TheDarkness

Guilt by association? Guilty of loving you? Is this the random song title thread?

Ironically, I had been meaning to read the first link in your sig, and hadn't even noticed the second. Do you mind if I copy that into here and attribute it to you/make it a quote of you?

Who could have predicted that?

Run like hell. Or run like hell not. There is no try.

But what if it's a careless whisper?

So, I've been working on something for this for the game I'm designing, but most of the elements are not game specific, so I figured I'd share this here. It was inspired somewhat tangentially by the Dune thread. Ironically, I always kind of disliked the idea of this power, now enjoying modelling it. So, the problems with characters seeing into the future are many. First, it suddenly puts the whole narrative into the GMs hands instead of contributed to by the players Second, there's absolutely no way to make any such prediction come true without intrusive amounts of GM intervention Third, it means suddenly making up things one didn't plan and giving them a lot more weight than the normal stuff done on the fly Fourth, it forces the GM to reveal things that may actually reduce the suspense level of the game or make the rest of it all kind of just going through the motions Fifth, it, unlike most powers, because of the previous points, imo takes away from instead of contributing to the game So, how to deal with these problems? My idea was, essentially, to take the basic ideas underlying most divination and apply them to the problem. Now, it would be horribly cumbersome to force a tarot, i ching, or khabbalic reading mid game and also apply it to the world and its personages they are playing. But, the basic ideas are applicable. Use randomness to create a combination of things that allows the GM to look at the combination, find what is similar to what is already in store, look at what is not, what seems to have no use, and come up with a vision. Now, true to the game, it doesn't matter what form of seeing the future one has. If it is related to time travel, then we can assume that the future, like the present, is comprised of countless bundles, some of which may be splitting off at the time one is observing, some of which are merely timelines so close to the one one is looking at to have intruded in on the view, etc. If it is done through dreams, go all David Lynch. If it is mystical, go all 'this dream produced by the director of the TV show Hannibal'. So, if I have a player who can sometimes see into the future, we will set up some flash cards. When she wants to scry into the future, she defines either the person or place she is checking out(we'll presume the time is generally accurate, but not pinpoint accurate). I pull aside the card from the appropriate deck, people, place, whichever one. Some cards are people. Some people are characters, some are types, like mother, sister, teacher, stranger, etc. Some are people they have met or know well. Some friends, some enemies. That's one deck. Some cards are places. Real places, types of places. Of course, in each deck, there are some things only the GM knows. Some cards are relations, types of interactions. Rivalry, conflict, hate, love, misfortune, betrayal, loyalty, loss. Now, in the game I'm working on, the ability is measured in D6s, so you roll, you automatically get three picks plus whatever die result. Obviously Hero would do this differently, but the point is, you pay for the opportunity to add elements to the vision, you pay for a broader view. Now, if the Scryer picks only people cards, then all she will know is that, more than likely, these X people will be together at the future point, or at least tied together somehow. If she picks only location cards, then she only knows that these places are somehow important regarding this future point. If she picks only relation cards, she will be presented with images that convey the sort of relations, but not know who or where. Now, she does not get to look at the cards. Say she picks three people cards, two relation cards, and one place. She then chooses(without seeing the cards' contents) which of the people there are tied by the relations. She could tie two of the people together by both relation cards, or assign one to two different pairs, with one person having ties to each of the other. Now, the draw, she can do in game, but it should be assumed that this is an in-between game thing to give the GM the chance to look at the results. The GM's role is to first, avoid as much as possible completely erasing any result within. From there, the GM should consider the match of people and places. If one of the people is far too difficult to explain being in that place, but has a relation card with another of the people, then the GM should draw another place card and that one person will be in a portion of the vision that is actually elsewhere with the person they have a relation with, but the person they have a relation with should still, if not discounted by the GM from being in the first place, be in the first place also for that part of the vision. From there, the GM can decide on which ways the relations go. These two have a hate card between them. Does A hate B, B hate A, or is it mutual? Thought should go into which things may contribute or not interfere most with the game. Does this interpretation present interesting opportunities for in-game interactions? Does it actually flesh out this previously minor villain in an interesting way? These are the main things the GM is hoping for. Then, the next session, the vision is presented sans cards. It is presented in broad ways, a pastiche of events that seem only half real, some things represented more by seeing the hate in an eye than in dialogue that details plans that must later be repeated. Now, this doesn't get rid of the problem of how to make things happen, but it presents a very broad interpretation of what happens. It also shapes the story in a way that is not dictated by the GM alone, and also makes anything revealed too early hidden further in the broadness of the vision. Further, the GM gets a new view of the landscape, and, frankly, the more the player uses the power, the less they end up being sure of. And the more they may fear actually causing the parts of the visions that they want to avoid by suddenly moving events against the people who somehow become part of it. If a player attempts the same subject for a vision, they will simply get a repeat of the same vision. Anyway, that's where I'm at on thinking through the process.

Assuming a balance means that someone will eventually actually be tipping the boat. Each case should be taken as they are. For example, on gun control, the furthest push was during the Reagan era, almost everything else has been a rollback since then. The last ten years has seen CC become a norm far more than it ever was before, so there is no evidence that the left pushed at all on that front as much as the right. On religious rights, there has been no push except to enforce laws already on the book that tax payers should not foot the bill for religious iconography. That's just pushing for enforcement of laws that have been around forever. Not a significant push. On marriage rights and health care overhaul have been the two biggest pushes, the first because there has always been a tendency for constitutional rights and cultural norms to come at odds, and, being a nation of laws, this tends to cause friction that erodes support for the less savory or invasive cultural norms whose proponents have historically enforced by limiting rights. The latter, health care, occured because the previous system was a disaster that was on the verge of causing serious unrest. The reality that the plan that was used was similar to a Republican plan from the nineties suggests that the current narrative is a bit off. I really don't see what push actually occured other than making marriage rights constitutional, and the health care reform largely reminiscent of an earlier Republican model. And marriage rights don't appear to have taken center stage in this election. Immigration is not, and has never been, something the left is the sole arbiter of in politics, all election time lip service aside. War is something all our presidents since Teddy Roosevelt have been knee deep in.

The common responses to fear are fight, flight, or freeze. Doing any of these three simply because one is afraid might get a good result, but might not, because one has no time to think. But, much of what we fear is not so immediate. Choose your response wisely, choose it not because you are afraid, but because it is the best response available to you. If you fight, find how to fight effectively. If you flee, flee because you must. If you stay, stay because you know it is safe to do so. Fear gives us impetus to act, but should not inform our actions. It is an engine, not a steering wheel.

You mean scotch? Fascists deal in fear, they have to sell fear constantly. Not caving to fear, even of real things, is a good start.

It's important to keep in mind that normal damage still causes damage to BODY, in otherwords, damage that could kill. It's just less likely, moreso given the defenses commonly given as the baselines for stats like PD and ED. There is actually a thread in the Hero System discussion forum on placing limits on PD and ED. So, if you wanted, you could require characters to take a limitation that only allowed a fraction of their defenses to apply to BODY damage from normal attacks, and then you have a more realistic feel where one might, in a narrow set of circumstances, be killed in a fist fight, more commonly be clubbed to death, etc. Think of normal damage as being somewhat shocking, yes, it might kill, but it's far more likely to stun or knock out than kill. Think of killing damage as specifically built to kill, weapons that, if used as intended, are going to do very bad things that normal people won't easily heal from. That said, I actually think that, to model different feels, gritty, super, nerfy, it would actually be simpler, aside from having to rebuild them all, to change the weapon damages rather than to monkey with other things. But many people have taken the latter path, it's perfectly possible. So, want the chance of death from a clubbing to be more applicable? Reduce the ability to apply straight PD to BODY damage against normal attacks by a limitation. Don't apply it to resistant defenses, because armor SHOULD protect pretty well against a club. Just my thoughts.

It's a very genre true rookie villain. I could totally see him robbing a bank in an old Spiderman or Flash issue.

Then my thought on it would be that area of effect is unnecessary, it's just a special effect. Resistant protection, however you model the darkness so that it basically just makes him unseeable but allows him to see(I'm not sure how you'd model this, possibly invisibility with a visible effect which is inky black, a field of darkness, I don't know how to model that one, as darkness is usually AOE). Plus, then there's no need to handwave the AOE with mobile eating up attack actions whenever movement was needed.

We have a lot of hawks in Kansas. Our house is about ten minutes by highway from the city, and about five minutes from the boondocks, so usually, five minutes one way, and its farm houses and big hawks on street lights. One day, my wife shouts for me to look out the window. I do, there's a hawk across the street in our neighbors yard chowing down on a rabbit. I'm looking, when I hear my wife going out the door. She's got a camera in her hand. I follow her, expecting her to take a picture from our side of the street. No. She crosses the street, and then slowly sidles up and takes a couple pictures. Then, sidles closer, more pictures. In the end, she's no more than three feet from the hawk, and she takes a whole roll of film of the hawk eating, looking at her, eating. She's an awesome, dangerous woman. Unfortunately, the camera's shutter was apparently broken in a closed position. This was in the days of film. No pictures whatsoever, she rails about this loss to this day, while I assure her, the best pictures of that day are still in my head. She calls me a kiss up. I don't argue it. She's got hawk allies, I'd best not make trouble.

Especially if you do it as resistant protection, it seems like no big deal. The field of darkness is another thing, but that can be linked, I would think, as opposed to needing to be in the same build. Does he or she have some offensive capability?

Tnere's a villain idea in there somewhere.

Oh, I get that, but usually that would be implied in the build, like the bullet proof jacket example.

Apparently closing out of my browser was the solution. I've always wondered what it was like to be a slow talker.

Ｃｈａｎｇｉｎｇ　ｆｏｎｔｓ　ｄｏｅｓ　ｎｏｔｈｉｎｇ　ｔｏ　ｃｈａｎｇｅ　ｔｈｅ　ｆｅｅｌｉｎｇ　ｔｈａｔ　Ｉ＇ｍ　ｅａｒｌｙ　Ｍｉｓｔｅｒ　Ｆａｎｔａｓｔｉｃ　ｐｒｏｐｏｓｉｎｇ　ｔｈａｔ　ａｌｌ　ｔｈｅ　ｍｅｍｂｅｒｓ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　Ｆａｎｔａｓｔｉｃ　Ｆｏｕｒ　ｔａｋｅ　ａ　ｔｈｅｍａｔｉｃ　ａｐｐｒｏａｃｈ　ｔｏ　ｄｏｃｕｍｅｎｔ　ｐｒｏｄｕｃｔｉｏｎ　ｓｏｌｅｌｙ　ａｓ　ａｎ　ｅｘｃｕｓｅ　ｔｏ　ｂｅ　ａ　ｊｅｒｋ　ｔｏ　Ｓｕｅ　Ｓｔｏｒｍ.

Ｐｌｅａｓｅ　ｓｏｍｅｏｎｅ　ｍａｋｅ　ｔｈｉｓ　ｓｔｏｐ.

Ｉ　ｗａｓ　ｃｏｍｉｎｇ　ｏｎｔｏ　ｔｈｉｓ　ｔｈｒｅａｄ　ｔｏ　ｓａｄｌｙ　ｅｘｐｌａｉｎ　ｔｈａｔ　Ｉ　ｈａｄ　ｎｏ　ｆａｉｌ　ｔｏ　ｒｅｐｏｒｔ,　ａｎｄ　ｔｈｕｓ　ｃｏｕｌｄ　ｎｏｔ　ｔａｋｅ　ｐａｒｔ　ｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｏｍｅｒａｄｅｒｉｅ　ｏｆ　ｓｈａｒｅｄ　ｆａｉｌ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｉｓ　ｂｏａｒｄ　ｗｈｅｎ　ｍｙ　ｋｅｙｂｏａｒｄ　ｓｗｉｔｃｈｅｄ　ｔｏ　Ｃｈｉｎｅｓｅ,　ａｎｄ　ｓｗｉｔｃｈｉｎｇ　ｂａｃｋ,　ｄｅｃｉｄｅｄ　ｔｈｉｓ　ｉｓ　ｔｈｅ　ｏｂｖｉｏｕｓ　ｔｅｘｔ　ｐｒｅｓｅｎｔａｔｉｏｎ　ｏｆ　ｃｈｏｉｃｅ　ａｎｄ　ｗｏｎ＇ｔ　ｌｅｔ　ｍｅ　ｃｈａｎｇｅ　ｉｔ　ｂａｃｋ.　 Ｓｏ,　ｍｙ　ｆａｉｌ　ｆａｉｌｅｄ.

Oh, I'm personally on the same page, though I think the Dune movie really couldn't, at the time, do ornithopters or shields as well as they could be done now. And definitely, I'm all about the first book. And yeah, the weirding way in the movie was an odd choice. This is sort of why I tend to favor not tying the characters to known characters when I run games. First, it's a big universe, there's going to be a lot of important things going on that don't directly relate in any way to Atreided or Harkonnen. There are going to be other fueding houses, conflicts between mentats and bene geseritt, etc. Tying in big characters runs into the same problem the books and the movie had, you start adding bells and whistles and, oh, more Duncan, and losing something in the exercise. But for this thread, I just wanted to make something useful for all, whether they do want to play fedaykin with close ties to Paul or not, whether they are fans of the further stories, the movie, the scyfy show, etc. It's a bit like Star Wars, everyone has what they include in their canon, and what they don't care for or don't think about. Actually, thinking about it did give me a seed of an idea for someone who can see into the future, and a means to handle that for a game, not sure that it will be a dune game at this point.

Back in the day, I almost always ran games, but for a while, a friend decided to run a game. Now, we didn't know the term at the time, but he was definitely munchkiny to the utmost, and, as everyone was making their characters, he was like, um, no, he won't make it, here, you could add these limitations, yeah, up that power, etc. Now, I'm a stubborn person. As the character creation process stretched into the three week span, and I looked at the character I had, I found I absolutely loathed this tumorous mass of complications and limitations and exorbitatantly silly builds. So I made my protest character and my plan. He was a street level fighter kind of guy, no obvious powers. Now, he was actually a mutant, and had powers of finding people's weaknesses, both physical and mental/emotional. He had a modest detective skill, and so he'd also find out what he could that way. I did not tell any of the PC's the full extent of my power, but my friend was like, dude, he'll never cut it, and I was clear that I wasn't worried, I told him I wouldn't be upset if he died or anything, I said I still had my tumor of a character he had approved in case the first one died or something. I then added, hey, if you want, you could have him get captured by some baddies, if you want to work a game around that, that's fine, I'll use my other guy, just make sure it's the coolest villains, no lame ones, but like an awesome villain group. So, the game starts, and my guy is certainly underpowered, but I play him as smart as I can, and I enjoy it nonetheless. But every once in a while, I'm like, hey, that villain was cool, they'd make great muscle for the group that captures my guy, and he'd be like, oh, tired of playing him? And I'd respond that I wasn't, actually liked the challenge of outfoxing powerhouses and coming up with good plans, tactically, my guy kind of became leader of the group, because as munchkined as all the players were, the NPCs were moreso, and so we were constantly in real trouble. Anyway, eventually some of the villains we had met did form a group. And attacked us, and it was going bad, I'm the only character who can't fly or jump obscene distances, and I tell them to retreat, of course they didn't want to, but I say it's okay, do it. And they do. Anyway, after the game, I tell the GM I feel like playing the other character for a while, so if my guy's a captive, can he stay captive for a while, and he's like sure. And I ask if it's okay if I have him working on a skill or something, if he's in prison or a cell or something, not like combat moves, just a knowledge skill or something, and he says sure. Anyway, I switch to playing the great swollen boil of a character for a while. I think probably three months in real time. Anyway, one day, the GM asks when I'm wanting to switch back, and I said, oh, anytime is cool. The next session, another of the characters finds out some information about where my first character is hidden, and finds out that the whole villain group is planning something at a certain time and place, and it will only be their base defenses(only, even their base defenses shot rounds of pure munchkin). Game goes through, we manage not to die, free my character. My second character, wretched, bloated sack of protomunchkin that he was, goes to find his lost love or his pancreas or some such thing, and I resume my old character. I ask the GM, "Did they torture me a lot?" GM: No, mostly mocking you, you're small potatoes to them. Me: Oh, typical bullies, always need to go find the little guy and push him around, every day. GM: Yes. Me: Oh, remember that skill I wanted to work on?" GM: Yeah? Did you decide what it will be? Me: Can I just call it Stuff I Know About The Villain's Complications and Vulnerabilities and Weaknesses Learned After Months In Close Contact With Them Without Them Knowing About My Mutant Powers? GM: [blank Stare] Me: Would it be possible to get a write-up of their weaknesses? I mean, if it's too many to write, I could just look at their character sheets. GM: I hate you. The resultant fight between our group and the villains, the villains my guy had not a hope in the world of hitting or harming, saw him watching from a nearby rooftop, directing the battle with a helmet mic where necessary as our group used every soft spot in the villain's munchkinny bodies against them. Had there been one munchkinny mentalist in the party, this would have never worked, but no one seemed to have high ego, and I had kept the strength of my abilities so borderline that they didn't raise any red flags as being particularly relevant, because no one was thinking, yeah, this power gives him a slight chance in a round, but what about in hours and days and months of exposure, how much can he find out? And so, for once, the munchkins were held at bay. That was before the munchkin mentallists did finally come. I had apparently inspired my friend. But, we had made an agreement, I could, using my points, make a munchkin version of the same guy I was playing for survival purposes, and, in return, I was to never attempt to surrender to anyone ever again.

Barrier globe=absolutely no chance whatsoever of being choked as long as the globe is up, barring people who can bypass the globe Resistant Defense=absolutly no chance of choking damage It seems like any of the builds for this we're seeing as a byproduct logically make choking not worth it. I really feel there's something in how the super is pictured by the OP that I'm missing, I'm wondering if the field is actually less directly protective than we're picturing, and it is actually a product of not being able to see him that stops chokes. Otherwise, pretty much most of the ways we can imagine to build a force field will make choke holds a highly unattractive option.

When you buy resistent defense, don't you have it all over your body unless you specify otherwise? I find that a strange requirement. It would be like a wrenching attack as NND, with the defense being 'stretchable hands' and then asking people who had stretching, I'm sorry, did you buy stretchable hands? No? Such a pity... I am against anything that would motivate players to have to specify exactly what parts they can stretch how much. Not all of my friends are 100% highbrow.

EDIT: [My original post I just edited away was totally wrong, tell no one] If you want no chance of chokes' damaging effects, resistant defense will do it, as an area of effect of resistant defense gives everyone, as Tasha built, total protection from the damage from the chokes' NND. That's the cheapest option while having it as an area of effect. Barrier, being a physical barrier with no neck, absolutely makes it impossible without taking out the barrier to choke those protected, which includes preventing being held in a choke, even if the choke cannot damage you, since a requirement for choke is that it must grab the neck, no damage otherwise. But it's way more expensive. No matter what, to move with it will count as an attack action in either build. I suppose the question is, is this globe something he can put around other people, or is it really a personal field that just would occupy the hex he is in? Or could be both? And when we talk about force field, we're talking PD, ED, or both? If it's a personal shield, he loses a lot of effectiveness by using the barrier option, because he loses attack actions, unless he doesn't plan on moving. For personal shields, Steriaca and Tasha have sold me on the value of resistant protection for that part of things, it's much more economical, and, even if he can extend protection to others, when he isn't, he may not want to have the limitation that comes with mobile AOEs where if he wants to move, he has to use an attack action. Further, for just the effect of protecting against chokes, barrier is not only overkill, but disappears the moment the barrier's body is gone, whereas resistant protection remains no matter what. More specifics on the overall nature of these force fields might lean toward one way or the other, methinks. Oh, and Nolgroth, the trump to choking NND is resistant protection on the neck(I'm pretty sure they could have just said resistant protection, since it seems like that covers it), rigid armor on the neck, or Life Support: self contained breathing). The one downside to resistant protection is that, even if the NND cannot damage, you are still grabbed and held. Barrier is the most literal interpretation, as long as it lasts and he is in it, no one can choke or even grab him unless they have some way to get inside the field.