coach

Why not just "Flight" and chase the bugger down? I like the Force Wall the best, actually. Just put it in front of him and let him take damage from hitting it.

Had a situation come up the other day in the game regarding entangle. The druid had an area affect, continuous, personal immunity 1d6/2def entangle. The idea was that he summoned plants up around him that kept on grabbing whatever was nearby. Now, my understanding of continuous attacks is thus: the attack goes off on every one of the attackers phases and on any segment that a new target moves into the area. The area was 6" radius. So, the bugbear, who has a 35 STR, moves into the area and wants to get to the druid, who is at the center. She hits the outside hex and is immediately entangled. I give her a freebie casual STR roll to break out and she fails that. She then makes a full STR roll and easily breaks out with the more-than-double BOD that allows her to have a full phase left. She then has 5 more hexes of entangle to move through. Does the entangle re-grab her in every hex? Can she make a full STR roll in each one and keep moving as long as she doubles the BOD of the entangle? Can she make a casual STR roll in each hex and keep moving as long as she exceeds the entangle? How would you work that? Thanks

Okay, so how would do this? In the movies, especially the martial artist types, you see lots of times where the hero hits the guy next to him while shooting his friend across the room. This is disallowed by the Multiple Power Attack, so how would you do it? Also, would you allow Rapid Fire or Sweep combined with the appropriate MPA? Using the book's example, could Defender shoot his target three times with his EB & Flash MPA?

I would rule that if you were using something very large, larger than a hex, then you would be targeting the hex. I would say that the target hex is DCV 3. I would probably also assess a few OCV minuses to the attack to simulate trying to hit somebody with something as unbalanced as a car. Also, note that a midsize car has 3 DEF and 14 BOD, so you can't do more than 17d6 with it.

Yeah, that's what I figured you wanted; that's what I was trying to give you. So, drop on a 1d6k Penatrating, Continuing, again linked to the first RKA. That should do the trick, more or less.

Yes, that is the thing about a harpoon, they were nearly always connected by a rope. Also, note that in modern times, harpoons are not necessarily thrown. They are often shot from a gun. So, you'd want RKA, possibly with a -1 to OCV to simulate the fact that the rope would tend to pull it off a bit. For buying the rope, I'd say 15" Stretching, No Non-combat, No Stretching Damage, Only to Grab, Linked to KA, Only if KA Does Body, No Manipulation, No Lifting. Then for the barbs on the harpoon, buy Clinging +40 STR, Linked to KA, Holds at 10 STR per 1 BOD That The KA Does. The damage of the Harpoon itself, if jabbed or thrown, should probably be about the same as a Spear, 1.5d6k, -1 OCV, 10 STR Min. If shot from a hand-held gun, I'd give it a 2d6k, STR Min 10. If it is one of the big ones shot from an emplaced gun, I'd say about 2.5d6k - 3d6k. Hope that helps.

So, if you put Find Weakness into a Multipower, when you switched that slot off, would your found weaknesses go away? Also, can you use Find Weakness in a Combined Power Attack?

Heh, I guess I did miss that because in that case I don't understand the question. Your question, "Has anyone else ever tried this, or had someone in a campaign attempt such a trick? What sort of ground rules would you set for such a character so as to limit the obvious potential for abuse?" I mean, it's your campaign and your NPC, right? Just let him build permanant objects until you think it is enough. Was there something else I missed? Personally, I don't know that I would allow Charges in a VPP at all. I don't like the way it is written and think it is terribly abusive. It just seems like freebie Limitations.

It looks good, but I'm just wondering why you spent points on stuff you can do with mundane items of no points. You have the 2d6 magebolt, but that's not really any different than a heavy longbow. Sure, it is defended by ED, so you may get a few more points through, but most FH characters/monsters have nearly the same PD/ED. In terms of combat effectiveness, I would think that you would do better to take those 20 points and drop them into STR, SPD, and DEX, and the necessary WF, and just use a bow. And those are all useful in other situations, too. Or, if you want to keep it more Magic-y, use those points to buy and Aid to those CHA. And the magelight spell, too. Why not just pick up a torch or lantern. Sure, it's only 4 points, but with 150, every point counts. I have always found it most effective as a mage to not spend points on stuff you can get for free.

Well, if you are worried about abuse of VPP by a player, you should probably just disallow that player from having one. I regularly play VPPs and know of SO many ways to abuse them. One of the easiest is Aid. Just take your Aid whatever and jack it up to were it fades per day and smack it on you and all your friends every day, and all of a sudden everyone is more powerful than their points reflect. So, really, the only way to control VPP abuse is just to say, "you can have a VPP only if you don't abuse it." Trying to make up special rules for each abuse will drive you insane.

You know, I have noticed this same thing over the years, that limitations are not particularly limiting. I tend to play gadget-flled heroes. I just like building things. And the focus limitation is nice to have. I doubt if I lose my focii one in ten games. But other people in the group don't necessarily take any or many limitations. And somehow I always end up with the weakest combat character. Probably because I spend all my extra points on non-combat skills. I would consider myself an "Experienced Hero Guy" according to the above definitions. I, as a GM, am guilty of the same crime of not enforcing limitations very well. I'm starting a new game soon, so I am going to try it and see. I do tend to agree that the limitation points do not seem particularly well-balanced. Using the fast-shot and slow-shot example from above, rather than compare it to Stun or CV, since that seems to be unpopular, let's just tack on some extra dice to see how it comes out. Version 1: Natural Blasters Fast-Shot: Half-Phase, 12d6 EB = 60 Real Points. Slow-Shot: Full-Phase, 18d6 EB = 60 Real Points. Version 2: Gun Blasters Fast-Shot: Half-Phase, OAF, 12d6 EB = 30 Real Points. Slow-Shot: Full-Phase, OAF, 15d6 EB = 30 Real Points. In the second version, Slow-Shot seems to be penalized 3d6 for no apparant reason. As was pointed out, since they both have OAF and are otherwise identical, that Limitation should affect them both equally. But Slow-Shot lost 3d6 off his Full-Phase Limition in the second version. Does it limit him any less in this case? I wouldn't think so. Well, except that he wouldn't have to worry about that extra phase if somebody took his OAF, but then he'd have worse things to worry about. What I have noticed, though, is that in most cases, as long as people build to a concept that they like, the limitation issue doesn't seem to come up. Nobody ever seems to care that I usually have "more" points because I have taken lots of limitations. I guess we don't try to compete with each other, but see it more as a team. So, if one of us is a little more powerful, so much the better! As long as you don't have any Munchkins playing, it rarely seems to be a big deal.

One thing ya'll seem to be forgetting is that WF basically comes with 3 free combat skill levels with the weapon in question. That is, without the WF, you take a -3. So, just by merit of an officer having a WF makes him significantly better than a normal. On the other stuff, well, the one officer I know, who underwent all this supposedly rigorous testing and training, has a tested 80 IQ. So, don't give me this "rigorous" stuff. She passed all those tests. I can outrun her. I have more stamina that she does. I'm more agile than she (and *nobody* would mistake me for a dancer). And I'm a gamer, so you know I won't be qualifying for the triathalon anytime soon. And yet she passed all those tests. And, lots of the cops who have pulled me over over the years have been WAY overweight. Actually, I do know some very nice cops who are in okay shape and decently intelligent, but I would not give them any higher rolls in their primary skills than I would any other professional. And none of them are what I would consider body-builders. Sure, they go through training, but so do plumbers, computer programmers, doctors, and game-designers. And there are many professions that go through WAY more training than police. Remember that an 11- roll means that you are "Competent" at something. That's really all you need to make a living at something. And a 4 CV is way better than a 3 CV. Just a point or two can make a huge difference in champs, you know, particularly at the low end. Anyway, I think that 31 points is way enough for a competent normal. If you add in the proper Perqs that I forgot, you probably get around 40 points, and that's quite a bit for an *average* police officer. That's all the original question asked about. Sure, some will indeed be higher, and some will be lower, but that's a good average.

Great! Wow! That is sweet! I think it may overestimate a 1st level character a little, but other than that, that is a fantastic evaluation. I especially like the ability to kind of tell how many points a given level would be. But, I think I may have mis-stated my question. Actually, looking back at it, I really did mis-state it. What I'm looking for is some website where I can just go and pick out conversions of D&D monsters to Hero. See what I've got is a Fantasy Hero campaign that kind of has a D&D-ish flavor to it. So, I might want to through in a Neo-Otyug or two. But, wow, keep posting on what you're working on, that is so cool. Thanks!

Oops, yeah, I did miss out on the Perquisites to allow them to carry and enforce the law. But, for your average patrolman, I think you may be overestimating their skill/ability level.

Okay, this may actually be a little over the top, but it's pretty close. Some who take good care of themselves will have a little higher STR and CON, and others who don't will have a little lower. Average Police Officer Val Char Cost Roll Notes 11 STR 1 11- 115kg; 2d6 11 DEX 3 11- OCV: 4; DCV: 4 11 CON 2 11- 10 BODY 0 11- 10 INT 0 11- PER Roll 11- 11 EGO 2 11- ECV: 4 13 PRE 3 12- PRE Attack 2½d6 10 COM 0 11- 3 PD 1 Total PD/rPD: 3/0 2 ED 0 Total ED/rED: 2/0 2 SPD 0 Phases: 6, 12 4 REC 0 22 END 0 25 STUN 3 Movement: Runnning: 6"/12" Swimming: 2"/4" Leaping: 2"/4" Cost Skills, Perks Roll 2 WF; Common Melee Weapons: Clubs, 0; Small Arms: Small Arms, 2 8 +1 Level w/All Combat 3 +1 Level w/Pistols 2 KS: Police Procedures 11- 1 Criminology 8- Costs: Char.: 15 Disad.: 0 Powers: + 16 Base: + 25 Total: = 31 Total: = 25

So, I don't think I understand. Are you saying you want really powerful mages to be way more powerful than really powerful fighters? I mean, if so, who would play a fighter? Personally, I think that D&D is horribly unbalanced and can't imagine why you would want to continue that tradition in a more balanced system. For example, in our first D&D 3E game, we started at 12th level. I made a Wizard, Titlethwarp Barbekeller, not so much because I wanted to play a Wizard, but more because nobody else did. However, as the game progressed, it eventually became "Titlethwarp and his lackeys", despite the fact that we were all the same level. At one point, it got so ridiculous that I took out three armies of 500 people each while the rest of the party took out a total of about 12 individuals. I was mainly slowed down by the fact that my teammates were in the way and I had to get them out of the way before I could deal with the third army. How is that fair? Why would you want to continue with that format if you didn't have to? So, of course, in our second game, where we started at 1st level, we all started with fighter-types and switched to magic-using types after 2nd level. By 9th (total) level, we were WAY more than a match for any CR 9 threat. I would suggest just having the mages pay for each spell individually. So, you have to pay 160 points to destroy an army with the wave of you hand? That seems totally appropriate to me. Why shouldn't the fighter-types and thief-types not be allowed the same amount of power? I would think that if you go with the Multipower version of the mages, you wll end up with a party full of mages. Of course, if that's what you want, then that would be cool. But, anyone would have to be a fool to take anything else. And, if they do, they will quickly be left behind and find themselves mostly useless. We have played numerous Fantasy Hero games and find Hero System to be extremely well-suited to it. In all of those we have gone with the "pay for each spell separately" way of buying magic. And pretty much every time, the Mages still come out ahead of things. The main issue, of course, is that mages have access to a vast variety of abities that no one else does. You want some healing, don't look to the fighter. You need some clairvoyance, don't ask the thief. But, we have found it to be decently balanced just to do it that way. YMMV.

Yeah, some of the other systems have something that might come down to "Accidental Activation", which is where a power would go off without the character willing it to do so. For some reason, we never got one of those in 5 editions of Champs. So, from your examples I'd go with taking it as a Disad, like the others said. However, the question still remains, what to do if it were something good instead of bad. What if, every time a character sneezed, he got 2d6 Healing? I think that I would probably buy it Always On, with all the appropriate Advantages, and then give it a big Conditional Power Limitation, "Only works when X happens". The limitation bonus would be based on how often the triggering event happened, but I'd say at least a -1, probably more like a -2. Even higher if it was something that didn't happen every day, like sneezing. Unfortunately, I think that this would still come out as way too expensive for its utility. What is the exact effect you are looking for? Maybe there is some other way around it.

In general I would never allow power frameworks in a FH game. They are just too powerful. One thing mentioned in another thread is that the best use of mages is out of combat. Sure, your fighter can do 6DC at 13OCV with his greatsword, but if he's dying, he's really going to want that healing that the mage has. Or, if he needs to get some info, he's gonna be calling for the telepathy or clairsentience. And who's gonna get him across that 1000' chasm but the mage with flying. You let a mage have a 4d6 Flash in your campaign and you're gonna see what a pain the butt that is. Make it AE and for 40AP you have all your bad guys floundering around all the dang time. I mean, how many people actually have flash def. So, in general, I would say you would want to limit your mages to buying each power individually. They can layer up the limitations to -2 or -3 pretty easily and that keeps it more or less in line. If they are smart enough to take utility spells (Tunneling, Aid, Invisibility, Desolid are some others that are particularly useful), then you will see that they really are not that underpowered. They are just differently powerd than the fighters.

Hey Ya'll, Does anybody know of any good info on converting D&D 3 characters and monsters to Hero System? If someone could recommend where much of this has already been done, that would be great! Thanks!

Yeah, I think a lot of people have missed the whole roll-playing vs role-playing aspect of the game. My group can go through significant portions of a game night without ever rolling any dice. But does that mean that the numbers on the paper don't mean anything? Of course not. We just take them into account when we are ROLE playing. So, Jimmy has a 10 COM and Johnny has a 20 COM. They both go out and are trying to pick up girls in the bar. Who do you think is going to do better? We play it out verbally, of course, but also take into account those things when we do it. Now, if Jimmy bought Seduction at a 17-, then he would probably do better. There's a lot of the just plain old personal interaction stuff that we do without much dicing. And in that case, COM can have a significant influence. As can PRE. Or even things like STR or Distinctive Features. You don't have to roll for everything just to tell you how the characters will react. For my own PC's I pretty much always give them at least a 16 COM, and I'm more of a number-cruncher than most. It's fun to have good looking characters and it helps out when trying to make nice with people. Heck, in one of the funniest COM related stories we had, in my Gamma World game, the other PCs forced one of the players to have plastic surgery to fix some of his scars and bring his COM up from 6 to at least 10. He was freaking out too many of the townsfolk in their travels and they got tired of "looking" at him. Use that stuff for role-playing bits and it makes it a lot more fun.

Okay, am I totally wack or has the site been down for a few days?? I tried to surf over here just a few minutes ago and I was still getting that java error stuff. Then I did a google search on Hero Games and of course this came up. So, on a whim I clicked on in and voila!, there was the site. I had even checked it on two different computers and two different browsers. Maybe it's just too much sun.

Hmmm... Most of my campaigns are non-superheroic, so it's a little different. To learn a new skill, you usually have to have a teacher, which aren't always around. In general, I ask players to document what skills/abilities they are working on and then let them know when they are done. Usually, I limit it to spending 1 EP per week of game time. They can usually spend it on stuff they are currently using without needing a teacher, like if they want to buy more combat skill levels. And they can teach each other, of course. Sometimes, for harder skills, I'll say that it takes 2 weeks per point to learn a new skill. And, of course, they have to document what they are working on or they don't get credit for the time passed. They can even pre-study, if they want. That is, even if they have no EPs to spend, they can go ahead and start spending some time learning a skill and then pick it up when they get the EPs. This has always worked really well for me and we get some very interesting skill sets as people go along and find that they need new and different stuff.

Well, over the years, I have noticed that when you need to land a Move-Through, you generally can, either through teamwork or other circumstances, so I don't think the CV modifiers are that restricting, they just make you think a little more creatively. And 11d6 is a decent amount of damage, sure, but not when compared to 22d6. I did like the comparison to Rapid Fire, that does show other ways to get outstanding damage. I'm not sure what I'm looking for here. Just to see if anyone else had noticed the problem and if any GMs had found a good way to address it. Of course, she is on my side, so I'm not too upset about it, but we don't want to mess up the campaign. Any other thoughts are appreciated.

So, is this an NPC? If so, I'd still go with the "special effect" method of making it a plot device and not worry about the points. Since it doesn't really effect combat directly (except that he might be more reckless), it is more of just a "the villain keeps coming back" plot element, kind of like the villain who keeps getting out of prison. However, if you are looking at it for a player character, I would also suggest buying it as the Resurrection option with some triggered, highly limited Duplication. Although, I think, as a GM, I would probably disallow this power as being very un-heroic.

Hey, I don't know if this has been discussed before, and I have never really thought about it, but it came up in a restricted game we were playing the other day. The situation was that the game is a pretty low-point super-hero game with a 12DC damage cap. So, we have a brick with a 60 STR and 30" of Leaping. Normally, she does the same damage as most everyone else. But, she put a Move-Through on this giant millipede we were fighting and can crank it up to 22d6. This is a HUGE difference between what our EBer and Mentalists can do, especially in a low-level campaign. So, what can you do? I mean, it's not fair to limit a brick's movement, is it? But, getting double duty out of your movement seems a little unfair to the other character types. This is usually just an issue with a brick since most other character type cannot benefit significantly from movement damage. And even most speedster types take movement damage into account when calculating their DC for damage limit consideration. So, what do ya'll do about this? Thanks.