Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SableWyvern

  • Birthday 12/11/1974

SableWyvern's Achievements

  1. Re: Sweep Combat Levels 'S cool. I was using "you" in the generic sense, didn't mean to make things sound personal. I agree with the general premise that where two equally costed powers are available, it makes little sense to take the inferior version and that, further, where the GM is happy to let a player take either 20 CSLs or 20 CSLs that act only as sweep PSLs, the player should get something back if he chooses that latter option. My only point was that in certain circumstances, there is merit in requiring -0 Limitations to be taken -- which, based on your very last sentence, seems to be something that you agree with. On the other hand, I'm not convinced there is merit in forming a NCM point for CSLs -- the more things you roll into NCM, the more concepts you'll find becoming difficult to build. At the moment, you can play around with a whole range of damage dealing, soaking and avoiding abilities to develop a range of characters that are ultimately well balanced one against the other. NCM, applied too broadly, will ultimately penalise some of these concepts for no real gain. Then again, I'm still really just a n00b when it comes to HERO, so I could be completely mistaken about this.
  2. Re: Sweep Combat Levels So, let's imagine I say "Nope, I won't allow you to take 20 CSLs in my game," and then later you say "Hey, I'm wondering if I could take 20 CSLs or PSLs just to counteract sweep penalties." I give it some thought, and reply, "That's edging on being abusive and unsuitable. However, I think it might be workable -- I'll require you to take a -0 Lim on regular 2pt CSLs to do it, but if you're happy with that, I'll allow it." Is that less fair than just saying no? Are you really going to argue that your sweep PSLs should be costed based on a superior power that -- in this particular game -- for all intents and purposes doesn't even exist? And, just to point out that this isn't a purely hypothetical discussion, I've done something very, very similar in my current game. I limited one of the PCs to a CSL or two less than he originally wanted (which he was ok with). Later, he came to me with some rough ideas for some combat manouevres (in the general sense) that involved combining different attacks or manouevres for a variety of effects. Being true to concept, I did my best to accomodate him, and I allowed him to take 3pt CSLs for some of these combos, mainly for use in off-setting sweep penalties. The fact that these combos and special attacks were a little more limited in general utility than his basic attacks went some way to countering the extra CSLs he gained with them, but I felt he was still edging past the original limits I had set. Thus, I ruled that his 2pt CSLs would only apply to specific attacks they were selected (eg, quickdraw attack, rather than sword), and his 3pt CSLs only to a limited number of combos (rather than to his entire sword martial art style). That I allowed him to add CSLs to these combos and manouevres at all was a concession on my part, in an effort to help the player develop the character in the way he wanted. It is my responsibility as a GM to make sure he doesn't outclass other PCs whose players also envisage themselves as combat oriented, to avoid a CSL arms race, and to prevent a need to just start scaling up my NPCs in an effort to present any sort of challenge uber PCs. If he'd decided to start whinging that his new 3pt CSLs should either apply to his entire martial art style or cost less, I would have been less than impressed.
  3. Re: Sweep Combat Levels Discuss your character concept with me and explain what it is you're trying to achieve, and we'll come to an arrangement that best enables you to both realise your objective and ensure that the character integrates well into the campaign as a whole.* One of the things I quickly realised about HERO is that fixed, objective limits on anything aren't really the way to go, and that context is what matters. Although, with only a couple of exceptions, I am still using hard AP caps. *That's rhetorical, btw, unless you're actually planning to join my current game.
  4. Re: Sweep Combat Levels I betcha it's also easy to guess which would would be most likely to find my GM veto power being applied to it.
  5. Re: how to: homing sense I'd go with something like this, however I'd be less generous with the limitation -- a big, indirect benefit of this sense would be that some simple triangulation will mean the character can always determine exactly where he is, if he has access to an accurate map.
  6. Re: how to: homing sense A variant of photographic memory may let one remeber everwhere one has been, and even where those places are in relation to other known places. But it wouldn't let you know that Jim's House is somewhere directly to your left, when you wake up after a big night and find yourself hanging upside down from a beam in an abandoned warehouse somewhere. It certainly wouldn't allow you to identify the current direction in which you'll find a ship you were aboard six years ago on the other side of the galaxy.
  7. Re: Help with Power: Regen as Armor Slight Tangent: Two people in this thread have mentioned adding Invisible Power Effect to Armour. Isn't Armour already invisible (being an innately 0-End power)?
  8. Re: Suppress Running? Cheers. That makes sense, and is a good example of applying a power in a non-conventional fashion to achieve a desired aim -- a skill I really need to develop and refine.
  9. Re: Suppress Running? The original has AoE 1" Accurate, which I don't think the player will want to drop. I'm not sure where the concentration comes into it; I assume you mean must continue to expend an attack action. I'm not sure exactly how this would work. Would you care to elaborate on how you'd apply the power in those two circumstances (ie, chain shirt vs full plate)?
  10. Re: Suppress Running? The (fairly hard) active point limit is 60. To be honest, neither the player nor myself really considered the idea that STR would even come into the equation, until this thread. A TK build has some advantages and some disadvantages; the biggest single issue with the magnetic build you used is that it cancels out movement options that don't rely free limbs (eg, wingless flight). It also directly hinders movement, irrespective of leg armour (whereas, based on SFX, the movement drains would not apply to targets without leg armour in the original build). I think that the player in question would like your magnetic build in principle, but I don't know that you could get a sufficiently high strength on the TK within the active point limits available, such that it would be a preferable power to the one already in use.
  11. Re: Suppress Running? That doesn't suit the concept ... but, it is a power that I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with, and -- while it is more expensive than the Suppress in question -- it is also a much more effective way to stop people dead in their tracks. Which leads me to seriously reassess whether or not the original power in question is as problematic as I had first imagined. I have a feeling my initial reaction was due to the fact that the power surprised me with it's efficacy, rather than it being objectively too powerful. I am now even more willing to let it stand, and see how it goes.
  12. Re: Suppress Running? First up, I should point out that my main concern is that the PC will be able to ham-string any and every NPC he comes up against who doesn't have Power Defence or an unusual movement mode. I also note that Okham's Spoon's solution to my problem will give the player some points back for his reduced capability (less dice of effect for half the power, plus Linked limitation), which is a fairer solution than just reducing it's effect, as I originally considered. It does look like the player in question plans to be using this ability with some frequency, so I'd like to make sure it's kept in check. Even with the reduction I've applied, it remains fairly potent. No, not at all. My original post probably made the PC vs PC conflict sound more serious than it really was. The players themselves were quite amicable about the in-game dispute that resulted in the Vice attack being applied, and the characters invloved didn't take the situation to heart either. The Vice was used specficially because it allowed for an abrupt, but completely safe form of conflict resolution. That conflict is the only time Vice has been used yet (we have played, to date, only one session of HERO, ever). I simply noticed the ease with which the first PC rendered the second fairly helpless (although, being a mentalist, the victim could have escalated, if he'd wanted), and am trying to keep potential imbalances under control. The player in question has accepted my proposed changes with good grace, and I remain open to the idea of letting him expand the power back to its original form at a later date. Edit: Actually, after much consideration, I think I might take a less extreme stance and let the power stand as it is -- for the moment. I'll let the player know I intend to keep a close eye on it, however.
  13. Re: Suppress Running? Ah, ok. Still fairly inappropriate given the SFX, then.
  14. Re: Suppress Running? Cheers. Hmm ... I must entirely have missed the "takes no damage" option for Entangle, otherwise I may have considered it when we were originally designing the power. As things stand, I prefer the Suppress method as it makes it easier to adjust the results based on the SFX (eg, ignore movement penalties for unarmoured legs). Actually, now that you mention it, that is something that I think I'll keep an eye out for, and watch very closely in the event that a player decides he wants it. Thanks to everyone for the feedback.
  15. One of the PCs in my group has a Suppress DEX/SPD/Running/Leaping, which was used in our first session recently (against a fellow PC, but let's not get into that ... ). The SFX of the power is that it causes metal armour to seize up, inhibiting the target's ability to move. The DEX and SPD portions of the Suppess seem quite reasonable, but the Running bit immediately proved far more powerful than I had realised it would be. It only requires 12 points of effect to totally stop an unimproved human in his tracks, and 20 points of effect will nullify a move of 10". This leads me to wonder if Running, other than that bought as a power, is even meant to be suppressable, or if it should be treated as an inherrent ability. OTOH, both I and the player are quite happy with the general way in which the power functions, and if I was to rule that basic Running is unsuppressable, we'd need to totally rework it. I'm thinking that the easy fix is to require 4 points of effect for each 1" of Running movement that is Suppressed (I'll probably leave Leaping as is, as Suppress Leaping isn't exactly a high-utitility power). This ensures that they will be noticeably slowed, without guaranteeing to stop most targets dead in their tracks with ease. I should also mention that, due to the SFX, Running would be completely unaffected by the power if the target has unarmoured legs. Your opinions sought.
  • Create New...