Crypt

Do you think it would be possible to merge Blast, HTH and Killing ? For instance: ATTACK (----(LAST EDITION: Nov 16th, '09 at 09:13 AM)----) Base cost: 1DC/5pts + a mandatory 'No Manipulation' (-1/4 ) limitation (it cannot be used to do anything else but damage. It cannot manipulate things. So by default Attack is a limited form of STR) By default: - No Range - Normal damages - 'Normal' method of rolling damage (total=stun; 'pips'=body) - Add to STR : +1DC/5 STR Some possible advantages: - Ranged (+1/2) (or any other range advantage) - Killing (+1/2) (This is the official killing damage, as usual, as it works on 6E2 page 104. The cost of this advantage is the same as an AVAD vs Resistant PD or ED. Actually this IS such an AVAD, cf 6E1 p326. +1/2 is also the same cost as the one of a Resistant advantage applied to PD or ED, cf 6E1 p 275) - Increased Stun multiplier (+1/4 per +1) Some possible limitations: - Doesn't add to STR (-1/2) - Decreased Stun multiplier (-1/4 per -1) - UKM (-1/4): Uses the 'killing' method of dice rolling (total=body; body X 1/2d=stun) instead of the normal one[/b]) Note: about Stun multiplier increase or decrease with the normal rolling method see Advanced Player's Guide p81: add or remove a number of Stun points equal to the number of dices rolled for each +1/-1 Stun multiplier. So: A 'HTH power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , No Manipulation (-1/4) (= 1DC/4 pts) A 'Blast power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , Ranged (+1/2) , Doesn't add to STR (-1/2) , No Manipulation (-1/4) (= roughly 1DC/4.286 pts) A Range 'Killing power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , Ranged (+1/2) , Killing (+1/2), UKM (-1/4), Doesn't add to STR (-1/2) , No Manipulation (-1/4). (= 1DC/5 pts) A HTH 'Killing power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , Killing (+1/2) , UKM (-1/4), No Manipulation (-1/4). (= 1DC/5 pts) Or with 1 level of decreased Stun and without UKM (in order to get results similar to the killing rolling method while using the normal one): A Range 'Killing power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , Ranged (+1/2) , Killing (+1/2), -1 Stun multiplier (-1/4), Doesn't add to STR (-1/2) , No Manipulation (-1/4). (= 1DC/5 pts) A HTH 'Killing power' = Attack 1DC/5pts , Killing (+1/2) , -1 Stun multiplier (-1/4), No Manipulation (-1/4). (= 1DC/5 pts) If we merge those advantages and limitations into the base cost then the costs are very close to the official ones, except for Blast: 'HTH power' = 1DC/4 pts 'Blast power' = 1DC/4 pts Range 'Killing power'= 1DC/5 pts = 1dK/15pts HTH 'Killing power' = 1DC/5 pts = 1dK/15pts If i use the normal rolling method for every kind of damage (i want to do that ) by removing UKM then the costs are: 'HTH power' = 1DC/4 pts 'Blast power' = 1DC/4 pts Range 'Killing power'= 1DC/6 pts HTH 'Killing power' = 1DC/6 pts then if we add the -1 STUN modifier to the two Killing attack the cost is again : 'HTH power' = 1DC/4 pts 'Blast power' = 1DC/4 pts Range 'Killing power'= 1DC/5 pts HTH 'Killing power' = 1DC/5 pts //////////////////////////////////////// EDIT: some explanations = - The Rolling methods = (====> UKM limitation) N atks do 1.5 more STUN than K atks N atks do 1.17 less BODY than K atks But BODY costs twice as much AP as STUN and characters tend to have twice as much STUN as BODY. So the ratio is 1.5/(1.17X1.17)=1.09 = very close to 1 so the rolling methods don't favor one or another kind of attack when taking AP into account (and i believe we must consider that when dealing with HERO rules. AP are the final referee.) BUT if we take CON into account (and i think we should) then the ratio is still 1.5/1.17 = 1.3 in favor of Normal rolling. Score: N1/K0 => so the UKM limitation makes sense. - The defenses (6E2 p 104) = (====> Killing advantage.) Normal and Resistant DEFs work against N Stun and N Body Normal and Resistant DEFs work against K Stun Only Resistant DEFs work against K Body So K is clearly advantaged here, isn't it ? Score: N1/K1 -The intent of the attack: Sometimes we don't want to kill even with a Killing attack. Sometimes we want to kill even with a Normal attack. Score: still N1/K1 N1/K1 = no winner. /////////////////////////////////////// My question is = do you think this house rule would unbalance the game ? (About the UKM limitation : i must confess it gives me a way to get rid of the killing rolling method...I don't like using several different rolling methods, i like homogeneity and simplicity so i may use the normal rolling method all the time, simply by not selecting the UKM limitation when building powers )

Re: One roll to rule them all (6E) I like charts , that's better than dividing on the fly IMHO and i will keep using a zero centered rolling method.

Re: One roll to rule them all (6E) (weird it doesn't appear on the HERO System Discussion page ?)

This is an updated and expanded version of a house rule i used with H5E. http://cryptmaster.free.fr/site/HERO/chart_6E.php It may look complex but actually it's not. It works on several modifications, let me explain it => - First it supposes you use a roll high version for resolutions. Substract 11 from your scores. eg: a 14- becomes a +3. - Second it's centered on 0. 3D6 is replaced by 2D-2D so it needs 2 dices of one color and 2 other of another color. One color for negative dices, one color for positive dices. Let's say you roll -4 -2 +3 +1 = -2 It's open-ended. Each -6 or +6 has 1/2 chance to become a -7 or +7 which in turn has 1/2 chance ti become a -8 or +8 and so on. (note: i may give you the resulting statistics if you want.) For instance: you roll -3-6+6+6, the -6 +6 +6 each has 1/2 chance to become a -7 or +7. Reroll those three dices. (Note: 1/2 chance = 4+) For instance -4 +1 +6 = the first -6 becomes a -7, the first +6 stay the same, the second +6 becomes a +7. We reroll the two remaining opened rolls. -5 +1 => the -7 becomes a -8, the +7 stay the same. Reroll the -8 = -2 so we stop here. Total = -3-6+6+6 -1 +1 -1 = +2. Despite the appareance this is quite intuitive and fast. (believe me...) Then add your roll to you basic capacity, whatever it is, and add any modifiers. Eg: Your skill : +3; your roll +2; external modifiers : -4 ; total = +1. To succeed the total must be equal to 0 or superior. Well now i may explain the table. Its purposes is to merge action rolls and effect rolls in one unique roll. Let's concentrate on the two major informations which are the dice column and the roll line. I think you see the dice column. The roll line goes from -10 to +20. (Don't look the Fumble line now) Example = Imagine you use a 4D killing weapon. Your skill : +3; you roll +2; external modifiers (DCV, etc) : -4 ; total = +1. The total is equal or superior to 0 so this is a hit. The pure roll (without any modification) was a +2. This information is used to get the value of the 4DK weapon without having to roll it. Look at the 4D line. Cross with the +2 column. => you may see two lines and four numbers. 16/5 and 32/16. The first line is for Normal damages. The second line is for Killing damages. The first number is for STUN, the second is for BODY. Here we need killing results so the result is 32/16 which means 32 STUN and 16 BODY. If it was a 4DN attack then the result would be 16 STUN and 5 BODY. NOTES: you may see that: - the -10 column gives the minimum result. - the 0 column gives the average result - the +10 column gives the maximum result - the NS and KB of the +6 column give the active points of the effect. - the +20 column is equal to the +6 column added to the +10 column. Now let's explain the Fumble line. When rolling 2D-2D a -10 or worse final roll is a fumble. For instance: -6-6+2+1 -1-1-1-1-1 = -14 is a fumble. Cross this roll on the Fumble line with the Dice column. For instance 5DN and -14 => the NS (or KB) value gives the active points of the fumble. Here this is 23 active points. So it may be 4D1/2 dices of normal damage, 2D1/2 normal NND or any combination you like (not necessary damages.) The same -14 with a 2DK => use the 30 AP line (6D) instead of the 2D line. => 27 active points of fumble.

Re: APG Cover Preview very nice cover. The new colors combo is

Re: Question reguarding To Hit probability IMHO you may easily use this kind of roll without breaking the game, it's close enought to the original one and may fit to a more epic/random* feeling. * call it as you please. Some genres may even need far more explosive rolling method so seeing the very serious 3D6-closed-low roll method as sacred may be a real hindrance.

After reading some selected parts of Hero 6 i come to some general conclusions about this game. It's still the best construction toolkit ever. The power construction details are probably better than in the previous edition. But it will never be the Grail game i'd like to see...That's dramatic There are two reasons: - Resolutions methods, mainly the 3D6 roll low one. When i compare them to an extremely homogeneic game like Earthdawn where fumbles, open-ended, results levels, the step=average logic and the fact that actions and effects are on the same scale.... the ones from Hero look so old. - Scales and complexity. This is the deepest problem, the one i really really hate. I have no fun with divisions. When i think about logarithmic games like EABA or MEGS, Hero looks awfully old and unnecessarily complex. I hoped the 6th ed. would be a bit more logarithmic so we no longer need to divide movement, CVs or the like. But actually it seems to fall a bit more on the linear ugly side. In the name of simplicity negative CHARS have been removed. STR from 0 to 4 no longer follow the +5=*2 scale and one of the consequence is an exception in the note about lightweight objects (book 2 page 81.) Honestly, i firmly believe that exceptions only bring complexity. I hoped the 6th would use the exponential VF as a core mechanism instead of an option.....but actually it was removed and we have to divide meters by 6 when moving through. Divide by 6....that's so sexy.... This game is so old....there are too many fans....i'm afraid it will never change. It could be so great if it had learned some lessons from other games... But i don't want to leave it because no other game has such a powerfull set of building rules, no other game elevates the reasoning from effect philosophy as high as Hero. So i have two optimistic questions = - The easier one = i already use a roll high resolution method (2d6-2d6 with open-ended) but i still think there is more fun with Successes count (like in Burning Wheel or Shadowrun) or exotic ones like in Earthdawn. So my question is = did someone made something like that ? Do you have an url ? - Now the hard and very important question = i remember that someone, months ago, gave an url to a logarithmic modification of Hero. Does someone remember what this url was ? I don't want to argue about the Hero philosophy. I'd just liked to save it, for me.

Re: The unofficial: I Have 6th edition thread

Re: The unofficial: I Have 6th edition thread I've bought the books+PDFs. I've printed and bound (glue+thin cords / several 20 pages booklets) both PDFs in a all in one 770 pages pocket format (half A4.) Some pictures => http://cryptmaster.free.fr/H6pics/

Re: Top 5 Favorite 5E Supplements Ultimate Martial Artist Equipment Guide Star Hero Fantasy Hero Post Apocalyptic Hero

Re: Hero Extreme Edition And what kind of stuff do american guys pay for with fries ?

Based on several facts, ideas, perceptions and/or informations : - the reasoning from effect principle - the option where Dex is splitted in three parts - the disappearance of figured stats and figured CVs in 6E - the existence of powers like leaping ETC.... i imagine an extreme natural evolution of HERO where only Powers exist. No more chars, skills, etc. For instance a char like STR would no longer exist. You (may) pay for the abilities to lift things, throw things, have a physical damage base, etc... What we imagine "strength" is in real life would be the package of all those powers but nothing would force you to imitate reality. Nothing would be free. No running basic value, no perception basic value, etc.... You pay for anything you are able to. If you want realism you just have to buy each pieces of this so called reality. (IMHO the majority of mechanical troubles in RPGs comes from figured values.) There would be only one kind of "char" = one or several type of bodies which would be the bases from which powers are linked to. Power=action Action needs existence Existence=one type of "body" A body could be organical, mental, spiritual, magical, robotic, totally alien, etc.....and must be bought with points. Each power would have to be linked to a body. If the relevant body is "stunned" or "killed", the linked powers no longer works. Because a body may be damaged it would be worth considering buying a recovery rate for it. You could also buy protection powers for it. Old skills would be some kind of non-automatic Powers. Some actions (powers) needs energy (mana, endurance, etc.....) which itself could a have (or not) a recovery rate. Some actions also need perception powers. etc... please, please just imagine it for a second before arguing about keeping the very classical (archaeological) and not Hero specific stats and skills

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far i know, that's just my perception of it. I will make a thread about that.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far In essence hundred RPGs use some kind of figured stats or derived values. IMHO the "you pay for what you get" principle is the very real identity of Hero, the one which protects him from the need to be physicaly accurate. (see for instance Leaping which will no longer be figured from STR. So there is no more need to wonder if it's realistic or nor to be able to leap x meters with STR y. You pay for x meters so you get it, whatever your STR. If you want realism so pay for it. I like this simple idea) Thus figured stats and CVs are only artifact of the past, the last who break this principle and it seems logical to get rid of them. Then the last artifact will be damage added from STR....

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far The basic 3d6-roll-for-success mechanic remains, and it will continue to be "roll-low." >No problem, i will keep using a 2d-2d roll high method No changes to the Speed Chart. >Good Movement will continue to be measured per Phase. >ok All measurements will be given in meters. There will be no use of "hexes" or any other mapping arrangement in 6E. >Very good !! Comeliness will no longer be one of the Characteristics. It's being replaced with an optional Talent, Striking Appearance. >Good idea All the other Characteristics will remain, but none of them will be "Figured," i.e. derived from other Characteristics. They'll all start with a base value that must be bought up separately. The costs of some of them have been "tweaked" -- no further details yet. & OCV, DCV, OECV, and DECV will become separate Characteristics, not derived from DEX and EGO. They'll start with a base value of 3 and will be bought up separately. & Leaping will no longer be derived from Strength -- it will start at a base amount for all characters, as with Running and Swimming. >That makes sense with the "you pay for what you get" philosophy. You will be able to apply your Normal Defenses to the STUN damage of a Killing Attack whether you have any Resistant Defenses or not. hm ? ok, we'll see... The method of Adding Damage is supposed to be simplified -- no further details yet. oh yes !!!! Thanks !!! The current version is a nightmare I wonder.....if OCV, DCV, OECV, and DECV will become separate Characteristics and there will be no figured stats then why STR should add to damage ? (i mean, because of the "you pay for what you get" principle) It would not be illogical (following this principle) that: you pay for a base of damage and you improve it with maneuvers and that's all. The Multipower and VPP Frameworks will remain, but Elemental Control is being replaced by a new Limitation, Unified Power. Seems to be a nice idea

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. yes yes.... The tool will have to make working a world where everything is possible. The problem is that even if a 10PD armor spell may exist it should be hard to get..... even if it costs the same as 1DK.... You see what i mean ? The cost could have been the very best and simple way to do that. Instead of that i will have to dictate limits and confront frustated players ("i have the points ! why do you forbid it ? Because of balance ?"... I already know what they will say.) But in the other hand maybe it will work by itself and such a spell will not kill the drama of encountering a dragon and his 3DK attack, for instance. We'll see.

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. And Steve said "No"... (he would not half the effect) It was so "self-evident"...

For an Armor spell, would you half the effect of an used on other version as if it were an adjustement power ?

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. well....so there is hope . I will see how it evolves.

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. That's completely dishonest. First i have round up values in order to please you, second you don't pay the 2PD base, third you don't repay PD for each armor power, and last armor cost 3CP/2rDef, period. And of course base PD comes from STR which has his own uses. Now the correct values are => 3DC= 3dN or 1dK, 15 pts N: average 10.5 STUN & 3 BODY K: average 10.5 STUN & 3.5 BODY N: average with hit locations 9.6 STUN & 2.7 BODY K: average with hit locations 8.75 STUN & 3.2 BODY N: 3.5 rDef + 7.5 Normal PD => 5.25 + 5.5 = 10.75 points. K: 3.5 rDef + 7 Normal PD => 5.25 + 5 = 10.25 points. N: with hit locations 2.7 rDef + 6.9 Normal PD => 4 + 4.9 = 8.9 points. K: with hit locations 3.2 rDef + 5.6 Normal PD => 4.8 + 3.6 = 8.4 points. I see only the bold costs as the good ones but add the normal costs in order to be a nice boy Note: averages multipliers from the hit location table: StunX: 45/18 = X2.5 Nstun: 16.5/18 = X0.912 BodyX: 16.5/18 = X0.912 You may note that the hit loc. rule tend to lower damages on the average but this is another story. A good argument even if you start from a possibility and finish with a certainty very quickly. I'm going to ask to S.Long.

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. I don't understand the values you use. 3DC= 3dN or 1dK N: average 10.5 STUN & 3 BODY K: average 10.5 STUN & 3.5 BODY (if we use locations and the average pondered STUNX and BODYX it would be 8.75 STUN & 3.2 BODY) 4 rDef + 7 Normal PD = 6 + 5 = 11 points. (6 pts of Armor for the 4rDef and 5 pts for +5 PD from a 2 base) Note: Because of figured chars i think it's not fair to add the whole normal PD cost Note: Obviously we must use average values. Using maximum ones when dealing with xD is not significant, mainly when x is high. eg. 4d => only 1/1296 chance to get the maximum.

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. That's simple: i would not have to worry about the character's spell if 1 CP of Armor would stop 1 CP of K dmg on the average. That's as simple as that. The immediate result would be more liberty for the players and their characters. IMHO this is worth considering. By default with 60 CP (40PD) of armor equally spread among PD and ED , with locations rules and a pondered average (*) loc (X2.5 / X1) and, for instance 5 normal PD => STUN= (Body x 2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 40 - 5 = -10 = 0 BODY= 14-R = 14-40 = -26 = 0 You say You would be even more safe with a compound power (eg: + mental defense + power defense, etc....) This is a fact: 40 rDef cost 60 CP. (*) i'm not sure this is the right english word for a "moyenne pondérée" If Armor costs the same as K power => 15 points per 3.5 rDef = rounded to 4 pts per 1rDef It becomes: 60 pts armor => PD15 STUN= (Body x 2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 15 - 5 = 15 STUN BODY= 14-R = 14-15 = -1 (instead of -26) = 0 The spell would become = Stone Skin Armor 6 PD/6ED Base: 48 Hardened (+1/4) Active: 60 Cost Endurance (-1/2) Gestures (-1/4) Incantations (-1/4) Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2) Increased End Cost (X3, -1) Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate Real : 16 (17 without the Extra Time) Improved Stone Skin Armor 6 PD/6ED Base: 48 Hardened (+1/4) Usable Simultaneously (X4, +3/4) Active: 96 Cost Endurance (-1/2) Gestures (-1/4) Incantations (-1/4) Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2) Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate Real : 35 (or 38 without the Extra Time) Thus i would have a lot more time for working on the scenarios in place of worrying about game balance when dealing with abilities as trivial as a defense spell. (this is trivial compared to weird combos like dK+megascale, for instance.) Note : the spell is currently: Stone Skin Armor 6 PD/6ED Base: 18 Hardened (+1/4) Active: 22 Cost Endurance (-1/2) Gestures (-1/4) Incantations (-1/4) Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2) Increased End Cost (X3, -1) Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate Real : 6 (still 6 without the Extra Time) for the same cost it would become roughly a 2PD/2ED spell. (also remember that such rDef is not localised.) For a Fantasy Hero campaign i think that this is a decent result for "only" 6 CPs. It could as well be a 4PD/0ED spell, which is the same as a Brigandine covering all the body. Now please tell me = why rDef should be cheaper than dK if everybody put limits on it ? (like 45 pts for Defs vs 60 pts for Atks)

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. Honestly i don't see why, as far as we choose to use average values we get average comparisons, don't we ?

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc. No need to be rude I really take note of the various variants you all propose. Keep cool...