Tech

Ah, I see you mentioned Thorn, who's in CKC. He's been used effectively in our campaign.

I wouldn't allow the Perceivable. My understanding is once something costs END (whether by default or by adding Limit: Costs End), the power is obvious. It's morning so if I'm mistaken, you know why. The regeneration very much seems 'plot-device' and not worth buying. Gotta agree with this.

L.L. I'm surprised but happy you remember Hank the Ranger from the old D&D cartoon. Archer, gotta say I disagree with you when you said, "It just seems like arrows are very much against the setting of most worlds the PC is likely to be on. So even if they weren't made illegal by the Empire, it's unlikely you'd run across a bow shop and be able to restock that old physical arrow supply. Yeah, you can make your own if you keep the equipment on your ship. But how often can you get back to your ship? " If the character is from the 31st century, I'm sure the bow can be made of nearly indestructible material, the arrows can have a tech advantage to them (now that arrow made a BIG boom), and until more arrows are available, there's always a high-tech/energy sword or blaster. The arrows being hi-tech can easily be made that once fired - and after hitting the target - they return to the bow character (but not the BIG boom arrows). Also, the arrows can continue to track their opponent until they hit. Since she's new, the arrows that return can be simplified to just be Blast, and so on. Don't want to put too much of a complicated build together on a beginner.

I think the Duplication option is not what I'm looking for. As N-B said, I'll go with the Stretching idea. *Gasp* What's with you, man?Joking aside though, it's great to watch that movie, if you can.

Not nitpicking, just throwing out a thought. Perhaps Dr. Nope should have a power affinity with an array of Entangles (or even Drains), instead of poison. The name suggests a denying of something, whereas I'm not feeling the name associated with poison. An entangle denies the bad guy from attacking/retreating/etc. Your thought?

I'll go with Chris' idea. Thanks. I'm thinking though, that it might be always on. I'm picking on Olaf since he's the best example: when Kristoff takes Olaf's arm, Olaf isn't spending any time activating a power: it just happens.

When did the 1st edition of Champions come out? I know the year was 1981 but does anyone know the month?

Olaf (from Frozen/Frozen2) and Jenny XJ9 (My Life as a Teenage Robot) both have arms that can move, even though not attached to the main body. In both cases, the arms can point or even hold someone's hand. How would you build that?

I wouldn't say it's the player base. I'd say it's the author's personal style with the combo of rules changing. As each edition comes around, more points are handed out to players.

This is 6th edition so I'll take a try at it: I wouldn't apply No Range to it and would add OAF to it, since it appears anyone can pick it up. Since it is a physical manifestation and focus, you could theoretically roll it away from you, creating light at a distance; No Range wouldn't allow that. An Accessible focus can be mobile so that takes care of the Mobile problem. Just a quick thought. Alternately, I could also see this is 0 points, similar to a flashlight.

Ashura, I'd go with what JmOz and LoneWolf said. Second, liking the animated gif.

What he said. As for villain attack rolls, I always roll them in secret. Let's face it: in every gamer's life, there are days when the dice are just set against you. You blow your block roll, your attack rolls, everything. It happens. I'm not going to add to the player's misery when he's rolling lousy and I'm on a streak of fantastic rolls. I did that just this past weekend - I changed the attack dice roll of a villain (more than once) from a 'hit' to a 'miss'. I don't do the DnD killer DM stuff: "You missed? Ha! Wow, are you going to get it!"

In my opinion, to powergame means to do everything a player can do to make his character as tough as possible, as powerful as possible, to be at maximum ability for any situation. I've heard from many forums here, as well as elsewhere that when talking about powergaming, it's very commonly in the negative sense. For the most part, I agree. It depends on the campaign and the GM whether or not it's overwhelming, or it fits right in. Quite frankly, I think it'd be almost necessary for the Justice League but I think the majority of us don't have those kind of campaigns. Having said that, for the campaign I'm in (and also GM as one of the 4 GMs), we work with character concept for any character, not powergaming. If someone wants to build a mentalist, martial artist alien, give us the concept and we'll work to see if it'll work. We are quite open-minded but we have our limits: someone once wanted to use a character from a different campaign who had a CV of 7 with 10 lvls, massive PD, ED and damage, etc etc. We said 'no'. I'm glad we said no; many of his other characters were broken builds according to the rules, such as hitting yourself to absorb the damage using that very power but I digress. As I said, and others have too, it depends on the campaign and GM. Some campaigns will almost require it, other campaigns powergaming will break it and likely lead to hard feelings between players. For our campaign, it's carefully looked at.

Thanks Duke. However, after downloading them and upon trying to open any of the files, I'm told they're not a valid file format.

Duke, I tried to check those character sheets you scanned. After signing in to google, it says you need to request access.

If that's what you're comfortable with, stay with 4th edition and enjoy your gaming. I rarely touch 6th edition myself. I would go with 'Only in Hero ID'.

Making an assumption on the original post, I think JmOz is talking about how do you like your write-ups, not write-ups for someone else. fdw3773 is right at making simple builds at conventions but I'm (again) assuming JmOz meant 'for you personally'. Personally, I like making my hero & villain write-ups pretty detailed most of the time; it's fun for me. No one else is going to be running my villains when I'm GM'ing or my heroes when I'm player. If he's talking about what someone else is going to use, simpler is better.

For myself, I still use Panda & Raccoon. I like them enough to have updated them a bit and sent them against the heroes recently.

The second one is a bit much but I see your point. As both GM and player, I like to write things out, but not to extremes. I would write out that attack as 12d6 EB but if I was feeling overly creative, I could touch a bit on the second part. There is a certain pleasure with writing villains out, even if you're the only one who's really going to see it as GM, simply because it's fun. As GM, I write out/stat out all my villains, if only because I like to express my creativity. If I'm using a minor villain who is a one-shot, then I will go with brief stats such as: example: 10 Str, 14 Dex, 20 Con, 10 PD, 10 ED, 5 Speed, 40 Stun. CV 5, 8d6 EB. It's not worth my time to write-out minor villains who the players will (most likely) never encounter again. Of course, there have been those exceptional times when the players say "I really liked that guy..." That changes things; he'll get a write-up.

I've used the 'forgotten' (but not to the campaign I'm in) villains and the seasoned players are like "wow, it's him again!" when they do show up. It's fun to see that reaction. Never heard of Hero Games being called a 'cockroach'

It's whatever you want. As LL replied, there is no "most common occupation".

The players use cells once in awhile to talk to each other but surprisingly, it hasn't come up much. It's a freebie, like a player having a car.

Using a shield in combat is more accurate to say that you are attempting to block an incoming attack - both HTH and ranged. If you block, the shield takes the damage. The shield should have BODY because after awhile of blocking, it's going to get worn down and break, depending on what material is used in it's creation. In Champions, shields with extra PD/ED are given an Activation roll as an example of how well the shielder (I made up a new word) is able up protect himself. I don't play Fantasy Hero but I think it's defined as extra DCV. It might work better as: Extra defense, with the limitations: must make a block roll & foci Ultimately, how realistic are you wanting a shield to work determines how it's going to be used in any campaign. I'm okay with extra PD/ED foci, with an Activation roll, although I'm beginning to like my example.

Which, in itself, is telling.

steriaca, I'm not sure I'm onboard with the Egoist/Mentalist/etc feeling like he's hitting a mental wall. If a hero with a 40 Str (8d6 damage) hits a tough guy with a 35 PD and doesn't affect him, he doesn't necessarily feel like he hit a wall. I guess the special effects kick in here: Tanner is artificial. What would an Egoist feel trying to hit something artificial? Throwing out an idea is that the Egoist might feel a buzz in his head when trying to attack Tanner with Ego Attack/Mental Blast, but otherwise is unaware that he's doing no Stun damage. He doesn't have a power "Detect how much damage I did". Thoughts?