Robyn

Re: On the Use and Abuse of Character Weaknesses....

I like brainwahing them and sending them back to the team. Good excuse for the hunted to lay off for a while too' date=' until some programmed 'event' [/quote']

 

Especially if it is a programmed "obey and forget" event

 

The group can spend forever trying to track down the Shapeshifter who is impersonating one of them to commit crimes, only to finally catch the villain and find out that it is their teammate.

 

Whereupon the player turns to the GM and says:

 

PC: "But you said I was on a date with George!"

GM: "Right! And you remember how you met George, don't you?"

PC: "Of course! He's one of the heroes who broke into VILLAIN* and let me out by destroying my superprison along with most of their secret base."

 

*I don't know the "real" villainous organizations well enough to put a good name there.

 

Indirect results. George might even be a real hero, and VILLAIN was just killing two birds with one stone; move all the valuable stuff out of their base after learning in advance that George was coming, to be replaced with decoys and malfunctioning (destined for the scrap heap) technology, and leave the impression that they had been dealt a severe setback; then, blackmail George later on to provide a cover story for the brainwashed PC. Or, maybe George wasn't much of a hero without their assistance; the whole "George demolishes VILLAIN headquarters" was a setup with troublemaking goons and almost-out-of-warranty equipment (that still functioned perfectly, in case anyone checked) to eliminate what VILLAIN would have soon gotten rid of anyway. Or perhaps the entire "George" story was fabricated out of whole cloth by VILLAIN, and it was a safe investment since George never had to do anything villainous himself to be worthwhile; he just had to date a nice superheroine and occasionally give the trigger word to pass on orders.

Re: I want to build my base out of plastique

*sigh*

 

You've all overlooked a SERIOUS problem with this idea: plastique is NOT a structural material! There's no way the base would stay up!

It's the folding base! Fully collapsible into a mere fraction of its working size!

Re-expansion is up to the villain in charge, of course. Hopefully telekinetic

When the villain is away, noone else can come in to play (or steal her toys).

When the heroes break in and take out the villain, the base promptly Entangles them under several tons of plastique.

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

Just realize that if there are no restrictions on learning magic' date=' lots of characters will want to learn one small spell from each school so as to get immunity to the lot...[/quote']

 

I was thinking a patron-type system, possibly with the "choose which dark lord to sell your soul to" restrictions on being chosen by more than one.

 

Its a bad idea for most Magic Systems. Because one wizard can launch a magic missle is not a good justification for that wizard to be immune to other wizards magic missiles' date=' for instance.[/quote']

 

Lucius is correct in his interpretation, immunity is not just to the exact same spells but all spells of the same "source of magic" SFX. Not "type", which would classify spells by what they did, but "source", which classifies magic by where it comes from. The problem is that I can't value those SFX, much less cost out Personal Immunity for them. The HERO system specifically separates SFX from mechanics, which means there are not only no rules for building SFX with mechanics, but no guidelines either. (I can build the Visible effects of a power, using Linked Images, but while the exact nature of these Images is appropriate to the SFX, the SFX is more than that.) This is why I was thinking of mandatory Limitations on each spell; the source of a wizard's magic won't permit them to cast spells on any other wizard chosen by the same source (actually, that's not entirely correct; the spells will be cast just fine, but the source won't feed enough power to that spell to do anything).

 

I've learned that the mechanics do not need to fully reflect the "how this works" story/SFX of a power, so I'm considering a Personal Immunity as well. But if anyone has a way to cost out the SFX, please share

Re: I want to build my base out of plastique

You should watch the end of Tomorrow Never Dies. I suspect the villain may have done just that. (stupid villain...)

Maybe he had it in mind as an inescapable deathtrap.

"You may have defeated me, Mr. Bond, but you shall not escape this place alive!"

The hidden costs are a neverending supply of plastique. Want some more? Just go back to your base and tear out a piece of the wall.

On page 487 on 5ER, the Explosives table has an entry for "Plastic Explosive (1 block)". The damage was 15d6 Normal, but at the time an entirely inappropriate thought was running through my mind, inspired by my recollection of an old saying "enough on me to blow up the entire block" . . . what if you had an entire city block made out of plastic explosives? Then, my thoughts turned to the next logical step in that sequence:

What if your entire base was built using plastic explosives?

How much would this cost? Hypothetically speaking, of course

I'm told, from time to time, that I'm overthinking things. But if I engage in more thought than someone else upon a given topic, wouldn't I be better qualified than they to determine when I've been thinking too much about it?

I am excellently positioned to identify overthinking, and indeed do have some criteria for it. I will now share these criteria, as drawn from my own experience, and built through HERO mechanics

+xINT, No Conscious Control (no handwaving this; the power cannot be invoked at will, it may or may not activate when the character is using INT whether more INT is needed or not, and will typically shut off when the character ceases activities that do not require boosted INT anymore), Activation Roll with Burnout, Side Effect: headaches (Always; they kick in when the +xINT power wears off)

If possible, the "-1/10AP" should be taken from RSR and applied to the Activation Roll, or even -1/5AP since this fits the INT increments (and their corresponding bonuses to INT-based skills) better.

Re: Bizarre Spell Ideas

Head-turning Beauty: As you walk around, say, a park (yes, idea inspired by jkwleisemann ), there will be visible reactions. The surprising part is that these will come from everywhere, including those who are not quite human. Even inanimate objects such as trees, flowers, and light poles will turn to look as you go by.

Sadly, this spell has no effect on humans, who are oblivious to the caster's beauty.

Re: Build challenge: stasis fields

The Single Point in Time is considered to be the exact moment the field is set up. Continuous basically means that the target(s) basically are always "sent" to that exact moment as long as the field is active.

I think you're saying that each target is repeatedly affected by the power, since it is Continuous*, and the first effect counts as all the others rolled into one. I like the idea that, once a stasis field affects somebody once, it doesn't need to roll to continue affecting them (which, considering the rolls would be made in the same moment it first tried to affect them, would lead to some very quickly resolved paradoxes).

*Or would AOE alone maintain the application of the power? If a character teleports/EDM's from one AOE into an identical AOE in another dimension, does that count as leaving one and entering the new one? Does it matter if there is any "transit time"?

I'm probably overlooking something serious' date=' but I [i']think[/i] that would be a reasonable way to start modeling the effect.

 

[EDIT: Yup, forgot about the not getting hurt in the stasis field.]

A big one for me was how to let it turn off (or be disabled) later, with the affected target(s) emerging in the present at that time.

Re: The Munchkin Build Contest

Throw on Detect Vulnerabilities and Susceptibilities for extra laughs.

The sad part is that, if you passed this by the GM before the other players presented their characters, the GM would probably refuse to give them any point values for Vulnerabilities, Susceptibilities, or Limitations on their powers that said "extra effect only against X".

Of course, at that point, it's a race between the GM and players to see who kills you first

Re: The Munchkin Build Contest

Variable (Special) Effect bought as a Naked Advantage.

All you have to worry about from then on are the mechanics.

As a twist, take UBO for the Naked Advantage.

All your teammates can use whatever SFX they'd like for their powers.

But for the final straw, take UAA on your Naked Advantage.

Now you can force your opponents to use different SFX, ruining whatever synergy they had.

Either form of UOO might require Constant or a similar Advantage to work properly.

Here's the story: wizards are immune (invulnerable, unaffected by, pick your favorite term ) to magic that has the same "source" as their own magic.

Here are the mechanics: mandatory Limitations on all their own spells to save points by "cannot affect other wizards who use same SFX", or Personal Immunity for each spell (I'm not quite sure how this would work out).

Here's the question: by preference or experience, how would you handle this or recommend another GM to handle it?

This is one of the things which, after reading 5ER (well, most of it, anyway ), I still think of as a tricky build. In the affected area, time stops; those inside are frozen, cannot perceive (because, subjectively, nothing is happening during the no-time), and will not age. It is also impossible to harm those inside a stasis field because any effect that enters it will instantly become affected as well.

There are several ways to do this with EDM, of course. The tricky part turns out to be in the details. How accurately can you replicate the criteria above? Exact builds are preferred for EDM, but even general ideas of how to use other powers for any of this would be appreciated

Re: Alignment Issues

I'm responding to YOUR post. I'm allowed to do that.

 

So I'm not obligated to respond to "your idea" or anyone else's idea

I must confess that your logic here is quite beyond me. You go from "responding to THIS post" to "so there is no obligation to respond to any particular idea". You can't simultaneously be responding to a post, and (because you can respond to that post) NOT responding to the ideas raised in it. Well, you can, but it's misleading and irrelevant. As an argument, it would be a straw man. Since you seemed to be correcting me, not arguing:

Dude, there is no 'deity' here - it's the Way the Universe Works. It's a fundamental law.

I simply pointed out that, "here" (where my post was set in), "Deity" was quite different from "Force of Nature". It's not your "here".

Re: Alignment Issues

One could posit the argument that the difference between a Deity and a Force of Nature is semantic; in other words - you say "to-may-toe" and I say "to-mah-toe."

 

Behold, my Deity of Goodness dissaproves!

 

Dude, there is no 'deity' here - it's the Way the Universe Works. It's a fundamental law.

 

The things that make it all interesting - and what Sublime Reality is based on for my campaign

That's your campaign. Please note that I was responding to arcady's post, which wasn't presented specifically for your campaign. In fact, his post (just) preceeds your mention of the article you wrote, so it's very unlikely he was even thinking of that when he posted.

Gravity, like several other laws of physics, could be a Force of Nature.

Gods, again borrowing from my idea, are not "impersonal, aloof" beings but quite human.

Re: Alignment Issues

Fail to follow the alignment' date=' and you suffer skill roll penalties from 'divine disfavor' until you can manage to 'shake' the alignment by adopting a new one.[/quote']

 

Hrm . . . interesting.

 

To borrow from a recent idea, Good and Evil not as Forces of Nature but Deities; compliance with one's alignment is measured by the approval (or disapproval) of one's patron in the pantheon.

 

The downside of this is that, depending on the group's philosophy regarding the roleplaying of NPC's, it may rely on the GM alone to ask "What would Thor do?"

Re: Opinion Fluff: Game Philosophies

1) Dogmatic: The philosophies of the group are codified. Everyone knows, or is expected to know, the tgroup rules and philosophies, and they are strictly applied.

2) Free-flowing: The group makes philosophical decisions as they arise. There are no codified rules.

1.5) The rules and philosophies of the group are codified, but never spoken of or even alluded to, just mindlessly (and soundlessly) obeyed. Any questions about the rules will be met with silence; any questions about why noone is saying anything will be likewise met with a resounding silence.

Not ignored, or disregarded. They're just not going to say anything.

This describes an uncomfortable number of playing groups

Re: I finished reading 5th Edition, Revised

I grasp the concept - but I have no grasp of the implications. Who are the PCs?

I was originally thinking of a single-player game, like Sinbad, but as I wrote it I noticed how "game" might have multiple meanings.

How about the Gods themselves?

Why would I want to play in a game where random crap happens because "a G-d" intervened?

Is there any difference between that and the GM? If the mythology of characters in the campaign setting firmly believes that everything (good and bad) which happens to anyone is the work of some deity or another, does it matter whether this belief is right or wrong?

(By the way, I found the missing review, and the post above has been corrected to point to the URL.)

Re: Opinion Fluff: Game Philosophies

The philosophies presented presume that there is a trust between the Players and GM and that trust won't be violated by either Players or GM.

But as an unstated presumption, how does that default?

Sorry.

Re: Opinion Fluff: Game Philosophies

Interpretation

1) Closed Rule Interpretation: If the rules do not specify something, then it is disallowed pending Authoritative Permission.

2) Open Rule Interpretation: If the rules do not specify something, it is allowed by default pending Authoritative Restriction.

3) Guideline Rule Interpretation: A set of guidelines are used to show what things fall into Closed Rule Interpretation and what things fall into Open Rule Interpretation.

Definitely neither 1 nor 2. If it's not specified, it isn't specified

(yes, those are essentially the same phrases, just shifting the "is" contraction)

The first two may both apply to a given situation, depending on how the question is phrased; no specific examples come to mind, it's just a thought, but may lead to their conflation.

Re: I finished reading 5th Edition, Revised

Gods who' date=' for some bizarre reason, wish their plaything to be bludgeoned to death, not stabbed to death. Or killed by a flame based Energy Blast, but not a flame based RKA.[/quote']

 

Are you familiar with any of the ancient mythologies in which humans existed for the entertainment of the gods? Gods who were not aloof, inhuman entities but very much like powerful children?

 

That was the simple inspiration and setting for my build. If taking it in that context doesn't make a difference for you, read on:

 

Gods play games with the lives of men. They also have fun. Very primal fun, if you know what I mean (and if you don't, you definitely don't want to read this). Sometimes, this fun leads to a development of their long-term interest in some part(s) of the world. (Other gods, jealous or mischievous or what-have-you, may take an interest themselves upon learning of this.) So, after a while, they have a world that is positively crawling with various supernatural creatures, effects, and other "here-there-be-dragons" possibilities.

 

Gods don't always get along. Alliances and rivalries can be quick to form, shift, and dissipate. Direct opposition (between gods) is not unknown, but more common is their earthly agents working out local disputes by proxy. Also not unknown is direct intervention (god to mortal or god to agent), but usually this is when the other god is occupied elsewhere (through distraction or their own initiative) so an escalation will not occur. More frequent is the indirect intervention, going down in disguise to give cryptic hints or pretend to be a damsel in distress, or even challenge the agent to a battle of wits (it should be noted that even mortals have outwitted the gods before).

 

Gods appreciate subtlety. If one of them can be sneaky enough to intervene without any mortal (or agent) the wiser, this is often allowed even if another god notices. (They all watch over their earthly areas of interest, when not visiting elsewhere for some purpose, this is after all what they do for entertainment.) If, on the other hand, they are caught (identified), the mortals/agents can resist their ploys, and the god may retreat in shame. Getting caught is bad form, and receives a penalty in the gods' game. Just don't ask who keeps score.

 

Gods want to be respected. Mortals may fear the gods instead of (or in addition to) respecting them, and to some gods fear counts as respect. But mortals don't last very long. In addition to being rather squishy, they don't live for more than a few decades anyway. Gods, on the other hand, live forever, and are likely to be around a very long time from now, still aware that they were bested in some contest or another. Respect from other gods counts for a lot more than respect from mortals.

 

Gods don't get no respect. Not even from themselves. When you can squish a mortal into the ground with scant effort, there's no challenge to it. No chance of failure. It gets boring - real fast. Other gods are just as likely to be unimpressed by such feats. The imposition of handicaps (limitations on the power that can be brought to bear on a given contest) makes things more interesting. The more a god manages to accomplish with the less they have used to do it, the more respect they earn from other gods. Thus the "battle of wits", agents, and other developments in the evolution of the gods' game.

 

My build, Plaything of The Gods, is about the next step in this evolution: using mortals, not agents, as proxies. The gods select a single mortal whose life they will make very interesting, and then proceed to wager on the outcome of his adventures. Each of them has their own agenda, and these interests may conflict, agree, or be irrelevant to one another. If the mortal disappoints a god, it may oppose him in his next adventure, seeking to punish him for failure. For the most part, though, the gods recognize that mortals go squish easily, and have taken measures to ensure that he will not be killed for a meaningless outcome.

 

If he were simply difficult to kill (at all), he would be the equivalent of an agent; there would be no challenge in it, and therefore his accomplishments would not be worthy of any respect in the game. He must earn his victories, through his own skill and cunning, else there is no "mortal" factor (merely the cheating by various gods). Unpredictability is desired, but not that he suddenly (and unexpectedly) be eliminated from the game mid-play by some thug in an alley with a knife. Stopping all the thugs and like dangers would be a waste of their time, not to mention the level of interference it would require (what use the game when rigged?), so the gods agreed upon a manner of protection that would preserve his value as a gamepiece (for future adventures, since survival would be no guarantee of success in the endeavor at hand) when anyone ever tried to slay him outright, but would allow him to perish under all other conditions.

 

For their criteria of "slaying the mortal outright", they used - the Killing Attack. The one type of attack which, by the rules and by the resulting perception of characters* within a campaign setting, is specifically meant to kill people.

 

*I mean "perception of characters" as in "the perception that characters have", not "how the characters are perceived".

Re: I finished reading 5th Edition, Revised

I could reasonably allow a STUN Regen' date=' but ... why would anyone buy it? Sorry, spitballing.[/quote']

 

For those times when you are so far into negative STUN that Recovery is "at GM's option". To take you out and keep you that way, they have to counter your Regen factor somehow, otherwise you'll just keep getting up after a few minutes.

Re: On the Use and Abuse of Character Weaknesses....

Eliminate osmosis entirely? Probably not possible. We're only human. But good roleplayers can and do work to minimize it.

If you're overly aggressive with what isn't known, it may be possible to eliminate it (albeit at the cost of your character inexplicably forgetting much of what they should know - but maybe you're playing a chronic amnesiac). Or you could just be a complete innocent as a player, and not know anything that your character doesn't.

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

I just relooked in the 5th Edition book though' date=' and unless you have a different edition of 5th edition, this is a lie.[/quote']

 

Sort of. Edition and a half? He did say "5ER".

 

I got my rulebook like the day 5th edition was put out

 

You probably, then, have the book known as "FRED", usually used to refer to the 2001 edition which had ~390 pages. Christopher was quoting from the 2004 Revised Edition, which has ~590 pages.

 

it is possible' date=' though unlikely that this power was changed. Even if it was changed though, the choice would still be dependent upon the attack used. For instance if the attack used was a simple punch than it would be stupid to pick an exotic defense or resistant defenses, so even IF this was changed in a reprinting, it is meaningless.[/quote']

 

I don't think ~200 pages (over half the length of the original 5th Edition book!) made only "meaningless" changes.

Re: Name Help

I'm thinking of a character with the ability to see' date=' and manipulate matter and energy on a macro scale in ways that quantum mechanics dictate matter and energy are manipulated on a quantum scale.[/quote']

 

Sounds like Luck, activated at will.

 

Or more subtly' date=' "The Mechanic".[/quote']

 

Sounds like a metagaming reference

Re: On the Use and Abuse of Character Weaknesses....

However' date=' since they *created* her, I (as the GM) think it's perfectly fair to figure that they made a few plans in case she went rogue the way she did. Namely, all agents sent out to retrieve her are sent packing KO gas and Stun grenades; the AoE effects largely negate her relatively massive CV, and the NND effects have defenses that she doesn't have (though, in some cases, other members of the group do.)[/quote']

 

That's what a group is for. Of course, the agents can learn from their failures . . .

 

If you want to be sneaky, and the agents are devious, let them spy on her for awhile once they find her; then, when the rest of the group is away, they strike.