Silbeg

Re: Knockback "realistic"?

In my own opinion (and in my own campaigns) attacks which do not impart kinetic energy to the target (lasers' date=' heat rays, etc.) did not do knockback. Killing attacks that rely on making small holes in the target (arrows, cmall-caliber bullets, stillettos, piercing swords: epee, foil, rapier for example) would do less KB than a normal attack.[/quote']

 

There is an easy solution to this (and an obvious one in the Hero System). Certain special effects should probably have the "No Knockback" limitation on them (a typical example would be lasers). This is definitely more of an issue with normal damage attacks, as Killing Attacks will tend to do a bit less KB in any case (due to the extra die).

 

However, I would definitely not mess with the RAW, since I think they are ok, especially for genres that actually use KB (such as Superheroic).

Re: Would you allow this

Simple' date=' yes. But if I were to follow just 5ER, what method would I use to build such a construct? The only similarly-acting build I can think of would be a Zero-Point Elemental Control. Just because it can be generated in HD doesn't mean it's doable in The Book (barring a House Rule, of course).[/quote']

Well, just by the book, I would place 32 charges on an MP... and not worry about it.

Re: Would you allow this

I would use the hero-designer method.

 

1. Create List.
   
2. Add Charges Limitation to the List.
   
3. Check the Box-Thingy that Applies the Limitation to List Items.
   
4. Add Powers as List Items.
   

 

As for the additional limitation "shared charges" - without seeing the construct - I'd lean towards allowing it.

Huh...

So simple... why didn't I think of that?

d'oh!

Re: this power

I'd only add 0END if their Running were also 0END.

 

Persistent is a good idea though, unless they plummet when Stunned and/or Knocked Out.

Only problem here would be that to be Persistent, it must already be 0END...

Another way to do it would be with an END Reserve powering the flight (he stays hovering as long as there is END left), or Continuing Charges (in which case he stays flying/hovering until he runs out of time).

Another "issue" would be the increased Knockback that you take while flying.

This could be neutralized by 6" Knockback Resistance, Only to Remove Extra KB from Flying (-1?)

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

Here's one - linear versus exponential progression. For example' date=' every 5 points of STR doubles the amount you can lift, but adds a flat 2" to the distance of a standing throw. Which means at high point totals you can lift the Earth but can't throw a baseball more than a mile away.[/quote']

 

Unless you are using the "realistic throwing" charts from The Ultimate Brick.

 

Which leads to the issue of all RPGs... the hunt for the supplementary rules from the various "splat" books.

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

The difference of course is that unconscious is also terminology used in 5ER' date=' and in fact the book seems to use them more or less interchangably. 'Con Stunned' appears nowhere in any Hero book that I am aware of. [/quote']

 

Absolutely agreed.

In fact, I never heard the term until about 5 years ago at a gaming convention... and I have been playing Champions since almost 1981... (memory gets fuzzy on exact dates after 25 years... )

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

Ah. That would certainly be confusing.

 

So do you not use "Unconscious" at all?

or, using the terminology in 5ER, "Knocked Out", per 5ER 411.

Re: Flash, Flash Defense, Cost Vs. Value

My gripe is based on an actual game situation. I was playing a holy-warrior type character and I had given him an AOE Flash' date=' No Range defined as "Holy Light." Because of the campaign, it was limited to 30 AP, so it was a 3d6 Flash[/quote']

 

This is exactly the reason that I really hate pure AP limits.

 

From the rest of your story, it sounds like the GM gave you an adversary that exceeded the possible capabilities of the PCs, and was probably not built under the same restrictions. The Flash DEF was nothing that you could really do anything about (but I as the GM would have probably tried to avoid giving the enemy that, since it sounds like she was pretty uber, and you needed ways to be able to affect her).

 

Without the Flash DEF in play, you and your party could have used better tactics to take advantage of the Flash. Had they held their actions for your Holy Light to take effect, they could have landed a blow in the 3 segments that the Flash would have been effective.

 

Of course, against a single target, coordinated attacks always help to reduce the target's DCV (though, given what you have already said about the enemy, I would guess the GM gave her Combat Sense IV as well... )

Re: Buying off a skill roll with a focus

I may do it slightly differently, based on what you are describing (as well as G-A and KS).

I would suggest changing the RSR limitation to a Variable Limitation, defined as either the RSR or the Focus. Assuming a -1/2 RSR, and it being replaced by an OIF, you would get a -1/4 total limitation for this.

The character would then need to spend enough XP to pay for the reduction of limitation.

This would show that if he has the device, he can use it without skill... or if he doesn't, he has to rely on his skills.

I would hesitate to just force the player to replace the RSR with a Focus... since it is a little odd that someone that could originally do something, albeit not every time successfully, and then become completely reliant on a device to do it (forgetting completely how to do it without the device).

But, then again, that is just me...

Re: Trusting Systems vs trusting GM Judgement

Amazing...

Things become all the more clear now...

The need for increasing GM control and authority caused by a player that feels the need to take advantage of everything.

Whatever happened to enjoying the game, playing along with the story, being a good sport... There is always more than one person in the game, and most RPGs (if not all) are not competitive, well at least not "me against the other players and the GM", but rather "us against the villainy in the world".

To see a story on true sportsmanship, see http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/story/8091708?GT1=39002

http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/story/8091708?GT1=39002

Re: Black Paladin in CU:NOTW (possible spoilers)

Now stop that!

Stop what?

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

As to its applicability with the Hero System' date=' I don't have my books with me to confirm your M1A2 vs. battleship comparison, but it's not an issue I've ever seen in a game.[/quote']

There was a debate a year or so ago, which was "showing" that an Abrams could sink a battleship before the battleship could destroy it (or something like that).

 

There was a classic issue of scaling, or however you want to talk about it.

 

On the other hand, I know how I would deal with that issue (treat the battleship more like a building than a vehicle, giving it a chance not to sink until 10X BODY has been inflicted... and the fact that all the BODY from the attack may not actually affect the vehicle, but just the wall... something like that..)

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

I was trying to limit the crunchiness for a moment

 

On a more serious note...

 

I wish HERO had some sort of centralized 'zoom' feature that pointed out what combination of abilities fit each level of 'game detail' that GM's and players want to use. Anyone with enough experience can discover this for themselves but the main book doesn't speak to this concept enough imo.

That would be something good to put in the Hero Genre by Genre section. And, additionally, in the genre books.

I would agree, though, that scaling can be an issue in Hero. What is a good damage scale for Superheroic levels is often overkill on Heroic. Also, it seems to me that it is more difficult to balance at the heroic level... how do you make a 9mm pistol lethal at heroic level, while making it bounce off of most supers (answer is probably that you don't!)

One of the things I liked about the D20 Star Wars (first two editions... I do not have the current) was the scaling... from person scale, to vehicle scale, to spacecraft scale. I would love to see something like that make it into the Hero System... not sure how it would work, but would probably go a long way towards solving the M1A2 Abrams is tougher than the USS Iowa problems.

Re: Flash, Flash Defense, Cost Vs. Value

The extra cost for additional senses is per die. So instead of a 12d6 Slight Flash' date=' you [i']would[/i] get the 7d6 combined Flash.

Dave,

I am not sure where you are getting that from (unless you are suggesting a house rule). Per 5ER 176, it seems pretty clear to me that it is an adder to the power, not an adder to the per die cost. Hero Designer also seems to back this interpretation up.

I would love more insight, if you have it.

Thanks!

Re: Flash, Flash Defense, Cost Vs. Value

I definitely like the 5E version of Flash much better. The only place where I have concerns are the stacking of senses... For a very small cost (basically the cost of a die), you turn a 12d6 Flash vs. Sight (which is tough, but not insurmountable) into an 11d6 "Flash Bang" Flash vs Sight Group and Hearing Group... thus nullifying most characters' primary targeting sense, and primary non-targeting sense.

I have felt for quite a while that stacking the senses is too cheap.. while the mechanism for Flashes are actually much better (BODY -> Segments instead of Phases).

To me, a Flash vs. Sight Group + Hearing Group is really an MPA....

So, the above would be better expressed as: 7d6 Flash vs. Sight Group + 7d6 Flash vs. Hearing Group (this would be 54 AP).

You would probably link the two each other (it is legal to doubly-link powers)... and there you go. A much more balanced build, in my opinion.

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

The problems with figured characteristics I'm sure was one of them.

 

This was a change I really liked actually.

I also liked the change.

However, I would probably like to see this go one level further... to have an attribute of "Size", much like vehicles have. One of the problem with creating a smaller character, for example, is that the DCV bonus that a smaller target should have has to be bought as levels with DCV... and by definition, levels are not persistent. Now, I suppose you could buy the levels with DCV as Persistant, Always On, Inherent, but that gets a little silly, and expensive.

So, I'd say that HERO could do a better job dealing with differences in character size... but this is definitely not a "deal breaker"... and one that I can easily "hand wave".

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

It should be noted that Flying Dodge isn't as "strong" as D4C in some ways as it doesn't result in an auto-miss; if the opponent manages to hit the character (with the +4 DCV bonus factored in) then they do actually hit regardless of the outcome of the FMOVE element.

Does Flying Dodge work like “Martial Dive For Cover”?

 

No. Flying Dodge functions differently — it doesn’t require a DEX Roll, render a character “prone,” or the like.

If a character with Flying Dodge moves out of the way of an area-affecting attack, compare the inches moved to where the attack hits (typically the hex the character was formerly standing in) and the attack’s size — it’s possible that, as with a Dive For Cover, the character’s movement didn’t carry him far enough to get out of the way. If the Flying Dodge’s movement carries him beyond the area covered by the Area Of Effect/Explosion, then the attack doesn’t affect him.

If a character uses Flying Dodge to try to avoid a ranged non-area-affecting attack, he still gets to move and still gets a DCV bonus from the maneuver, but he’s not automatically missed — the attacker still gets a roll to hit (unlike with Dive For Cover, where the attack would automatically miss). If it’s a HTH attack, the Attack Roll is irrelevant, since the character won’t be in HTH combat range any longer.

It seems that this has changed, from the last time I read it. I may update my house rules... but I have also, in the past, gone the way you do, JmOz.

Have to do more thinking... ow!

Re: Black Paladin in CU:NOTW (possible spoilers)

At the conclusion of Shades Of Black' date=' it mentions that if the climactic battle with the heroes goes against the villains, Chantal will attempt to flee and leave the Black Paladin to his fate. I assumed that's what happened in official continuity, and what the BP considers her betrayal.

[/quote']

 

Yeah, you are probably right on that...

 

 

 

However...

On the sidebar talking about "In the Champions Universe" it states that Nighthawk stabs (and kills?) Chantel with the dagger during the fight, and that BP and Talisman are captured. This is the part that confuses me, since the brief summary seems to indicate that she did not flee... but was defeated.

 

 

 

I am hoping that there is an "official" story about this... since it does seem that there is some discontinuity.

 

Thanks, all!!

Re: Black Paladin in CU:NOTW (possible spoilers)

I'm sure an official answer is forthcoming, but...

 

could it be that this actually did happen in the real CU campaign, and for that reason was added to the update?

Ok, I am going to hide my question in a spoiler tag, for those people that haven't read CU:NOTW, and don't want to know... I would request that repliers do the same.

Thank you all for your time!

Re: So, what don't you like about HERO 5th?

I have to agree with Killer Shrike on the FAQ vs. RAW issues that have been caused over the years. I will note that in the example given, DFC causing misses was very contradictory, and only talking about AE or Explosion attacks.

If the attack is an Area Of Effect or Explosion, and it hits the target area but the targeted character avoids the effects due to Dive For Cover

To me, the contradictory point is "hits the target area but the targeted character avoids...". In fact, to me, the target is then the hex, not any single character. Thus, you have hit the target, and whether anyone in the targeted area is still in there is moot.

DFC notwithstanding, my least favorite FAQ ruling is over Flying Dodge. Other than DFC, this is the only way to abort to a movement power. Unlike DFC, it is the perfect defense against a single attacker, as you can always be out of range of an attack. I don't believe this was the intent when the maneuver was originally written, but...

So, I have house ruled that the attack lands before the movement... and all is right in the world again.

As for Instant Change, I am not so upset about it being gone. In fact, I wouldn't even worry about it in a superhero game... time to change from one "outfit" to another has never been an issue in my games.

Regeneration, yeah... that's a wonky build. If it were built "correctly" (which can be done now with the 5ER "Trigger" and "Decreased Re-use Duration", it could be properly built, I think, and not have the issues. Could it be done as a standalone power? Sure, but I think a more proper build using healing would be sufficient, one that doesn't require a lot of extra stuff (like the special time lims)

Re: Hero System: Sidekick

All true. Just remeber there is another company that does matts as well, but they are cheaper and even a vis-a-vis will become semi permanent if you leave it a couple days.

 

I just stick with Chessex now.

Yeah, I have a Crystal Caste mat, which is more beige than white... completely different, more plasticy surface. I like the chessex ones better.

Just remember to get one big enough for at least the majority of the encounters you plan to have...

Re: Multiform

I guess I don't actually see the abuse that the OP was referring to.

Multiform abuse, in my mind, comes in to abuse when you have forms that have a higher point cost than the campaign norm.

Example... in standard superheroic game, the characters all start with 200 base, plus 150 in disads. Since technically Multiform is not limited to this maximum, the character could have an 700 point character in his MF. Now, this character would have to have 500 points of disadvantages, or with GM permission buy off the extra disadvantages (at an additional cost of 350/5 = 70 AP.

Now this form would cost his "true form" 700/5 + 350/5 = 140 + 70 = 210 pts, leaving only 180 points for the base character. Of course, he would never be playing just the "base character" in this way, rather, if an "adventure" (read combat) occurred, he would just change form.

Thus, for this 210 point power, he would have a character built on twice the number of points as the rest of the players. His base character would be nothing more than a talented normal that could change into an alternate form (perhaps Bruce Banner and The Hulk?)

It is this sort of thing that leads to abuse of the power. However, this isn't that much worse than a character doubling his effectiveness through the use of foci, OIHID, fancy Power Frameworks, and the like.

In any case, it is the responsibility of the GM to always proofread and approve any characters he or she is letting into the game. Hero doesn't enforce balance of character design through the charGen process... it enforces it with the will of the GM.

Re: Hero System: Sidekick

Only if you think you'll really need one. You could go through a lot of paper that way. I'd check your local hobby story for vinyl "battle map" with hexes printed on it. Erasable markers can be found in most stores. Just make sure they are erasable.

As an FYI - I really like my Chessex Mondomat -- 4'X8' of battlemap joy - one side hexes, one squares, so can be used for those "other" games that aren't in to hex-love.

Oh, suggestion, though... look for the 1.5" hexes over the 1" - you'll be able to fit all of your kewl HeroClix on them, which you can't do on 1".

And, for markers, you must use water-erasable pens... such as Vis-a-vis... dry erase will not work. And don't even think about what a Sharpie will do to a battlemat!

Re: portional speed

My experience has been (in versions prior to the rule being codified) that fractional speeds are easily taken abused. While the player may claim that it is as a defense against drains (which, if true, should be bought as a limited Power DEF), in reality there will soon come along an Aid (or Succor) to SPD...

Amazing, that the character happened to have "4.4 SPD", and the SPD booster just happens to be 2d6 Aid to SPD, Standard Effect (suitably limited, or in a convenient VPP).

Now, the character ends up always working with a 5 SPD, since he is always getting boosted prior to fighting.

No, I fully agree with the "No fractional SPD" rules.

And, to answer the many questions about increasing DEX while keeping a purchased SPD the same, I would say that purchased DEX is effectively bought "NO Figured Characteristics".

I say effectively, because that isn't really true... actually you are removing 1 point spent on SPD per +1 DEX bought. If you do end up buying so much DEX that it would have an effect on the SPD of the character, then just buy the additional DEX with "No Figured...", pay the cost to increase the SPD, or just take the loss. That's the way the cookie crumbles.