Crypt

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? I'm sorry about that but this is the way scales work, even if it's not pleasant. When you speak about scale you speak about ratio. And when you speak about tactical and strategical scales you speak about spatial (and temporal) scales. The spatial part may be translated to a map (2D or 3D.) If your "scales" are not spatial nor temporal i would be curious to know what kind of mystical scales you spoke about. I guess what you meant was "scale in common language." But this common usage is not correct, whatever the way you use it (on a map or not), even if 99% people use it this way.

Re: Is combat in HERO strategic? you should say "smaller scale." 1/100 is a smaller scale than 1/10 (because 1/100<1/10) but concerns a larger area.

Re: Open Ended, etc. I would not use such a linear method. (with the 3D6 method there is only 0.46 % to do 100% damage while there is 16.6 % chance with this 1D6 method) English is not my native language so i may be unclear sometimes. What i said is = I see no reason behind the fact that the more powerfull is an effect the less chance it has to be far from average. Or, if you prefer, the weaker is an effect the more chance it has to bring extreme results. PS: please note that i think the majority of other rpg systems have a lot more weaknesses than that.

Re: Open Ended, etc. Do you have any rational explanation to the fact that the more powerfull (the more die) your attack is the less chance you have to obtain a result far from average ? And is there any other rational explanation to the fact that a 1D6 dmg is 100% linear while others are not ? Obviously using the 3D6 repartitions bring some probabilities changes when rolling for effects. (the far from 3 is x, the more changes appear.) But IMHO, using xD6 is what should be seen as the distorting method. Not the 3D6 one. PS: also note that open-ended results (19+) have very small probabilities. You would have to make millions rolls before getting a 27.

Re: Open Ended, etc.

This is just my two cents roll house rule => First i reverse the Rolls- by substracting 11. So a 14- roll becomes a +3 bonus. Roll 3D6, add the bonus and the target is 10+. (3D6+bonuses+modifiers must be equal or superior to 10) eg. 15- ---> +4 Roll 3D6 (12) +4 = 16 so this is a success. (by 6 points) 111 is an automatic failure. 666 is an open-ended, not an automatic success ==> Second if a 666 is rolled i re-roll those 3D6. '6' become +1 and all other results become 0. All +1 must be reroll until no die remain. eg. 666 => reroll 3d6 ===> results are 3,5,6 ===> 3 and 5 are ignored, the '6' gives +1 and is rerolled ===> 6 ==> +1 and reroll ===> 4 = STOP TOTAL= 18+1+1 = 20. eg. 666 => reroll 3d6 ===> results are 2,6,6 ===> 2 is ignored, the two '6' gives +2 and are rerolled ===> 6,3 ==> 3 is ignored, the '6' gives +1 and is rerolled ===> 5 = STOP TOTAL= 18+1+1+1 = 21. Here are the statistical results (empirical probabilities) for 100 000 000 rolls = Nbre de 3 = 463407 (0,463407% equal_or_sup:100) Nbre de 4 = 1388736 (1,388736% equal_or_sup:99,536593) Nbre de 5 = 2776299 (2,776299% equal_or_sup:98,147857) Nbre de 6 = 4631797 (4,631797% equal_or_sup:95,371558) Nbre de 7 = 6941682 (6,941682% equal_or_sup:90,739761) Nbre de 8 = 9722479 (9,722479% equal_or_sup:83,798079) Nbre de 9 = 11577444 (11,577444% equal_or_sup:74,0756) Nbre de 10 = 12501208 (12,501208% equal_or_sup:62,498156) Nbre de 11 = 12500450 (12,50045% equal_or_sup:49,996948) Nbre de 12 = 11572222 (11,572222% equal_or_sup:37,496498) Nbre de 13 = 9723027 (9,723027% equal_or_sup:25,924276) Nbre de 14 = 6943355 (6,943355% equal_or_sup:16,201249) Nbre de 15 = 4626739 (4,626739% equal_or_sup:9,25789400000001) Nbre de 16 = 2779792 (2,779792% equal_or_sup:4,63115500000001) Nbre de 17 = 1388685 (1,388685% equal_or_sup:1,85136300000001) Nbre de 18 = 267899 (0,267899% equal_or_sup:0,462678000000011) Nbre de 19 = 134253 (0,134253% equal_or_sup:0,194779000000011) Nbre de 20 = 44245 (0,044245% equal_or_sup:0,0605260000000101) Nbre de 21 = 12313 (0,012313% equal_or_sup:0,0162810000000064) Nbre de 22 = 3039 (0,003039% equal_or_sup:0,00396800000000042) Nbre de 23 = 735 (0,000735% equal_or_sup:0,000928999999999292) Nbre de 24 = 158 (0,000158% equal_or_sup:0,000193999999993366) Nbre de 25 = 21 (2,1E-05% equal_or_sup:3,59999999943739E-05) Nbre de 26 = 13 (1,3E-05% equal_or_sup:1,49999999905504E-05) Nbre de 27 = 2 (2E-06% equal_or_sup:1,99999999495049E-06) Third every xD6 effects (damages, power effects, etc) are replaced by a 3D6 roll and a table. 3F = 17% of maximum effect OR automatic failure 4-5 = 25% 6-7 = 36% 8-9 = 47% 10-11 = 58.5% 12-13 = 69.5% 14-15 = 80.5% 16-17= 91.5% 18= 100 % 19= 111% 20= 122% 21= 133 % 22 = 144% 23= 155 % 24= 166% 25= 177% 26= 188% 27= 199 % MAX The 3d6 roll for damage is the same as the one rolled for the combat skill. This is the pure roll, without any modifier. (!!!) Eg. OCV 5 and 2d6 normal dmg vs DCV 3 Roll 13 ==> 13+5-3 = 15 = success because it beats the 10+ target. Damage = use the pure roll (13), not the modified one ! => 13 gives 69.5 % of 12 (the maximum result of 2d6) => 8 Stun and 3 Body If no skill roll is needed and you must roll for a xD6 effect, simply roll 3D6 instead of those xD6. Thus, whatever your effect roll you will always obtain a 3D6 repartition. eg. 1d6 is no more linear and 10d6 has the same chance to get maximum or minimum results as 3D6's. EDIT: do not misunderstand it xD6 repartitions are simply replaced by the 3D6 repartitions, without any modifier. Margins DO NOT improve damages. Everything is summarized here ==> (without open-ended) note: the '1/2' column is for half chance rolls. If, with every modifiers added, you have a final +3 bonus you must roll 15 or more (pure roll) to obtain the 'half chance' results. with open-ended => http://cryptmaster.free.fr/HERO/MODS/HEROpenEnded_eng.xls

Re: 3D Star mapping software Yes, i've just re-uploaded it, to be sure. Don't forget to select and zoom through sectors and stars (wheel=zoom) note: Right now i have to fix a mathematic problem which appears when, for instance, you set Speed to very high values ==> the smallest speeds won't work anymore and rotating objects will vibrate. (this is a floating problem which appears beacause of very high time and space scales.)

Re: 3D Star mapping software some LunarCell and Glitterato (photoshop plugins) textures ==>

Re: 3D Star mapping software Multiples scales InterSectors (1 sector = a 50 ly sided cube): this milky-way like galaxy could contains 120 000 000 sectors somes sectors cubes: by selecting a sector and zooming in => Interstellar (a 50 ly sided cube): by selecting a star and zooming in => Interplanetary: zooming out = scaling out. the T key can be used to enter/leave scales too.

Re: 3D Star mapping software Added: - planets axis tilt - moons orbital inclination - clouds animation Next: to fix the Gouraud shading problem

1: How would you combine increased range and decreasing effect (i don't remember the exact name of this limitation)? For instance at 50 active points (==> range 250") + Increased Range (2 levels: *5*5=> 6250 ") + Decreasing effect with range Would you use the flat decreasing effect range (5" to 8": -2DC; 9"-16": -4DC, etc.... as i remember) OR multiply it by the Increase Range multipliers ? * 25 here so ===> 101" to 200"= -2 DC; 201" to 400"= -4 DC, etc.. 2: Yesterday i saw The Medusa Touch, a very nice old movie with Richard Burton and Lino Ventura where Burton play the role of a very powerfull telekinesist. For instance he can damaged a space shuttle orbiting the Moon. To do so he looks to them on television (with a 1.5 secs delay). My question is = would you use the Indirect advantage to simulate this ?

Re: 3D Star mapping software Planets 's orbital inclinations : Next step: axis tilt

Re: 3D Star mapping software right now my Pluto is like another planet = with no eccentricity nor axis tilt nor inclination. The orbit will be fixed as the other ones. (i'm currently working on axis tilts and orbit inclinations) Clock and counterclock rotations are already added. The asteroid belts are planned. About Pluto, Ceres and Eris => they will be treated as any planets (whatever they are dwarf or not). right now planets datas work this way : stored in xml files so they can be easily modified => ex: <id>7id> <idstar>0idstar> <name>Neptunename> <OrbitDistance>30OrbitDistance> <size>3,883size> <mass>17mass> <Rotation_days>0,67125Rotation_days> <AxisTilt>28.32AxisTilt> <OrbitInclination>6.43OrbitInclination> <color>bluecolor> <texture>neptune.jpgtexture> <infos>une planeteinfos> <id>8id> <idstar>0idstar> <name>Plutonname> <OrbitDistance>39OrbitDistance> <size>0,25size> <mass>0,0022mass> <Rotation_days>-6,387Rotation_days> <AxisTilt>119.59AxisTilt> <OrbitInclination>11.88OrbitInclination> <color>browncolor> <texture>pluto-lok.jpgtexture> <infos>une planeteinfos> If you copy, paste and modify one of this planet datas (and increment the id ! ) there will be a new planet in the software.

Re: 3D Star mapping software X1000 sized planets: Right now orbits are still circular. There is no excentric orbit nor orbit tilds. I think so. I'd like to be able to show the 63 known satellits of Jupiter with their actual orbits inclinaisons and excentricities (or at least the 16 biggest) I think i will try to add such features (after solving the gouraud shading problem.)

Re: 3D Star mapping software I will start simply then look further if it's worth trying. I don't want to spend too much time on rendering (there is a lot to do in data generation and process)

Re: 3D Star mapping software and now.....textures next : lighting

Re: 3D Star mapping software I've tried on a very old 700mghz 256m notebook with only 2mg video memory, i've installed Net 3.5 and DirectX March 2008 =====> it works ! SO : your DirectX version must be up to date.

Re: 3D Star mapping software I've installed VISTA, reinstalled VS2008 and D3DSDK then recompiled ===> It WORKS under VISTA (at least on my pc...) Could any Vista user tell me if it's ok for you now ? => http://cryptmaster.free.fr/test3D/SHA.zip please note: you may have to update DirectX=> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=740AC79A-5B72-447D-84F9-EE6407ED1A91&displaylang=en

Re: 3D Star mapping software

Re: 3D Star mapping software did anyone succeed in launching it ?

i don't understand what happens... Did you launch "SH_Astrogator.exe" ? Did you get an error message ? Which one ? Did you install .Net Framework 3.5 ? I don't know if it's supposed to work on W2000.... It works on my PC (XP SP2 + NET 3.5) and on the notebook of a friend (XP+3.5 too. I don't know if SP2 is installed on his pc.) I use VS2008 so i think it should work on any XP_SP2 or VISTA PC. EDIT: it may comes from DirectX. I use DX 9c.

http://www.worth1000.com/contest.asp?contest_id=7970&display=

Re: How would you: emulate Ars Magica actually as i currently gamemaster a Harp/Hârn and a Space Hero campaign and play a true Ars Magica 4 campaign of a friend there is very few probabilities i would gm a Ars Hero campaign this year...

Re: How would you: emulate Ars Magica You're right, actually, in the Ars Magica system, spontaneous spells are more tiring than formulaïc ones. It depends on the wanted effects. If you want to bypass a determined difficulty (unlock a door, etc), failure to attain the needed level is still a failure, that's true for both F & S spells. For spontaneous spells = If you want to make an energy attack, you do your best, a 5D6 is still a success. For formulaïc spells = Basically the spell has a fixed effect so failure to attain the needed margin is still a failure, even for an energy attack. But, of course, we can imagine the character may want to cast a less potent version of a formulaïc spell. In this case the character must declare it before rolling. Note: as i remember, in AM, formulaïc casting has another bonus because, as far as i remember the spell is failed only if you miss by a number (i don't remember how much.) This is the same as saying you get +X for formulaïc casting. to be sure there is no confusion: Formulaïc = known spell Spontaneous = not known spell. So, for a F spell, if you miss, you miss. (but see previous note.) Imho that's the limit of an AM emulation. AM and HERO doesn't really have the same definition for "complexity" but i think it's not a problem => my base reference would be the HERO one. I don't really care about emulating AM effects, my goal is only to emulate AM 's casting mechanisms. --------------------------- i'd prefer one roll. yes.

Re: 3D Star mapping software BlackAngus told me he had trouble launching it (under 3.5 framework + VISTA) could someone else with .NET 3.5 and/or VISTA tell me if it works ? http://cryptmaster.free.fr/test3D/SHA.zip PS: be sure your browser does not "download" a previous cached version. PPS: multiple stars (double, triple, etc) added. Their coord must be the same as the primary one. Stars ids must be correct or it will crash. see Trantor Triple for an example.