theinfn8

Shield forms. Adding any weapon requires adding a WF for it. Shields aren't armour. People don't realize the destructive power of a shield...

It's like "street level" fantasy. Otherworldly hunter stalking the streets at night. The local law can't seem to stop it. The axe gang are starting to consolidate power near the docks and the organized crime family isn't happy about it. A sickness is starting to spread in the slums that is particularly resilient. Local politicians don't seem to care, maybe the heroes can help...

Thank you for all the work you put into making an excellent product. As with all creative endeavors, you eventually have to reach a point where you say that it is "done enough", otherwise it will never be finished. Don't sweat the small things. I have bought multiple copies for players *because* it is such a solid product. Keep up the good work.

One of the major differences between real world pantheons and game pantheons is that in a high fantasy setting you have (or had) that set of gods literally involved personally with affairs on the world. It would be difficult for a society to ignore the existence of a god in that respect. They might all have different ways of worshipping (due to culture), but it isn't unreasonable to think there would only be one. The only time I did multiple pantheons was to say "this is the meta idea of each god, name it as appropriate for your need". Same gods, different names and/or aspects. It worked ok. Most of my players haven't ever been that interested in exploring the spirituality/religion of their characters.

Sorry for taking a bit to respond, but I had to really think about this one. For context, I meant more like a Darkness type effect for the thief, but skill additions are a completely legit way to "spell" that out... My take on it is that, with exceptions, maybe you don't allow skills as spells. Or maybe you do. The cost would be pretty high though, as the demand would be high. Maybe it takes a vial of blood from a master of the craft, which also severely limits supply. I don't see this necessarily being something that couldn't be avoided from being game breaking. On the other hand, I'm starting to see a "spellpunk" setting coming together. Factories filled with poor producing goods by being given a skill potion every morning. Work, consume, sleep, repeat. Never getting ahead because you never actually learn a trade. Spell/item creation with toxic by products. "Power stations" built on top of magical hot spots transporting it to cities or bottling it to sell independantly. High speed mass transit gliding along ley lines. Skill potions wouldn't be that far from the Shadowrun/cyberpunk idea of skill wires. In which you can literally buy a skill at a decently high level with money. Actually, you have to buy your spells too, thinking about it...

Yeah, the intricacies of a good murder mystery game are worthy of their own topic in the forum. And some players just aren't wired for them.

That sounds like an awesome game... O.O

Methinks there is a difference between mana and manna Technically a D&D based system is all 0 END spells. But I get what you're saying. Requiring an external source of "magical power " could also be an interesting way to charge for magic though. "Oh, you have the attack core spell? If you buy this elemental fire power stone, it will really light your world up..."

You make some valid points. I am not trying to argue that there is a *need* to balance the two. I am saying, what if we did this? Whatcould it look like? The wizard would buy "Fire Combat Spell Familiarity", then go buy a 1d6 "Flame Blade" spell (1 1/2d6 with INT 10) with cash. There is no point differential, because they paid for the same thing as the martial guy. Maybe spells would need a "Real Spell" limitation. If you don't spend time every day maintaining your spell memory it starts to degrade. What about an INT minimum for spells? Seems like a logical progression if we treat spells/magic in a similar manner as gear. But really, otherwise, what are the limitations that weapons have that spells do not (or could not in this case) possess? How often does the limitation for Real Weapon actually come up in game? Could a wizard duel look like people doing Spell Disarm, Spell Dodge, or a Spell Haymaker? I know, I am getting a little on the extreme side, but the question is still valid. Why not? Is there really any reason other than genre conventions?

"Magic fuel" gave me this image of people selling mana batteries that you use to power the spells that you bought and learned. Not incredibly good with spells? Buy this "wand of light" with a special slot for a mana battery. A whole industry would be built around it. At some point anyway. That world might not be to quite that point yet. Had never heard of "The Case of the Toxic Spell Dump", but it looks interesting. Will have to add that to my list.

Potions would definitely work. I would probably do it as a GM controlled list, but that's me. That being said, I have wonderful players that I can trust to stick to the spirit of the game and not try and cheese it.

You have some good points on weapon speed, but I would point out that being trained with heavier weapons also includes the techniques to maintain threat. Heavy weapons are typically wielded in arcs and have enough reach that you are back attacking again before the opponent can close. Any opponent trying to block these weapons with a lighter weapon are going to be blasted off the line as well. They are definitely slower, but that doesn't mean they are ineffectual. And I don't really know where I'm going with this. I just melted my brain on a six hour discrete math final. I will readdress when my thoughts are recovered. I know I had a point somewhere...

You are absolutely right and that slipped my mind.

Some sort of "drop X DCs per range increment" wouldn't be too horribly complicated. I would be afraid of getting into Chartmaster levels of weapons vs. armour complexity. But people still love and play the game, so *shrug*.

Most definitely, tweak away at the rules! Depending on the tone of the game I'm running, sometimes I want those gritty realistic rules and other times I don't bother to stat something out because the specific game mechanic is unimportant. Yeah, I could "build a starship with FTL travel" or I could say "it works, you arrived, travel was otherwise uneventful". With armour and weapons, there is a lot of granularity that could be added. One of the things I've been thinking about is how to differentiate characters in a sword and sorcery type setting. Being a specialist in one specific unique weapon is one way of accomplishing that. But we would need more development of weapons to make them unique and interesting

You are conveniently misrepresenting the RAW. In multiple places it indicates that you can absolutely do this. "...allows the Grantor to grant a power to a single Recipient (though the Recipient can be the Grantor himself)..." (6E1, p. 354). And even if it is "primarily" meant to apply powers to others, primarily is not synonymous with "only". This is an edge case that very well could warrant this particular construct. The argument about trying to get it cheaper than it would normally cost is actually incorrect. The whole point of this setup is not to gain a power for cheaper than it would normally cost. The point is to emulate a specific set of circumstances that the other means presented do not fit the desired effect (by comments of the OP). If a player only wanted this one effect, would it be game breaking to allow that magic sword that can attack on command? I daresay no. Let us examine this. UOO case: Take an 8d6 Blast, Base: 40. Add the UOO for +1/4 we get 50 AP. Tack on some of the example limitations, Incantations (-1/4), Full Phase (-1/2), and Concentration (-1/4), Real Cost: 25. I now have a power I had to spend a full phase to get, need to spend 5 END every phase to keep active, plus I need to use an attack action, make an attack roll, and spend an additional 4 END to use when I want it to hit something. Compare this to the alternative. If I take an 8d6 Blast (40 Base), and add Constant (+1/2) to it I am now at 60 AP. Tack on the same three limitations, Real Cost: 30. I now have a power that I can make an attack roll with once, then spend 6 END to have it attack and hit automatically every phase thereafter and still allow me to make my own additional attack action. I hardly find the difference in power level of these two powers to make 5 CP a "cost savings". I appreciate your thought process on this and pointing out what you felt were inconsistencies in my application of the rules. And thank you for taking the time to respond. It is through logical discourse like this that I am able to learn and grow.

Late to the party, but why make it Constant? You could use UOO and the grantor is also the recipient. Build the intended attack power, then apply the desired start-up requirements (advantages and limitations) and apply per the rules. You end up with an attack power that is Constantly available (requires END to maintain), that needs your start-up requirements, but that you can call on at any moment to attack.

My personal experience with regard to armour. I have two different sets of padded armour, one lighter vest for shock absorption under my harder armour (plate and chain) and a thicker one for unarmoured practice (read, with blunts, whether that's wasters, shinai, or synthetics). In the thicker padding most attacks, you feel them but unless someone connects with a full force swing from the back forty, you aren't likely to suffer any long term damage. Now, would I expect the padding to stop a real warhammer or mace from cracking my rib? Not at all. The blunt force impact is way more concentrated with the weight consolidated in the front of the weapon. Swords actually lose a little against the padded armour, mostly due to the lack of weight. I've seen test cutting and arrow shots against heavy gambesons, but never really anything that measures the affects of blunt force against them. Even adding chain on top of the gambeson, I've heard of people breaking ribs in the SCA (not what I do, but that's blunt force trauma as a comparison). The chain robs a lot of the energy from the strike and would stop the cut from most metal swords. The gambeson just helps soften it some more. With the plate and chain, you know when you're hit, but it's mostly academic. Unless you're fighting a trained individual that knows how to get around the armour (or gets a well timed blow) the metal is going to do all the work. I took a counter blow that hit the armpit, which tends to be hard to armour, and was I ever glad I had my padding on. I had a nasty bruise that turned some amazing shades of color over the next 24 hours. Luckily nothing broken. All that for, is padded armour underrated/cost inappropriately? Depends how much accuracy you want on weapon type vs armour type and if we're trying to emulate reality or fiction. Underrated, yes, since it's an essential part of any heavier armour kit. Cost or valued inappropriately? Unless you feel the urge to be super specific about type of damage vs type of armour, probably not. It's useful, essential even, and way better than nothing, but I would still rather have some kind of steel on top of it.

This is kind of where my thought process started from. The question, what if "spells" were more like equipment in a heroic level game? Yes, a lot of the idea comes down to having the two approaches to play being similar in cost and effectiveness. In a world like that, why wouldn't a thief tap into some shadow magic to make his job easier? Sure, he could spend a bunch of time mastering more mundane methods of stealth and consequently gains the benefit of never risking it being dispelled, but is that always the better choice? I like where everyone is going. Because, yes, a purchase structure for spells would change the society it appears in. What might that look like? Yes, martial fighters could choose to pick a spell or two up. Would other fighters be mad? Would there be guilds/orders built on one "true path of the sword"? Or would confining everything to items change things? How might it all be built out?

Not everyone will see a need for this level of... standardization(?) between martial and magic based characters. And that is absolutely ok. Ultimately, it is the GM that decides what anyone can and cannot do in the specific game they are playing. So no, the player is not free to make anything they want. That being the case, why not try and standardize across the two meta ideas of martial and magic? I'm interested in exploring this idea and seeing what other people think, what it might look like. You bring up important points and your thoughts are appreciated.

A magic item only route would be interesting. In the anime Fairy Tail, the main characters visit a dimension/world in which magic has been dying out and is performed via the use of magic items with "stored" magical energy. I don't recall if it goes into how they are made, but it definitely makes them seem uncommon, if not rare. Of course, if you've seen the anime, it absolutely blurs the line between the standard idea of a caster and a warrior.

Interesting. I get the fact that magic can do vastly more than simply buying a sword allows. But isn't that a possible benefit of buying spells? You control the market. That climbing kit that provides a Clinging power could be available as a spell of Spider Climb. You mentioned magic items. I was running that around in my head as well. Would a physical item requirement be necessary to balance it out a little? Or could we get into a "magical disarm" kind of situation? Magical martial art forms? You bring up some good points, thank you.

Good questions. To clarify, I am not asking for a fully fleshed out magic system, though anyone can feel free to submit examples. I'm interested in sparking a discussion of what the concept might look like actualized for any given individual. A discussion of the meta involved, even. Possible advantages or disadvantages. Thank you for your thoughts.

This is one of the routes that I considered as a possible setup. In your experience have players found it equitable? Do/can they buy CSLs for spells that are combat related? Is there an advantage/limitation that allows strength of will/intellect/what-have-you to stack additional damage? Thanks for a fast reply.

I've been mulling over an idea of late and thought it might be interesting for others to cogitate on as well ( or give their experiences if they have tried it). For martial based characters, it is often enough to just pay currency and receive a power that can be used as long as they can refrain from losing it. The use cost is a minimal outlay in a weapon familiarity. They receive a bonus to damage simply for being "strong". What would a magic system look like that followed a similar vein? Purchasing spells with currency is not a completely foreign idea in RPGs, to be sure. But how would *you* make it work in Hero?