Tech

I think Farkling's got a good idea for what you're looking for. Regarding things like the ol' Block/Attack manuever hinted at, house rules work. Once in awhile, a player comes up with something that generally bucks the campaign in that no one is allowed it. However, if it's a really really cool idea and fits in with the character without being unwieldly to the campaign, it's given a rare exception and allowed. If a power or concept helps everyone enjoy the game and enhances it, it should be allowed IMO.

Interesting. Never thought about that. Then again, I never bothered thinking much about Swimming.

Thanks. However, I'm still wondering if the character does indeed drown and if so, how long (at 1/10 normal lifesigns)?

Re: Running Hero with defined Disadvantages? If I'm understanding your line of thinking, your question asks "Has anyone run a campaign where the heroes created must take certain disadvantages already defined by the GM?" If that's the question, I haven't done that or been in one. However, some friends of mine have. The campaign lasted about 2 years so I guess it was fun. I can see quite a few advantages as well as disadvantages with this. A few Advantages: Players know the general setting. Most likely, the common background will easily bring them together and fairly quickly. It can give them a common goal, a common enemy and even a base run by their benefactor. Disadvantages: Players may not want those disadvantages. Hey, it's happened before.

For 'Simulate Death', it mentions that your breathing and other life rates are basically 1/10 of normal. What happens if someone using Simulate Death falls/gets thrown into a pool, lake or ocean? Worse yet, a sponge? Kidding. Does the person take 10 times longer to drown? Do they drown at all, though I assume they eventually would? Assuming the drowning, how long would it take; assume a 6 SPD if that matters at all. Finally, if I want someone with SD (assuming he would drown) to be able to survive a very long time (hours) underwater, would you suggest Life Support or something else?

Why, yes, I do GM a lot!

I have a hero who's power doubles in END cost after the first use in a battle. I kept it at a -1 Limitation, not as a Side Effect. Side Effect is too quirky to use in this matter.

You can always try... If you still like the ol' Block-Counterstrike, there's a way around the rules. Try something like: Damage Shield, only activates with a successful Block manuever, or something like that. Can't look at D.S. right now as I don't have the book in front of me.

Wow, combo manuevers and Danger International.. it's been awhile since I've read those. I can't answer your question but interested in the answers, also.

Re: Re: We meet agian Mr.Hermit Aw, you beat me to posting that line. I don't think Dr. Destroyer could have clones, according to his origin.

Pardon me if this is a little out of context, but I have one superheroine in my current Champions campaign who'd survive. I guess it helps she's from another dimension with immortality, hm?

Hey CorpCommander, why not give your Giant Squid: 4d6 Absorption to Stun, only vs Electricity just in case they really do try electricity.

bump again, if only for those who have joined recently.

CorpCommander, you might want to try a different Susceptibility. Fire doesn't seem right for a squid. Squid aren't any more susceptible to fire than we are, although if you want it that way - go for it. My suggestion is something like electricity, poison, contaminants (don't know if this is a Fantasy campaign or not). Worse of all, howabout: Susceptibility: 3d6 Stun/Body from Polkas

When using Negative Levels, do they automatically cost END? I haven't read that part of the book, partly 'cause it's hard to find. Sorry people but this is one person who thinks the layout of the 5th ed is harder to find stuff.

It doesn't matter to me but I'd say there is no 'correct' way as we're looking at interpretations of house rules. I think we're all in agreement that it's okay to tunnel through a Force Wall but whether or not to use Tunneling is the issue.

I'd say yes to both, as long as it fits special effect. Even if I allowed it, I'd say you'd have to have Tunneling: Inches + def must = FW PD + ED defense.

I rather like it. Even if your head hurts to the point where you really can't concentrate on anything (I've easily been that sick before), that doesn't mean your illness turns you into a vegetable. Still, to each their own.

This is an interesting way of doing it, although it wouldn't last too long. I don't know how long the effect is being looked at but for a long-term effect, I think my suggestion works. For a short-term effect, your way looks good.

Starlord, have you seen Sunburst, Ray and Radium? They were the three villains most widely thought of when mentioning Project: Sunburst. Of course, they were in Enemies I and later, Classic Enemies.

I was going to post mine, but it's rather odd that everything except Champions was posted.

A Drain or Suppress vs Dexterity and Stun (I favor the Drain), with a delay of days or weeks will work. Unless mistaken, I think the 5th ed mentions something about using negative Combat Levels and using them against others but I'd go with the Drain. ex. 4d6 Dex Drain, 1d6 Stun Drain, delay 1 week. Add 'Range' if concept fits. Depending on the disease, you might want to add: 3d6 Int Drain, delay 1 week, only to lower skill rolls, to represent the increased difficulty in thinking.

I have no problem with an EC in an armored suit nor charges on an MP. If there are limitations on either an EC or MP, be aware o player that they will will be encountered by you. Anyways, I don't think the End Reserve should be in. I don't have any problems for the most part of doing unusual things with End Reserves, but if all the powers require Concentration and Extra Time to activate, it seems very odd that you need to do this with the End Reserve. What if powers are activated before the End Reserve is concentrated into activation? I can't see the justification for the Flash Def with the limitations given. What's the special effect? Next is my opinion but I'm sick to death of seeing Killing Attacks with Penetration being almost commonplace. The MP is intriguing, the Penetrating KA aside.

bumpety-bump

I use a house rule for Penetration that goes something like this: no amount of BODY will ever be caused by the Penetration. Instead, an amount of Stun equal to the BODY of the KA gets through. My players like the houserule. I have a less dangerous campaign that a lot of others I read about.