Kesedrith

I think you did a pretty good job of it yourself.

And not a terrible synopsis of the thinking that went into both the original statement and then the redaction of that later. A lot easier than wading through the papers on 55 Cancri e for certain. There's other issues with the original hypothesis too. For instance not all of the carbon on Earth, not even a significant portion of it, formed diamond. A much larger portion went into forming things like carbonates, graphite, and atmospheric gases. Therefore even if 55 Cancri e were to have as much carbon as oxygen, it is unlikely that a significant portion, much less all of it, would have been incorporated into diamond. Graphite is the more likely end member, barring significant water, and if there was a fair amount of water, then carbonates are more likely results. There's also issues like core differentiation, it's conditions (were they reducing or oxidizing?), and other factors that come into play on whether you get a result of diamond, graphite, carbonates, or exsolved gas. In short, a "diamond planet" is very unlikely, even if the starting materials are carbon rich. That said, this discussion does bring up the issue that the SF trope of a "mineral rich" or "mineral poor" world is quite plausible. Anne McCaffrey's Pern was uninteresting for colonization by all but an agriculturally minded group because it was 1) remote in location and 2) it had very low mineral wealth. My point here being that the range of planets out there has only expanded, and you could very well have a system where the worlds are iron poor (by comparison), and therefore almost all of it is locked up in the planets's cores, meaning there's unlikely to be any real industry in metals, but perhaps it's that much richer in silicon/silica so they produce a lot of grit/sand, concrete slurry, and so forth. Maybe such systems are also enriched in carbon too though, and therefore are good sources for organic chemicals or even agriculture. They might be also be so biologically diverse, and temperature stable over large latitudes, that they're the proverbial "pleasure planets" that appear in SF media, covered in lush rain forests and the like. Then again, all of this may be just worrying about incorporating too much realism in your space opera.

Wow! Yeah, I think I'll stick with those put out by Seager, Lissauer & de Pater, and that crowd. Just...wow.

You know, I can see that web comic panel now........

I'll have to second Netzilla's general idea, and reinforce that it doesn't seem like you're describing a system where spells can just fizzle or BANG!, but where they just may not work as intended always. Therefore slapping on Side Effect onto spells, and then let success or failure decide whether the "weird" is beneficial, indifferent, or negative, with you rolling "effect dice" behind the screen to determine just how "bad" it is. That would allow -you- to throw in something like instead of the fireball just being bigger on a great success, maybe it's actually smaller....but took on Indirect and just bypassed the wall the targets were hiding behind. That "Cloud of Fog" the caster tried to put up? Yeah, no, it's a "Cloud of Butterflies"! Same penalties to seeing through it (there are a -LOT- of butterflies), but it let's you have some fun with the "Holy crap, what was that!" factor. Just make sure that your potential spellcasting players understand that, "Weird stuff is going to happen."

Yeah, we had a "Night of a Thousand Nut Shots" one time that had a ninja character's name shifting from "Night Dragon" to "Nut Dragon". What I was really going to point out that on calling shots, there are also "rules" you can use for allowing a call of "high shot" that doesn't roll against any location below the waist, and all sorts of similar location roll modifiying calls.....if you want to add that complication. The point being that people can aim high or aim low, not trying to hit particular locations, but simply localize a zone. Lower penalty than calling a specific location, but beats a sniper who's almost certainly aiming for center of mass (if not the head) and hitting.....their foot!

4th and 5th being my editions, I sort of have to chime in, and on that, I have to agree that if they are separate personalities and the like, and especially if they have their own abilities and powers, then that's the Duplication with appropriate limitations that Lucius and the palindromedary point out. If they can both use the body independently, but are restricted to the same power set and such, then that starts becoming just Extra Limbs, and that then becomes the special effect for some things like Enhanced Senses, extra Speed (each head orchestrating their own sets of attacks), and so forth. Then we can get down to the point where it's just an odd, natural thing of the species (like D&D Ents), and then it's just 5pts. for the Extra Limb, and maybe the justification for some Disadvantages.

Fictional, yes. Anime worlds would also lend a fictional backup to it turning out okay. Realistically though, that's not how it would go at all.

Of course being a penniless baron may be why they're out adventuring too, so it could be a good plot hook. Your lands are all rocky stubble and with no ore or stone quarry to speak of, so how do you pay the king's taxes and keep your title and lands? My thinking is just that there's a lot of obligation that goes along with a title of nobility. If nothing else, there's the expectations on behavior and lifestyle. It's not just getting a title and being able to lord it over anyone beneath your station.

Fair enough.

And so this thread reminds me of a modern fantasy story (House Between Worlds by Marion Zimmer Bradley) in which there are nodes where it's easy (easier) to cross between planes. One of those in San Francisco is a comic book store. Anyway the point is that yes, I've run one game where a single instance of EDM would have been allowed. The PC's were eventually going to have to stop Orcus from entering their world with his demon army through the Demon Gate. A way to prevent the latest Demon War though, would be to get through, somehow, and destroy Ocus's mace. All they had to do would be to gain enough support (the campaign was called "Heir Apparent") to get an army to the gate, figure out how to activate it before Orcus did, and then go through, get his mace, and destroy it. Easy. Right?

I like the idea that such a sword would be desired by necromancers, as the true power would be that you could summon, and bind, the souls of the blood that went into its forging. Maybe I'm just sick and twisted in the head though.

I've always thought that one of the biggest perks of a title of baron or higher is good ole noblesse oblige. You can call on your "cousins" - fellow lords - in their demesne and pretty much expect a night of food and a place to rest, whether you're penniless or not. You're not, after all, a member of the common rabble, and hence worthy of some consideration. Commoners would also be expected to defer to you, but this carries the obligation that you may be called upon to render judgement (low justice) if the local lord isn't available, or even defend the poor peasants. You can also be called upon to render service to your liege. Personally, I've always thought that the costs for the title are too high....-UNLESS- the lands, servants, incomes, and so forth come along with it. Which require either paying the points for them, as stated above (Demesne, Money, Followers, etc.) or earning them through the course of the campaign. Without them though, as above, I've never seen that the title alone carries that much more benefit compared to the obligations that come with it. After all, if you're a baron, and your count or duke are called by the king to form an army and come to render service, guess who that means they're calling to form the knightly cadre of that army?

It's been suggested that the items could be used for an extreme evil - bringing the demon/devil involved to the mortal plane in its true form, rather than its limited avatar it must adopt, etc. - as well as making the claiming of the item a moral dilemma, and yes, actually -not- returning the items is the true test. For instance, the bow is in the hands of a dryad trying to save her forest. She's -very- beautiful (test for the half-elf), but an arrow shot from the bow is inordinately accurate (bonus to location shots), and perhaps can "always" find the heart of an enemy that's named (test for the half-orc, dwarf, and warrior as what greedy sob wouldn't go after that, what prideful warrior wouldn't want a bow that makes him nigh invincible, and what cleric full of wrath wouldn't want to be able to absolutely smite his enemies?) In short, taking the bow now renders the dryad and her forest dead. Without it she simply cannot defend her forest against the powers arrayed against her. Several characters are tested against their sin, and they are given the test of returning the bow despite the cost, or leaving it where it is, or even finding someway of rendering the powers arrayed against the dryad defeated and moot, and thus taking the bow won't be a hardship. (Ah, but will following such a path tempt the dwarf to wrath, the warrior to pride,....) The above scenario can be altered to put the mirror in place of the bow. (Perhaps it allows the dryad to see where the enemy will strike from, and with what forces, and so she can marshal her own strength to always be able to counter.) Probably it could be altered to fit any of the items, and this scenario isn't unique. I'm just not sure that people would appreciate a five page post for me to synopsis all of the possibilities. The long and short is that there are truly numerous ways that acquiring each item can be a test of multiple sins in and of itself, but can also be just an overall test of "right vs. wrong," with multiple "outs" for how to fix it so they can take the item or they can just choose not to hamstring the entity currently holding it. Finally there's the biggie: knowing what they all do, possibly even finding out what the ultimate goal of acquiring all of them is, do you actually turn them over and say that the Big Evil is just none of my business, bringing Hell on Earth, (but at least you're not in the real Hell!) or do you hold onto them (assuming you took them in the first place), and risk the trip back to torment or use the last hours to try and lay down the smack on the Professor and his hellspawn pal!

In most of the campaigns I've been in, that seems about right. If you're trying to create 2 from Dark Matter especially, because those nanites she needs aren't exactly the most common things in the galaxy. They could also be partially or completely turned off by that field her creator had.

In the end, I think the answer to your original question is: "When do you feel like it's become Call of Cthulu?" Indie could arguably have "feelings" about things, and his abilities with that whip certainly border on the supernatural. The were monsters and boogums that could come out, though they were easily defeated if you just remembered your legends well enough. Wizards, aliens, deities...They all made an appearance in the movies, and it sounds like the books didn't help on that score at all. I guess in the end the real delineation is if the game started feeling like "monster of the week," then you've probably gone a little too far. In the end, the whole point to all the Raiders stories is that there's at least some element of truth to all of these old stories.

Yep. We understand how and why electromagnetic radiation works pretty well now. As to wave-particle duality, that's just inherent to nature. Electrons can be made to interfere with each other and act like waves, as can protons or neutrons. I think this may be a discussion for a different board though.

The system I use tends to be a simple one that revolves around the idea that magic is an exertion of will on the universe. Magic works because you have the will and/or talent to make it so. Along that line, I also usually require the Talent (5e) of Mage Sight. To be able to do magic, you must first be able it's presence. Either as a force to be tapped (see C.S. Friedmans' Cold Fire series for an excellent example) or as "cracks" in reality into which you can insert your will to make things happen. The consequences of this are first, that you cannot develop the ability to use magic later in the game if you do not lay down at least 5pts to get that basic level of Mage Sight. (Or a wizard friend of yours could do his study to grant you that boon, but I've never had anyone delve into the matter that way, and wasn't, and am still not, inclined to suggest it.) Second, each wizard generally has his own style and version of spells. There are schools and teachers, but no two wizards are going to cast the same spell the same way. Due to that teaching influence it's often similar to your teacher, but not the same. Third, there are some who become powerful and wise enough that they understand that ultimate nature of magic - that it's an exercise of will - and they can indeed do away with all the finger wriggling, chanting, and mumbo jumbo. They can will it, and it is simply so. And yes, I've had players set their characters onto that path, but I let them know up front that a definite prime requisite is a magic skill of at least -21, INT of 20, and EGO of 20. I've never had a campaign last long enough for anyone to reach those basic requirements, much less any of the rest (Mage Sight at the level of a sense, ranged, discriminatory, etc., as well as other requirements). I also impose that your style or method of exerting will must be rather self consistent. If you must carve runes in a staff, then you must carve those runes to enact your magic. If you need a wand, you must have a wand. If you must be able to speak and verbalize your desire....well, you get the idea. I also tend to allow VPPs, though I discourage new players from using them. Unless it's a very experienced player, there's none of this "on the cuff" changing of the powers in the VPP either. You're not bogging play down for the next 30-minutes while you try and figure out how to put together a new power for a spell. As to how it works? I've not had any complaints, either from myself or the players, so I'd say pretty well. Most of my spell casters tend to wind up being priests or religious devotees though, or a more warrior type who's managed to learn how to summon a sword so that he's never unarmed or something similar. I also do tend to add more "rules" to magic than this basic framework, depending on the world and the flavor of magic I want to the magic.

Yeah, unlike the anime version of this idea, I think it would end up for a nightmarish scenario. Adolescents are simply not noted for their ability at self control, and if they have powers that allow them to pretty much do whatever they want with impunity, that's exactly what I'd expect to happen. Let's face it, most teens are reined in almost strictly because "Mom and dad are going to be...angry."

I have to say that this is the issue to me. When I ran one I didn't put limits on the powers so much as on skills, characteristics, and on requiring some limitations like activation rolls, burnout, and other such that truly limited what they could do with the power and when. I like citing Marvel's Cannonball as an example. Originally he could just blast along at full speed with no maneuverability or anything else. Slowly he learned more about his power and how he could use it, gaining more control so that he could finally turn while blasting, then he could stop and turn around, then hover, and finally he could use his invulnerability even when he wasn't zipping around or full on blasting. He therefore didn't actually get more powerful, he just learned how to use his power more effectively and in a wider range of situations. That's teens for you: they're already got a good head on their strength, they just lack the experience to always know how best to use it and how not to push things beyond their ability to control just yet.

I have to say that I think this is a big part of it. I only use a basic stat block of STR, CON, BODY, STUN, CV, DEF, and any special abilities I want the critter to have, and run with it. If it's a big, important encounter, a recurring villain, or something like that, then I actually work through a full build. Otherwise, you just tend to go through too many, and really they're more plot devices, there to do what you want them to do, than anything else. All that said, I do agree with the sentiment that if there's something specific you're looking for, give us the run down. I'm sure you'll have a few builds or comments thereon within a day or so.

Maybe I'm the minority here, but I would think with such a scenario that it would be an easier thing to stop them coming through, than to send them back. I'm also vile and vicious enough to think in terms of the "things worse than death." How delicious it would be for such beings that these "heroes" had failed. They're tough enough that they were even able to try, but they also defied my coming. I'm going to grant them all regeneration so that I might flay the skin from them daily, knowing it'll regrow tomorrow. I'll also plant rumors that I can be sent back to my prison or cast out, just to watch them go through the motions....and fail again. In short, I would push the heroes toward the conclusion that their world had fallen. It was time to find a way out and make sure the next in the chain didn't fall to these things. Then again, maybe I've just watched too much Mortal Combat and read too much PC Hodgell.

You have it backwards unfortunately. The Maya were the older civilization, and had been in decline for some time. In the end, the Europeans hit North America at just the right time, as all of the native civilizations were in decline. (The reason is still the center of a great deal of debate.) Had Columbus's voyage been just a couple of hundred of years earlier, he would have found a much more populated and organized North America, and that whole scenario may have turned out very differently.

If you're looking for interesting points in history, there's also 1066: Norman invasion of England. 1212: The Children's Crusade 30 BCE: Death of Cleopatra (and the accompanying conquest of Egypt by Rome and Gaius Julius Caesar.) ~2580 BCE: Building of the Great Pyramid of Giza.

Thank you, sir. It was a good group of players who didn't mind playing within some homebrew rules I'd made up to try out to even out defenses and damage potential at the start. Basically the starting limits on DC were based on the character's speed, and the cap on defenses was based on your DCV. The system actually worked amazingly well, and I think it helped with that meshing of the team, as they had to cover and rely on each other.