PhilFleischmann

In an earlier post I mentioned that I had inserted a couple of kingdoms of Mer-Folk to Ambrethel in places I thought they would logically fit. One of those places matched very naturally with details from the text and map, while another IMO adds some adventure potential for peregrinating PCs. Neither realm requires any modifications to the rest of the setting background.
 
TA p. 118 states that the inhabitants of the city of Hruumiel, the chief port of the slave-trading state of Talarshand, "have formed an alliance with a nearby kingdom of mer-folk to protect them and their shipping from Sharthak raiders; in exchange they give the mer-folk much gold, and many other goods besides that cannot be made underwater." (See map of Vornakkia p. 106.) I noticed on that map that the Harfang Reefs almost completely enclose a large region of the sea between them and the southern coast of the Vornakkian Peninsula. That seemed like an appropriate place for the Kingdom of Harfang; the Mer-Folk have fortified the reefs for defense against the Sharthak, and built their towns on the relatively shallow sea floor. The city of Imlag, which the Talarshandi conquered, is on that coast. My head-canon is that the Imlagians had a cooperative relationship with the Mer-Folk, and after the city's conquest the latter harassed Talarshand's shipping in retaliation, until the Talarshandi struck their current deal.
 
The map of the Eastern Westerlands on TA p. 74 notes the presence of two fair-sized islands south of Tornathia, Trogen and Orindon. The Encyclopaedia Turakiana says no more of them than that they exist; but I couldn't help noting on the overall map of Ambrethel on pp. 49 and 162, that those islands are on a direct line between Tornathia and the northern peninsula of Keshman, and thus represent the shortest sailing route between the continent of Arduna and the Kumasian sub-continent. Logically control of those islands would be of significant strategic value, but since none of the land-based realms claim them I thought it would be interesting if the Mer-Folk did.
 
In my addition to the setting, the Mer-Folk have settled between and around Orindon and Trogen, digging their habitations into the sea-mounts forming the islands to make them defensible from Sharthak raids. They charge a toll from all ships passing through their waters, attacking and if necessary even scuttling any ships that don't pay. The Mer-Folk have leased land on the islands to the major trading nations of the region -- Aarn, Besruhan, Keshman, and the Tornathian League -- to establish trading posts. Each post numbers roughly 5,000 permanent inhabitants, under an appointed Governor. The trading posts are the point of contact for trade with the Mer-Folk, resupply and repair of ships, and ports for the warships each nation stations there to protect its interests.
 
No small amount of intrigue occurs between the four posts, as each realm vies to promote their own positions and undercut their rivals. In spite of the islands' strategic importance, they're considered a backwater as far as government postings go. The role of Governor generally goes either to some young diplomat looking to make a name for himself and rise to a more prestigious position, or older ones shuffled off here until retirement when out of favor at court. Thus the governorship fluctuates between periods of intense activity and apathy. For the most part the locals run their own affairs and ignore their Governors. They know any given Governor won't stay long and won't bring any lasting change.

I'm not sure that with a general Clairsentience power I'd let you target e.g. "Joe's apartment" if you weren't within line of sight, but I would let you pop a Clairsentience point "120 meters that way".  You can reorient from there, get closer, then re-pop or move your point to a new spot.  Focus in on Joe's apartment that way.  
 
I've sometimes done a GPS bug as something like Detect Lat/Long, with a Clairsentience with that Detect.  Make it Mobile with a Limitation that it's based on their movement (as GM I handwave away the "max velocity" portions of the Mobile part if the user of the Power has no control over where it goes).  
 
I think the question is: if you're using Clairsentience with the Limitation "Only through mirror", do you have to know the mirror is there and be able to target it?  I would probably say no you don't, but the Clairsentience points are fixed and you're at their mercy.  In the Joe's apartment scenario above, if you're outside of Joe's apartment building, you could certainly cycle through the mirrors in the various apartments, but given that they're fixed in place you're getting a lot of bathroom views.  If you knew approximately where to target it (e.g. third floor, building B ) you'd have a better chance, but you're still cycling through bathrooms.  

I can see what stimulated this poll though.  We talk about tone and genre and verisimilitude.  When we argue about rules there is often a drive for a "realistic" output.
 
I think it is why we have a toolkit rather than a ruleset.  There is an expectation that the GM will pick the tools to be used in a game.  As such our rules should be capable of achieving "realistic" outcomes but their primary purpose should be providing our gamer souls with a "fair" outcome.
 
As such, like a few folk above, my response to the poll is all of the above.  Our toolkit therefore needs to facilitate games where falling off a high building results in nothing more than comedy inconvenience to games where you can die from a single knife wound bleeding you out.
 
Let's take that insight to our rule conversations....
 
🙂
 
Doc

I don't play RPG's to be "realistic".  I get realistic every day, it's called life.
 
As for the rest, I have run and played games that would fall in all of them.  It all really depends on the story being told. 

Sorry to drag this back into the light, but has anyone ever considered the opposite approach to balancing magic and mundane items: make weapons and armor cost Character Points just like magic? So characters would be more like low level supers who pay points for their gadgets, etc. 1d6 RKA Enchanted Dart spell? Cool, pay points and have unlimited access. 1d6 RKA mundane arrows? Cool, pay points and have an unlimited (at least practically speaking) supply. Armor spell? Pay points. Purchased armor? Pay points. 
 
Sure, there is the issue of losing items or foci, etc. But as is convention in HERO, if you pay points, it can’t be permanently lost. Inconveniently lost? Sure, but that’s a good percentage of how the literature works anyway. They should all be replaceable by quest, purchase, or some other narrative contrivance.
 
What if your barbarian gets tired of his hardened hide armor? Let him ditch it and give him his points back. Maybe he can increase his DCV and go without armor altogether. Or perhaps use the points for something else. Boots of Defense? Sure, why not. But pay for them. 
 
I suppose that mundane equipment that can be consumed or otherwise extinguished should only cost cash. It seems like common sense what should cost cash and what should cost points. Really, a bag of torches are mundane and shouldn’t cost points. A Wand of Light should. And anything which directly affects combat, or affects critical situations requiring rolls, should cost points. 
 
Does this risk looking more like supers in funny clothes? Maybe. But it can be regulated narratively. As long as the GM has a reasonable idea of what should cost points and why, I think anyone can buy into the idea pretty easily. 
 
So what’s the difference between wizards and warriors? Maybe not so much. Is this bad? It depends on what you’re looking for in a fantasy game. I like blurred lines between “classes” anyway. That the whole reason I dumped D&D when Fantasy HERO originally came out. But practical differences can emerge: a warrior may pay points for weapons and armor, while a wizard pays for equivalent spells. But while the warrior will only pay for a couple of weapons, she would also buy a lot of other Characteristics and Skills to distinguish herself as a fighter. The wizard will spend an equivalent number of points on other spells (or spell skills, depending on your magic system). Or you can meet somewhere in the middle with a buffed out battle wizard with great armor and a few spells.
 
Regardless, it’s less important to distinguish between who pays for what and who doesn’t. “Classes” become irrelevant, and points are a-ent on all the things that distinguish players from each other. Nobody would really complain, I’m willing to bet, if they have to spent cash on a lantern as opposed to points on an enchanted Staff of Moonlight. The staff, or the sword, or the bow, or the chain mail, define a character. The mundane items don’t. 
 
I’m just spitballing here, but maybe it would work?

Whatever game I'm playing in, whatever the genre, I want it to feel like the sort of media that contains the same genre of stories.  I want the characters to do, and to be able to do, the kinds of things the characters in those stories do, with the same rationales and for the same motivations.  
 
Besides genre, there's also tone and feel.  I don't need or want all of my games to have the same tone and feel.  With Hero, I know they don't need to, because I've played in Hero games with tone and feel covering the entire range of the poll options.  
 
I can't therefore chose any single option.  I vote "Any and all of the above." 

No one actually wants realistic damage results. Truly realistic damage wouldn't make dramatic sense. Phineas Gage took a six foot tamping rod through his brain and lived. More than one soldier has been shot through the heart and recovered fully. On the other hand, people have died from shock after getting hit with a bullet that didn't penetrate into their thoracic cavity, people die from simple slips and falls on a routine basis, and sometimes people die of an aneurysm with no warning at all. All the crazy medical stories you've ever heard are 100% realistic, because they're actually real, but players would feel cheated if they happened in their games.
 
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t." -- Mark Twain

What this fine fellow said. 
 
And more than that, I don't actually want realism.  I want verisimilitude.  I want that genre-appropriate veneer of realism, but without all the headaches that accompany actually being realistic.  Faux-realism, if you will. 
I don't care what the relationship between volume and jumping height is, I want halflings to jump worse than humans.  Yes, I know that cats are much smaller than but easily outjump humans I don't care.  Bilbo can't bunnyhop. 
I don't care if assault rifle shots should be able to penetrate that brick wall we're hiding behind.  I've seen enough action movies to know that what should happen is the wall trembling and chips flying as the heroes figure out how to deal with the situation. 
I don't care what sort of fuel efficiency my spaceship gets or what transfer orbit makes the most sense or how the engine works.  I just want to know how much I have to pay for enough space-fuel to get from Earth to Mars.  The physics aren't important to the story, we just need a consistent number. 

What genre and theme?  That makes a _huge_ difference, at least for me. 
 
I like my supers and my space opera to be like the comics of the the sixties and eighties, with a bit more drama but supers-are-super. 
 
I like my westerns to be realistically lethal- everything short of hit locations is on the table, and nobody catches three bullets and keeps running. 
 
My cyberpunk and pulp are action movie, and the rest of my space-related sci-fi is either Traveller or Atomic Age. 
 
My fantasy swings from gruesome to action movie, depending on the campaign in question. 
 
Everything else falls into the cracks.  Honestly, it depends on the tropes we want to play with at the time. 
 
As you can probably tell from that, I have very little problems picking and choosing the rules I am using and the ones I am ignoring. 
 
 
 

OK, so how much do you think "Detect Any One Specific Person, Chosen Each Time the Power is Used" is worth - before adding all the other modifiers like Range, N-Ray, Mega-Range, etc.
 
Just ike "Detect Gold" allows you to detect the presence of gold, but it doesn't locate the specific gold coin that you gave to the travelling merchant that you met a week ago on the road to Phaneinopolis.
 
"Detect People" (Large Class, Very Common = 10 points) will not find one specific person you're looking for.  It will find all people.  You can add "Discriminatory" so you can check each person you detect, one at a time, to determine if that's the one you were looking for, but that could take a while.
"Detect Fred Farnsworth" (Single Thing = 3 points) will find the one specific person named Fred Farnsworth, but it won't detect anyone else.
+5 points for each additional class of thing detected.  It seems to me that it's only fair that if the additional "class" is only a single thing, then it shouldn't cost more than +3 points.  So to detect any one specific person from a list of 50 people would cost 150 points - before adding in Range and N-Ray, and everything else.  If you want to detect any one specific person in the entire human race, that would cost approximately 3 x 7.6 billion points.  But I'm willing to be generous and only charge 1 point for each additional single thing detected, so it'll only cost you a flat 7.6 billion points.
 
If you're detecting all the people within a 15-mile radius, you could add Discriminatory and a few levels of Rapid Sense to check each person to see if they're the one you want in a reasonable amount of time.  How many people will be within a 15 mile radius?  Well, it depends on the setting, obviously.  In the modern word, there could easily be over a million.  So six levels of 10x Rapid Sensing would cost 18 points, to check a million people in the time it would have taken to check one.  If you happen to be in a big city with more than a million people in a 15 mile radius, it'll take longer, but probably still a reasonable amount of time.  And a mere 12 more points of Rapid would allow you to check everyone in the world in that time, to find the one person your looking for.
 
So, the bottom line is:
 
Detect People - 10 points
Range - +5
360 degrees - +5
Discriminatory - +5
Targeting - +10
N-Ray - +10 (Defined as "not through anything that isn't a mirror")
Rapid x6 (1000000x normal speed) - +18
= 63 points, then adding at least one level of Megascale Range for +1/4 = 79 points.
 
And that gives you a base PER roll, subject to (Mega) rMod, and other circumstantial modifiers, so you might want to add Telescopic or some Enhanced Perception, in case your target is near the edge of your range, or is hidden or concealed in some way.

You really need two powers to do this. Use a Multipower because you only need one at a time.
 
You need Mind Scan to find out where to look with Clairsentience because Clairsentience(or Detect) alone will mean you have to search for your target by shifting through every mirror  in the area, one at a time with no idea where to start.
 
Builds the Mind Scan with Invisible Power Effects and limit it so it only finds things in LOS of a mirror. Now you have an idea of where to direct your Clairsentience.
 
Now make a Clairsentience that uses the located mirror as your sensor point. You can see the target but if  they cover the mirror or leave the room you're SOL. 

You buy the Clairsentience "Only from the point of view of a mirror", and then you count the number of people you see.
 
This doesn't work, because it doesn't let you see anything other than the "Target".  If there's a street sign reflected in the mirror behind the person, this power will not see the sign.  I don't think I would allow "Target" as a thing to Detect in the first place, unless it was specifically defined when the power is bought.  "Detect Fred Farnsworth".  If it's just "Detect People" then it will detect all people, and won't let you pick one just one to detect.
 
If you want to *see* whatever is reflected in the mirror, then Detect is not the power you want, but rather Sight - in this case, Clairsentience for Sight.
 
Another consideration is the definition of a mirror.  Is it just actual mirrors, built and intended to be mirrors, or will any reflective surface that could be used as a mirror count?  How about a hand-held mirror, or a compact mirror in a woman's purse?  If that compact mirror is the closest mirror to the person, all you'll see is the darkness of the closed compact inside a closed purse.  Does it have to be a silvered glass mirror, or could it be a polished metal mirror?  How about a car's rear view mirror?  If that's the closest mirror to the target (and the target isn't in the car), your view might be moving too fast for you to catch a glimpse of the person you're looking for.

I do find autofire without a bonus to hit to be completely counter-intuitive.
 
If I point a machine gun at you and hold the trigger down I expect my chance to hit you at least once to be higher than if I fired a single bullet.
 
More of a tangent, but my Danger International group didn't like the way autofire and hit location interacted.  I hit him in the foot, the head, the ankle, the shoulder!
 
So we came up with a house rule for hit locations in an autofire situation.  Roll 3 dice and arrange them horizontally in the order they landed.  If you hit a second time remove the die on the left and roll a single die adding it to the right side.  Repeat as necessary.
 
This resulted in shots tending to cluster which at least *felt* more realistic.

My first thought is some sort of Mind Scan combined with Clairsentience.
 
But then another thought occurred to me, and I don't know how much this should cost:  Something like Fixed Locations for Teleporting, you could have Fixed Locations for Clairsentience.  And they could be either regular Fixed Locations, like your best buddy, or Floating Fixed Locations, that you have to spend some time "studying" to change.  Seems like a rather obvious adder for Clairsentience that should have been available already, now that I think of it.

This is a thing I've thought about doing.  Generalized Fixed and Floating Locations to Fixed and Floating... things?  I was never sure what to call them.  Slots?  
 
5 points for Cramming is effectively a "Floating Skill Familiarity Slot:".  Which makes 1 point a Fixed Skill Familiarity Slot, which gives you a Skill Roll at 8-.  Coincidence?  
 
Some other uses could be dimensions for Extradimensional Movement, or slots for a Variable Power Pool in a game in which VPP has to take "only from known list" or somesuch.  Shapeshift shapes.  Configurations of Variable Advantage and/or Limitation.
 
Anything else that this could be generalized to?

My first thought is some sort of Mind Scan combined with Clairsentience.
 
But then another thought occurred to me, and I don't know how much this should cost:  Something like Fixed Locations for Teleporting, you could have Fixed Locations for Clairsentience.  And they could be either regular Fixed Locations, like your best buddy, or Floating Fixed Locations, that you have to spend some time "studying" to change.  Seems like a rather obvious adder for Clairsentience that should have been available already, now that I think of it.

My first thought is some sort of Mind Scan combined with Clairsentience.
 
But then another thought occurred to me, and I don't know how much this should cost:  Something like Fixed Locations for Teleporting, you could have Fixed Locations for Clairsentience.  And they could be either regular Fixed Locations, like your best buddy, or Floating Fixed Locations, that you have to spend some time "studying" to change.  Seems like a rather obvious adder for Clairsentience that should have been available already, now that I think of it.

My first thought is some sort of Mind Scan combined with Clairsentience.
 
But then another thought occurred to me, and I don't know how much this should cost:  Something like Fixed Locations for Teleporting, you could have Fixed Locations for Clairsentience.  And they could be either regular Fixed Locations, like your best buddy, or Floating Fixed Locations, that you have to spend some time "studying" to change.  Seems like a rather obvious adder for Clairsentience that should have been available already, now that I think of it.

If I buy 8d6 Drain, half to STR and half to CON, that costs 80 points.  That's bad design, as I can buy 4d6 Drain STR and CON at the same time for 60.
 
What if, instead, I buy 4d6 STR Drain, 1/2 END (50 AP) + 4d6 CON Drain so I get the same result at the same END cost (for 80 AP instead of 60)?
 
If we apply Jointly Linked as -1/2 to the larger power (33 points) and -1/4 to the smaller (32 points), we get a 65 point cost for 4d6 STR Drain linked to 4d6 CON drain, at the same END cost.   That seems to suggest that we should at least allow "Jointly Linked" as -1/2 to the greater power and -1/4 to the lesser power as a default, or that the price of affecting two game elements at the same time is much too low.  If we allowed both powers "Jointly Linked" at -1/2, we would end up with 33 + 27 = 60 points.  Maybe that is the answer (with GM judgement to be applied when one of the Linked powers is substantially lower cost than the other).  That would suggest +1/2 is reasonable to affect two game elements at the same time (or to combine any two roughly equal attacks into one).
 
By contrast, choosing between a 4d6 CON drain and a 4d6 STR drain could be done in a Multipower for 48 points, and costs 4 END.  Let's make it x 1 1/2 END so the END cost is 6.  Now it costs 32 (ignoring rounding issues)    +1/2 to select any characteristic means 60 points, for the same 6 END.   For 60 points, I can have 12.5 slots in that Multipower (40 + 12.5x4 = 50 for a total of 90/1.5 = 60).  Paying for 12.5 slots seems like a reasonable compromise for "unlimited slots".
 
If we made it a VPP, we would need a 27 point pool, a 20 point control cost, Cosmic (+2).  Every power must be x 1 1/2 END, so that drops the control cost to 40 - even -1/2 for "only drains" (the book sets drains and aids at -1) would drop the control cost below 33, so the VPP model would be cheaper.  Make that -1 1/2 and we get a 20 point control cost, so 47 points in total.  A +1/4 for "choose one ability with the same SFX" or "choose one characteristic" would be 50 points and 5 END versus 47 points and 6 END.  That seems to put +1/4 in the ballpark, at least.
 
 

No, do not address it
these are just different character builds
if the player feels that they should do as much damage as the other ,then maybe a rebuild is in order
also look at damage over time
a speed 4 character only does  (move thru velocity is 60m = +10d6(35pts of damage) and a -6 to ocv  [4 hits very unlikely but does 35x4= 140 points on average
a speed  8 character only does (move thru velocity is 30m = + 5d6(17.5 pts of damage) and a -3 to ocv  [8 hits unlikely, but does also 17.5 x7 140 points on average
the bell curve is going to kill the speed 4 character if both have the same OCV vs a targets same DCV
 
target has a def of 25
both speed 8 and 4 do 8d6 hand to hand(average 28 pts of damage)
so if both have final OCV of 10 before the move throu vs a target with a 8 DCV here are the percentages
speed 8 has a final ocv of 7 and will hit dcv 8 around 50% of the time (so in a turn speed 8 does on average 45.5 (20.5 get through to do damage) (20.5 x 8)/2=82 pts of damage on the target))
speed 4 has a final ocv of 4 and will hit dcv 8 around 16.2% of the time (so in turn speed 4 does on average 63 pts(38 get through to do damage)(38 x 4)/6=25 pts of damage on the target))
 
of course Move bys will have the speed 4 do more damage as the ocv and dcv mods are the same
it will come down to who chooses the correct maneuver
the speed 8 is better off using move thru (only a 12.5% difference) vs the speed 4 using move by hitting 62% of the time
 
and the move by have the speed 4 doing + 6d6(21pts)+ 28=49 pts per hit  49-25=24  after def (24 x 4)/1.6=60 pts per turn
the speed 8 is getting  +3d6(10.5 pts)+ 28 =38.5 pts per hit 38.5-25= 13.5after def (13.5x 8)/1.6= 67.5 per turn
damage over the course of a turn has the speed 8 only up by 2d6 on average over the speed 4

Unless the rules have changed, they _are_ available without violent action.  Violent action provides a _modifier_ to the presence attack.  Reputation can provide a modifier.  A soliloquy can provide a modifier.  Related use of presence attack provides a modifier.  Familiarity with the opponent provides a modifier in my games, but I don't think that's ever been officially stated anywhere.   
 
Still, it's like reputation: 
 
I _know_ Captain Clockwork, and he just can't bring himself to throw that cargo truck at us.  It's too much risk, and he won't do it. 
 
I mean, this has been a fun conversation, but for my money, unless you want to change the "takes no time" element of the mechanic, everything proposed thus far is already covered.
 
 

I believe there already are rules that reduce the effectiveness of repeated PRE attacks.  You can't just keep smashing things and expect the target to be equally stunned each time.
 
And presence attacks need to be available even without "violent action" - it's sometimes a function of the character's leadership and inherent impressiveness.  Like if Captain Patriot is trying to calm down a rioting mob of civilians.

There was something that I was curious about and I was hoping that those among you with greater system mastery than I have could enlighten me.  The Advantage, Expanded Effect, allows an Adjustment Power to affect more than one game element at a time as a +1/2 Advantage.  This is often paired with the Advantage, Variable Effect, also a +1/2 Advantage, used to vary which game element was adjusted.  In 5th Edition, the Advantage, Variable Effect, roughly did the same thing as both 6th Edition Advantages: for +1/4, any one game element (Characteristics or Powers) of a designated special affect could be adjusted; for +1/2, any two game elements of a designated special effect could be adjusted; for +1 any four game elements of a designated special effect could be adjusted; and for +2, all game elements of a designated special effect could be adjusted.
 
My curiosity is regarding the significant Advantage cost of increasing the number of game elements simultaneously affected by an Adjustment Power.  5th edition only costed (roughly) +1/4 Advantage to adjust an additional game element; whereas, 6th Edition, the cost is increased to a +1/2 Advantage to adjust an additional element.  Why the price hike?  Was there a significant balance issue that needed to be addressed?  Just curious.  Thank you.  

I'm a fan of granularity.  And, you know, doing things in a cock-eyed manner.
 
Maybe we could consider, instead of extra CON you buy extra PD, something like:
 
I'm still standing: +5 PD (Only to avoid being stunned)
 
Now obviously this only applies to normal physical damage (although you could buy resistant defence or defence against other damage types).  It would not reduce the STUN damage you take and it would only really matter if you took damage over CON but less than CON+5, so the limitation depends on how often that would happen.  I'm thinking at least -1, and I might give you -2.  Judgement call and makes no actual difference on 5 points to final cost.  It means you can take a punch but you can still be taken down by taser.
 
Compared to the calculation that GB(i) did as the first response (i.e. -3/4), that sounds about right and is probably a more socially acceptable way of doing it.  I think we can probably all agree that CON is overpriced.
 
 

I get the feeling,  based on what I've read in this thread thus far, that I've always been way too open, because I have always allowed the target to soak an attack completely unphased to be a PRE Attack in its own right, or a modifier to one the target makes in the next phase:
 
You unload your entire magazine into the berzerker' s kidneys; bullet's glance of, whizzing away in every direction.  He turns to look at you, serious annoyance on his face.  "I'm sorry; did you say something?". The he turns to you and raises the chunk of Oldsmobile he's been using for a club... "
 
When it becomes a 'you _know_ you're outclassed and screwed' situation, yep.  That modifies a presence attack right there....