dataweaver

Re: How To: the Photon Tube IIRC, "Spreading" has restrictions on it such as the multiple targets needing to be next to each other. The Photon Tube wouldn't have those restrictions; in that way it's more like a Selective Area Effect. It differs from Selective Area Effect in that it gets weaker the more targets you go for. Still looking for info on the Enhanced Senses issue...

The concept: my gadgeteer character has a device called a "photon tube"; this hand-carried device is capable of detecting and/or emitting almost any wavelength or wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, from radio waves up through gamma rays. A built-in computer is able to analyze the detected radiation and to modulate the emitted radiation, both with a great degree of precision. Given proper software, the photon tube can be used as a radiation analyzer, a radar or ladar, a flashlight, aa radio and/or laser communications device, a radio/radar jammer, a dazzler laser, or (at higher intensities) as a very precise multi-target laser weapon. Its analysis software when combined with the "ladar" option lets it perform a spectrographic analysis on whatever objects it detects, figuring out its chemical composition. Right off the bat, I'm thinking that the following powers will be appropriate: Energy Blast Enhanced Senses (HRRP, Radar, and others) Flash Flash Defense Images My first problem is this: "electromagnetic radiation" spans two of the Sense Groups: Radio and Sight. Furthermore, it fully covers both of them. Do I pay an extra 5 points to extend "High-Range Radio Perception" to also include Sight-Group emissions? Or do I need to purchase a separate Sight-Group analog to HRRP? If I can extend HRRP into the Sight Group as well as the Radio Group, how do I purchase the Enhanced Sense modifiers such as Discriminatory, Analyze, and Targeting: do I purchase them for a single Sense (the expanded HRRP), or does the fact that the Sense crosses Sense Group boundaries mean that I should purchase them as if for a Sense Group? Ditto for Radar. My next problem: is the purchase of Analyze for Radar sufficient to account for the "spectrographic analysis" capabilities of the PT? My last problem: The EB function of the PT is capable of singling out a bunch of individual targets in a manner similar to a Selective Area Effect; however, doing so requires the PT to divide the beam between the various targets, weakening the individual attacks in a manner similar to "spreading the beam"; how would I account for this?

Re: Always On as a Disad I'm aware of the Spirit rules, and I like the concept - OTOH, there are differences between a Desolidified character and a Spirit (such as the lack of BODY and STUN). Still, if I tweak the Spirit rules to more closely conform to the effects of Desolidification, or vice versa, I could then add Desolidifiaction to the Size Powers group - which is actually more of a "powers that don't react well to Always On" group than anything else. Likewise with Density Increase, and I might want to consider a few more of the Body Change Powers.

Re: Too many stats in Hero How about this: for players with low intelligence or savvy, let the GM make an INT or PRE roll (respectively) on the character's behalf any time that the player's choice is, in the GM's opinion, stupid or crass. On a successful roll, he gives the player the option to reconsider his choice, giving hints as to why the player's choice might be inappropriate and possibly even suggesting a better alternative if the roll went especially well. The inverse - requiring a roll any time the player comes up with a brilliant idea that the character probably wouldn't have thought of - doesn't work nearly as well; in these cases, a better alternative is to take the player aside and advise him about his poor roleplaying.

Re: Too many stats in Hero It depends on what you mean by "Derived Stats". In GURPS, you have ST, DX, IQ, and HT as primary attributes; Hit Points, Fatigue, and Speed are clearly derived traits. In addition to these, though, there are issues such as Will and Alertness (which technically aren't stats - yet - but can be thought of as traits derived from IQ. Likewise, the Reaction Modifier can be thought of as another "pseudo-Attribute", hidden in the guise of numerous Ads and Disads which provide bonuses and penalties to it. Then there are things such as "Fearlessness" and the like - other Advantages and Disadvantages which can potentially produce results equivelent to additional Characteristics. BESM does something similar, with its equivelent to Perquisites/Talents/Powers (called "Attributes") providing situation-dependent modifiers to its three Stats. In addition, you have Health Points, Energy Points, Attack Combat Value, Defense Combat Value, and an optional Shock rating. OTOH, Hero System also has a few "hidden Characteristics" in the form of Running, Leaping, Swimming, Mental Defense, OCV, DCV, ECV, and possibly others. The only real difference between Hero and these other systems is that Hero doesn't disguise its complexity: it presents all of its Primary Characteristics and six of its Figured Characteristics in one massive lump, making it look messier than it really is. And even eight Primary Characteristics can be made far more palatable if properly presented.

Re: Always On as a Disad OTOH, applying a -25 point "Adder" to begin with (and thus reducing its cost prior to applying Advantages down to 15 points) would lower the initial cost of Desolid before applying any Advantages to it. Net result: Permanent Desolidification would cost 30 points (for a 50-point saving vs. Persistent Desolidification). Here's my problem: under the current rules, permanent Desolidification (that is, Persistent and Always On) costs the character 54 points - even more than standard Desolidification costs. In my experience, the practical drawbacks associated with being completely unable to interact with the physical world aren't even close to being offset by the inability of the physical world to affect you. Even the 30-point total that I came up with above seems excessively expensive for the benefits vs. hindrances provided; a cost of 0 plus or minus 15 points seems more reasonable to me. So I'm trying to figure out how to get the system to give me something closer to this result.

Re: Always On as a Disad

Re: Too many stats in Hero It does, doesn't it? To my mind, that's a good thing - especially considering how few changes are needed to accomplish it.

Re: Too many stats in Hero The only problem with Fuzion (in terms of Champions) was that Champions: the New Millenium didn't have a sufficiently flexible Powers system. Other than that, it was at least as good as Hero System (and, in many ways, is the one that I prefer). Especially since the Powers system has been addressed quite nicely by Jason Dour's "Heroic Abilities" add-on - google for it. As for "too many stats": I disagree. The problem is that Hero System's characteristics are poorly organized. Restructure into two sets of Primary Characteristics: Physical (STR, DEX, CON, BODY) and Mental (INT, EGO, PRE). Replace Comeliness with an Appearance Perquisite patterned after Reputation; STR and PRE are analogs of each other (except for PRE's participation in Interaction skills); INT can be treated as a mental analog of DEX (I'd base ECV off of INT instead of EGO), while EGO can be treated as a mental analog of CON. All you need to complete the symmetry is a mental analog of BODY - call it MIND, and use it in a manner similar to Sanity in Call of Cthulu. In terms of Figured Characteristics, Presence Defense can be revised to conform to the same type of mechanics as Mental Defense; it then becomes the mental analog of Physical Defense, while Mental Defense becomes the mental analog of Energy Defense. Adjust SPD, REC, END, and STUN so that their formulae are derived evenly from both sides of the split. End result: you have even more Characteristics than you did before; but the ones that you have are more structured and thus less intimidating.

Re: Always On as a Disad Hmm... you have a point. Consider this, then: turn "Always On" into a negative-value Adder, patterned after the cost structure of Physical Limitations (so that the more severe the problems associated with not being able to shut it off, the more points get subtracted).

Re: Always On as a Disad Well, that's kind of the point: the Always On Limitation doesn't always give enough of a discount (there's no way for a 15-point power to get a 25-point discount with _any_ Limitation; but the concept behind Always On is one of the few ones where just this sort of thing is occasionally more appropriate to the concept).

What do people think of the idea of using Physical Limitations to represent Always On, instead of calling it a Limitation? The severity would represent how much trouble not being able to shut the power off would cause, and the frequency would represent how common the problems are likely to occur. It would also potentially allow for particularly weak powers with potentially severe drawbacks to have a "net" negative cost, much like a cheap Multiform linked to Accidental Change can end up giving you points overall.

If the effect that you're looking for is the GL-like energy constructs, you could get a lot of mileage out of Force Wall and TK, where the Force Wall has an Advantage (no more than +1/4) "can be moved and reshaped at will", and the TK has the Limitation "must be used through the Force Wall" (probably a -1/4). Meanwhile, you might consider a Multipower instead of a VPP.

There have been examples of Green Lantern using his ring to wipe someone's memory, or to restore clarity of thought. Likewise, there have been examples of Green Lantern using his ring to fly through solid objects, effectively acting as if he was intangible. He has time travelled, and has travelled to at least one "alternate dimension" - the "world within the ring". There are some things that he has never done to my knowledge, such as teleportation, summoning the spirits of the dead, or foretelling the future. To that end, I think that Chaosliege has the right idea in principle: let him do anything that he has the points to do, based on the size of his VPP; but make the "typical" uses (flight, images, energy constructs, life support force field, instant change into costume, etc.) effectively automatic (I'd go so far as to bypass any Ego roll in cases such as these), and apply substantial penalties to particularly inappropriate activities. Want a touchstone for what's appropriate and what isn't? If it can be easily explained in terms of manipulating energy (especially the green energy stored in the ring), it's probably appropriate; if it deals with sensing or altering something physical, it's less appropriate, but still acceptable. If it deals with a person's mind, it might be appropriate; if it's clearly in the realm of the supernatural, it's extremely inappropriate.

I'd also consider something to the effect of adding the "Doesn't Require a Control Roll" Advantage, and then limiting that with "only if the power is explained in terms of an energy construct". That would let GL come up with new energy constructs with ease, but would require him to do some undefined sort of careful manipulation of his powers if he decides to use his ring to read someone's mind or to travel through time. Another possibility would be "disrupted by PRE Attacks": the VPP responds to successful Presence Attacks as if they were Drains or Suppresses, with EGO being used to resist and recover. This explains why GLs are required to be "fearless". Finally, there's the issue of the ring's charge. Depending on the version, this should be a "ceases to operate after 24 hours, until it's recharged" and "ceases to operate when the Central Power Battery is disabled", or it should be an END Reserve, with the REC being dependent on an OAF (the personal power battery).

If you're going to play up the "the only real limits are imagination and willpower", VPP is definitely the way to go - but forget the "Requires an EGO Roll" bit; VPP already requires a control skill to retool its capabilities, and that better reflects the role of creativity in the process. Willpower (and thus EGO) comes into play in terms of how large the pool is; just tell the player that the VPP can never have more points in it than, say, 5 times the character's EGO... But in truth, the "boundless options" aspect of GL's ring is not different from the tendency of Batman or Iron Man to have just the right gadget for the job at hand - it's more a matter of a comic book convention than it is an actual superpower.

This is a common fallacy, but it simply isn't true. Ships with fast exhausts are more fuel-efficient than ships with slow exhausts, and can thus go faster given the same amount of fuel; but give any rocket enough fuel, and it will eventually be able to attain any sublight speed of your choosing. Reread my proposal; for normal space movement, noncombat speed is replaced with 1.8 billion inches per turn (IOW, the speed of light). True, I neglected to include the effects on mass of relativistic velocities; but the vast majority of games won't need that. IOW, those of us who prefer Hard SF games Just Aren't Getting It. Let me try this again, as I'm apparently still not being understood: I am not trying to replace any core rules in Hero. If you are concerned mainly that the game plays smoothly and are willing to sacrifice believability for that goal, you would simply use the established rules as is; my proposal is not intended for you. My proposal is for those who find the unrealistic aspects of the Hero movement system to be something that's interfering with their enjoyment of the game; as such, it's presented as an alternative to the official rules, not as a replacement of them. Those who aren't interested in them ought not use them. The trick is to come up with more realistic rules without sacrificing playability. Just because other games have thrown playability to the wind in favor of realism in the past doesn't mean that every effort geared toward introducing realism has to do likewise. In short, I don't want to hear about how TNE was so unplayable, or how a certain anime-inspired game overdosed on realism and was thus unplayable (incidently, I suspect that an even bigger flaw in that case was a mismatch between an inherently unrealistic genre and an attempt to provide realistic rules for it). I would welcome commentary on how the proposals put forward in this thread are unplayable, and specifically what makes them so; that would give insight on how to improve things, or possibly convince me that I'm on a fool's errand. It would be useful. Rants about how realism sucks and shouldn't be a goal aren't. Finally, a major reason why I brought this up was that TUV and Star Hero make an attempt at more believable rules of the type that I'm looking for; unfortunately, they both bungle it badly by trying too hard to remain consistent with the (essentially unrealistic) core rules. They're clunky and rather unplayable, and they still don't achieve the believability that I'm looking for. What I've proposed is less clunky, more playable, and more believable as is than the official "realistic space movement" rules are; they only "fail" in that they're different from the core rules. If the Hero System has one flaw, it's that it attempts to force everything completely into its mold, no matter how innappropriate that may be.

So fix the Turn Mode rules, as I suggested above; bypassing them doesn't solve the problem. I disagree that you'd need to do a bunch of math every time you want to turn a ship; rather, you'd have to do some fairly simple math at the time you create the ship (take the square root of your combat speed to find out how fast you can go and still have a Turn Mode of 1; take the square root of twice your combat speed to find maximum speed for Turn Mode 2; square root of triple your combat speed for a Turn Mode of 3, and so on). This would be needed to provide realistic turn modes for other environments as well (where you don't always have the luxury of being able to accelerate in any direction you want to), so you might as well use it for normal space movement while you're at it. That said, vector-based movement has its advantages as well; it could be presented as another alternative to the "more realistic Turn Modes and Acceleration" model that I've been talking about. There's room for both, especially since vector-based movement can be summed up in under a paragraph.

It takes some effort and research, but the abilities of Green Lantern's ring can be catalogued fairly well: energy constructs (both physical and intangible) personal force field and life support flight, FTL travel, and time travel Desolidification limited Mind tampering and body alteration The ability to control the ring from a distance The ability to duplicate the ring A built-in "computer" with Universal Translator A built-in "homing beacon" and "emergency beacon" The ability to communicate with other rings The existence of an entire world "within" the ring Likewise with its restrictions: The ring requires focused willpower to function; therefore, anything that disrupts the wielder's concentration (such as a sufficiently successful Presence Attack) will disrupt the ring's abilities. The ring needs to be recharged on occasion; it can get the recharge from a dedicated power battery, but it can also get it from another ring or from a ring construct; all of the rings prior to the most recent one also had a twenty-four-hour time limit on their usage, possibly instead of the "END Battery" nature of the current version. Previous rings have had weaknesses built into them, most commonly to the color yellow or to wood. This restriction is apparently not essential to the operation of the ring, as has been claimed in the past. (The above was derived from the Green Lanter Corps website, specifically http://www.glcorps.org/rings.html.) Of the above, the hardest to put into game terms is the "energy construct" power - you can come close with Images and a variation of Force Wall and TK (where the Force Wall is capable of being moved and/or reshaped, and the TK represents the force which the Wall is able to exert), but there have been instances of the ring creating things like fire extinguishers or autodoc chambers - devices which do things beind hitting hard or pushing things around. And then there are the instances where the constructs have the shapes and mobility of living creatures, if not the minds; they're not really the same thing as Summoning, but there are similarities.

At no point have I disputed that; I've great respect for the idea that playability trumps realism. But don't fall into the trap of thinking that these goals are mutually exclusive. Indeed, most of the suggestions above are geared toward greatly increasing realism while simplifying existing rules; the only ones that don't are the Turn Mode/Acceleration-per-inch rules and the jumping/swinging rules. The former was mentioned as part of an attempt to replace a badly kludged system aimed at fans of realism with a purpose-built (and thus more streamlined) system with the same goal. The latter didn't actually get any alternative rules suggested for it because I'm unsure of how to go about doing it without sacrificing playability.

I beg to differ; Turn Modes are essential for space travel, even of the realistic variety. Mind you, realistic space movement incorporates the effects of Sideways Movement automatically; the vessel doesn't need to be pointing in the direction that it's moving. However, a pilot who wishes to maintain a given speed while changing the direction that the vessel is moving is still going to find himself flying along a circular path with a radius determined by a combination of his acceleration and his speed - just like a Turn Mode. I really do wish that something like this had made it into Star Hero and TUV, in place of the "realistic space travel" section that did make it in - those of us who are interested in Hard SF realism don't want to deal with a compromising "twist the existing rules to fit" system, and - as the above post demonstrates - not all of the ramifications of realistic movement rules are intuitively obvious, so a "house rules" approach is likely to end up with oversights and/or clunky solutions (such as the "No Turn Modes in space" suggestion above, or the lack of a "Sideways Movement in space" suggestion in my original post).

I've recently picked up a copy of The Ultimate Vehicle, and was less than impressed by the way that it handled several aspects of vehicle movement - namely, gravity-powered and towed ground vehicles, the effect of wind on aircraft, and the so-called "realistic" rules for space movement. In all three cases, it seemed to me that the writer was trying to shoehorn realistic movement concepts into the existing (and inherently unrealistic) movement rules. This has substantial possibilities for Murphy's Rules, as well as unneccessarily cluttering up the ruleset with additional patches. What I'd like to see would be an alternate set of movement rules that's geared toward a more realistic treatment of the subject, primarily for use in Hard SF games. For instance, wagons, bobsleds, and sidecars wouldn't have a limited form of Gliding; instead, they'd have a specialized version of Environmental Movement common to vehicles: "rolls or slides easily" (1 pt at most), and the rules would include something about using STR to pull wagons or sleds. More importantly, I'd want a realistic treatment of movement in general. Forget applying Ads, Limits, and/or Adders to Movement Powers in order to simulate realistic movement; just change the underlying movement ruleset to one better tuned for realism. It's not like you'd ever want to use both rulesets at the same time... For instance: Equate "combat speed" to acceleration, and "noncombat speed" to Top Speed. Your Turn Mode equals your current speed times whatever multiple of your combat speed you're currently moving at (unless the vehicle has limited maneuverability); your acceleration per inch is based on whatever multiple of your combat speed you're currently moving at. "Normal Space" movement has no Noncombat Multiple, but noncombat speed can go as high as 1.8 billion inches per turn if you have the time and END to manage it (also, "Normal Space" movement only costs END when accelerating, decelerating, or turning, and the cost is based on the change in speed and/or the turning radius; it might work well as a new power akin to Flight). Of course, I'd also revise the jumping and swinging rules; the rules for how far you can jump or swing are fine, but the speed at which you can jump should be based entirely on the local gravity, independent of your inches of Superleap - and swinging should handle both how quickly you can swing and how long your swingline can be (think of the former as being a measure of how much tension the swingline can take before breaking). Finally, "tailwinds" should allow aircraft to exceed their purchased noncombat speed (in inches per turn), and by an amount equal to the windspeed. IMHO, this is in the same category as gravity-powered and towed ground movement, in that all three are "unpowered".