dgulledge

Mumble years ago, I did a conversion of a lot of 1e material to Champions (pre-Hero System). One of the things I learned is that you can try to do as exact a match as possible from the source, but it's actually a bad idea. You end up with spells in some kind of framework, with all sorts of advantages and limitations layered on to try to exactly match the original. It gets ridiculous. You're better off using guidelines like those cited about from Killer Shrike for general power levels. Then do a build of what feels right at that power level. Once I saw what has been done with Hero System Grimoire, with various options for every spell, I decided that I truly didn't need one definitive version of each spell. Having reached that conclusion, I knew that I could go for the right feel rather than exact mechanics. With that said, there are some things you want to do. You want to scale damage, range, area of effect appropriately. That doesn't mean matching the source. That means that if one spell has twice the range of another in the source, it should probably have twice the range when you convert it. Similar concerns apply to other features of a spell. Monsters are harder to convert. The big reason is what DShomshak commented on above. Simply, the Hero System has mechanisms for modelling things that don't all appear in most games. If monsters are lacking in defenses against certain types of attacks, those become weaknesses. If every monster converted from a particular source is lacking those defenses, you've increased the value of those attacks because they become disproportionately effective. Monsters really need to be a build from scratch to match the intent of the original.

I actually love all of the examples in FH. I have yet to see any book for any FRPG that does such an excellent job of laying out all of the types of fantasy campaigns. Not that I won't probably buy FHC as well.

I've been 3D printing Dragonlock terrain from Fat Dragon Games. I like it. It's quite suitable for dungeons, caverns, castles, etc. for fantasy. They have some starship floor plan parts as well. Does anyone else have some favorites to recommend? Obviously, since I'm pointing out Dragonlock, I've got no problem paying reasonable prices for quality stuff, but frankly my budget goes to gaming books first, then other stuff.

I really shouldn't wander away from this forum in the future. I totally missed that this existed and had been thinking I needed to build something like it myself. Thanks.

I've been using the Hero System since 1981, and not once in all that time had Hardened Smell Flash Defense occurred to me. I'm sure I've never used a Smell Flash, and yet I can easily give real life examples.

Oh yeah. Right after Espionage was published, I got the clue of just how adaptable the Hero System actually was. Before Fantasy Hero existed, I converted spells, monsters and magic items from other systems ... badly. But I didn't give up the idea.

In the discussion of the default size of Temperature Levels, I found this paragraph "Typically, each Temperature Level represents about 3°-5° Celsius (10°-20° Fahrenheit) differ- ence, though the GM should set the exact param- eters based on the campaign, the environment, and other factors." 1°C = 1.8°F. I see two obvious ways to interpret this: 1) The Celsius range is correct, so a Temperature Level is 3°-5°C = 5.4°-9°F. 2) The Fahrenheit range is correct, so a Temperature Level is 10°-20°F = 5.6°-11.1°C. Given that all of the other measurements in the game are stated in metric units, I'm assuming that the Celsius range is the correct one. I checked and 5e has the same wording.

Sorry. I wasn't terribly clear. My thinking was that Piercing serves the same purpose as Find Weakness did, more or less. You're right that it absolutely doesn't behave the same way, especially in the case of multiple Find Weakness rolls. What it does is provide a mechanism to reduce the effectiveness of an opponent's defenses for the benefit of a specific attack. The idea, if I may presume for a moment to intuit the intent of the designers of two different editions, is game balance. You don't want characters with defenses that can never be defeated. I think Find Weakness was under-priced as a solution in high powered games. Every point of Piercing will allow you to do one more point each of BODY and STUN, or get one point closer to doing any. If the attack it's coupled with is a Blast, 1d6 costs 5 points and does an average of 1 BODY and 3.5 STUN. 1 point of Piercing will cost you 2 points and negate a point of defense. For those 2 points, you get 1 more point of BODY and 1 more point of STUN. That's still a little under-priced relative to just buying another 1d6 of the attack itself. I had characters with Find Weakness under earlier editions. It was powerful and I liked it. I don't disagree with you about being glad to see it go. The only thing that kept it from being too unbalancing was the fact that it required a roll. Personally, I doubt I'll use Piercing. With the Armor Piercing advantage and the fact that Piercing is tied to a single attack power, it feels redundant to me. I assume there's a reason for it to exist separately from Armor Piercing, probably so that it can be more easily purchased than a naked Armor Piercing advantage to be used with any weapon. As such, it would be an appropriate power for an expert marksman or swordsman.

I agree about simple solutions. I also prefer where possible to stick to the rules of the game and specifically the edition I'm using if possible. In the case of Find Weakness, there's a power in the Advanced Players Guide called Piercing that you can probably adapt with a couple of limitations, particularly Requires a Roll.

Even Find Weakness and Missile Deflection aren't much of a problem. The 6e Advanced Player's Guide offers a new power called Piercing. Instead of reducing a defense by 50%, it reduces the defense by a fixed amount. Put a Requires A Roll limitation on it and it is a lot like Find Weakness. The 6e Deflection power isn't all that different from Missile Deflection.

I'll second NSG's interpretation. With RM, the mechanics for studying spell lists, gaining power points with each level, recovering power points each day, casting spells, resistance rolls, etc. were the same across the realms of magic. Each realm was there to represent a separate source of power. Because of that, casters from one realm didn't share spells with another realm, thus each realm had separate base lists, even though some of them were very similar. You can find certain common spell effects in all three realms, grouped into different lists and available at different levels. Part of what makes RM fun for me is that there is so much variation from character to character. Two 5th level Magicians don't have to be much alike. The chance that they'll have a spell list or two in common is fairly high, but with 10 open, 10 closed and 6 base lists to choose from, they can be very, very different.

Jenks is my favorite character from the series. Much as I like Rachel and Ivy, Jenks is endearing. He isn't just comic relief because he's smart and competent, and yet he's comic relief too. I'd happily give him and his family my yard for a garden.

I agree with you, although that isn't the only reason my stuff came out unbalanced. I ended up with a huge number of advantages and limitations on everything. By the time you have half a dozen or more modifiers in each direction, you've managed to stumble over at least a few combinations of options that don't work as well together as you might hope. Realistically, some limitations are worth more or less depending on what they are used with. I haven't seen the arguments about characteristic costs, but I can guess at some of them. As I indicated, I got into Champions back in the early days.

I must have missed that. I'd take either one of them, but I have to agree that Ivy is just plain dangerous.