvious Focus is used, all a character can perceive is that it is an Obvious Focus. At best he can only guess at what powers the Obvious Focus might have, based on logic, prior knowledge, and other factors. But the fact that it is an Obvious Focus is plain to everyone who can see it.

If the Focus is Obvious, it stays visible. That includes armor (an OIF) and virtually any item a character is carrying. It doesn't matter if the Invisibility applies over an Area Of Effect, is Usable By Others, or any other thing -- the only issue is whether the Focus is Obvious. Of course, this comes with the usual caveat that the GM can change the rules if he thinks it's desireable to do so. He might rule that worn items are covered by Invisibility, or that they're "semi-covered" so that another person has to make a Sight PER Roll at -4 to see them. Going the other way, he might also rule that "items" defined with, say, Only In Heroic Identity or Physical Manifestation are also "Obvious" enough that Invisibility won't cover them.

I’m not sure I understand you. Unless I’m forgetting or overlooking something, a Martial Grab with 20 STR is a Martial Grab with 20 STR — you don’t roll to increase the STR (to 35, in your example). You roll to hit, and then if you Squeeze the victim (or the like), the character rolls for damage based on his own personal STR. The STR used to maintain the Grab remains 20 regardless of the damage rolled (and as noted on 6E2 92, the STR bonus for Grab-based Martial Maneuvers only helps the character maintain his hold; it doesn’t increase the damage done by Squeezing, Throwing, Crushing, or what have you). The Crush Martial Maneuver (HSMA 7, 244) provides a +4d6 damage bonus to STR when a character Crushes someone following a Grab or Crush. That damage bonus doesn’t affect the STR used to maintain the Grab in any way. Does that answer your question? If not, please post a follow-up or PM me to let me know what I’m missing so I can give you a better response.

It would not work — unless, of course, the GM wanted to adjust the rules as written for some reason.