SableWyvern

Re: Dragon Wing-Buffet I have indeed, but I couldn't see any way to usefully apply it. Going back and looking more closely, I can see how the telekinetic grab may be more appropriate than I first suspected. Edit: In fact, now that I take a proper look at the grab rules, a grab + throw would be just about perfect. And has the benefit of applying the target's strength to the result. Thanks.

NO. This is not about an exotic smorgasbord. I'm talking about a dragon beating its wings to upset the movement of nearby individuals. After some serious head-scratching, this is what I've come up with: RKA 1d6+1 Does Knockback +1/4 (I'm not using knockback in this campaign, so this advantage is necessary) Does Double Knockback +3/4 AoE (Cone, 5") +1 Active Points: 60 No Range -1/2 Does No Damage -2 Real Cost: 17 Energy Blast seems like a better starting place for a non-lethal attack, but it's much of muchness mechanically, except that the RKA involves fewer dice. Thoughts?

Re: Please Critique My First Ever Build Thanks for the clarifications, kave. It took me a little while, but once I'd read through the multipower rules, I worked out how Sean had reached his final values, and the consequences thereof. Your summary confirms my conclusions. As a general update, the player in question has probably decided to drop the second alternate form as not particularly suited to his character concept, meaning we'll have another 25 points to play with (and another 25 points of disads to come up with). That should give us room to comfortably create a dragon that is effectively dragonlike in a combat situation, and still have room to fill out the build with a few relevant skills and ancillary abilities. I'm also looking to fill out the multipower with some kind of wing-buffet attack, and maybe a tail-bash doing normal damage. Any advice on how to do a wing attack that affects movement would be appreciated. So far, a movement drain power is the only way I've seen to do this, but that doesn't really emulate what I'm after. Something that incorporates knockback and/or knockdown, without actually doing damage (or maybe a little Stun), would provide what I'm after, although I'm not sure if there's any easy way to simulate that (I'm not planning to use knockback rules in general, but would be happy to apply them in this instance, perhaps with an appropriate advantage). It's also worth pointing out that this build, apart from being a hands-on learning experience for me, is designed as a starting point for the player in question. I'm not trying to build his dragon, but to give him an idea of what a dragon build could look like, and then go from there to co-operatively create something that fits his specific needs. And yes, it's for FH. As I've mentioned elsewhere, my rather ambitions campaign pitch was "Your character has access to some kind of powerful magical power(s) and/or item(s). Come up with a concept, and we'll make it work."

Re: Please Critique My First Ever Build On the Leaping issue, my confusion actually related to something completely different. On page 33, in the Movement Table, we see that characters start with a 2" Leap that can be increased up to 5" for 1CP per inch. Then, on page 34, in the Strength Table, we see Leap distances based on STR. As best as I can tell, the Leap values in the STR table replace the base leap found in the Movement table, but I'm really not sure.

Re: Please Critique My First Ever Build Negativity is most welcome, especially when it's constructive (which yours certainly was). I'm not surprised to find serious problems in the build. I put the dragon together for two main reasons -- first, to get a feel for the process of designing (irrespective of the final usefulness of the design), and secondly to learn from the feedback after I posted it. I would have liked to add in some skills, but didn't have the points. I'll have to look into multipowers and see how you got those much cheaper attack values (so far, I haven't touched the more advanced power stuff like frameworks, multipowers and VPPs). Thanks for your thoughts. It was meant to be 350, but the spreadsheet I was using was all over the place, so there could be some errors in there; or they might have crept in when I transferred it to text. I felt compelled to keep the dex high for the purposes of getting a decent OCV, although from your comment that may not be as neccessary as I'd imagined. I originally included stretching as per the template, but cut it out for points, although only after reading that stretching was more representative of humanoid forms. I'd certainly add some back in if I can scrounge up the points.

So, this is my first trial run building a HERO character. This is actually an alternate dragon form for a Multiform character. The Multiform is 55 + 5 for an extra alternate, so I had 275 + 75 disads (+25 in non-benefiting disads, since the base character will be built on 250) to play with. The campaign has a tentative 60 Active Point limit. I am also using Normal Characteristic Maximas, but decided they don't apply to dragons. I originally wanted to use the Huge template, but ended up with a slightly stripped down Enormous, thanks to the points constaints. Anyway, any and all feedback would be greatly appreciated. Strength: 40 (30 points) Dexterity: 18 (24 points) Constitution: 15 (10 points) Body: 28 (36 points) Intelligence: 18 (8 points) Ego: 18 (16 points) Presence: 23 (13 points) Comeliness: 10 (0 points) Points on Primary Characteristics = 137 Physical Defence: 18, Resistant 10, Hardened (x1). (21 points) Energy Defence: 13, Resistant 8 (14 points) Speed: 3 (2 points) Recovery: 11 (0 points) Endurance: 30 (0 points) Stun: 56 (0 points) Points on Derived Characteristics: 37 Running: 12" (12 points) Swimming: 2" (0 points) Leaping: 8" (0 points)* Flying: 14" (useable as gliding) (35 points) Points on Movement: 47 *This is based on the Strength table. I'm not sure how this is meant to interact with the standard base 2" Leap. FIREBREATH Ranged Killing Attack, 1 1/2d6 Damage (Base Cost 25 points) Advantage: Area of Effect (10" Cone, +1 1/4) (Active Cost 56 points) Limitation: No Range (-1/4) Limitation: Charges (8, Boostable, -1/4) Limitation: Costs End (-1/2) Limitation: Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/4) Real Cost: 22 points. BITE HTH Killing Attack 3d6 (9 Damage Classes) (Base, Active and Real Cost: 45 points) CLAW HTH Killing Attack 2d6 (6 Damage Classes) (Base, Active and Real Cost: 30 points) Other Abilities Discriminatory Scent (5 points) Combat Sense (as sense, out of combat) (17 points) 3 Point Combat Skill Level (Natural HTH Attacks) (3 points) 2 x 2 Point Combat Skill Level (Bite) (4 points) Disadvantages Enormous (frequently, greatly impairing) -15 Distinctive Feature: Dragon (not concealable, extreme reaction, obvious) -25 Hunted: Dragon slayers and arcane ingredient collectors (as powerful as PC, non-combat influence, occasionally, seek to kill) -15 Enraged: When treated with scorn or taunted (uncommon, chance 11-, recover 14-) -10 Psychological Limitation: Easily Flattered (uncommon, strong) -10 Psychological Limitation: Vengeful (uncommon, strong) -10 Psychological Limitation: Solves problems with violence and intimidation (common, moderate) -10 Physical Limitation: Heavy sleeper (infrequently, slightly) -5 Total Points Spent: 350 Total Standard Limitations: 75 Extra Limitations (not compensated): 25

Re: Make them Pay! Hmm... Guess what?

Re: Messing about with Multiform Thanks (for the advice and the welcome). Yep, I noted the extra disads rule, although not until trawling through some old posts on this very forum, and plan on implementing that feature.

Re: Messing about with Multiform Nevermind. The player in question has reverted to human as the base form (doesn't like the idea of being stuck in dragon form if the Multiform power is countered).

So, I've got one player in a prospective high powered FH game who's looking at playing a character with the ability to change into a dragon. Multiform is the obvious fit, and has the benefit of allowing a slightly more powerful than normal build as his dragon form (250pt game with a 60 Active Point limit gives him 300 points to play with for the dragon, which I'm happy to allow). However, he's expressed an interest in defining the dragon as his true form. If we do this by the book, the dragon form suddenly becomes limited to 250 - Multiform cost, which is a lot less useful all around. If needs be, I'd be happy enough to just ignore the rules on this matter, build the human form as the base and then fiat that, once character gen is finished, the dragon is treated as the base creature. However, before I do that, I'd be interested to hear if there is a better way of going about this, or if there are any complications I would need to be aware of in making such a ruling. Thanks in advance.

Re: Make them Pay! It's still very early days for the concept, and he hasn't even settled on it for certain yet. However, if I were to venture an opinion I would say we're looking at a single wielder in the main, but at least the potential for moving from one to the other. Possessing major enemies would probably not be a viable gambit in any case, being precluded by the PCs' notoriety, so jumping wielders would probably tend to be a matter of necessity rather than strategy (and would entail certain moral issues to boot).

Re: Make them Pay! Heh. One of my players just turned this discussion on its head. If you're playing a piece of equipment, should you pay CP for the people who carry you? He's potentially looking to play an intelligent sword that has possessed its wielder. And yes, the question is rhetorical, I just thought I'd share.

Re: Make them Pay! From the start, I was trying to get across the idea that this is the design standpoint I'm working form. Obviously, I didn't do that very well. That being the case, it seems that points for gear is ok in this specific context. However, that leaves me wondering about this point: So, how does one get around this problem in an actual supers game? Are there other workable solutions, beyond increasing the item's intrinsic power over the course of play?

Re: Make them Pay! So, you're proposing that I should veto a player who wants his "thing" to be "I've got a huge sword of bloody doom and really nifty armour", or another who wants to be some kind of mage that uses an ecclectic array of magical devices? Cause that kinda sucks, and largely invalidates the whole reason I turned to HERO for this campaign in the first place. I don't want to sound like some upstart new guy that ignores wisdom earned of experience, so please keep in mind I'm just trying to come to grips with the entire issue. I could just go "I guess KS must be right," and move on, but I'd rather understand the decisions I'm making. If the campaign treats magical items as something personal, an extension of who you are, rather than merely tools, it seems to me that points for gear should work. Keep in mind that I've pretty much accepted your take on the wider use of points for mundane stuff. Can you give me a clearer understanding of your problem with points for magic -- and this is the important bit -- given a world where it is commonly accepted that people don't just pick up any random magic item and make use of it; where attuning to an item is in fact a big deal? Some specific examples (real or invented) using this default assumption as a starting point would be immensely useful. Edit: Interestingly, default d20 D&D does effectively use points for items as well -- its very precise wealth-by-level structure (which I've never actually used, since I tend to favour less item-heavy games) simply creates a seperate pool of points, measured by the gp, for items. I'd be interested to hear your take on how this differs from points for gear in HERO.

Re: Make them Pay! Having had a look at KS's short essay inspired by RPGnet, and seeing just how many points simple items cost, I'm beginning to get a better idea of the issues involved here. I can say with a high degree of certainty that characters will be paying for non-standard equipment in my upcoming campaign. Equipment will potentially go a long way towards defining a character (potentially making up almost the entirety of what makes some PC's special), and this is impossible to do fairly without involving CP costs. As for in-game reasoning for spending on acquired magical items, I am going to go with a magical attunement theory -- although, it is my intent that looting not be a common occurance in the this campaign in the first place. For mundane items, while I still don't have a problem with the general concept, the implementation is beginning to seem more difficult. I'm strongly leaning towards ditching the idea at this point. In any case, I've got plenty of time to look further into the matter and make a final decision -- I've still got to finish off a Conan campaign and then run some a|state before HERO hits the scene. Which is a very good thing, since I've really thrown myself in the deep end with the entire campaign concept.

Re: Make them Pay! Cool. Thanks for the (continuing) feedback. I've been giving this quite a bit of thought, weighing up the benefits I'm looking for out of Points For Gear versus the potential problems -- and I think I may be on to a way I can get the best of both worlds. The main thing I'm looking for is a way to gently push players towards signature items in a way that I think is not disimilar to Supers -- although, I will readily admit that my understanding of the finer points of the Supers is pretty much limited to acknowledge that there are finer points. At the same time, I can see problems with paying CP for every last piece of thread, chalk, fishing hook etc... So, how does this sound as a solution: First up, encourage players to think in terms of signature items. "Your character is likely to have rope on hand at almost all times? How about giving yourself a magical rope?" Second, introduce a class of nearly-mundane items, that are just a bit better than truly-mundane ones. I'm not sure how easy this will be to do in HERO, since even small modifiers tend to be very useful, but hey, this is supposed to be the game you can do anything with, no? Then, give these items a very attractive points cost. Players then have the option of making do with regular stuff, or getting something slightly better at minimal cost. They can decide for themselves which way they want to go (and obviously, they can mix and match, only selecting costed items that are important to them). Thoughts? Oh, and KS, thanks for the links, I'll check them out. I've already been scouting out your site, mainly because I'm likely to be in for a lot of magic system building in the future.

Re: Make them Pay! Hmm, ok. I'm getting the impression that people see this as a FH-specific problem, and one that does not apply to a modern Supers game. If that's the case, I'm having difficulty following the argument, so some more detail on that front would be appreciated as two what seperates the two in this instance. In any event, I'm quite confident that my players won't have any difficulty adapting to this kind of genre convention, so it should only be mechanics issues that have the potential to cause problems. Edit: ah, and on the Independant thing -- if I do end up going down this road, I will almost certainly treat independant mundane items as replenishing between sessions/adventures if lost or damaged, without a cost required to do so. Whether I do that using official mechanics, or just houserule it, I wouldn't have any idea, not knowing the system yet.

Re: Make them Pay! First up: Hi, I'm new. My first actual exposure to a HERO rulebook was yesterday. But I've been contemplating a particular campaign concept for Fantasy HERO for a little while now, and this very issue arose as I skimmed through the rules yesterday. I'm looking at a high powered game, with one of the central concepts being that every PC has some kind of magical ability -- be it conventional spell use, shapeshifting, a powerful magical sword, MMORPG-like special combat moves, a pack of loyal and dangerous homonculi etc... To some degree, I'm blurring the lines between high fantasy and supers in some respects. So, I'm browsing through the rules and trying to determine whether this is a supers-level or heroic-level game, and tending to think low powered supers. Then I come across the rules being discussed in this thread, and my immediate thought is "nah, character points for mundane gear is nonsensical in this context". But then, I thought about it some more. The PCs in this game will be a chosen few, already great heroes who have now been invested with absolute divine and secular power to defend a new formed and still-emerging empire from foes both within and without. Heroes in their own right already, with signature abilities and equipment. It began to make sense to me, in that context, that the items the PCs use are an important part of who and what they are. And thus, it makes further sense that those items are paid for in character points. Looking at it from that perspective, it seems reasonable to me to allow the PCs to pick up or otherwise acquire equipment for temporary use. If a PC wants to grab a sword off a a slain foe and wield it for a while, that's fine (although, I would expect, suboptimal, since the character will likely be built for some other purpose). But, once there is a discontinuity between scenes ("Three weeks later...") the sword would be forgotten. Similarly, things like rope would not be forbidden, if they are deemed necessary to a course of action, and there is no logical reason why the character couldn't acquire such a thing. However, if the player wants to have a guarantee that rope is available when he needs it, then he pays the CP cost, and it becomes one of his signature items. Which implies an added benefit: you pay for it, you're pretty much guaranteed to have it, short of a major plot point or a conscious decision to leave it behind. Reading through this thread gives me the impression that implementing CP costs for items, in this very specific context and fashion, is workable. Opions from those with more than 24 hours of HERO System experience would be appreciated, however. Edit: It just dawned on me why exactly this should work, and I'd guess it's much the same reason it would work in a Supers game: a warrior isn't going to be spending points on a heap of mundane items just be effective in combat. He'll be spending them on one or two powerful magical items that make him what he is, or on the abilities he uses to turn a mundane item into a bloody whirlwind of doom.