Valerious

Hi. I have a question about stretching with the Does Not Cross Intervening Space advantage. Would it allow a character to reach inside of a closed box? Grab an item inside and pull it out? Or suppose a character had a targeting sense that allowed him to see and target someone inside an enclosed room. Could he then use his stretching to attack someone inside from outside the room? Thanks.

Re: Hero System and Rpg.net I'm not at all familiar with the rpg.net forums. But for what it's worth, looking at it today, there's a pretty positive thread talking about Foxbat: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=311653 Although there was some dislike(I wouldn't quite call it strong enough to be hate) for 5th edition, there's at least a decent number of people there with positive memories of Champions and the Hero system.

Re: Newb needs build help Personally, I'd go with the no-range EB rather than a hand attack. If it were a hand attack, then STR would add to it, which feels awkward to me for the special effect being used. Otherwise, I like how Thia Halmades did it.

Re: Running jokes in your campaign Several years ago in a Shadowrun campaign, one player had an Ork with a crazy high body score, as well as multiple cyber/bioware enhancements that made this guy nigh impossible to kill. Sure, you could give him deadly wounds and put him down, but you could bet that after the combat he'd be back on his feet in no time, usually more quickly than others who had much more mild injuries. This lead to the player being somewhat, well, reckless in combat. When the foes were no big worry, this was fine. But against tougher foes, he'd often go down. He soon became our resident "red-shirt", the guy who was killed(okay, being given a deadly wound isn't necessarily fatal in SR) to prove the situation was dangerous. So to this day, when it becomes clear a combat is dangerous, someone will remark, "This would kill Steve."

Re: GMs: Funniest Character Sheet Mistakes You've Seen. I think I'd get in trouble if I discussed one character's "cumcussion grenade". Obvious mispelling that I've never had the heart to tell him about. Same character also had a power called "confidance". He thinks he can dance well maybe? Another had a psyche lim "cloustrophobia". It seems like that should be funny, but I haven't found a meaning for clous. Haven't looked too hard either, though...

Re: The Question write up? So many great moments from JLU. My favorite: Supergirl: Have you been going through my garbage? Question: Please...I go through everyone's garbage.

Re: Game Play Concept: No Limitations

Re: The Munchkin Build Contest Hey, sorry if my response came off as saying you could have built it better, as that wasn't the intention. I'm sure it worked well for the character, and sounds like it could have been a reasonable power that I might approve as a GM. Given the topic, I was suggesting ways to make it more munchkiny.

Re: TK & Martial Arts? While I haven't dealt with a TK MA, I have both played and GMed stretching Martial Artists. They do present some interesting challenges and can do some cool things, but I didn't consider them unbalancing. I would imagine they are similar in ways. The main difference I can think of is the stretcher doesn't have a range penalty and can benefit from stretching velocity damage, but can't really go beyond the stretching inches purchased, while the TK has effectively much longer range, but has to deal with range penalties. I'd imagine that would even out pretty well. I'd allow it in my game, but like all unfamiliar things, I'd keep a close eye on it. I definately would consider it a separate martial art to do it with TK than with your body. If you use AP limits, I'd also want to consider the total AP used in the attack; if you have a 60 point limit, and it's a 60 poink TK with maneuvers on top of it, it might not necessarily be broken, but I would think that'd indicate somewhere to apply a little more scrutiny.

Re: The Munchkin Build Contest Why stop there? I had a player once try a similar scheme. He upped the return rate to 1 hour(+1), added Variable Effect at the +1 level and chose his favorite 4 characteristics/powers, and bought up to the 60AP limit in increased maximum(20 extra max effect for 10 points). End result was a character that could add 25 points to 4 characteristics/powers that wouldn't wear off for an hour. Every idle moment, he'd be boosting himself to make sure he was never without it. Basically, by spending 60AP(it was in a mp and had lims that made it cheaper still), he was essentially adding 100 total points pretty much all the time. I'd bet it could be done even more efficiently than that, which is scary. It was the first character that I couldn't find a direct rules violation in that I had to reject anyway. I praised him for his creativity, but had to say, no way.

Re: Code vs Killing (Total)

Re: Code vs Killing (Total) I'd like to add my amen to that as well. I recently had a problem in a game I am running where some characters really weren't roleplaying their CvKs. I was having to point their codes out often, since they didn't really seem to effect much. They had an accidental death, but I wasn't sure it made much of an impression. But the problem got fixed in a way I was very happy with. I put them up against a superstrong villain with a CvK(they're not neccesarily just for heroes!), who, at a critical moment in the fight, pulled his punch against a member of the group who's defenses he was uncertain of. As a result, they were able to rally and take him down, when it easily could have gone the other way. When questioned about it, the villain pointed out that he really could have knocked him into next week, but he couldn't be sure if the hero could take it, and killing wasn't something he was willing to do. He explained that he had to hold back, although he threatened he wouldn't make that mistake a second time. An NPC contact reiterated the point, emphasising how even this villain was careful with his powers, even though it cost him the fight, and there was a nice, well roleplayed discussion of power and responsibility. They got the point, and it mostly happened naturally in the game(I did give at least one GM lecture, but the game events had far greater effect). Since then, there's been some great roleplay in the group regarding the CvK's, particularly around the interplay between the characters that have them and those that don't. It's great when those things can work themselves out ingame. Sometimes an example helps a lot.

Re: Code vs Killing (Total) One important difference between a moderate, strong, or total code according to the book is how rational the person is when faced with the situation. Moderate: The code will decide their choice of action. Somewhat easy to change their mind though; an EGO roll at +5 is required. I picture this as the guy who doesn't beleive in killing, but can be reasonable and make rational decisions based on the situation. He'd take one life to save 50. He most likely will kill the villain stealing the nuclear bomb. Strong: The character takes irrational actions where killing is involved. This is the guy who goes out of his way to not kill. When confronted with a situation where he might have to kill for a very good reason (like the villain and the nuclear bomb example again), he might be able to make himself do it, but isn't going to like it much. Even then, I think he'd only choice that after all other options are exhausted. He'll likely beat himself up over it for a long time, and wonder if there might have been a better way. Total: Totally irrational. Will not kill. Ever. Teammates can't talk him into it. His dedication to not kill is so complete, that he simply cannot be reasoned with or persuaded on the matter. His conviction is unmovable. The EGO roll to overcome it is at a minimum of -5, but is at the GM's discretion whether to allow the roll at all. Personally, I only allow exceptions to a total code in extraordinary circumstances, like kill the villain or the world is destroyed kind of thing. This guy not only wouldn't kill the villain stealing the bomb, but he'd probably step in front of the bullet if a teammate tried to kill him, or stop his teammate in some other manner. He'd prefer to find another way to stop the villain. Like others have said, a solid definition of the code is very important. For example, if a player tells me that his character would have no issue killing invading aliens, and I have a game world where such events are common, the I'd reduce the frequency on the disadvantage. If a target being "irredemably evil" voids the limitation, then I'd reduce the disad proportionally to how common an "iredeemably evil" trait is in my world.

Re: Fear of the dark I too have a hard time separating what from how, so apologies if this is less helpful. I would really need to know the effect in play. If the power paralyzes the target in fear, I'd make a BOECV Entangle. If the character says "Boo!", then I'm buying extra PRE for presence attacks, and us the presence attack chart. If the character is frightening in appearance, some mix of a negative COM and extra PRE, and again using the presence attack mechanics may be appropriate. If it's a fear spell, then a PRE Drain is probably appropriate, with the appropriate effects for negative PRE if it does well enough. If the ability is intended to make someone run away, the Mind Control with the single command "Run away" is a good suggestion. Heck, if the effect of the fear is that the target has difficulty fighting, then Change Environment with an adjustment to CV for it's effect becomes attractive. Lots of ways to do it.

Re: Bricks and Improvised Weapons Essentially correct... unless you consider a character an object of opportunity. I never would... unless it was an unconscious character, then he's free game. Anything that can dodge or otherwise resist is not considered an "object" let alone one of opportunity. Anything else easily picked up is fair game. That's pretty much exactly how I'd run it in my games.