handleyj

So we ran across some vampires in our game this week, but we ended up having a few questions: 1) The Drink Blood attack is a RKA with No Range and Continuous (and 0 END). We assumed that the vampire had to get close to do the bite, but then she and the victim could get separated and the victim would continue to take damage. Is that correct? If not, why build this as a RKA instead of an HKA? 2) I can't really find anything in the big book that dictates when a Continuous power with 0 END would stop functioning. We assumed stunning/killing the vampires would work, so we went with that. But then the question came up: could the vampires start their Continuous attack, then turn desolid? I figured no, because the attack wasn't bought with the "while desolid" (or whatever) advantage. So I figure when they turned desolid, then the continuous attack would stop. 3) What else can stop a Continuous 0 END attack? Is there a rule in some book for this that you can point me to? Thanks! -joe

I seem to remember seeing a rule that a character couldn't use any movement Powers with Dodge and/or Flying Dodge. Did I dream this? Can a character use Leaping or Flying with the FMove Element of Flying Dodge? How about making half-moves with those powers and normal dodge? Thanks!

Re: Stupid Velocity Question Thanks, everyone! That makes much more sense than what I was thinking.

Re: Stupid Velocity Question Oops, I think that's calculating real world velocity from Hero stats...? I was wondering how to calculate velocity for things like move throughs (STR + (v/3)d6) ... how do you calculate the "v" part there? And where is that specified in the book? Thanks!

What is the formula to determine a character's velocity? Is it SPD x Running? Can someone point me at the page in 5ER that says that? I've looked around, but the actual calculation for velocity has eluded me. Thanks! -joe

Re: Making Spellcasters More Fun Awesome! You are repped!

Re: Making Spellcasters More Fun Wow, I hadn't noticed. Ever since I started getting into Hero System, I haven't been keeping up with d20 book purchases. But I think that's very cool. I like the idea of wizards having something *wizardly* to do every round/phase.

Re: Making Spellcasters More Fun Hmm...it's the impression I've gotten, but maybe I need to go back and look at some of those posts again... I'll also note, that the Turakian Magic System doesn't have a spells per day limitation...which is nice...

Re: Skill Level Questions: Valerious The Harper Doh! I typed a quick reply to Ghost, but it seems to have disappeared. Hopefully I won't be repeating the post here: 1) Combat skill level - I get it! Very nice. Did you see that someplace in the character description, or did you just figure it out based on experience? 2) Any insight into buying 2pt Skill Levels with an OAF? Page 29 of Sidekick seems to say that you shouldn't buy any skill levels lower than 3pts with a focus. Is that something you would normally allow as a GM anyway? Thanks! -joe

Re: Skill Level Questions: Valerious The Harper Thanks Kevin. I was kinda thinking the same thing, but I'm glad to hear someone else support that theory.

Re: Skill Level Questions: Valerious The Harper Ah! Combat skill level on that second one. I get it. Did you see that someplace, or did you just know it from experience? Also, any insight on buying 2pt Skill Levels with OAF even though page 29 seems to say that you shouldn't buy Skill Levels of less than 3pt with a focus? Is that something you would normally allow (i.e. 2pt Skill Levels with a focus)? Thanks! -joe

Re: Skill Level Questions: Valerious The Harper Bumping this...hoping someone can help me out. I'm still very much a noob at this stuff, and when I read a rule, then see the examples not line up with my expectations...it's a bit frustrating. I'm hoping there's a typo in there...that would mean I understand things enough to find inconsistencies. Or maybe they don't line because it made sense for this particular character... Or maybe I missed a rule someplace, and the example character is good...in which case I need to read more carefully. In case anyone doesn't have Sidekick Revised, the same example character can be found in Fantasy Hero. Thanks! -joe

My questions here are about Valerious The Harper who is one of the sample characters in Sidekick Revised (page 119). Ol' V has some skill levels that confuse me: +2 to Magic Skill Rolls (cost 10) +1 with Magic Spells (cost 3) Greater Orb of Fire: +3 with Fire Magic Rolls; OAF (-1) (cost 3) Then he has these Power Skills: Air Magic 13- Fire Magic 15- Sorcery 14- Wizardry 14- Questions: 1) What do you think the difference is between the first and second skill levels? I understand the points differences, but in role playing these, what would differentiate a Magic Skill Roll from a Magic Spells roll? 2) So basically, if he's casting a fire spell, he can allocate +6 points to the Fire Magic roll? 3) It seems to me that the Greater Orb of Fire was built with three 2 point skill levels, then the OAF added to make the cost = 3 points. But on page 29 of Sidekick Revised it states, "Characters may only buy 3-point and more expensive Skill Levels with Focus." What's up with that? Is Valerious breaking the rules? 4) The second skill level (+1 with Magic Spells (cost 3)) also seems to be a rule breaker. Again from page 29, it says the 3 point skill levels are for adding +1 to any three related skills. But Valerious has four magic skills, and a boat load more spells than just three. So what's up with that? Seems that he should have purchased a 5 point skill level...

This seems like a very basic question, but I've searched the forum, read the Frameworks FAQ, and 5ER of course ... but the answer didn't jump out at me. My basic question is: how do you improve a Power Framework with XP? For example: 1) if I have an EC with 18 base points and spend 2 XP to increase the base to 20, well now all the powers in the framework are illegal. 2) If I have an MP with a 50 point reserve, and I continually spend my XP to increase the reserve, then eventually I'll have enough reserve points to use all the powers at once, at full power... Thanks in advance! -joe

Re: Block Yikes! Hyper-Man, I like your explanations very much! Sigh, I was so set on being stubborn on the whole SFX thing, but now you've given me something to think about. I really prefer a simple approach, and just using the rule as written, is certainly the simplest approach. And of course, I think it is a law that two people are not allowed to agree on any Internet forum. But for one person to actually change another's opinion... Well I'm just not certain I want to be responsible for hell freezing over. I must sleep on this. Thanks for the link!

Re: Block Yes! Exactly. According to Fred (p. 384-385) there is a point where you simply can't block any more (i.e. "Bye bye Block"). I set out to try and define a way to find that point. And I think you're agreeing that I've done that. However, I think you're disagreeing that I've found a good way to do it. But with that, we've reached an area of pure opinion. I feel successful! Yay me! An excellent point. But was I assuming the grizzly bear had a 20 STR? I think I was... In which case, I think my formula still works. Do grizzly's have an STR of 20? Hold on, lemme check... Ah, actually according to the Beastiary, they have a 26. Agreed. Obviously we're in the realm of role-playing now, outside of mechanics, but The Bulk's catch phrase is: "Just 'cause you say it, don't make it true." I see what you're saying: if I explore one side of the coin, I should look at both. But I was really was just looking at penalties for AMAM. I wouldn't want to go down the road of offering bonuses to the attackers for STR (beyond what they already get). Again, Fred (p. 384-385) has this statement, which is "almost" a rule, and I just wanted to explore how to define it better. I haven't noticed any place where it mentioned the opposite. Yeah...I disagree. As in most things, it all depends on the situation. And in the situation of a character trying to block a vehicle, Fred says it "probably" won't work. In the situation of two characters fighting on a 1 foot wide bridge over a valley of lava, Block becomes your best option, because you sure don't wanna dodge!

Re: Block First off, I'd like to mention that I'm a newb to Hero (as if you couldn't tell from my post count). So I'm ignorant of the system and appreciate the help. I've only started reading the Combat section in Fred, and I'm a slow reader. But when I got to the part about Blocking, I was struck by the fact that anyone can Block anyone else, and thought I'd check the forums. I think what I'm really looking for from this thread is some help in defining what my house rule will be in these situations. All the talk about the different types of strength are interesting, and certainly on topic, but I'd like to try and quantify this into some kind of a rule for when I'm playing the game. Here are my thoughts on the subject so far: 1 - The SFX Solution I love how The Hero System seperates SFX from the power/ability/whatever. It's a great idea. However, IMHO, I wouldn't use an SFX to redefine one "thing" into another that already has a definition. Huh? The moment you say the SFX for your Block includes the target "moving such that the attacker misses" (or as Hugh Neilson said, "...avoid his blows actively..." (emphasis mine)) then you've just made your Block into a Dodge. And that just won't sit right with me. A Block is the target forcing the attacker to miss by either dead-stopping his attack, or redirecting his attack. You wouldn't define a Transform as "a blast of fire that transforms an uninjured person into a person that has 8d6 damage." Energy Blast already exists, and is defined. The same as Block and Dodge. 2 - The "Almost" Rule It seems to me that the rule I quoted in my last post is there, and should be adhered to. Of course, the problem is that it isn't given any kind of quantitative definition. But the rule seems to allude that at some point, it is just obvious that one character can not block ... something. The example given is a character (assuming a non-Super) can not block a vehicle. So all we need is to quantify the gray area between "Obviously can block" and "Obvisouly can NOT block." I love this idea! This sits with me very well, indeed. It seems like a very simple idea, and I like simple. "No, Aunt May, you can't block that armored car." "Yes, Hulk, you can block that armored car." 3 - Quantifying The Obvious As Hugh also pointed out, the STR Table in Fred makes it hard to use it as the only measure of what can't obviously be blocked. But he mentioned DCs which made me look at the Damage Class table...hmm...this is interesting. Comparing the two tables may give us a pretty good look at what is "obvious." Hugh's Aged Martial Arts Master (let's call him AMAM - Hero System loves acronyms!) has an 8 STR. He can lift a washing machine. Pretty good! I don't think I could lift a washing machine! Let's also assume (and this may be a mistake) that the "Example" column on the STR table is not just things you can lift, but things you can block. When I read the "can not block a vehicle" rule, I was picturing a modern road vehicle. So going down the Example column, the first thing that matches that description is "Sportscar." STR 25. So AMAM can not block a STR of 25. Now we hit the problem that Hugh pointed out, the "Lift" column on this table is not very granular. But the Damage column is! But alas, another problem: looking at the Damage Class Table on page 403 of Fred, the "Normal" damage column isn't a very good comparison point. The Killing column is a little better. But the "10-point" column is really perfect. So this may be another point where I'm making a mistake. But I'm going to compare the Damage Column from the STR Table to the 10-Point column on the Damage Class Table. Here we go: AMAM = DC3 STR 25 = DC10 Difference = 7 DCs OK, let's not use Spider-Man, and Hulk, because I don't want to start an argument about what their STRs are when converted to Hero System. So I'll use some brand-new, custom heroes. "The Spider" can lift 10 tons. Looking on the STR table, this is between a 40 and 45 STR, so let's give him an 8.5d6 damage. Then "The Bulk" has a STR of 60 giving him a damage of 12d6. Now let's compare those against the 10-Point column of the DC Table: The Spider = DC17 The Bulk = DC24 Difference = 7 DCs Very interesting! 4 - My New House Rule??? So let's get back to AMAM. Somewhere between his STR of 8 and STR 25 lies the rule I'm looking for. So let's take a look at those examples: STR 10 (DC4) - Adult Human - AMAM can certainly block that. STR 13 (DC5) - Refridgerator - Err...well, let's move on. STR 15 (DC6) - Two men, Boar - that sounds more difficult, but not impossible for AMAM STR 18 (DC7) - Floor safe - Once again, the example isn't much help here. STR 20 (DC8) - Grizzly bear! - again pretty tough, but *maybe* not impossible. STR 23 (DC9) - Cow, Horse - Not sure this sounds tougher than a grizzly, but: STR 25 (DC10) - Sportscar - Bam! We hit the rule! Impossible! Wow! I like that a lot! Starting at 3DCs above AMAM, things look a little more difficult. Let's assign him a -1 OCV for blocking that, and add -1 OCV for each DC above 3 until we hit the limit of 7 DCs. That nicely gives us a maximum penalty of -4 OCV at 6 DCs. I could even decide to just keep applying -1 OCV for each DC of difference if I decided the block shouldn't be "impossible." Oh! Even better: Hugh asked "Do extra MA DC's anhance the ability to block? Do they reduce the target's ability to Block?" I'd say "maybe." Nothing stopping a GM from comparing the total CV values of the combatants, and not just the STR DC. But myself, personally, I'd want to keep it simpler. Just one calculation at the start of combat (or more likly, the first time the question of a target wanting to Block a MUCH stronger opponent). And of course, it should go without saying, but "...the GM must apply common sense, dramatic sense, and considerations of game balance...." And if you read all of this...I'm sorry! Feedback is always appreciated. -joe

Re: Block As I read this thread, I wonder about this paragraph in Fred (p 384 - 385): "... However, the GM must apply common sense, dramatic sense, and considerations of game balance when determining what attacks a character can block. For example, although a character could Block a Move Through performed against him by another character, he probably can't Block a Move Through performed by a vehicle." To me, trying to block The Hulk sounds like trying to block a vehicle. I know it says "can block another character" but we would also assume that Spidey could block a kid on a tricycle, even though it's a vehicle. So were I to run this situation in a game (Spidey tries to block Hulk), I would just say it can't be done. If I was feeling kind, I'd tell the player that. If I was feeling devious, I'd just role The Hulk's attack role, and not Spidey's block role. He just can't block The Hulk. So the only decision I'd have to make in this situation is how much STR can't be blocked by another character. Obviously it would have to be relative STR. Something like you can't block a character that has double your STR.