JMcL63

Re: What WOULDN'T your character do? Katana, SAE (Sword Against Evil), the renegade ninja who has set out to destroy the evil that spawned him? He'd never vote.

Re: A Thread for Random Musings It's 5.30am. I've just spent most of the last 17 hours sweating blood playing catch-up on an Open University course (main distance learning institution here in Britain) to prepare myself to write an assignment in the hope of getting it posted before the post office closes this afternoon, in time to make a Friday deadline. I spent most of yesterday working on another assignment for a different course yesterday, with the same deadline. Not to put too fine a point on it, I'm completely f****d. I'm off now to catch a couple of hours' kip before getting back to work. Sheesh!

Re: Y R axes better than swords??? A lot of good points have been made about power, STR mins and so on. I guess I would just add the following: 1. The mythology attached to swords might have something to do with their being the weapons of the lordly elite in most pre-gunpowder cultures (a sweeping generalisation I'll admit, but I hope my point is clear nonetheless). 2. I would reflect the basic concern of the original poster by giving most swords a +1 OCV at the very least. It all depends on how you design them- you can also design weapons with extra DEX for the initiative count, for example.

Re: Hit Locations Halved When Target Stunned? I seem to remember a GM house-ruling that hit location penalties were halved due to being grappled, so I'm not surprised, and actually quite pleased to discover that this is already in place for being Stunned. This is a good rule, even if a bit fiddly (in terms of being the kind of thing likely to be forgotten in the heat of the moment).

Re: local game HERO AnswerMan vs. being GM? If I get you right Hyper-Man, this is about knowing the rules better than the GM versus being the GM yourself? Well, I can recall, in my old Aftermath days that my GM always relied on me to answer rules questions. This didn't stop him running a great campaign. I guess it's all down to the balance between rules knowledge and rules lawyering. A rules lawyer who works only for their own character and against the GM can be the worst player imaginable. But a rules-knowledgable player who uses their knowledge to help the players understand what their characters can do, and helps the GM make calls about events in play can be a real asset. On the other hand, the simple ability to understand rules mechanics does not a good GM make. Otherwise anyone who could understand the rules of Monopoly would immediately be a good GM. Good storytelling involves a knowledge of dramatic structure (however basic), and applying good storytelling in an rpg (ie. good refereeing) involves insight into group dynamics and other equally ephemeral aspects of interpersonal relationships. In other words, learning rules is one thing (and being good at this is enough to learn how to play, and win, competitive adventure games), but learning how to use rules to GM an enjoyable roleplaying session is another. Hope this helps.

Re: DARK CHAMPIONS: What Do *You* Want To See? At the moment all I can say is that I'd like to see the book in my hands. I hope to be able to add more worthwhile comments in the near future. In the meantime, all the best to Steve and to all the rest who are working on this, by myself most eagerly awaited of HERO supplements.

Re: Sleep spell - one GM's take That's a good one.

Re: Sleep spell - one GM's take True. I realised the limitations of my suggestion not long after posting it. Ah well, back to the dra... ZZZZZzzzz.

Re: Sleep spell - one GM's take Whether you choose to use Drain or Suppress, it strikes me that sleep could perhaps be best modelled by a heavy duty attack against END. Just a thought.

Re: Ye Old "Hero is Hard" Debate Well OK, I haven't read the entire thread from beginning to end, so I apologise in advance if I tediously repeat anyone else. First off, HERO is 'harder' than most games. That is, the rules have a steeper learning curve, and are more demanding than you'll find in most games. HERO is not a 'pick up and play' rpg. This means that it will always have a more limited appeal than many other rpgs. Us die-hard fans of HERO's universal rpg-engine might as well just get used to this fact, and redirect our responses to the issues this debate raises to more productive issues. What I am getting at here I guess is what you get for that extra investment in learning the system. I mean, HERO is most definitely (IMO) a game where players really must learn the intricacies of the combat system. This is because the HERO combat engine is simultaneously dramatic and tactical. The basic mechanism for this is the infamous SPD table (something I would never use were I to attempt to design a post-HERO universal rpg). The tactics are really hardcore, and emerge from the combination of playing-off your OCV versus your DCV in your choice of combat manoeuvres, and in your timing of said manoeuvres according to the ebbs and flows of the SPD table. What you have then is a cycle of combat in which you intervene according to your choice. This is both realistic (after years of studying WW2 history I really do believe that this is how the reality of combat works); and dramatic, in that this is also how superheroes operate in the comics (not to mention other heroes in other genres). This is what you get by investing time in learning how the HERO combat system works- a truly satisfying combat system that simultaneously satisfies both the grognard and the melodramatic action-hero in many of us. Fans of Buffy or Xena should find this satisfying, but I can also imagine many roleplayers to whom this would be irrelevant. The above is only a discussion of that aspect of HERO that is most controversial even among its diehard fans. The character creation system is something else entirely. Here, the main advantage is literally unlimited flexibility. If you can think of it, you can design it. As soon as you start using the powers, then the finest detail you can envisage can be brought out using the appropriate combination of power advantages and limitations. For those who like fiddling with detailed character concepts, this is the greatest thing since the invention of rpgs. But for those who just want to pick up a game and play, why should they bother? So, I guess what I am getting at in this fairly obvious restatement of some of HERO's greatest strengths is that they are only strengths for those who want them in their games. For those who don't then they are not, because of the effort required to make use of them. And that is to not even get into the issue that, however universal, HERO is most definitely not the ideal system for playing all games in all settings (Call of Cthulhu being my favourite example in this respect). It is just the single most flexible generic system around because it is the only genuinely universal system available as far as I know. This post is already getting long enough to be a serious ramble, so I'd better sum up what I am getting at as this: there will always be rpg'ers to whom HERO is more than they want out of an rpg. There is no point in getting upset by their apparent 'blindness' in the face of the self-evident merits of our favourite system. Rather, we should highlight HERO's strengths so as to make the system appealing to those who are looking for what a game like HERO has to offer. That's it I guess. PS. However complicated or not, the number-crunching in HERO is arithmetic, not maths.

Re: Variable Power Levels for Heroes I was playing in a supers game once, and there were a couple of new players there for a session. Danger International (or was it Superagents?) had just come out so, rather than sit and wait for the new players to make up superheroes, the GM just had them make up agents. We weren't sure how this would work, but they fit in just fine, and in the end, they stole the show. So lower-powered characters can work well. One kind of scenario where I can think that this would be a good narrative device would be in, say, an expedition to rescue a PC where, for continuity reasons, not all of the players involved in the group could have their main PC's in the expedition. In this situation it might make sense for there to be a bunch of lower powered characters present, representing aid and assistance from some source or other. This is something I have been thinking about for a situation in my own, currently dormant, superhero campaign.

Re: Help with a construct: several characters -> one mega power. This is the classic HERO dilemma, which I've been thinking about today: to go the whole hog with a design, or to just cobble together the 'front end'. I know that doing the whole job can be hard work, but it can be worth it. I was designing a hive fleet for a bughunting game once. Obsessive that I am, I went into all the little details. As a result, not only did I have a set of powers for each beastie I was designing, but the limitations I had to apply to make them work also gave me lots and lots of very strong cinematic-style special effects and other neat stuff that my players enjoyed even as they were overwhelmed by both the game system (they were novices), and by the grim scenario I had dumped them in. So, dotting the i's and crossing the t's is well worth the bother if you want your creations to have real character instead of just a list of stats for delivering attacks. Which is why I venture to suggest that, for a con one-off, working this idea out in full detail would probably be worth the bother- IMO you really want to pin everything down so that you have a fully realised conception for the day. Afterwards, you could always use the basic idea as a villain or something. So I have to ask: how long have you got to get ready beauxdeigh?

Re: Help with a construct: several characters -> one mega power.

Re: Help with a construct: several characters -> one mega power. The quibble I have with the succour suggestion is that this puts one PC in particular 'at the centre' of the megaweapon. If this is what is desired, then that's fine, but it doesn't seem to me to be what was originally requested.

Re: Help with a construct: several characters -> one mega power. Beauxdeigh, I have been pondering this on and off since my last post. One thing I noticed, and which bugged me, was the suggestion that you have recourse to GM's fiat. I don't like this because I believe HERO is flexible enough that anything you want should be available without this last ditch. In the case of your own idea, I venture that building your megaweapon as some kind of vehicle or base and through the use of multiform might be the way to go. That is: each PC has their basic form. They also all have a single multiform. This is essentially their normal selves, but with the appropriate powers changed for the vehicle/base megaweapon. When the PC's wish to use their megaweapon, they have to get into position, activate multiform on the same DEX in the same phase, et voila there they are with their megaweapon. I know this might be a bit late in the day, but I hope it helps.

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: The Authority:What the heck? Erm, alright I have a confession to make. I've just this afternoon been into my local comics store, and I checked this story out. I was wrong, and it was all a case of misunderstanding on my part. The best we could figure out was confusion re. the short run of the Coup D'Etat miniseries. In any case, The Authority is not about to be cancelled. Sorry about the confusion folks. I'm off for a dose of sackcloth and ashes...

Re: A Thread for Random Musings Two cupboards fell off my kitchen wall tonight, after staying up for over 5 years. My tinned and dried goods were alright, but I've lost some 80% of my crockery and glassware. I'm p****d. Oh, and this is a really dumb place to post this tale of woe, since by the thread rules, no one can reply with sympathy and/or humour... D'oh, there's always the musing about musings if anyone gives a damn!

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER A bit of both really. I mean, if you're reading in the horror genre, you don't really need the sense of reality to be established, since you know it's all coming crumbling down anyway. After all, the original Dawn of the Dead movie didn't bother, did it? We were just dropped straight in to the action. So part of me feels that this technique is not absolutely necessary, and is indeed a little less than brilliant when everyone knows that genre conventions mean that this reality is going to be torn apart. It's a tired device therefore I'd suggest. And yes, I think that King takes too long at this, IIRC.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? I put The Authority on order at my local comics shop. The guy in the shop told me that it was being cancelled, with the implication that my order would be short-lived. That's all I know at the moment, and seeing as no-one else knows squat about this, it may just be an idle rumour or a breakdown in communication.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? I feel I've got to get a few of my own feelings about this series off my chest. What I think is the basic appeal of the Authority is the fact that it takes actual features of the real world, and makes them central premises of a superhero comic. That is to say: we live in a world where millions die each year from poverty, war, and other forms of political violence. Many people who even bother thinking about these things no doubt feel so powerless that they might imagine that only something like a team of bloody-minded megapowerful superheroes could do something about it. What I am getting at then is that the violence in the series both reflects the ultraviolent world in which we live, and people's frustration at their powerlessness in the face of same. I would suggest that these realworld themes are the subtext of the earlier issues (as collected in the first TPB), and that one of the things that made these early issues evidently so much more palatable for many is that the realworld stuff was handled metaphorically in a way that was soon to change. Beyond this, I still agree that the series is not really what it was, and I would tend to argue that this is because the premise that made it so interesting to begin with has a short shelf life. It is not a concept suitable for the open-endedness of the traditional superhero comic. Rather it would seem to be a concept that requires the dramatic closure of a mini-series. I suggest that the desperate attempts to find a new direction that was the false Authority are a symptom of this. If the series is to be cancelled (and my previous comments are essentially an argument in favour of this), then I would hope that it is rounded up properly, so that those of us who still read the comic can at least feel that it has redeemed itself.

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER Stephen King? Meh. It's not that he's a bad writer or anything. His prose is easy enough to read and I've got quite engaged with some of the characters in the books I've read. It's just that I don't like having to read approx. the length of the average short novel as he tries to create the utterly spurious sense of normality which we know he's just going to ditch eventually anyway. This is just a waste of time, and not good writing, IMO.

Re: Golden Heroes... Golden Heroes was the first supers rpg I gm'ed. It had its good points, eg. the 'panels' based combat system, although I still feel that 4 panels weren't quite enough to give the right feel for superheroics. Other bits I didn't like were the random powers generation, and the utterly puny energy blasts. With the standard rules you simply couldn't get a proper energy projector character. Still, the very mention of the game gives me a real nostalgia buzz. Oh, and one of the designers- Pete Haines- now works for GW on their 40K range, so he's come in from the cold, so to speak.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? All I have is the word of a member of staff in my comics shop. I presume they'd know because they'll've been told how much longer they can order it. I guess there might also be news in the comics industry press.