Crypt

Re: Attacking an object Yes, it seems that replacing the base DCV 3 of non-adjacent AoE and inanimate objects by 0 would be the only solution. IMHO the difference between adjacent (0) and non-adjacent AoE (3) is useless because there are already rules for calculating distance modifier. A base of 0 DCV, that's all. Then animated being or object's "base movement" (from DEX and/or actual movement), their size and their distance modify this base. It would be a lot more logical and simpler. (then maneuvers and CSLs add to this base.) Because of the distance and the hole size. There are rules for that. What is the rationnal behind those free 3 points of DCV ??? I think it only brings troubles. An average human has a base DCV of 3. When he's KO or Sleeping it drops to 0. (prone or not, that's not the problem.) OK, that's nice and logical. Now, an inanimate object should have a base DCV of 0 instead of 3. Distance and size are another things.

Re: Attacking an object PS: Let's say a basic humain (OCV 3) want to punch an adjacent 50 cm object ===> 11+3-3-4 = 7- = 16% hit probability. I'm quite sure i have more chance to hit...

Page 447:"A human-sized or hex-sized inanimate object typically has a DCV of 3..." Don't you think it should be 0 instead of 3 ? (a sleeping or KO being has DCV 0 so i think an inanimate object has no reason to have a better base DCV)

Re: 3D Star mapping software Still working on it

Re: Mapping the galaxy your maps are very sweet ---------------------------------

Re: an emulation of the Harp/RM Study effect thanks, i will use the VPP version.

Re: Cloud Form + Flight + No Running Yes but flight is a 3D mvmt mode. I think this is worth the turn mode limitation. In fact i even think that 3D+turn mode is still better than 2D without turn mode. But, nevermind, thanks everybody for your replies.

Re: Cloud Form + Flight + No Running or a limitation on Desolidification (no running mode) But do you agree that the character will have to buy off this limitation (or disadvantage) as soon as his cloud Flight would be equal or superior to his normal running mode ? I don't see where Running is defined as Non-Combat mvmt. As far as i understand it Running (or any mvmt mode) is basically defined as a combat movement (6" = 6" of combat mvmt) while Non-combat movement is a multiple (default X2) of this combat movement (with some tactical side effects like OCV reduction and the like.) IMHO the consequence of a No Non-Cmbt Mvmt on Flight would only mean that the character cannot flight at 2X his combat mvmt Flight velocity (= 2")

I have to convert several Harp's characters to HERO. One of them has an animal form spell which uses another spell called Study. Study is used to memorize a number of forms. The more levels in study, the more slots in it. For instance if the character can memorize 3 forms and have studied a cat, a howl and a cow he could use animal form to transform himself into one of this animals. The character can empty a study slot at will in order to memorize a new form. (by casting Study) I don't want to build a HERO standalone version of Study (there is no study power). But i'd like to keep its effect. I could build animal form with Multiform and a number of added alternate forms. But those alternate forms should not be fixed. (= the study effect) I've thought about several possibilities, including a quite limited VPP version, but i'd like to know your opinions about this problem.

What if i'd like to build a variant of cloud form which allows a very slow flight but no running mode ? Cloud Form: Desolidification (affected by wind, fire or cold) (40 AP) Cannot Pass Through Solid Objects (-1/2) Total: 27 + Flight 1" (2AP) Linked to Desolidification (-1/2) Total: 1 + How to forbid running ? (thus only flight 1" would be possible)

Re: What's the most useless supplement you'd actually like to see? - NetHack Hero (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetHack) & - Ghostbusters Hero .

Re: Negative Strength and END cost Ok. It seems fine. Does anyone know if it has already being done by someone ? Sometimes playing very normal peoples in a realistic way can be fun. For instance in a horror scenario. (I'd like to use HERO for absolutely every theme)

Re: Negative Strength and END cost This is a combat situation. There is a fight and one of the character is lifting the gate in order to help his friends fleeing the big red dragon who's charging them. So in this combat situation the character would never get tired of lifting the gate (let's say he has REC 4.) I'm not sure lifting the maximum you can is so different from holding breath.

Re: Negative Strength and END cost Third question => Let's say my 10ST character is trying to lift 100 kg, without moving (for instance he lifts a gate so his friends can walk under it.) It would costs 2 END per phase (heroic.) This character has SPD 4. Would you agree to the fact that, because he doesn't move, the more logical thing to do is to reduce his SPD to 2 in order to spend only 4 per turn instead of 8 ? EDIT: i think i would not allow a post-segment 12 Recovery here (if he keeps lifting the gate.) What is your opinion ?

Re: Negative Strength and END cost this leads to another question => Is it official ? I tend to see CHARs as Powers. By following the general rounding method less than 3 ST would cost 0 END but by following the power rule page 102 the minimum cost per phase is 1 END. Which one is the good one ?

Re: Negative Strength and END cost So a -20 ST character lifting 1.6 kg (his max) will never lose END while a 10 ST lifting 100 kg (his max) will lose 2 END (heroic.) That may seems a bit strange. What are the reasons behind the fact that END costs for ST feats are not proportional to the (Feat/ST) ratio ? (eg: END cost for lifting 1.6kg/-20ST = End cost for lifting 100kg/10ST) I think there is a good reason but i don't see it clearly.

What are the END cost for using negative Strength ? (in a heroic campaign)

(major) Transform used to Create Things=> Would you agree to say that if i roll for a 4D6 MT and get for instance a 12 BODY this is like i get a 12 Character Points created item ? (4d6/2 but Body cost X2 so 4D6 Body = 4D6 MT Character Points) Then what about the needed skills for complex creations ? For instance would you impose a Required a Skill Roll ? (4D6 costs 60 CP ==> skill roll -6) Let's say i'd like to transform "nothing" to a car, or a castle, or anything. Let's say that this thing is a 50 CP item. If i have, for instance, a 20d6 MT and roll for a total of 60, would you agree this is the same as a 60 CP result so i may create the 50 CP item from nothing (after succeeding a -30 or worse required technical skill roll.) since several parts of "super creation" may be simulated with a VPP i have refocused my question

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? There is a complete mutual misunderstanding here so i suggest to actually stop this discussion now. Please.

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? ok, i agree and believe you even if i think this was actually more about a logical argumentation than a linguistic one. Everything is allright. I stop here.

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? Maybe i should explain myself in another way => I think you would agree that the word "scale" has several definitions in english => Scale=A progressive classification. Scale=A ratio. Scale=An animal scale. in french => Echelle = A progressive classification. Echelle = A ratio. Echelle = A ladder. So this is not a native or not native language question because, except for the animal and ladder variants, the definitions are the same in English and in French. The question is: what kind of definition HERO uses ? H5 page 7 ==> So, 1"=2m, which is a 1:2 scale. Don't you think this is the ratio definition ? Don't you think the combat scale of HERO is a ratio ? Are the HERO author(s) wrong just because he/they don't use the most common definition ? I know that languages may have several definitions for one word (i'm not a complete freak) but what is the most usefull, the less confusing way of handling that in the scope of this rpg ? (...knowing that HERO actually uses one clear definition. Do you think HERO uses several definitions ?)

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? Ok. PS: even if HERO mainly uses the ratio definition ? (cf for instance the Fantasy Hero Mass Combat : there is no confusion here. The word scale is used as a ratio = "1 turn equals", "1 hex equals", "Range divisor !" It's even written "The last column in the Battle Scale Table, Range divisor, indicates the range scale of the mass combat, which is related to the distance scale." We can also read "The larger the average unit, the larger the scope of the battle." So there is no confusion, by combining those two sentences we can see that scale and scope are related but are not the same thing. So even if i'm not a native englishman i think i'm not completely misunderstanding what 'scale' means here.... Or am i ? Because this is a HERO thread i think we could use the HERO definition. )

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? yes but, when you say, for instance, that 1 unit equals 1 squad this is a ratio, isn't it ? PS: stop, lol, i surrender. :):)

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? Unless you speak about ladders, échelles, dragon scales or écailles i think the english scale is the same as the french one. But Well, ok, i'm sorry, i'm not a native english speaker so i'm wrong, you're right and i surrender. Majority of frenchmen do the same usage mistake about scale so i guess they are right too. Me too. Thank for you english lesson. PPS: This kind of scale ? Ok, i see what you mean (not a very usefull definition when speaking about tactical and strategical scales, isn't it ? Honestly ? Don't you think the ratio definition is more usefull when dealing with scales in battles simulation ?) But, well, stop, you're right, i'm wrong and everything is fine. Ok ?

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? This is not "my" definition. And this definition (scale=ratio) is not specific to maps, as i've already said. Statistical opinions are the empirical facts of belief, this has nothing to do with the empirical facts of what is a ratio. I would not be suprised that the majority of people believe role-playing-games are only a kind of video-game. Would you agree with them just because of a statistical superiority ? Reasonable ? Lol... Information. Isn't it a free "forum" ? (not a very friendly one.....this is often rude and disdainful here....that's very surprising for a dedicated forum. Well, nevermind...) And because this is a HERO forum and the originial post was "How strategic is the combat system for HERO?", referring to Fantasy Hero page 201 we can see that the Hero's usage of "scales" concerns spatial, manial (is it the correct english word ?) and temporal ratios and that there is a wide selection of possible scales, from sub-tactical to strategical. PS: my intent was not to speak about that for a long time, it was just to inform, but i'm very surprised to see how strong is your will to bend reality and defend opinions. I cannot struggle against beliefs so the final word is :"As you like it" and bye.