Tech

It's warming to see these posts. As I've said before (and will continue to when it comes up in a post): build your character around a concept. I've clashed with others in this matter but a character built around a concept can expand the starting concept out much farther and longer than those that aren't. A character built with a personality isn't just a 'bag o points' and is fun to play; they continue to be fun to play after hundreds of experience points later. By then, the characters are experienced, developed and balanced because they have a central concept. Other characters drop to the sidelines because they didn't have a personality base in the first place. One of my oldest characters started with a 40 STR and 22 DEX. 500+ Exp pts later, he still has a 40 STR and 22 DEX - he also has 3 Combat Levels and 1 Overall now and yes, he's still fun to play. In short, way to go Monolith and everyone else.

It's warming to see these posts. As I've said before (and will continue to when it comes up in a post): build your character around a concept. I've clashed with others in this matter but a character built around a concept can expand the starting concept out much farther and longer than those that aren't. A character built with a personality isn't just a 'bag o points' and is fun to play; they continue to be fun to play after hundreds of experience points later. By then, the characters are experienced, developed and balanced because they have a central concept. Other characters drop to the sidelines because they didn't have a personality base in the first place. In short, way to go Monolith and everyone else.

I'd go more with a -2 limitation so you can totally max out the power and cause all sorts of problems for your GM. Kidding! I agree with the -1 limitation.

You obviously haven't been in some of the games I've run where the players run into strings of abysmal dice rolls. Me-GM: Make your roll. Player 1: I've get a +1 to my roll so I've got 15-. I roll a 16. Me-GM: (shakes head)

Well, done! I was afraid I was going to see Tarzan with a 18 Str or 15 Dex but I'm glad I didn't see that.

The Monster does well enough to put shivers into the players & characters. Leech does a good job to scare the characters but it has to be carefully set up - but when it is, it works like dynamite. Weasel, sans the Find Weakness with everything, does a good job of scaring players and characters.

I disagree with the Ultimate Mentalist regarding not allowing DECV levels. As BNakagawa demonstrated, you can easily get around this rule, although I'd go with what Monolith suggested. In standing with my disagreement, it seems highly arbitrary and contradictory: you can buy levels that only count for DCV in combat but you can't levels for DECV in combat. Both are levels for defensive combat and I see no point to the distinction. I already use a house rule which says you can buy DECV levels.

22) A detective hero or any hero on patrol runs into VIPER agents that aren't interested in fighting but rather, in helping the heroes thwart a problem. An innately-powered villain is gathering technology to enhance his (or her) already formidable power. In return for not being taken in custody, the agents give the heroes legitimate blueprints of technology that could magnify his or her power several fold as well as the final location where the technology can be pieced together. They don't want this villain to take over the world; these agents have had enough of VIPER and this is a small way to repay for their deeds in being part of VIPER. The heroes eventually show up and the fight ensures. Although technologically expensive in losing the plans themselves, VIPER had planned this to get rid of the heroes and the villain in one massive attack. Will the heroes team up with the villain to defeat VIPER?

This is an amusing forum. I don't think everyone will ever come to an agreement on the sun's damage. Some leave it as a plot device (as I do) and others try to significantly, realistically and mathematically figure out the damage, which I have no problem with either. It's cool seeing figures and equations over my head. In those cases though, reality must be used to at least start the fictional damage or else you don't have a basis to start calculating on. No game system will ever be perfect and Hero Games is not exception. However, it certainly does a pretty good job at covering almost everything. If you want something to do massive gobs of damage (ex. 50d6, 80d6, 976d6, etc), I don't know if this is the game system for it. IMHO, the system can handle your 12d6 EB or 18d6 Haymaker well-enough but starting to throw out 160d6 or 976d6 or whatever for the sun and it's, well, it's needless. I guess what I'm trying to say is that after a certain point, having a power/attack/whatever with gobs of dice simply becomes a plot device. I don't feel like trying to take into account all the real-life aspects of physics because the games are fictional.

This is simple. I like it!

Re: Omlevex Universe I do believe we are! I checked it out and it certainly does look cool.

Meager talents? (cough) Me thinkest thou jestest. Anyways, great work on that last pic. Star Wars & Superhero characters together... must've been quite a game!

GOOP sounds really interesting. I look forward to seeing it's stats.

Man, it's been so long since I had a character do that to themselves than I almost feel compelled to do that the very next gaming session. Let's see: we had Stellar. We had stellar energy blasts and a Flight of 30". He liked to do move-throughs and even started a 'Wall Removal Company'. I think the motto was 'Need a wall removed? Contact Stellar Wall Removal. We'll remove any wall, any place, any time. Extra thick walls done at no extra cost' or something like that. It was funny at the time. Stellar's ultimate challenge came up one day: a robot made of Adamantium. We all knew he couldn't break it but Stellar couldn't resist - it'd be the highlight of his move-through career. Um, he went splat - down to like -30+. My brother's character, Splinter, threw energy splinters and Entangle - both take damage. Mechassassin had ko'd/hurt two teammates and was working on the other three. Splinter had like 1 Stun and 1 End. My brother was wondering if his character should recover or hit Mechassassin with an Entangle, which would mean burning Stun as End. She chose the Entangle and even pushed it, burning way more End! It was a well-done gamble as she hit M and froze him, promptly knocking herself out. The other two teammates promptly did move-throughs of like 14d6 and 19d6. He went down. Everyone loudly cheered for the heroic way Splinter chose to act.

This doesn't seem to be enough. If 'Stunned', the target shouldn't be able to do anything. However, an entangle doesn't prevent actions such as taking a recovery, blasting their way out or staying in the entangle yet use Mental powers to name a few. Likewise, it is unbalanced for those who for whatever reason can't break their way out of the entangle (which I doubt is very few, except maybe martial artists). If gone this route, I'd give it Immune to all senses, a high DEF and some kind of time limitation like only lasts 3 segments. However, this gets horrendously expensive and goes a roundabout way of getting your power effect. I personally prefer the NND route. Simple, precise and sweet although still expensive. ex. 10d6 NND, only to Con Stun -3/4. Real Cost: 67 pts.

This is something I wouldn't mind a little clarification on myself.

Interesting to have words put in my mouth... I don't recall giving any reasons for my stating why I feel Penetrating is overpriced. However, I will now put forth my opinion: I feel that for a +1/2 advantage, a KA (and I center my opinion on KA, not normal attacks) is allowed to bypass Damage Resistance to an extent, somewhat of a low-level AVLD, Does BODY, which as I understand it is +2 1/2 advantage - I haven't looked it up because I don't use it in my campaign. I think a +3/4 or +1 advantage for Penetrating is more in balance. It seems to me that a lot of VIPER and CKC used Penetrating as a backdoor to hurt people even with Damage Resistance or Armor for the cost of Affects Desolid or Armor Piercing. I've altered Penetrating in my campaign to reflect things appropriately. However, this digresses from the Damage Shield conversation. Hmmm... a +1 1/2 seems a bit too much for my tastes, JmOz but I will hypothetically try your idea while creating a test villain and see if I agree after building it. Monolith, I give a hearty handclap to your reasoning about Dex's. Good stuff.

In my games, I haven't run into any abuses because my players are fair and understand game balance. They also understand that whatever's good for the players is good for the villains also. On a completely different tangent, I rebuilt the Ruler of Crime from Enemies International using 5e rules and didn't particularly care for the increase of cost for his Damage Shield. FYI, I like the +1/2 and +1 advantage you brought up. I don't know if I'll use it in my campaign but I like it. I assume you mean the +1/2 turns into a +1 advantage, not add a +1 advantage. If anything, I feel Penetrating with Killing Attacks is abusive at a mere +1/2.

Argh. A section in my previous post doesn't make much sense. It should say: (sorry, but I named him before I heard of Neutron from The Conquerors) Anyways, this is interesting reading. I have a couple characters I simply can't see turning to the evil side. I think, upon reading these posts, that many of our characters would be fearful to meet if they ever turned evil.

I have a general idea of what the DNPC's stats are in my game but unless specifically needed, which I haven't run into, they don't get written up. The DNPC's match the activity of the heroes. Captain Star who lives in the country isn't going to have a lawyer DNPC in the city. The DNPC should be in the general vincinity of the hero, IMHO.

Re: If your heroes had gone down a darker path Scary to think about but fun. Hmm. My first character Neutron (sorry but I named him I heard of Neutron from The Conquerors) came from the old Viper background, getting powers from an experiment and busted out, realizing Viper didn't care about him at all. Yes, I also realize that was a run-on sentence. If he stayed on the dark side, he'd probably one of the most-feared villains Viper could throw at you, short of Viperia. He's around 650 experience now. His 'Neutron Explosion' attack can level a 10 story building to the ground.

Re: Re: Wrong System Don't worry, we won't hold it against you.

Sorry, but I wholeheartedly disagree on the point of Ripper. Without saying what his defenses are for those who haven't bought it yet, bluntly spoken: they're overwhelming. His 'Rip 'Em in Half' ability is also quite powerful. I may or may not disagree with you on the 350 pt villains but will leave it at neutral as I don't know how you build your heroes with 350 pts. I don't have a view of your heroes stats vs the villains.

Ah, opinions. Gotta love free speech! Now for mine: I'll say I liked and disliked it. The agent creation process certainly gives more options for agents but felt scattered and unclear. I don't care for the mystical background of VIPER but to each their own. I felt that Ripper was right alongside that of many of the villains from CKC - too powerful. Yeah, a lotta campaigns are more powerful and need them but from reading the posts, there's not too many of them. The majority of villains nowadays seem inundated with combat skill levels: who doesn't have them? Very few. Not all villains (or agents!) should have levels. The weapon upgrades for almost all weapons seemed overdone. Cross-referencing the old VIPER book vs the new, I saw some powerful upgrades, including 8d6 and 10d6 KA. Seems a bit too much. I'm not going to say sorry - I do think that the VIPER book (and quite a bit of CKC) is overpowering to the new gamer and promotes powergaming. I tried to say why I didn't like things I saw instead of merely saying I didn't like this or that. I'm glad others saw a great deal of use for the new book; unfortunately, I think I'll stick with 4e VIPER with some exceptions.

Good Idea: Buying more INT Bad Idea: Buying more INT which only affects your opponent. Good Idea: Buying an Indirect, AE attack, defined as a meteor falling from the sky and striking your enemy. Bad Idea: Giving it the disadvantage 'No conscious control'.