TheDarkness

Additionally, what about when your force sensitivity tells you that what you want to do is not the will of the force, or it is not the right time. The force was not an internal battery for the jedi the same way it was for the sith. The overall trend of the force trumps individual power. It should be modelled as such. Force sensitivity is a double edged sword. Further, I think a lot of the powers are modelled way to powerfully. Deflecting individual blaster strikes as they come one by one happened. This is not an automatic defense that can be applied to multiple blaster shots at the same time. And almost no one except the most powerful jedi and sith had combat telekinesis in any of the movies. Kenobi had less power than Vader, but greater sensitivity to the will of the force, and it had him win one fight against vader, and choose to die in the next.

Aside from the light sabre, low level mind control with the limitation it would not work on anyone above a certain Ego, levitation, but any starting character would be a ways away from a combat offensive telekinesis, after some experience choke at choking range(eating up points for a power that they already could do with their hands) requiring concentration, after a bit of experience leaping, after a bit of experience seeing the future(for what good it will do), social complication: uses the word 'youngling' in conversation. Perhaps once per game can "Act with the will of The Force" to boost an action in some way after a successful 'feel the force' roll. Deflecting blasters should not be a perfect shield at all. Probaly tied to a 'feel the force' skill roll. This, in a world full of blasters, means you have a close combatant who quickly needs to close, and, if facing enough people with blasters, will need to find cover and/or retreat like anyone else before they fail a roll. In fact, 'feel the force' would likely be a mitigating factor in many of their actions. And so, their powers, at the start, should hardly be automatic. One element I did like in the prequels was the tendency of Kenobi to prefer living steeds, as opposed to Annakin and Luke, who favor vehicles. These are skills eating points.

I agree. Leia was in command of a rebellion and had political influence, Han had a great ship, great piloting skills, was the best shot(in a universe of bad shots), Chewie had a powerful weapon(and good relative accuracy in a universe of inaccurate enemies), and later was a General. In the original trilogy, there is almost no scene in which Luke's ability with the force trumped the other's roles. He was a good pilot aside from the force, but the falcon was a better ship. Most of the time he wasn't able to use his light sabre to do all the things he did in ROTJ, and deflecting blasters is not an automatic win, nor does it automatically get you within lightsabre range. When outnumbered by troopers with blasters, he would have to run like anyone else, elsewise a stormtrooper might accidentally hit him. He also apparently had to be close to choke people(making it suspiciously like just choking people normally), and could only control the weak willed. He could leap, sure. So could a lot of creatures. Yes, in close range, the light sabre is about the toughest weapon there is. In close range. And there were weapons able to deal with it, just not cause as much damage.

I think that, in my view, when looked at as a technology, Hero is simply a more advanced technology than D & D. This is not a slam on D & D or those who play it, it is simply a fairly accurate comment on the systems. Balance in D & D(and Warhammer, for that matter) is always ad hoc, because there is no underlying system physics. The system is a collection of random elements that are added in to construct a game, additions destroy balance, which then requires new additions to reestablish. From a gaming perspective, this is a disadvantage. Those who buy the systems could not tinker too far with the setup, and, in response to that problem, more ad hoc layers were added over time. Hero, on the flip side, has more ties to an underlying system physics. This makes balance easier, though, frankly, there are some ad hoc elements that confound this. Further, as a product line, Hero players are not as dependent on the product line for play, though part of this is in the types of books available often leading players to just make their own things or find ones on the internet that they can have some confidence will be balanced. So Hero, as a system, is less able to go the Warhammer or D & D route of periodically rebooting everything, changing things, and expecting the players to follow suit if they want to use the newest products. Further, part of the design sytem is too complex, so the time investment seems too much. However, as far as power levels, others have pointed out correctly that D & D's ad hoc approach to this is problematic. The point value of spells in D & D converted to Hero are probably not entirely off base, there is a balance issue with spell levels in D & D that is basically a way to limit or reward spell casters. Balance in D & D is an enforced norm, not a systematic approach, which means that really, you cannot make the same characters in all cases that play and feel similar AT SIMILAR POWER LEVELS. The moment to achieve the same effect you need to up the levels, and the system you are comparing to is known for balance, then probably you simply cannot do the same thing, because suddenly, to have the effective character you imagined and the game effect you wanted, you will likely also be running with party members who, if the same level as you, are now more effective. Game balance in D & D is enforced ad hoc, level by level, spell list by spell list, talent by talent, and every new addition destroys this. In relation to a single character, balance skews different ways at different levels, with some levels making them have less game effect than other classes at that level, and some levels more. Further, the near total non-granularity of combat in D & D simply does not allow the same feel. There is a disconnect between what the combat round actually represents in D & D and what types of actions that we may try to make into part of that round. D & D combat rounds are based around the general impression of combat more than the details, and rules that implement the details are each and every one special cases and exceptions to this, so the feel is necessarily different. This is not dissing D & D, it simply is the nature of the beast. You cannot model D & D characters to have a similar feel to Hero characters without introducing major skew as far as levels, and you cannot model the combat round at all the same, they are so vastly different. You can make different types of characters for D & D, but the way they will feel and play will not be even close. They will always feel and play like D & D characters. This is not just a matter of the system, but of the class system, the ad hoc nature of levels and balance, and from the oddities that are the combat round and combat resolution, the desire of players to shoehorn specific moves into a combat round and combat system that is intentionally general and not specific, etc. So, you can have a ranger in D & D, it simply will always be a different animal than one made in Hero because D & D cannot produce balance in a specific build, it must build balance in its level system and in limitations based on class. Level is itself meaningless as far as balance, it expands and contracts in relative point values when comparing effectiveness from one class to another from level to level. Level, in D&D, is the relative ability and limitation you suffer for your choice in type of character, not just a level of power that can equate to points. Therefore, there are some things you cannot make a starting character who can do that you can in Hero, because you erase the limitation that is a big part of how balance is maintained, and that is not really possible. And if one is a starting character in Hero, and one is even just 3rd level in D & D, it's not really the same character anymore, it's a character with an uncommon level of experience compared to a starting character and thus a much different history and story.

In Japan, the thought that comes to mind is that it depends who the villagers are. If they are Barakumin, essentially the descendants of anyone who worked with death, including tanners and things like that, then yes, they would have a social issue(they still do in modern Japan, talking about descendants of people whose families haven't dealt with dead flesh as a trade in 100 years, people who are genetically Japanese). Both Buddhism and Shintoism in this case work against them as being 'unclean'. I'm trying to remember the name of one tribal group in Japan, in Feudal times, I'm not sure what they were doing.

The below is in reference to China. That depends. For example, if it's a time of peace, then they are more than likely on the land farming, part of a family doing so, etc. Higher class individuals most likely aren't dealing directly with them, and their interactions with officials are likely limited. However, when corvee labor is needed, either for conscript armies or to work on public works such as the great wall or dykes or what have you, they are the main source of this. However, their family may very well have a family member or more in the extended family who a lot of family resources are going into educating in the hopes that that member might become an official. Although in practice maybe the line between peasant and influential person was hard to cross in China, philosophically, the state ideology of Confucianism dictated that one could rise from the lowest position to the highest, and many families focused energy on certain members' success to help the whole family. Further, there is an expression, 'heaven is high and the emperor is far away', basically, things could be very localized and have very little to do with the powers that be that remain far away, and sometimes, the local leaders, as far as local issues went, might not actually be little more than local boys playing interference to keep things the way they were. Or, they could be corrupt, domineering jerks. Being educated, being cultured, are the highest virtues in this case. While it was suicidal for a cultured person to tell someone of the imperial line that they were wrong, it was also greatly admired and considered the responsibility of the educated, and a sign of their incurruptibility that even the imperial family had to show respect to. So, the most learned man in the village has a position of honor. The officials as well. Soldiers in many, but not all areas, were looked down on. However, even influential families had poor relations that they could not simply pretend didn't exist without violating Confucian doctrine. Nor did they necessarily want to ignore such offshoots, where their needs weren't too burdensome. Most villages do not have a local lord, there are no local lords. Officials, military leaders, etc. are most likely located in the more populated areas nearest the village, not at the village itself UNLESS they are from that village. Generals and high officials are generally not serving in their home province to limit their ability to rebel. There is a premium to being laoxiang, local. Under that, officials and the highly educated obviously have the most status, or those whose family ties put them in close contact with those who are. A farmer is a farmer. But, we are talking about a highly social culture. I would be hard pressed to define a local as having a social complication within their own community unless they are a criminal(tatooed as such for all to see) or similar. Having culture is seen as transcending class in this case. The emperor climbing to the top of Mount Tai, the peasant playing some local song on the two stringed erhu, at that level things are distant the way the serf and the King are separate in European kingdoms, but at the village level, especially a small village, the difference, except economic, would likely not be great. More than likely, the people who would look down on the villagers are coming to the village periodically to maintain government over the village, not living there. However, it is entirely possible for local heroes to live there who are influential from some past deeds or service, but are also still laoxiang, local. If it is a time of war, or floods or natural disasters, or large public projects, then people are being dragged off to labor that they may not return from. So, that would probably count, now that I think of it, as a social issue. This is all off the top of my head, and all based on China. My knowledge of Japan and Korea during such periods is more limited. Japan went a different direction with their Confucianism and had different geo-political influences, while Korea had everyone and their brother messing with them, and so I'm not sure the structure of their villages. Major events in the life of a village would be a local being married off to someone of some note, buddhist and taoist rituals, troupes of opera performers arriving in the village. They might have local shadow puppet shows, and those taking breaks from their labor might sing and play instruments, practice their kung fu, play majiang or chinese chess or other games, drinking games, etc. They might have their own village kung fu, liquor, foods, etc. Likely they would have a local dialect. Now, some things were used in one era and not another, so I'm just putting out what I can think of. At certain times, if one person was found to have rebelled or defied imperial authority, I want to say it was fifty people close to them were also to be punished; during such periods, people were loathe to risk that. That rule was not always in place. In some regions, the customs could be different. The miao, I believe, would court their beloved by way of a contest. The would be suitors would take position at dusk out of sight on different sides of a valley and have a singing contest, and the woman would decide, or not, whose song most touched her heart. The miao also did not consider soldiering dishonorable, and gave women more choice in whether they wanted to marry than the Han generally did. Married women of well to do families often held great power within the home, but had to take great care whom they dealt with outside of it for fear of damage to their reputation. On the farms, the women did not have that rule, as they had to work outside in the fields. Hope something in that mishmosh I just wrote helps.

I think, for me, an important distinction is between what can be done with the rule set in question, and what feels right in play. In play, most systems have rangers that just feel like fighters with a dash of druid type abilities. In Hero, you can hone in on the feel of gameplay for the character much more precisely, in class based systems, you are inexorably tied to someone else's vision, and therefore, the general feel of playing it. This is especially true for magic. Many other systems tend to have to come up with entirely different systems to model different types of magic, , and each of those magic systems tend to be patches onto the overall system, whereas Hero magic systems are all built on the same game physics. If your view of a fire mage does not match the view of the creators of the game system, be prepared for pained tinkering to get a passable approximation. Whereas, in Hero, you do not have to limit yourself to anyone's view of what your type of character is defined by, and the pained tinkering is not done to try to salvage your attempt at making an orc ranger that you like, but is merely the pained tinkering that comes free with every Hero book.

I wasn't meaning to sound like I didn't like the title, just didn't understand.

The Eddie Haskell Effect?

My thought on that is that they should play the low powered version of their character a session or two before they design the more powerful version, that way they get a chance to see how things develop(maybe even see some more experienced people at work). When I run games, I will sometimes have very short parts of a session where I hand the players sheets other than their own characters, usually for a kind of interlude. For example, in one supers game, I handed them the sheets of some hired mercenaries on a ship. Less powerful people than the players' normal characters. The ship was then attacked by a particular villain the players had heard of, but never met. The villain ended up letting the mercenaries take their best shot before stunning them, the villain then going through the hull of the ship and coming out carrying something away while the ship and the mercenaries went into the sea, it all took five or ten minutes of play time, and the actual game it was in the middle of made no mention of the event, but the players were like, uh oh, what's that about, while also seeing the villain in action a bit. I like doing a bit of that with new players, as then they get to very briefly play other things, see some well rounded builds, and have a better idea of what can be useful, as well as imparting some knowledge to them that their characters don't have. I even once in a fantasy game had the players play out a combat that their characters were watching , the actual people fighting were more powerful than the characters, so they got to see what the future holds, plus have a sense that not everyone populating the world is to be trifled with, but sometimes talking is better than fighting.

Blind Teleport- teleport, with the limitation that only blind people may be teleported Emergency Trigger Summons- triggered summons that brings Roy Roger's horse Bach's Fourth Extra-Dimensional Movement- An image power linked to extra-dimensional movement through time which sends a piece of classical music back in time. Deflection- deflection with alternate stat vs. presence attacks aimed at the character Claire-sentience- Clairsentience, only usable on Claire Static Cling- Clinging with the limitation that it can only be used while not moving or doing anything else Density Increase- temporarily reduces the target's INT Swinging with the neighbors- swinging, usable on others. Okay, I'll admit my list has devolved into silliness.

Although, wouldn't double-eye poke technically be poking someone with both your eyes(or with any pair of eyes, I suppose)? I'll try my hand at it: Ego Entangle- the user of this power may force the target or targets to consider in great depth their inner awesomeness, so that they become fixed to their spot, being unable to decide what their best feature or trait is. Blast from the Past- a delayed blast with the special effect that it appears to go off immediately, but then disappears in a time portal to fire off later.

Oh, wait, I see it now. The names Cantriped listed above give the name of the power, but the name is also a clear reference to what the build is. Missed that the first time!

I am entirely unclear on how these are meta. Meta usually implies drawing attention to the nature of a thing itself, I thought. These just seem like likely nomenclature for a power. The only build that comes to mind I made that might be considered meta would be one of the the tokens of magical power used by a heroine I had, Vanessa Black, a famous TV psychic who was actually a member of an order dedicated to collecting and empowering objects, hiding away ones too dangerous to exist, etc. She had a number of items, like Houdini's Cuffs, which she wore as bracelets that defended against entangles, the Magic Bullet of JFK fame, which could strike multiple times, etc. The object I might consider meta from that, and I'm not even sure that one is, was Uri's Skull, the skull used in the first portrayal of it in Shakespeare's time. The user of the skull, as long as they maintained their monologue, basically entangled everyone in an area effect(against EGO) and made them look at the speaker for the real time duration of the monologue. The speaker could do nothing but monologue. The meta part of the build is it was sticking its tongue out a bit at the fact that monologues take no time: the power was most useful the more time it took, and one of its most useful possibilities was to give teammates is a pinch time to recover while distracting whoever they were fighting. But a truly meta power, imo, would be Drain vs. Whatever Stupid Munchkin Crap Doug Came Up With This Time, Always on. As a GM, I think I might allow everyone to have that one free. In fact, I might even give it to trees, rocks, clouds, animals, vegetables, all entries in the periodic table, and the vacuum of space. If Doug simply must shamelessly munchkin, the universe ought to get something out of it.

I would see them as having a social advantage very locally, but otherwise, being disadvantaged towards those outside the village.

I'm not familiar with skill enhancers.

I hadn't heard of The Extraordinary Adventures Of Adele Blanc-Sec. I'll have to look that one up. I was in the mood for a horror movie. My wife and I watch a lot of horror movies, she leans toward the ones where everyone is so mind numbingly stupid that I begin to wonder whether the monster or killer is even necessary for the same effect. Anyway, I'm three weeks out from getting back to the states and seeing my wife, so it gives us something to babble about on Skype. Threw on what I thought was a horror movie, had good reviews apparently, but perhaps I should have actually read the reviews. The Eyes of My Mother. It's in black and white. It is not horror. It is drama. Disturbing. I don't know what my final decision on it was, other than that it definitely is disturbing, and definitely not what I was in the mood for. Asked my wife what she thought of it. She said she read a couple reviews, and realized that she didn't want to watch it. That said, the casting was good. Also watched, not a new movie, but The Chef. Not disturbing. I liked it. The cuban sandwiches were perfectly cast.

What do you know about it, Old Man? Sorry, I just wanted to say it.

I'm just trying to determine what aspect of Gadot's appearance appears more like a girl than a woman to some when compared to the other three. At least one of the three's face looks much younger than Gadot's, and that's the only one less waify. Or, we could argue whether breasts are canon or not. I'm game. Mostly cheeky on that, I'll switch geers. EDIT: It occurred to me, on reading my post, that the above could have come off the wrong way. I am actually under the assumption that you prefer the actresses you listed because of performances you liked of theirs, I was just razzing you about choosing three actresses with more pronounced cleavage than Gadot who actually, physically, two out of the three don't fulfill the physical requirements you described, and the one who does, looks far younger than Gadot and in no way Greek. I do not want to see Old Man's overstuffed G-string. Physical types for superhero casting is a weird zone. I'd imagine some might think of WW having a more round face, or less. The problem they face is she needs to seem a warrior, yet the same people who won't like a waif might be even more against anything above body sculpting, as opposed to a fighting physique. It's kind of a catch-22 for casters. Even for the males, athletic is the norm, but different eras have more or less muscle. We think of Flash as thinner, but there was a time that was only relative to the others, and, on his own, he was massively drawn. Some traits can hardly be considered canon simply because there wasn't a single character of note for decades that didn't have that trait, ergo, WW cleavage. I actually like the actress who plays Black Widow, while finding the story arc they wrote for her total oatmeal. And she looks NOTHING like the character. While the actor in the first X-Men movies playing Cyclops looks just right, yet, I could care less about his role. The problem with playing to fan expectations is that the fans don't really know what will make the best depiction, and don't have one opinion.

But two of the three have waifier arms than Gadot. And the third doesn't look Greek. It's the eyes, right?

I almost universally hate every iteration of Ranger that has ever been done. You kind of already hit on one with your grizzled veteran. The experienced man-at-arms who has experience with spear, sword, sword and shield, and polearm. This is mostly because most systems penalize fighting with a non-proficient weapon, but have no way of modelling advantage for knowing how your weapon is best used against weapon X or alternately penalizing fighting against a weapon one is not familiar with. Hero can model this sufficiently well.

Two of those three have sticks for arms. One probably is as far from looking greek as possible. In fairness, they all have two things in common. I'm seeing a common thread here.

Oh, and, as an Israeli citizen, she's actually got military training. I'm starting to wonder how much BETTER casting is possible for this. Dark hair, olive skin, military training, actually can do the action. Anyway, as an aside, here's an article about the movie, don't know if anyone has posted it yet. http://www.themarysue.com/wonder-woman-solo-film-versus-batman-v-superman/

I think the standard of less hip and breast than Linda Carter being 'waif-like' makes almost all the women in the world waifs. Further, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the radical idea that the producers of the TV show were not looking at certain of Linda Carter's aspects and then looking at the costume and saying, "Man, this is totally going to sell, because of the fan sensibilities and the keen understanding by the viewer of Amazonian features based on classical sources that may or may not actually describe them this way." And the depiction in comics, not much different. Where is the outcry over her not having one breast removed for more effective combat skills like the amazons were said to have done? Honestly, Linda Carter never, in a million years, could pull off the physical aspects needed to actually do the action that wasn't done in the old show ONLY because special effects were limited back then. If they could have, they would have. We all know that for decades, super hero shows and movies simply could not capture the comic book fights. This is not anything against Linda Carter, but Gadot can pull off the action. Linda Carter has never given the impression of someone who could look threatening with sword, spear, or shield. I'm pretty sure she'd agree with this statement. Gadot did just fine doing so. Summarizing them as both having skinny limbs is meaningless. Not all skinny is the same. Some skinny is athletic. And some athleticism has more carryover to actually pulling off the warrior thing. There is no way that MOST beauty queens, Linda Carter included, could pull off the role of a modern action hero for film. And that depiction, as far as the action, is far closer to the source material, comic books, than it ever was before, whatever our opinions of where the movies digress from the source material. Not to mention she's a gorgeous woman who looks Greek. And looks like a grown woman. Now, Michael Keaton, totally wrong casting. I always pictured Beetlejuice as taller.

If you are a foreign leader contending with the most powerful country in the world, would you rather have it lead by someone with experience and a power base in politics, or a divisive populist with no political experience and no power base in politics?