Jump to content

RDU Neil

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    3,863
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

RDU Neil last won the day on May 13

RDU Neil had the most liked content!

About RDU Neil

  • Rank
    Double Millennial Master
  • Birthday 08/04/1967

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As the MCU continues on Disney+ https://deadline.com/2019/05/kari-skogland-to-direct-6-part-the-falcon-and-the-winter-soldier-miniseries-with-anthony-mackie-sebastian-stan-daniel-bruhl-emily-van-camp-1202619197/?fbclid=IwAR3w8nTyFRbkLjevQXCbFpuN7oyB2cdSVgHLUIzPKj7r59qGuZM1KSKRktQ I like that they are trying to bring back Zemo and Sharon.
  2. https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/universe-may-be-billion-years-younger-we-thought-scientists-are-ncna1005541
  3. Personally, I chalk it up to horrible writing and dismal acting... as most WB shows are. But you are right, there is clearly an audience for fan-service comic book stuff, no matter how badly it is done... see Arrow, Supergirl, Flash, etc.
  4. Heroic level games where the use of special abilities and powers are difficult and rare but generate a dramatic effect while being very exhausting... I think that is a GREAT place for more traditional END rules... and in fact remove ways to make reduced END possible. I'd just figure out a formula that shows "X END per action = Y Actions before REC/vulnerability is necessary, and how many RECs before back to full" as a way of comparing playability. Can certain characters effectively "go forever" with their main action/attack... while others are effectively limited like they had charges? That kind of balance needs to be very clear, and are the players ok with how that will actually come about in the game? "Hey... the warrior can only really swing a sword, but he can do it all day... the Wizard gets maybe three actions... but they will be whoppers! Are we ok with that?" (e.g. only). Again, I just feel there has to be a better way to get to the dramatic moment of, "We've driven back the first wave, but gods, I can barely lift my sword!" where usually it is all about tactical rule playing, "If we rotate front line fighters every three actions, then no one ever runs out of END and everyone is always at full STR." I hate that stuff, though a lot of people think that kind of thing is what gaming is all about.
  5. I liked Wolverine up until the post-Byrne/Austin X-Men era, when he became ubiquitous and all ragey adolescent aggression along with the Punisher. He was never a big fave. And yeah... add in Black Panther (old school, before he got all armored up) and the blue-furred Beast (again, Byrne/Austin era) and they were definitely my favorites. I was never as big a DC fan, but in the old argument, I am Batman hands-down over Superman every time.
  6. I don't have the personal "favorite" aspect when it comes to Thor. He was always just around, and certain runs of the comic were good, but the character never connected with me... not like Cap or Daredevil or Iron Fist... characters I really loved in my formative days. I say that because I did love Thor: Ragnarok and "The Dude" Thor... not because I became personally attached to him, but because it made for good cinema. I absolutely LOVED the scene with his mother. Probably my favorite scene in a movie full of them. And I feel that his breaking of the hot headed, somewhat egotistical Odinson persona lent real credence to the awesome "Cap with Mjolnir" moment and his excited, "I knew it!" line which did more for his character than anything.
  7. I'm not a big fan of Kevin Smith... but there is something pure about this fan response... it is really long, but worth a viewing.
  8. I agree... as I've stated before, Steve/Caps arc was that of recklessly self-sacrificing maturing to a point of enlightened self-interest. This was counterpoint to Tony's arc from hedonistic self-interest to the ultimate sacrifice. Steve realized that to deny himself what he fought for others, diminished the achievement... Tony learned to accept what was greater than himself. Parallel arcs crossing each other.
  9. And if every single character had this same, steadfast attitude, then it wouldn't be special or interesting or dramatic or powerful when it is shown. It would diminish Capt. America and his steadfast courage, if that was just how all the heroes act.
  10. Nebula in particular was excellently done in terms of taking her 2-dimensional character from the GotG movies and making her really move forward and grow. For the first time, I really bought the whole Nebula/Gamora rivalry sisterhood. I thought there was a ton of character development... Natasha fully fleshed out her position as the most committed Avenger of all of them... Tony's move to satisfied and willing to sacrifice, etc.
  11. Here is the thread where my alternative END rules were discussed. Would be interested in your thoughts.
  12. I was big into what he was doing, but the play test crashed and burned with my group. Funny that you should bring up END, but that is one area I completely disagree... I feel that mechanic does the exact opposite of engaging with story, and completely disengages as it forces this micromanaging bookkeeping that drives me nuts. "I look at my fork." "Mark off your END." "Ok, I move to pick up my fork." "Ok... big move, mark off that END." "I actually pick up my fork." "Are you sure you have enough END for that?" I mean, seriously... how much of the source material has supers constantly worrying about every little move nickel and diming away their energy? And this is in Supers... let alone you never see in even typical level action adventure. END as written actually works well for gritty level stuff, where swinging a sword for a little bit DOES exhaust you and fist fights often results in two people sagging and staggering into each other. That is NOT supers, though. Also, END cost usually simply became a default "First buy all your powers to O END" built into the cost over everything, or other gaming of the system as a work around... far from inspiring narrative play, it caused gamist power builds to be foremost at issue. Now... dramatic use of limited resources... THIS I really like. The moments when a character goes "all in" on an attack and risks being weak and vulnerable afterwards... rules that encourage this type of decision making and dramatic play I like. We through out END as written decades ago, and instead moved to a END as a governor of active point use, and a pool for "pushing"... which has worked pretty well. (There is another thread on it somewhere on here.)
  13. Sorry... wasn't directing my comment at you at all... just that "handwaving" was kind of the old school short hand for dismissing what has come to be seen as the important stuff... how to actually make good judgments and decisions. I agree it shouldn't be an afterthought, but when you look at the page count and content comparison between "crunchy rules" and "a few mentions of facilitating play" a reader is driven to think one is way more important than the other... it just happens to be true in the other direction. I actually think there is room in an evolved HERO (very different direction than it has gone) to create some Nar rules, particularly around SFX, that could layer on the crunch. In fact, a lot of crunch is trying to quantify SFX in some areas (think Growth and Density Increase rules, etc.) that in other situations, are left unaddressed (energy blast doesn't deal with side effects of setting things on fire or whatever, so why does Growth or DI try to deal with being too big and heavy that you break things... all that is SFX so be consistent). If there were more rules around SFX in terms of "judging interactions and using SFX to storytell around power uses" that would be huge... but very much a new interpretation... not old school HERO at all.
×
×
  • Create New...