RDU Neil

This... a thousand times, this!

So... to the rest of my post, your statement here means you are ok with Danger Sense alerting you to a drone pilot on the other side of the planet? Or say, someone pressing a button on the other side of the planet and launching a missile... Danger Sense would have a flat roll, even at the most basic level? Now let's complicate it. Isn't working in a secret room many miles away to launch an attack a form of Stealth. That character is doing things in such a way as to keep someone from noticing you... so does the Danger Sense roll have penalties now? Even more... let's say the missile launcher dude is loud and boisterous and clumsy while he launches the attack from the other side of the planet... does that change things? What if the boisterous missile launcher is launching a stealth missile that is practically silent and designed to be hard to see... what is the Danger Sense rolling against, the loud guy launching the missile, or the missile itself??? Is it the sniper or the bullet? What is the difference between the sniper and the hard partying missile launcher from the perspective of Danger Sense? When is the missile actually a danger? When it is about to be launched? At launch? Only when it has spent several minutes in the air and is closing on the target? Did the Danger Sense go off 18 minutes before the missile even crossed the horizon? What about GodStarr! who is about to launch a hyper-relativistic weapon from the other side of the galaxy... but even so, it will take 36,000 years to reach earth at its present location and intercept the target with Danger Sense. In fact, the attack was launched before the target and civilization as we know it even existed on Earth, but GodStarr! is a god, so hey. When the target was born, was her Danger Sense already going off and keeps going off her entire life, because that attack was launched 35,967 years ago? Time is essential for determining what constitutes a threat or danger. Distance and time are the same thing. Distance is coded as Range modifiers in HERO, so if Range mods don't apply... time does not apply to Danger Sense. Anyway... you see how quickly it spirals into absurdity if there are not some clear limits... and not story/game world limits... system mechanical limits. To me, this mechanical limit would have to be based around what segment/phase the attack would land. Danger Sense only applies against attacks launched or about to be launched that would impact that segment/phase. (I don't use the speed chart, so I have action rounds, but it would apply the same.) e.g. Sniper will pull the trigger and bullet will strike all in the same action round, ok, you get the flash of danger insight just as/before the trigger is pulled because attack launch and land are basically simultaneous. Now, that boisterous missile launcher... Danger Sense didn't register when he flipped the switch, not until the missile was a couple city blocks out and 2-3 seconds from impact. THEN "Uh oh!" If the sniper is far enough away and the attack must travel more than one action round before striking, Danger Sense won't go off until the bullet has already traveled. That at least is a clear mechanical resolution (if not a metaphysical one) and yet... This unfortunately would not allow for a very common example of Danger Sense: Example: Michiko, a ninja assassin, has Danger Sense (11-, out of combat) because she’s exceptionally observant and almost never surprised. While preoccupied with her meditation, she fails to notice three samurai enter her garden. However, as they approach her, she makes a successful Danger Sense roll. Sensing danger, she spins, pulling a knife from her boot scabbard and denying her attackers a Surprise bonus. This is right out of the book, but in this scene no attack has actually been launched, she is just aware that attackers have approached... and not only that, there is no disputing why the samurai are there... Danger Sense wouldn't have worked if they weren't a danger. Maybe these samurai were friends looking to play Settlers of Cataan or whatever. Nothing in the description indicates their intent except the fact that Danger Sense went off. (Such a use of Danger Sense wouldn't work with my ruling. It would have had to wait until a samurai drew his sword and started to swing for her to trigger.) Really... the more I dig into Danger Sense, the more I realize the "Stop Sign" wasn't "Too powerful" but more a warning of the existential nightmare this Talent implies for the GM. Danger Sense only really works if the rules are "Player should be asked to make Danger Sense roll whenever GM determines it is dramatically appropriate to the direction of game play to find out if the PC detected an incoming/potential threat. The results of the roll have the mechanical effect of removing surprise penalties if successful, and the narrative effect of giving the players dramatic license to act on the knowledge of threat/imminent attack on their characters." Basically, Danger Sense only works if it is a solidly Nar rule, with a small layer of task resolution tied to it.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-oscars-black-panther-best-picture-turan-20190217-story.html?fbclid=IwAR2-SDvvNenOIw6gruevzhOuCUZsEPADZ8uEwK45rA2DqKCIehlQxAo2eWo The best argument for Black Panther as Best Picture winner I've read.

I totally get how Skill Level pricing is at odds with Characteristic pricing. My main issue though, is that they are too cheap at Heroic levels, and too powerful. I've noted PCs that are no longer in the DEX war business, have slipped into the Skill Level war business, because "not missing" is so damn important. AND because what look innocuous on the page... +2 here, +2 there... often stack very quickly and easily, and can get out of hand. But, since OCV and DCV were separated into their own Charcteristics, we now have a clear "value" for +1... it is 5 points. +1 OCV in all situations is 5 points. This does beg the question about 10pt skill levels as 10 points spent in OCV and DCV get you both at the same time, not just one at a time.

This is back to what I said before... the rules contradict. If something is "too far away" my senses can't perceive it, but Range mods are the only way "too far" is defined in the game... do they apply or not? Also, vs. "Stealth typically applies to all senses, including Combat Sense and Danger Sense" Stealth is just a way to create PER Roll penalties... so do they apply or not? IF your interpretation is correct it seems this could be amazingly clear if they wanted it to be. "Danger Sense is a PER Roll but not subject to any normal PER Roll Penalties (like range, etc.) EXCEPT for those generated by opposing Stealth rolls. What Danger Sense perceives is a general sense of immediate threat and where it is coming from. A successful Danger Sense roll negates any "Surprised" penalties to DCV." Done. Except, this implies that the sense is actually detecting "intent to harm" as well as "imminent threat", as the guy with the sniper rifle hasn't actually pulled the trigger yet, so there is no imminent threat until he does. So, if a two-year old toddles up behind you desirous of biting your ankles, does Danger Sense work? The intent is there, but the capability of actual danger/harm is not. Does it require BOTH intent to harm and imminent threat? Well then, that falling piano won't be detected, because there is no intent. And without Range penalties, is my Danger Sense constantly going off if I'm a well known superhero and villains all over the world are constantly plotting my destruction? If a military drone operator is 9000 miles away and operating a bombing drone several miles above my head as she "plans" to pull the trigger and blow up the building I'm in... does Danger Sense go off? If so, when... as the pilot is starting to target the building, right before she pulls the trigger, once she has pulled the trigger, only after the missile has closed some distance?

This is something I thought about. Make PER roll. "Ok, you see a small dark lump with something sticking out." or "You see a sniper" and then any interpretation of said sniper is up to the PC to make. With Danger Sense Roll... "Ok... yo see a small dark lump with something sticking out/or your see a sniper and you instinctively know they are about to shoot you." Now THAT interpretation has some merit... in that it is "Perception roll with a bit of understanding intent" thrown in. Now... is that worth 22 pts base cost? Hmmmm...

Yeah... I was thinking that a better Danger Sense would be "mechanically" simply a counter to the state of Surprised. Something like... 5 Pts: 11-, +1 for 2, If a character would be Surprised in Combat, they may make a Danger Sense roll. If they make the roll, they are not Surprised and have no penalties against that attack. +5 Points, applies to Surprised Out of Combat as well. Done. It is a simple mechanical answer to the Surprise Attack penalties. SFX of your choice. Seems better costed. Any "source material" application of Danger Sense that allows more is bought as a Detect as per the rules... like the classic "Spider-man defusing a bomb by his spider-sense telling him which wires NOT to cut."

Like I said, I haven't actually done this... we resolved to allow Dodge as a maneuver (normal or martial maneuver) to affect both HtH and Ranged. For game simplicity sake. Based on your question, if forced, I'd say that Basic Dodge would be two maneuvers as well... Dodge (as is, an no cost) is dodging vs. HtH... and Avoid (or whatever), also free but separate and vs. Ranged attacks. As a simulation of combat, the actions you take to make yourself hard to hit by someone close up and swinging at you are VERY VERY DIFFERENT than the actions you take to avoid being hit by projectiles being sent at range. In fact, actions you do to avoid a punch or sword likely make it EASIER to be hit from range and vice versa. And again, I'm not proposing this, even though it appeals to a certain sense of mine.

A more clear example of confusion... "Out Of Combat (+5 points): For +5 points, the character who succeeds with a Danger Sense roll will not be surprised while out of combat; he perceives surprise attacks before they occur (if they could be perceived, given his senses). For example, a normal human with this type of Danger Sense could see a sniper who was about to shoot at him from the top of a building," So, this says, "If they could be perceived, given his senses"... but then uses a sniper example. So either characters WITHOUT Danger Sense should NOT be allowed to roll perception vs. that Sniper (which I think we all disagree with), or Danger Sense at this level is not giving you anything more than PER. Also... Immediate Vicinity (+5 points): For +5 points, a character who succeeds with a Danger Sense roll is forewarned of danger to anyone or anything in his immediate vicinity (say, the room he’s standing in). General Area (+5 points): For an additional +5 points, the character can detect any danger in his general area (city). Any Area (+5 points): For an additional +5 points, the character can detect danger over any area. This is subject to GM’s discretion; danger at the planetary level is usually a good upper limit. These forms of Danger Sense do not suffer from the Range Modifier, nor do they require Telescopic or MegaScale to work. So this last statement implies that if you didn't take one of these increased area add-ons, then Range modifiers DO apply... again, making DS just another Perception Roll for 22 points. That just seems... wrong.

Yes, it is this exact set of descriptions that has me scratching my head. This then, is directly counter to... "+10 Character can perceive any type of danger, in or out of combat, and regardless of whether he could perceive it with his standard Senses" So... unless your example is referring to "if they paid the extra points, then it works when others are blinded"... but then the question is back to what I said initially... what is the point of Danger Sense if it you pay 22 points (basic, functions as sense, out of combat) vs. Perception roll, which is free. The only real benefit coming in the rare instances of a character's other senses being "Flashed" which can happen, but is pretty rare. The book also says "Stealth typically applies to all Senses, including Combat Sense and Danger Sense," Stealth (and Concealment) are simply ways of imposing PER penalties... so again, how is DS different than PER for the 22 point level? 22 points for allowing your PER roll to potentially add to a DS roll that is still subject to all the normal PER penalties?? Otherwise So we are back to "If the GM allows it, it might do a little more" but again... that "intuition" is subject to range mods, Stealth mods, etc., so isn't actually any better than PER. 22 points being spent on +11 to Perception Roll seems like a MUCH better spend, and would actually make sense... since that would cover penalties that otherwise make it "imperceptible."

So you always start with "Make a PER roll" and have DS kick in if they miss it? Do you change the modifiers for DS compared to the PER roll, or is it essentially, that the get a do-over of the same roll? If you had no realistic hope, due to range mods and concealment, etc., how is Danger Sense (which is a PER roll modified by these things as well) supposed to help? It will be the same impossible roll, if the PER roll was.

Yes... that fits my basic interpretation, in terms of what it tells you... intensity and rough direction... but as you point out, what does it provide that perception does not? Is it not impeded by barriers? i.e. a perception roll doesn't work/has major penalties if the object is on the other side of a wall, or maybe several walls away... plus range mods for how far away. Does Danger Sense operate through barriers, kinda like "hearing"... I can sense a train bearing down on me from outside the house because of noises and vibrations getting louder, more violent, etc.? Range mods still apply, obviously, but that guy with rail gun lining up a shot via IR targeting through three concrete walls... my Per roll doesn't apply, but Danger Sense does? How is being on the other side of walls any different than Stealth or Concealment applying? I thought the point was that A normal PER roll would be nearly impossible to pick out the camoflaged, concealed position of the sniper just before they fire, but Danger Sense absolutely does (at least in the source material). Spider-man doesn't hear the ninja sneaking up on him, but {WAVY LINES WAVY LINE} and "Behind me!" and he dodges or whatever, because his Spidey-sense tingled. Detects in HERO make sense to created a "sense" of something that basic characters senses would not register... Detect Magic, etc... that aren't covered in the defined Enhanced Senses (like IR). The main question is "what is Danger Sense detecting that your normal senses don't?" which begs the question, what is the point of Danger Sense "only if your senses could detect it"??

Ok... so the point is that Danger Sense should be considered a "separate" Perception roll? Not in place of, but additional to. So a PC with DS basically gets two rolls to spot bad stuff?

In my supers campaign, it as a minor background/world building point that professional sports as we know them in the real world died out in the '90s. The "steroid era" was heightened with the "metahuman" issue, and any player who was better than the rest got tarred and feathered with accusations of being "too good to be human" and that there was no level playing field. This, combined with increasingly open and visual superheroics that made human athletes seem lame... it all combined to implode the "professional sports industry." Michael Jordan was one of the last big names, and he is more known as having to fend off tons of accusations of being metahuman, than being a great athlete/player. Just a fun aside in our game, which was more of a "people with powers" than traditional superheroes. The effects of a burgeoning population of superhumans on earth was catastrophic and transformative over the many years of the campaign... so this "death of professional sports" was just a footnote.

We had this issue come up in our current modern, action adventure game. One PC was a master swordsman, and it never felt right that his levels with "Sword" suddenly made him harder to hit with a gun. i.e. He had Martial Arts (including Dodge) with Weapon Element "Swords" and basically, his Dodge maneuver when he had his sword out went from +5 DCV to +10 DCV... and that made no sense with ranged attacks. Vs. Hand to Hand you could very easily understand that dodging with a sword whirling about you woul dmake it harder to hit with a punch or other hand to hand attack... but not make it harder to hit if it was someone 20 feet away trying to shoot you. We ended up reinforcing the rule that Levels with HtH don't apply to Ranged combat... but we still allowed Dodge to affect your full DCV... but any levels with Dodge did not apply. To be honest, if we were being more sticklers, just like you have to buy separate instances of Martial Arts to apply it vs. range and HtH... I think it is more logical that you'd have to buy Dodge twice... Dodge in my HtH martial arts is vs. HtH attacks... Dodge in my Ranged martial arts is vs. ranged attacks. We haven't gone there, but I've considered it.

So, I've got a question about Danger Sense and how it is interpreted/used by other in their campaigns. At core, we all get the "idea" of a Spidey-sense or whatever... but mechanically, as stated in the rules, it is simply a form of Detect. A form of Perception roll vs. Danger. But... aren't Perception rolls used against danger all the time, anyway? If a campaign has no Danger Sense, if the PCs are trekking through the woods and you want to see if they notice the elven archers about to pepper them, don't you make them roll a Perception Roll? How is having Danger Sense giving you something more, unless you you've bought it all the way vs. otherwise imperceptible threats. Per rolls are subject to modifiers vs. Stealth, Concealment, range mods, etc. So is Danger Sense. So what does Danger Sense give you (for a significant cost) that Perception Rolls don't? Want to notice that sniper taking aim at you? Perception roll... and/or Danger Sense... both do the same thing. How do you rule on differences between the two, or is Danger Sense only really worth it in very rare situations... which makes it not really worth the expenditure after all?

I want to like this a lot more than once.

To this point, and a it is a very good summation, I've always looked at MP as similar to VPP, but you get more limited selection for less cost as more ease of use. I personally don't like VPPs simply because I have no desire to have anyone at the table constantly looking up rules and powers and such to figure out what their next configuration is going to be. That may be what some consider fun, but that is not a play environment I want to be in. Not because their can't be a character concept for it, but those aren't concepts I want to be in/run a game with. (i.e. A Dr. Strange or Dr. Fate type of character who always seems to have just the spell for the situation... certainly in-genre, but absolutely horrible in actual play, unless maybe in a solo game.) Personally, I really LIKE MPs with lots of slots to mimic that kind of character, but with boundaries. Now, I'd have to check, but if I was to look at all the PCs in my current game, I'd need to check and see, but maybe all of them have a MP... but the funny thing is, they all "feel" different in play, but the fact that every PC has their "pool of points that expand my options" may actually be a given. We've never discussed it as a "Must have because of efficiency" probably because we've never had any sense that it was abusive. So... anecdotally, perhaps we are one more data point for "MP have become the default mechanic for supers to go wide, and nearly everyone has one"... but again, I don't think we've ever noticed this as a problem. I think it is because it tended to make characters more interesting to play if they had some breadth, not that players were trying to min-max and cover every base. (Again, our experience only, here) I certainly wouldn't want VPP to be the default "options" mechanic, that's for sure..

HAHAH! I can't stop laughing. I don't know why... but the mental image of STANburst shooting these flailing figures of a guy named Stan at people just won't leave me, and I find it absurdly funny. Ah... thanks for the laugh!??

Exactly. It has always been a fine balance between "min-max" and "bad build." Everyone has a different line between the two. I just figure I'd do what I could to encourage "build to concept" over "build efficiency" by doing three things... 1) relax point total controls, 2) set a campaign average standard to judge build effectiveness, and 3) group character building. The main player gets to do the first draft, but the entire play group (GM included) have a say in how the character is finalized. IMO, the single worst perpetrator of broken character builds is not any one mechanic (though things like MP use are an indicator of "look closer")... it isn't the mechanics, but the underlying assumption that the player builds "their character" to their own expectations and not as part of the group. The player has a lot of say in their character, but the group has input. Ultimately the more that prep AND actual play are group activities (or at least group input) the better.

I've been thinking about why I don't quite resonate with the concern over "caps becomes minimums"... but couldn't quite put my finger on it. Then I realized it was simply my perspective was slightly different. If someone says "60AP or 12d6 Cap," or whatever... I realize I never ever thought of them as caps... but averages. When our group short hands "This is a 12d6 game" we aren't talking about caps, we are talking about "The average base attack" and every power/build will be judged against that average. A gut check "Is this particular build/power/maneuver combo more or less or around the same effectiveness as a 12d6 attack? If so, cool. If a weaker than average, does it makes sense/is the player ok with that? If stronger than average, is it too much? Will it unbalance or make the game unfun? Essentially, I was never giving a "cap" to the game, but the average that players should aim for as a guide to their builds. Flexing around 12d6 effectiveness (as an example) is generally the expectation for that game/campaign/sub-campaign. Maybe that is a better way to think about it? It just occurred to me, rather than anything I've formally established.

I wasn't thinking any kind of particular level, but this did make me think... just like you can buy a CSL with only one maneuver... and if MA is considered a maneuver... is this a work around? I mean, I just read the rules again, and it seems that they (the rules) bend over backward to allow Multiple Attacks, but require all kinds of unique caveats (like, MA is a maneuver, but unlike other maneuvers, you can't buy CSLs with this maneuver). Kind of maddening. And granted, I think most of these are intended to ameliorate most of the abuses of a super with lots of different attack powers. In Heroic games, where this grew out of "Double Shot" and applied only to firing guns (and only specific guns) multiple times... it hardly seems a concern. A character could have +3 w/Pistols (9pts) only when doing a Multiple Attack... worth reducing it down to 2 points apiece... and now we are back to PSL level cost to offset negative OCV modifier. Heck... just buy flat out 2 pt CLS with your automatic pistol, get +3 OCV for six points at all times which just helps out with Mult Att as well. All those pre-emptive "you can't do a normal thing in this particular case" really bug me. Mult Att is either a maneuver that plays by the baseline rules for maneuvers, or it isn't. Especially in this case where the pages of unique rulings don't really do much in the end.

I love this idea... a lot. I'm no where close to a Fantasy Hero campaign, but I'd use this is a second.

This is a good example of needing a judgment call on Combat Luck... 1) Did the fighter player have the OPTION of taking Combat Luck and just chose not to? Ok... death is on him. 2) Was Combat Luck not allowed (by house rule) if you wore combat... or the Talent changed to not apply when armor is worn? That could stick in a player's craw. 3) What does "Doesn't work with armor" entail? It doesn't stack on Hit Locations where armor is coveirng, but it DOES apply in hit locations where there is no armor? Or because any armor is worn, Combat Luck doesn't work, no matter hit location? (That would be a serious bummer for this PC.) Not saying you can't do it, but if you have an extra rule of "Combat Luck doesn't work with Armor" then you need to be really clear about what that means.

When you peel it apart it does look like a cobble, but our group loves Combat Luck, even with armor, but because it fits the cinematic action. It lets them have a modicum of comfort when being blasted with automatic gunfire that one lucky shot won't completely take them out. It does make hits to armor (less common/less coverage in modern action than fantasy) much less likely to penetrate, but in a game where taking any Body damage is serious, it just allows them to have more confidence in combat. As I've said elsewhere, if it was a more traditional Danger International (spies and private eyes, not action movies) I'd disallow or further nerf Combat Luck (like only damage resistance and doesn't stack). Edit: Combat Luck is something, in my experience, that looks like a horrible cobble/cludge on paper, but ACTUAL PLAY it works very simply and elegantly and affects play in a way that feels right. Ugly in construction, elegant in execution.