Robyn

Re: Re-Imaged Hero(ines)

Thank you. And the next candidate is Starshine

We're playing My Little Pony now?

Hello! I'm Starshine a rainbow pegasus!

I love adventures and making new friends.

Please be my friend.

Will you comb and braid my long rainbow hair and tie it with a ribbon?

Just to be clear - that Starshine?

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

"Missle Deflection functions like a Block in HTH Combat: it takes a Half Phase to perform; it is an Attack Action...."

That specifies the type of Action it is - but is it actually an Attack?

Mind you, what the difference - if anything - might mean must be left to those who know more about the combat rules than I do

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

Well' date=' a counter shot could also be modeled as a Dispel, which can be MPA'ed with another attack. Hitting the attack in the air rather than at the attacks point of origin is, in game terms, just SFX.[/quote']

 

Rep when I can again

 

All this talk about MPA's... I seem to recall that you couldn't combine powers from two different frameworks for an MPA.

 

See here and here; both powers are under the same "bow" Multipower.

 

Secondly' date=' if you combine the missile deflection in the attack powers framework, the char couldn't abort to it after they've taken an attack in a previous phase, as changing slots in a multipower is a zero phase action, not a free one.[/quote']

 

If they already had the Missile Deflection in place, though?

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

I would argue that it isn't a "minor variation" though because by making the arrow both moving and oncoming you make the shot MUCH harder.

Mmm . . . details

Visually, it's about the same; and for realism, it's cinematic - which, as far as I'm concerned, covers that

Re: System cap on creativity

Just thought of another concept that the existing rules forbid as source material concept.

 

Concept:

Reed Richards stretches both arms 20 feet and rescues a kitten in a tree. Reed sees two robbers, one to his left and one to his right. Each is 20 feet away from him. He stretches out both arms and grabs both of them.

 

The current Stretching rules and application don't allow for this.

Thanks!

A lot depends on whether one views a GM created custom limitation/advantage that overrides the books default rules/definitions as part of the core rules or as a GM overcoming the system's inflexibility. Either view is just as valid' date=' but it does make discussing such matters difficult since the two views are diametrically opposed to one another and a consensus on the matter will probably not be achieved.[/quote']

 

Very true!

 

You'll need to give a concrete example of what you're asking.

 

I think the post I linked to will serve adequately, and you can also read Christopher Mullin's reply for another instance. It's difficult for me to come up with concrete examples, though, because I don't have enough experience with the rules to readily start with what is impossible and "work backwards" from there to a genre-appropriate situation where the verboten effect would be needed. The best I've been able to do is note when it occurs, and invite/request feedback so a bunch of other people (who are experienced with the rules, and trying to support various character concepts with them) can take a look at it.

 

Mind you' date=' demigods and the like might take a [i']wee bit[/i] of power to get rid of. Perhaps special artifacts would be needed, ones that provide an Aid effect to such a Dispel.

 

In such a case, we're dealing primarily with Avatars and the like, aren't we? It wouldn't be a stretch, then, to say that the source of their Summon effect was actually on their home plane, and require an artifact capable of applying Transdimensional to that Dispel.

 

However' date=' you CAN use Noncombat Stretching. So, if Reed bought 20" of Stretching, couldn't he use noncombat Stretching (40") to stretch one arm to the left and one to the right?[/quote']

 

If he could do that, why couldn't he use Noncombat Stretching (40") to stretch 40" in one direction?

 

Assuming the two robbers are each 40" away (are we doing this on a standard hex map? ), and it's Noncombat time, he can reach one of them but (by the rules) not both of them.

Re: SPD inflation obesrvation & solution

formula which was dcv -3 x 10 + spd X 3 + pd + ed =95

I'd suggest parantheses around your first two items, there, otherwise the order of operations will lead us to apply the "-3x10" first, and have DCV times negative 30!

Examples

I'm going to separate these into a few steps so they're easier to follow, for me and anyone else.

tough guy

1. 10 dcv -3 x 3 =21 + 3 spd x3 =9 + 33 pd = 32 ed =95

Variables: DCV = [i]10[/i], SPD = [i]3[/i], PD = [i]33[/i], ED = [i]32[/i]
Equation: [([i]DCV[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]SPD[/i] x 3] + [PD] + [ED] = 95
Substitution: [([i]10[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]3[/i] x 3] + [[i]33[/i]] + [[i]32[/i]] = 95
Resolution #1: [(7) x 3] + [9] + 33 + 32 = 95
Resolution #2: [21] + 9 + 33 + 32 = 95

Balanced guy

2. 15 dcv-3x3=36 + 6spdx3=18 + 21pd + 20ed=95

Variables: DCV = [i]15[/i], SPD = [i]6[/i], PD = [i]21[/i], ED = [i]20[/i]
Equation: [([i]DCV[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]SPD[/i] x 3] + [PD] + [ED] = 95
Substitution: [([i]15[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]6[/i] x 3] + [[i]21[/i]] + [[i]20[/i]] = 95
Resolution #1: [(12) x 3] + [18] + 21 + 20 = 95
Resolution #2: [36] + 18 + 21 + 20 = 95

Speed guy

3. 18dcv-3x3=45 = 8spdx3=24 = =13 pd + 13ed =95

Variables: DCV = [i]18[/i], SPD = [i]8[/i], PD = [i]13[/i], ED = [i]13[/i]
Equation: [([i]DCV[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]SPD[/i] x 3] + [PD] + [ED] = 95
Substitution: [([i]18[/i] - 3) x 3] + [[i]8[/i] x 3] + [13] + [13] = 95
Resolution #1: [(15) x 3] + [24] + 13 + 13 = 95
Resolution #2: [45] + 24 + 13 + 13 = 95

Re: Limitations as Vulnerabilities: modelling Advantages from the other side

Force Wall (Ice)- Unintended interactions (gives off water when exposed to high heat/fire powers - can short out exposed electronics' date=' cause water damage, foster mold growth over time) (-0)[/quote']

 

Preservation of corpses entombed within?

 

I think the "short out exposed electronics" would be a Thwarted By of the electronics; the "water damage" would be a Vulnerability for many things; the "mold growth" would probably be unrelated to the ice wall or the organic substance mold was growing on, so I could see that as an Unexpected Interaction or a vulnerability of the organic substance.

 

To preserve meat inside multiple walls of ice, I think Unexpected Interaction would have to be used - I don't see "meat rotting" as being a natural power of the meat, that a Thwarted By could be used for, and it's not a Limitation or Negation of the ice power.

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

Multiple Power Attack' date=' power one is missile deflection, power two is your RKA, perfectly legal in the system[/quote']

 

Oh.

 

And here I was thinking that reading the combat chapter might be dangerous, and wondering if I'd find bliss in ignorance

From this post, I gather that experience with HERO's ruleset can limit us when it comes to envisioning effects which we know cannot be modelled with the (core) rules. How badly do you think the HERO system "locks out" legitimate ideas through its own imperfections?

Re: What's with all the points

I was trying to find my old posts when I was bemoaning the 250 to 350 change' date=' but I couldn't.[/quote']

 

Couldn't have anything to do with the effort of trying to sift through over 10,000 posts, could it?

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

Sfx has nothing to do with it.

While you made excellent points about the mechanics, you completely missed my point. SFX has everything to do with conceptually wanting to do it: SFX is the concept of how it would be done. That the system doesn't allow it is irrelevant, since the SFX is easily imaginable: it's a minor variation of a classic trick (Robin Hood at the archery contest).

Re: Sliding bars measuring each spell's "energy"

Well it looks like your going to end up with lots of book keeping no matter which method you use. simply because your goal is literally to track how much of each power a character can use individually.

And when, too. Recovery will begin when a Reserve is below full (they don't all refresh at the same time), so their exact moments of replenishment will come at different intervals.

the method I suggested isn't 'entirely' untested' date=' simply because I dirived it's value to mechanics that already exist within the game.[/quote']

 

There's a bit of mixing and matching, though. Those rules were tested with the mechanics they were already matched with.

 

Normally' date=' a power uses of the entire 'charge' regardless of the level it is used at.[/quote']

 

I'm not entirely clear on what the difference is between your build and a Boostable charge, though - mechanically speaking.

 

Conceptually, you start out with a single charge and say "Why have just one when you can have many?"

 

Conceptually, the book starts out with many charges and says "You can combine these if you want."

 

It seems like you're just approaching Boostable from the opposite direction.

Re: Alignment Issues

A chaotic person would tell you that laws only ensure inequality...

 

Well, such a person would be wrong. Without laws, you only get what you can take by physical force.

 

It's exactly that kind of response that explains why Law and Chaos fight.

"You have to use lethal force against the pacifists! If you don't use some violence to settle disputes, the only alternative is all-out war!"

Also it's worth remembering that Chaotic societies still have laws.

And to the extent they do, they are less Chaotic.

 

Perfection is not expected.

It's worth remembering that Lawful societies don't legislate everything.

The Sheriff of Nottingham fights against him' date=' not because he's breaking the law, but because his actions thwart his evil purposes.[/b']

 

You can't imagine the Sheriff not having any evil purposes but just doing his job as it was assigned to him by his boss?

Or, even recognizing that Robin Hood was battling for Good, holding Lawful to be more important than Good?

I'll go a step further - I can imagine Darth Vader having good purposes, and holding them above his Lawfulness: yes, Darth Vader as Lawful Good.

Re: Need a new game

May also need a slight rewrite of the exe file' date=' as it may be programed to look for disk configs ... just a thought[/quote']

 

 

Without the source code, that'd practically entail a reverse-engineering of the compiled executable.

Re: What's with all the points

I' date=' like you am returning from the fond olden days of 250 and love it. There does seem to be some Stat inflation. I am regularly seeing Bricks with Speed 6, Martial Artists with 20 pd, etc. Sometimes you even see Pyrokinetics with 60 Strength.[/quote']

 

Point of curiosity - are you seeing these characters in official HERO products, or do your players bring them to you?

Re: Frameworks modifying frameworks

BTW' date=' so what if it's "not like you'll be missile deflecting and firing an arrow at the same time anyway"? Something like 90% of all multipowers I ever see are mutually exclusive powers (like attacks, before we had the MPA rule anyway).[/quote']

 

I can think of a situation where you might want to be doing both, actually (and the SFX would conceptually justify it).

 

Your character is facing off against another archer, who has just sent an arrow toward you. You want to send your arrow along their flight path, so it splinters through the center of theirs (sending the pieces off to all sides) and punches through to continue until it hits the enemy.

Re: Alignment Issues

A lawful person considers respect for others to be a moral imperative

But is morality the same as alignment? Alignment includes morality, but the Law/Chaos axis is in addition to the moral axis - else there wouldn't be a point to having both of them.

If morality is absolute' date=' and if concern for others is Good,[/quote']

 

If, if. If we presuppose that a certain side is "in the right", we can trudge on from that and go in a circle, eventually ending up right back where we started, only we'll think it's a conclusion rather than a premise. Of course, it's all right then to finally look back and check our premises, because we've just "proven" them. Isn't circular logic fun?

 

Law and Chaos must have no moral component

 

They can certainly refer to morality, just as morality can refer to law or chaos.

 

Law cannot be defined as concern for others or submission to rightful authority' date=' since these are moral imperatives.[/quote']

 

Correction - they are both.

 

Each axis governs the area(s) it has sole authority over. This restriction would not be necessary if they did not, at times, claim that the same area was in their jurisdiction.

 

Where a conflict exists, or neither axis cares, "free will" may enter the equation.

 

if Law/Chaos have no moral component' date=' they should not serve as alignment[/quote']

 

Why? I think you're conflating "alignment" with "morality" here.

Re: Need a new game

Yes' date=' the program I'm trying to run from the flash drive[/quote']

 

Maybe the old program is trying to access the files it needs with its own device driver, instead of going through the DOS subsystem? Try copying all the files to a directory on your hard drive, in case it can't handle USB.

Re: Sliding bars measuring each spell's "energy"

Pretty much' date=' and why not?[/quote']

You could create a custom power modifier

 

Because each of these are "house rules", unofficial modifications which are untested?

 

practically identical solution that still requires "rules tweaking" (because your forcing the players to use a specific build either way and apply the END reserve to only 1 power.)

 

I don't see a problem with forcing the players to use a specific build. In fact, that's exactly what I had in mind here: once I figured out how to do it, I would let them know that that's how it had to be done, and the only way they could do it.

 

Creating an END reserve for each spell was something I have taken under consideration, and you can see this in my original post. I don't see how it would require "rules tweaking" at all.

 

Example. two 10d6 Firebolts each can be used for up to... lets just say for simplicity 40d6/week (or roughly 200 AP).

 

This model may give you an idea of what I have in mind:

 

Robyn's Firebolt: Energy Blast 10d6, Penetrating +1/2, Sticky +1/2 (AP 100, END=10),

plus END Reserve, 10 END, 10 REC (AP=11), Slow Recovery -2&1/2 (1 END every 6 hours)

 

Note that this essentially does exactly what I want it to do, mechanically. The reason I'm looking for other solutions is that this method would entail a lot of bookkeeping

Re: Alignment Issues

a truly lawful person respects others and does not WANT to cause them trouble.

But isn't "causing trouble for someone" an evil act? Along the Good/Evil axis rather than the Law/Chaos axis?

If alleviating boredom is your core drive and overrides moral concerns' date=' then you are not Chaotic you are Evil. (i.e., putting yourself head of others no matter what).[/quote']

 

I catch a reference to the Good/Evil axis in your definition . . . what happens if we make it Law/Chaos?

 

Alcamtar: "If your core drive overrides moral concerns, you are Evil."

 

Robyn: "If your core drive overrides legal concerns, you are Chaotic."

 

Without laws' date=' you only get what you can take by physical force.[/quote']

 

What about personal production? It might be more accurate to say that you only keep what you (or your allies) can protect by physical force.

 

The domain of Law insists that everything has a singular nature. But the domain of Chaos is free to not, in a lawless society, have "raiders and thieves who only loot, never create" as its natural state.

 

Without law' date=' you only get the freedom you can ensure through force.[/quote']

 

Again, a Lawful presumption that Chaos will follow the patterns of Law - it isn't obliged to! If a chaotic society were, by definition, afflicted with constant challenges of freedom, challenges that could only be met with physical force, and only withstood by a superior physical force, then the only freedom anyone would get would be that which they could ensure through force. But that's an excessively narrow definition of chaotic societies.

 

If one group's army is stronger than another group's army' date=' there's nothing (other than the Goodness of the first group) to ensure the freedom of the second group.[/quote']

 

How about Neutrality?

 

Morally, freedom may exist simply through the "I don't care!" attitude of people who naturally mind their own business.

 

You've touched on an interesting point, though - there is nothing to ensure the freedom of one group from another, except physical force:

 

A system of laws written on paper doesn't make a Lawful society unless those laws are actually used.

 

Even then, a Lawful society may find itself helpless against Chaotic individuals who choose not to follow those laws. If someone physically powerful (such as, say, supervillains) does not respect the laws, it comes down to force, and what does society have?

 

These so-called "laws" are nothing more than a social agreement, Law is meaningless and powerless to those who do not heed it. Ultimately, the Lawful society is even more likely as a Chaotic one to find itself needing physical force to maintain the status quo. Not just because Chaotic societies could more readily accept a change to that state, but because Law by nature establishes more rules than Chaos, and thus increases the opportunities for someone to break them.

 

By that definition' date=' almost nobody in the world is Lawful. I guess the only Lawful people would be Adrian Monk-like folks who have an obsession with organization. But that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with alignment, because it doesn't necessarily say anything about the persons beliefs about society.[/quote']

 

A person's Law/Chaos alignment isn't limited to their beliefs about society; there's an interpersonal aspect present, too.

 

A classic example of Chaotic Good vs Lawful Evil would be the story of Robin Hood.

 

A classic example of Lawful Good would be Darth Vader.

 

Re: Need a new game

Feeling nostalgic' date=' went to load [i']Dungeon Hack[/i], and discovered that my computer does not have a drive for 3.5 inch floppies. So went to another computer, loaded the floppies onto a flash drive, still can't get it to load.

Have you tried looking for software that can provide a virtual floppy drive?

Something where you can control one character' date=' not an army.[/quote']

 

How about somewhere in between? 4-6 characters?

Re: Sliding bars measuring each spell's "energy"

Or if you wanted it applied to each spell seperately so that : "Hmm' date=' I can only use 30d6 of Firebolt each day, do I really want to waste it all on this guy and end the battle fast. of should I save some for later..."[/quote']

 

Yes, that's closer to what I had in mind. Of course, there wouldn't be a "daily usage" because the maximum expenditure would take more than a single day to recover.

 

Thus if you used 5 DCs of Firebolt to slay a goblin, you would still have 25dcs left in the 'Charges' which would recover like normal.

Such a modifier would have to halve the limitation value of the Charges. just like how a Flexible Multipower slot costs more then an Ultra.

 

Are you saying to build it in a Multipower, or to apply the Multipower-specific mechanics to something that isn't a Multipower?

 

I like Markdoc's solution, which involves a custom Limitation (value may vary, depending on GM, but that should be me so I won't worry ), and not a house rule

Re: SPD inflation obesrvation & solution

The inflation may not be a problem in higher-point campaigns. If characters are built on 75/75, taking a decent level of SPD may seriously dent their XP reserve.

Re: Alignment Issues

My claim is that it's not even close. In works of fiction (fantasy fiction especially)' date=' as well as in the real world, the Good/Evil distinction is of vastly greater importance. [/b']

 

Not in Moorcock of course. His Lawful deities aren't particularly good. Not in Zelazny's Amber series. The conflict between Amber and Chaos is not one between good and evil. Neither side is particularly good. It's just that one of them wants stability and the other wants flexibility.

How about the Shadows and Vorlons in Babylon 5? They were both "good"; their ultimate goal (and the original reason they stayed behind when most of the other Elder Races left for the Rim) was to guide the younger races along their respective paths of evolution, even if they did forget this over time and become focused on their rivalry with each other over how to achieve that goal.

Re: Immortality and progressive diseases

I'm just imagining someone whose entire body has become riddled with malignant cancer tumors. Ooh... Character idea!

If you're thinking of The Cancer Twins, just remember to post the character writeup under Pulp