LoneWolf

10 STR gives you the benefit of a 10 STR. If you buy your STR down to 0 you lose the benefits of 10 STR, this is the reason you gain points for selling back STR. What do you lose when you buy your COM to 0 that justifies the 5 points? What are the effects of having a 0 COM? Every other primary stat in 6th edition has a major negative when the stat is reduced to 0. A character with 0 STR is at half DCV and must make a STR roll to make almost any action. A character with a 0 INT has to make an INT roll to perform any action at all. I don’t see anything similar to those that a 0 COM would cause. Being hideously ugly is better simulated with a distinctive feature.

At -10 COM would not cost anything, but if it gives a bonus to fear based PRE attacks it is giving a benefit for no points. This idea also runs counter to the fact that in 6th edition when a stat is brought to 0 or below there is always only negative consequences. I have to agree that this is supports the argument of eliminating COM more than keeping it.

You can use the rules for complementary skills to achieve a same result. Instead of imposing penalties for those without the background skills impose a straight penalty to the rolls. Those with the complementary skills will have gain a bonus to the roll from the background skill. There is also no reason skill rolls in the Hero System have to be completely binary. In some cases, making the skill roll by more than the required amount should give a better result. Other than in skill vs skill contests how much the character makes their roll, rarely seems to be factored in. A better way would be to give a more favorable result for achieving more than you needed, Using the example of criminology above making the roll will get that the character was killed with a high powered rifle, but making it by 3 gets the fact the shooter was firing from the north east, making it by 5 might gain all the above plus the fact the sniper probably fired from a window in the next building. This does require a lot more work from the GM but makes the game better.

The 41 points included the cost of raising the INT to 23. Some of those skills are usually very useful in most campaigns. Computer Programing is probably one of the most used non-combat skills in the game and in most modern campaigns gets you a lot of information. Security System is another skill that has a lot of uses. Electronics is often a complementary skill so is also well worth the points. Inventor and mechanics are more situational but still come up enough that they are handy. The background skill under the current rules only cost 13 points including the skill enhancer. Under the proposed rules they cost 23 points. In all honesty most player don’t know bother utilizing skills that well. When I write up a scientist character with lots of science skills, I find way to utilize those.

Role playing to me is taking on the role of the character and playing that. A huge part of the character is the skills and stats the player purchased when they created the character. When your character with no social skills and a PRE of 8 tries to make eloquent speeches to get people to agree with him that is not role playing, especially when he rolls an 18 for his persuasion. I have seen one person do this properly. It was in a Pathfinder game and the player was playing an elf with a low CHA (7 if I remember), and rolls a -1 for his diplomacy check. The character was an elf who was somewhat racist and believed that elves were better than other races. He was in a bar filled with humans trying to diffuse a bad situation. The player starts calling the humans in the bar something that would probably get me a warning on these boards. That is role playing.

Increasing the cost of skills which this does is not going to improve the game. In fact, it is likely to do the opposite. Too many players don’t even bother with skills even though they are fairly cheap. Making them cost more is just going make players even less willing to purchase skills. Currently most scientist characters use the option to make their science skills INT based to get decent rolls when they purchase multiple sciences. Knowledge based characters do the same thing. By combining this with skill enhancers you can get a decent number of relevant skills for fairly cheap. Under the current rules I can spend 41 points for a 23 INT, and a 14 or less on the following skills computer programing, inventor, security systems, electronic and mechanics, plus the skill enhancer scientist and 5 sciences skills all on 14 or less. Under the proposed rule you have to spend 48 points to get those skills and that does not include the cost of raising the characters INT. Once you factor in the INT the cost jumps up to 61 points. That does not even factor in perception. This is a very basic scientist build what is the justification for the extra cost? A Ninja or other martial arts concept is going to get equally hard. All this system does is to penalize certain concepts. This is not just a solution in search of a problem. This is solution that creates a problem.

I never understood the idea that you had to try and act out social interactions that your character should be able to do, but you cannot. That is not role playing, that is using your own skills in place of those of your characters. That is in fact the exact opposite of what good role playing should be. I am an engineer with decades of experience with computers, but I don’t force my non-technical players to give me detailed descriptions when they try to “hack” into a system. What I will do is after the roll come up with a reasonable description of how they did it. Real role playing would be to make the roll and then play out the results. For example, if the player is good at making speeches and fails his roll by a huge amount, they should start spouting of absolute garbage that is going to totally screw up the situation. That is role playing, not trying to salvage the situation. If the player makes the role give some suggestion on how they did it and maybe change their wording to something that actually sounds reasonable.

Chakra is not a game term so I am not sure how that would affect anything. That seems to be something that just be a special effect of how the power is bought without any real consequence.

One thing to keep in mind is that even the developers make mistakes at times. To me this is clearly one of those times. This has apparently been going on for a few editions. To me the fix is simple. For hardened defense you halve anything that is not hardened to the appropriate level. For impenetrable you apply the amount of appropriate impenetrable defense against the minimum damage. Even though this is not official I suggest that everyone adopt this as a house rule. I would also suggest that this be officially adopted and added to any upcoming FAQ.

Does the same thing apply to hardened defenses? If I have 2 points of hardened armor and an additional 10 points of resistant defenses and 10 more points in PD what happens when I get hit with an armor piercing attack. Do I have 12 resistant DEF and 22 total DEF, or do I have 7 resistant DEF and 12 total DEF? The wording of the two advantages in the book is identical. This makes those advantages worthless. For 6 points I can buy 1 PD, 1 ED resistant defense with x2 hardened and x2 impenetrable and ignore 99.999% of the attacks with those advantages. Make this a set of underwear (IIF) and the cost drops to 5 points. If I buy a 23 DEF force field, I can totally ignore the BODY on a 4d6 double AP attack. Even a 13 DEF force Field will on the average allow me to take no BODY from the 90-point power. A more sensible way would be to look at the defense purchased with the advantage and adjust the defense against the attack based on that. So, the AP attack will halve any non-hardened defense, and the impenetrable DEF will reduce the amount of “Minimum” damage. A character should get what they pay for, but they should pay for what they get. Spending 5 points to be completely ignore the AP and PEN advantage on all energy and physical attacks is insane.

The way we have always done it is to compare the defense with the impenetrable advantage against the minimum damage of the penetrating attack. So, if you are hit with a killing attack and the minimum damage is 4 and you have 2 points of impenetrable defense you reduce the minimum damage by 2. Basically, treat the penetrating portion of the damage as an AVLD with the defense being suitable impenetrable defense.

When I built a similar character I started by creating the base character without the armor. I then used that form as the base for all the other forms. I included all the perks like wealth and contacts because the character without the armor could set up situations where they could be used by the armored form. How hard is it going to be for “Tony Stark” to buy something and say Iron Man is going to pick it up or use it? Likewise Tony could tell his contact to give the information to Iron Man. What it comes down to is the form able to take advantage of the perk? For the unarmed form I did give it some minor control of machines. The character had an implant in his head that could control machines; he had to use the implant to control the armor when he wore it. So, if he had the armor on, he could not control machines.

It depends on the special effect of the multiform. When Bruce Banner changes into the Hulk he loses his scientific skills and memories. When Tony Stark put on different armor he is still Tony Stark. Hulk does not need to buy Bruce’s skills, But Iron Man should have all of Tony’s skills and memories.

Multiform can be used for many different things, and in some cases, they will have different skills. But that is not the case for changing a suit of armor. In this case the same person is inside every suit of armor. Even in the case of something like lycanthropy some perks should still be paid by all forms. Does your contact that you asked for a favor stop doing that favor when you turn into a bear only to start doing again when you turn back to a human? If your human form has a follower that you have watching something, does he disappear when you are in bear form? If the perk can provide ongoing assistance or will take time to accomplish that perk should be paid for in all forms.

One thing to keep in mind about combat sports is that they often have rules about what you can and cannot do in a match. Often things you would do in a fight may get you disqualified in a match. In a Robert Aspin Phule novel there was a fencing match that the marine was trained in a different martial art. He lost the match because he did not know the rules of fencing and used maneuvers that disqualified him. In a real combat he would have won, but lost the match due to a technicality. The use of the professional skill to determine a match works fairly well to simulate this type of thing.

Multiform can be used without being abusive but there should be some limits. All forms should have the skills and perks. Why does putting on a suit of armor cause Tony Stark to forget all his scientific knowledge or cause his business to disappear? It does not so the character should pay for them. Even if the business or other perk cannot be directly used by the character they can still provide ongoing benefits. When Tony Stark gives an order to Stark Enterprises they will still keep working on it when he is in the armor. I would also put a limit on the number of suits to keep it from being abused.

@unclevlad you may disagree with the rules, but the fact is that Stretching does not have to pay END more than one per turn. 6E V1 P127 in the section on constant powers under durations also states, “Once a character has turned a Constant Power on, all he has to do is spend END each Phase to keep it activated.” Stretching is a Body-Affecting constant power not an attack power. Does the character with 30M of running need to pay 4 times for his movement when he does a multiple Move By, Does the character that has Resistant Defense costing END have to pay every time he is hit? The Stretching is not the attack power any more than the running is. It is simply allowing the attack to be made. If you look at the top of the chart where you found the fact that linked to a constant power is worth ¼ less, you will see that there is a entry that states it is worth ¼ more if the greater power must be used at full power. So, basically in this case they two modifiers to the limitation cancel each other leaving the value at -1/2 which is what I said in the last post. I admit I was wrong about the STR, but even so that is probably not going to be that much. Many martial artists only have 15 STR so that would only be an extra 3 END to make 4 attacks. These powers are a perfect example of what Unified Power should be used on. The definition of Unified Power is that the individual components are actually aspect of a single power. I cannot think of a better example of a Unified Power. Besides if the images are drained there is no greater power so the lesser powers cannot work.

Stretching is a constant power, so you only have to pay END per phase no matter what how many limbs you are stretching. In fact, the amount of Stretching represents the total amount the character can stretch so if they are reaching into two locations it has to be divided up between the locations. So, it is only 4 END not 12. You also only have to pay END for STR once per round no matter how often it is used. This is a Ninja so that probably means most of his damage is coming from martial arts so other than STR and Stretching he should not need to use more END for attacking. So, assuming a 15 STR, that comes out to 5 END total for all his attacks unless he is using a weapon that cost END. He will need to pay the END for the image or buy them at 0 END. The images will almost need to be used at full so that will cancel out the lesser power being a constant and put the limitation back to -1/2. You could also take unified power for to reduce the cost further. Putting the linked power into a multipower would reduce the cost even further. This was done mostly off the top of my head so it may need to be fined tuned, but the concept is sound.

All game systems abstract combat to one degree or another. Hero System actually does this less than most other systems. Keep in mind that a segment in Hero System is 1 second, and a turn is 12 seconds. Most other games have longer time divisions so that leads to you being able to do more things in your action. In Pathfinder a round is 6 seconds in which each character gets to act once. In Hero System a character might be able to act anywhere between 1-4 times. Holding actions too me seems more realistic than trading of acting like seesaw. In the real world people wait for or try to create an opening instead of standing there trading blows. It allows for things like follow up attacks where the first attack is designed to put the character at a disadvantage so the next attack can take them down. That is a lot more difficult to achieve in other system than it is in Hero System. The downside of this is that the Hero System has more complexity so often new players have trouble figuring out how to pull of what they are trying to do.

Advanced player can already do a lot of this by holding actions like you suggested earlier or purchasing specific powers and skills. A beginning player thinks a high DEX means you go first, an advanced player realizes that a high DEX allow you to choose when you go.

From the looks of it you did. What Hugh is trying to say is that the Rules Question area is the wrong forum for this type of thing. As he mention very few people can respond there, and all you will get is an answer on how the rule works. You already know how the rule works and it looks like you want a discussion and feedback from others.

When someone is actively looking for something that is obviously a sight perception roll, but what about when they are not actively looking or listening. If a character is trying to use stealth on someone who does not know they are there, does the other they get a perception roll to notice them. Is that a sight only perception roll or does it include all senses. Also if character is trying to find someone do you allow them separate rolls for each sense? That would bog down the game considerably.

Someone earlier was commenting on being in the dark only giving a -4 penalty. The thing to realize is that your perception roll includes all your senses. If you make your roll by -4 you detect what you are trying to find by a sense other than sight. You still cannot see the person in the dark, but you have heard or smelled them. You still take all the penalties of not having a combat sense, unless of course you have another combat sense. A -4 is more significant than it seems. To the person with an 11 perception roll it reduces your chance by 47%, for a 15 or less it is still a 32% reduction.

It would give a huge advantage to faster characters as it would allow them to move attack and move again. Someone with a higher SPD and good movement would be able to keep out of reach when it is not their phase. This can be done somewhat with the current rules, but it is limited to specific maneuvers or requires a lot more movement. Normally if you want to attack and continue moving you use a move through or purchase a martial maneuver with the Fmove element. Move By cannot be combined with other maneuvers and you only get ½ STR for damage. It would also allow ranged characters to avoid exposing themselves by being behind something and only being able to be attacked when they are actually attacking. Just hide behind something and when your phase comes up move out from behind cover, attack and then move back behind the cover. Currently doing this requires using the Snap Shot maneuver which is a full phase action so you cannot move, and you take a penalty to OCV. Even with Snap Shot you are still exposed during the phase you attacked and can duck back on the next segment on the DEX he attacked at. This change would mean the character move a few hexes, attack, and move back behind cover. He takes no penalty to OCV and is only exposed when he is attacking. Those are just two examples off the top of my head of problems it could cause. I am sure that this would probably also cause other issue. So, yea it kind of would break the game, or at least alter the balance of the game and have a lot of unforeseen consequences. At minimum movement and SPD will become more valuable and combat will last a lot longer.

Using TK or adding indirect and range to STR still has some potential problems. The main one is if the character has any unusual attacks they may not be able to use those. For example, if he has a Dim Mak attack built as a drain, or energy attack like some of the character from a video game the shadow would not be able to make those attacks. That is why I suggested Stretching. With stretching any attack the character can make himself the shadow can make. Using Foci might also have problems unless the character has multiple copies or is moving them from shadow to shadow. Stretching is fairly cheap so 20m stretching with Does not Cross Intervening space, Fully Invisible, No Noncombat Stretching, No Velocity Damage and Linked to Images costs 20 points.