Jump to content

Zarthose

HERO Member
  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Zarthose reacted to Derek Hiemforth in Teleport passing strike   
    No. HERO System Martial Arts p97 describes an attack with the FMove element (such as a Passing Strike) as a sort of "Martial Move By." Per 6E2 p70, "A character may not perform Move Bys with Extra-Dimensional Movement, FTL Travel, Teleportation, or any MegaScaled movement." (The same restriction is applied to Move Through on the same page.)
     
    It seems clear that the same restriction on applicable types of movement would apply to attacks with the FMove element, for the same reasons. Namely, they don't handle velocity or movement path the same way as other modes of movement. Teleportation, in particular, neither adds nor removes velocity, and it doesn't have a movement path per se (you disappear at one point and reappear at another rather than traversing a path).
  2. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Grailknight in Is it wrong to power game?   
    You seam to have completely missed my point, I'll try again. You cite the 3 different names, each one clearly defined in your mind. The REST of this thread is filled with people who have their OWN ideas what those mean, some of whom agree with you, many who do not. Thus no consensus. The consensus part means that if you don't have a clear majority, and have no position of power ( like you designed the game for example)  Then you are just pushing your own definitions on others, with no basis. 
    If you read the OP, then you would know some call me a power gamer...So clearly that guy has different standards then you do. 

    If you have no agreement on what terms mean, then you cannot have any meaningful conversation about said topic. 
    Example Guy X says "Power gamers are bad", meaning the people who soend one point to have a planet killing power
                   Guy Y says "Power Gamers can be fine" meaning the guy who buys Dex at 18 is not broken, hes just using his points efficiently>

    Nether is talking about the same thing, though both are useing the same labels
  3. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from drunkonduty in Is it wrong to power game?   
    I'm glad I was able to make a post that engaged people. Many of you brought some great ideas to the discuession, others I felt brought some assumptions. That does not mean thier opinions lacked value. I do feel it is an assumption to think everyone uses, or MUST use your definitions. Since there have been almost as many answers as posts, I feel I can conclusively say there is no solid defination of what is a power gamer, minmaxer or efficient builder. Though I do feel the "efficient" builder probably falls on ther weaker side vs "min/maxer or power gamer". 
     
    I feel it might be more accurate to state how YOU define these terms for yourself, as opposed to stating these terms must apply for everyone. There is clearly a fluid dynamic here since if you pulled out a module and presented it at 2 different tables I strongly suspect any given character might fall on weak, sweet spot and  overpowered based more on the table then any arbatery set of numbers. If your character is two powerful for the table, then its bad, if he's too weak, IT's bad. If there are 5 characters all with an average defense of 25-35, then rolling in with a 10 is gonna be a problem just as much as rolling in with a 60. Since tyhe nature of the game rewards efficiency, and everybody likes to win, people will naturally buy powers, skills and stats a good break points, and like others have pointed out there are other ways that can be unbalancing...the guy with no flaws, and perfectly well rounded for example. 
     
      I started the discussion hoping to find some outside metric that might help me decide if I was power gaming, min maxing or just being efficient. The clear answer now is those labels are meaningless...since there is no universal agreement on their meaning, and their is also not outside metric as to what is "to much" or "just right" or " not enough"...People will judge that based on how well your character plays in game...yet a skilled player can frequently wring far more from a character then someone will less experience or imagination...thus further mudding the waters on whats powerful or not. 
     
    I do feel better after reading all the answers, and I hope others will keep in mind that the character they find overpowering will be a wimp at someone eleses table. This requires more oversite from the DM, and open communication between the players then just flat numbers.
  4. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Lord Liaden in Is it wrong to power game?   
    I'm glad I was able to make a post that engaged people. Many of you brought some great ideas to the discuession, others I felt brought some assumptions. That does not mean thier opinions lacked value. I do feel it is an assumption to think everyone uses, or MUST use your definitions. Since there have been almost as many answers as posts, I feel I can conclusively say there is no solid defination of what is a power gamer, minmaxer or efficient builder. Though I do feel the "efficient" builder probably falls on ther weaker side vs "min/maxer or power gamer". 
     
    I feel it might be more accurate to state how YOU define these terms for yourself, as opposed to stating these terms must apply for everyone. There is clearly a fluid dynamic here since if you pulled out a module and presented it at 2 different tables I strongly suspect any given character might fall on weak, sweet spot and  overpowered based more on the table then any arbatery set of numbers. If your character is two powerful for the table, then its bad, if he's too weak, IT's bad. If there are 5 characters all with an average defense of 25-35, then rolling in with a 10 is gonna be a problem just as much as rolling in with a 60. Since tyhe nature of the game rewards efficiency, and everybody likes to win, people will naturally buy powers, skills and stats a good break points, and like others have pointed out there are other ways that can be unbalancing...the guy with no flaws, and perfectly well rounded for example. 
     
      I started the discussion hoping to find some outside metric that might help me decide if I was power gaming, min maxing or just being efficient. The clear answer now is those labels are meaningless...since there is no universal agreement on their meaning, and their is also not outside metric as to what is "to much" or "just right" or " not enough"...People will judge that based on how well your character plays in game...yet a skilled player can frequently wring far more from a character then someone will less experience or imagination...thus further mudding the waters on whats powerful or not. 
     
    I do feel better after reading all the answers, and I hope others will keep in mind that the character they find overpowering will be a wimp at someone eleses table. This requires more oversite from the DM, and open communication between the players then just flat numbers.
  5. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Grailknight in Is it wrong to power game?   
    I'm glad I was able to make a post that engaged people. Many of you brought some great ideas to the discuession, others I felt brought some assumptions. That does not mean thier opinions lacked value. I do feel it is an assumption to think everyone uses, or MUST use your definitions. Since there have been almost as many answers as posts, I feel I can conclusively say there is no solid defination of what is a power gamer, minmaxer or efficient builder. Though I do feel the "efficient" builder probably falls on ther weaker side vs "min/maxer or power gamer". 
     
    I feel it might be more accurate to state how YOU define these terms for yourself, as opposed to stating these terms must apply for everyone. There is clearly a fluid dynamic here since if you pulled out a module and presented it at 2 different tables I strongly suspect any given character might fall on weak, sweet spot and  overpowered based more on the table then any arbatery set of numbers. If your character is two powerful for the table, then its bad, if he's too weak, IT's bad. If there are 5 characters all with an average defense of 25-35, then rolling in with a 10 is gonna be a problem just as much as rolling in with a 60. Since tyhe nature of the game rewards efficiency, and everybody likes to win, people will naturally buy powers, skills and stats a good break points, and like others have pointed out there are other ways that can be unbalancing...the guy with no flaws, and perfectly well rounded for example. 
     
      I started the discussion hoping to find some outside metric that might help me decide if I was power gaming, min maxing or just being efficient. The clear answer now is those labels are meaningless...since there is no universal agreement on their meaning, and their is also not outside metric as to what is "to much" or "just right" or " not enough"...People will judge that based on how well your character plays in game...yet a skilled player can frequently wring far more from a character then someone will less experience or imagination...thus further mudding the waters on whats powerful or not. 
     
    I do feel better after reading all the answers, and I hope others will keep in mind that the character they find overpowering will be a wimp at someone eleses table. This requires more oversite from the DM, and open communication between the players then just flat numbers.
  6. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Nekkidcarpenter in Is it wrong to power game?   
    Is it ethically wrong to work your character in a way that takes the most advantage of the system? I'm not talking about spending 1 point to mega scale kill a planet, I mean Like spiderman having a IIF for his multipower webs with tons of charges? Is it wrong to use the system to avoid endurance costs and getting a discount on his MP with something that only rarely comes up ? 
     
    In my case my DM asked me if getting screeching ( reach weapon) while being invisible was gaming the system or not. I felt it was not, but as I'm the guy planning on it, maybe I'm biased. This character would by no means be unbalanced for the table. Other players would for example have area attacks, or extra senses that would allow them to ignore my invisibility...So I assume our opponents would also have equal access. What do you guys think?
  7. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from drunkonduty in Is it wrong to power game?   
    Is it ethically wrong to work your character in a way that takes the most advantage of the system? I'm not talking about spending 1 point to mega scale kill a planet, I mean Like spiderman having a IIF for his multipower webs with tons of charges? Is it wrong to use the system to avoid endurance costs and getting a discount on his MP with something that only rarely comes up ? 
     
    In my case my DM asked me if getting screeching ( reach weapon) while being invisible was gaming the system or not. I felt it was not, but as I'm the guy planning on it, maybe I'm biased. This character would by no means be unbalanced for the table. Other players would for example have area attacks, or extra senses that would allow them to ignore my invisibility...So I assume our opponents would also have equal access. What do you guys think?
  8. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Scott Ruggels in Running a Dark Champions game   
    For me its about 2 key things, Power level and tone. If your characters are so powerful no normal can ever challenge them, then they do not fit. Superman can never fit. Tone means the heroes do not always say the day, that you can tackle topics that are uncomfortable and that there will be problems. 
     I like the netflix shows as a prime example, with Power man being immine to small arms, but still capable of being taken out by a skilled martial artist or a shotgun to the head. Where the characters out of combat skills and stories matter at much as the fight itself.  Thats just my personal take on it.
     
  9. Like
    Zarthose reacted to massey in Honor in Fantasy Hero   
    I think there are two different concepts of honor, and we frequently confuse them.
     
    Japanese honor is not chivalry.  It's not a matter of following your own internal code and being true to your ideals.  In the Japanese samurai context, honor is reputation.  It's respect.  An honorable warrior is one who people give honors to.  He might be an utter dirtbag in real life, but people perceive him as being great.  He keeps up a good appearance.
     
    Personal honor in a modern western context is different.  That's more strength of character kind of thing.  It's the sort of honor you get in a hyper-individualistic society like America, as opposed to the more group-oriented societies of Asia.
     
  10. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Accipiter in Is Steve L. okay?   
    He is still posting cat memes on FB, so I suspect hes among the living
  11. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from mallet in Is Steve L. okay?   
    He is still posting cat memes on FB, so I suspect hes among the living
  12. Thanks
    Zarthose reacted to Panpiper in Zoom Dark Champions game   
    Zarthose and I have worked things out with my Lilith/Hellbane character. We have a couple other players confirmed, but would still like to add one or two more.  @Opale, @Shadow7 are you still interested? We'd be playing Wednesday evenings Eastern Standard Time.
     
    All the help you could want is available for helping to create characters if you want.
  13. Like
    Zarthose got a reaction from Beast in Question about "only in Hero ID"   
    If someone has "only in hero ID" I'm unclear on how that works? As a rule of thumb, should that be 30 seconds to switch IDs? Oe just a segment? If they want a completely different look ( human to demon) is that something they have to pay for ( shape change, transformation ect) or is that free? I just want to be fair, and am looking for guidance. Thank you for your time. 
×
×
  • Create New...