Toadmaster

Re: Presti's Weapon Rebuilds This was something I worked up a couple years ago. I never got a chance to play test it, but in many cases reverse engineered HERO weapons to find a way to build them. This first section deals with the basic weight distribution / shape of the weapon. Balanced weapons are those that do not have a heavy weighted end (swords, small axes etc). Multiple / limited attacks does not relate to mechanics, but fighting style, light well balanced weapons like many swords allow quick attacks and feignts (multiple attacks) vs heavy weighted weapons that have to commit to an attack (limited attacks). This is not simply swords vs axes and maces, a small headed axe like a francisca could be balanced, multiple attacks, while a claymore would probably be balanced, limited and the classic fantasy double headed "battle axe" is unbalanced and limited. Difficult to master kind of speaks for itself, and is a rather subjective thing. The - OCV does not imply any deficiency of the weapon, it is simply added to portray the added difficultly to learn the weapon (The first CSL is basically a part of the WF). I saw this as applying to weapons like Nunchucks, flails, whips etc and assume they would include special features to counter the added skill cost. Balanced, multiple attacks +1 OCV Balanced, limited attacks +0 OCV Unbalanced, multiple attacks +0 OCV Unbalanced, limited attacks -1 OCV Difficult to master -1 OCV The next batch deals with the shape, point of contact etc. Lever relates to swung weapons, swords, small clubs etc, a weighted lever would apply to hafted swung weapons, most fighting axes, maces, hammers etc. 1 1/2 an 2 handed is self explanitory. Blunt weapons have a reduced DC since they do not penetrate well, but as you seen later usually gain other benefits. Blunt weighted weapons gain penetrating (maces, hammers, generally not clubs), narrow sharp points add AP (picks, awls etc). Broad striking heads have reduced damage, but this primarily applies to tools, not weapons. Lever +1 DC Weighted lever +2 DC 1 ½ handed swung +1 DC Two handed swung +2 DC Blunt -1 DC Blunt weight add Penetrating Sharp point add Armor Piercing Broad striking head -1 DC This essentially breaks weapons down into a few basic categories, quick fast stabbing weapons (easier to hit, but less damage), quick slashing / chopping weapons easier to hit, more damage, big chopping weapons (more damage), weighted chopping weapons (even more damage), bashing weapons (basic damage), bashing weighted weapons (less damage, but bash through armor), and poky weapons that make small holes (less damage) but punch through armor. This was done under 5th ed, so there may be some changes I'm not familiar with in 6th, but hopefully it might offer something. It looks like you have some similar ideas already.

Re: One person versus a starship? Some random comments on a number of items. Kevlar would probably provide pretty decent ED at least against heat based attacks. Kevlar is used in a lot of fire resistant clothing including firefighters turnouts. Metal armor certainly could give good protection from electricity, power company linesmen have lightweight chainmail suits they wear when working on live high voltage lines. Modern body armor is much more resistant to knives and arrows than it was in the 80s. The older body armor was notoriously weak against narrow bladed weapons like ice picks, it was also basically only good for one shot, since the kevlar sheets were often displaced on bullet impact. It was supposed to be very effective against slashing weapons. In the 90s there were many improvements dealing with these issues, the sheets were bonded together which made them more effective against multiple impacts, this also provided better protection against stabbing weapons. Corrections armor was available with a thin "chain mail" layer to add even more protection from ice pick like weapons (shanks). The older vests were often just front & back panels with unarmored sides, the later armor usually added side panels leaving the arm pits as the only weak points. How much better is the new armor against non-bullets? I would guess it is far more resistant but it would probably still be a fair ruling to give stabbing weapons armor piercing against it. The hard body armor used by the military is probably just as tough against an arrow as a bullet, since it uses steel, polycarb and / or ceramic plates.

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? We saw that yesterday, great movie. I loved the eyes in Vector's Piranah gun and Squid launcher. When your own weapon rolls its eyes at your plan, you might want to reconsider. I need to get some minions too.

Re: The Hero System is bland and over complicated and in fact one of the rules frequently overlooked by the go "insane and die" crowd is the ability to gain SAN, in particular by defeating the minions of the mythos, but also through receiving psychological help. In a well run game SAN will go up and down, not just a slow death spiral to certain insanity. I particularly liked the connecion between Cthulhu Mythos skill and SAN, it was one of those things that kept everyone from becoming an expert about th mythos, bettr to have an unstable academic (possibly a retired PC) who can fill in the gaps for the more stable field investigators.

Re: Conan: The Current Movie in Progress.....

Re: Conan: The Current Movie in Progress.....

Re: Conan: The Current Movie in Progress..... I don't think so, I remember reading the story a few years after seeing the movie and thinking it was cool they had used it almost straight from the book. It had to have been an REH story or at the least one of those incomplete bits completed after his death as I haven't read the other authors who have tried to write Conan stories.

Re: Conan: The Current Movie in Progress..... I wasn't aware they were doing a new Conan movie, I do hope they are actually inspired by the REH stories and take the time to do it right. I cringe whenever I hear about people working on Conan movies because they tend to sound like TV movies along the line of Xena and Hercules. The first Arnold Conan movie worked for me despite its flaws because it managed the right feel, and there were scenes clearly based on events in the stories (his fighting off the wolves and discovering his sword was lifted almost right out of one of the early stories). Yeah, it could have been better but I think they did a good job particularly if you look at other fantasy movies from the 80s. The second movie fell into the typical corny half comedy of many fantasy movies. As far as perfect casting, I don't have anyone picked out but I do hope they don't go with the body builder or long haired "Fabio" model look they typically try to cast. Conan should be a large man but he should have an athletic build like a boxer or martial artist, maybe even a swimmer, not a huge steroid enhanced body builder. He also absolutely should not be a buff pretty boy. The 13th Warrior is one of my favorite fantasy movies, if they could give this new movie that kind of atmosphere, and work some of the stories into the movie that would be awesome. It probably isn't possible to base the movie directly around the stories, it should be very easy to work them into a larger plot which would work fine for me.

Re: The Hero System is bland and over complicated That is basically what we had with 3rd edition, Champions (supers), Espionage (spies / action, later absorbed into DI), Fantasy Hero (fantasy), Justice Incorperated (pulp), Danger International (Modern action), and Robot Warriors (giant robots). Still fairly light on setting, but the options were tailored to the genre. I think it is hard for many of us who started out with 128 and 256 page Hero games to recognize the intimidation factor faced by someone coming to HERO at the 5th and 6th Ed, we evolved with the game. Someone picking it up today is coming in cold to what 800+ pages of options? I see the same issue with GURPS 4th ed, and even somewhat with the new Basic Roleplaying, there are a ton of options available which can be difficult to sort out if you don't have a solid understanding of the basics. Yes there are books like Sidekick out there, but think about it, how many gamers actually buy the "beginners" book, it is something of an ego crusher. A complete Fantasy HERO (which essentially is just Sidekick + a condensed FH book and one setting) on the other hand doesn't say "for babies" on it. It's largely mental but could be very useful to bring in the OMG that book is huge fence sitters, plus there are many who just don't like generic games, so again it allows them to feel superior because HERO has come around to their way of thinking.

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? We watched Sherlock Holmes last night, I was hoping I would like it and was not disappointed. I liked the almost victorian Batman take on Holmes.

Re: I love me some xenomorphs! I always thought the big head was at least partly related to the battering ram "tongue". Is that real? That would be a boxed set I could see having (well other than just for the movies).

Re: I love me some xenomorphs! I don't know why, she swallowed the fly, I guess she'll die.

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? Just watched Zombieland, its going into my list of favorite zombie flicks, highly recommended. :thumbup: Was there really anything particularly odd about that, I mean other than being a Tarantino / horror movie? I guess if its a blind date or something but I wouldn't have had a second thought taking my wife to see that when we were first dating (it came out before we met). John Carpenter's Vampires was one of the first if not the first movie we saw together, of course I knew she had a sword collection and digs vampires so it seemed a perfectly reasonable choice.

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? Gamers, dorkness rising. I'd never even heard of this before my wife ran across it on Netflix. Awesome movie about a group playing D&D, too bad all RPG movies can't even be 1/4 this good. The pile of dead bards almost caused me to go into cardiac arrest I was laughing so hard.

Re: A couple of brain cells connected... Warhammer combines magic and gunpowder fairly well. Dwarves are masters of technology, steam power and gunpowder essentially being their magic. Nothing to say technology and science can't be veiled in the same secrecy of mages guilds. It really isn't hard to balance firearms and muscle powered missile weapons. Matchlocks (1300-1400) required a continually burning wick, and had reliability problems (damp powder being the number 1 problem), Wheel locks (1500-1600) did away with the slow burning wick, but were very expensive, complicated, temperamental, and unreliable. Flintlocks (1600-1800) came along, which lowered the cost and complexity, but didn't do much to improve reliability. Because of the need to have loose powder in the priming hole they worked best from a prepared position, despite the idea that people could have a couple of pistols ready to go jammed into their belt, that wasn't really practical until the percussion cap came along in 1825. If you have Civil War era firearms (percussion cap) or even US Revolutionary war era firearms (flintlock) all tech has probably advanced beyond what most consider traditional fantasy, although who is to say it wouldn't be fun to play in an 1880's fantasy world, I think I'd have fun playing the dwarf with no name (insert Ennio Morricone music).

Re: Cool Guns for your Games It's been done before... for real. M65 Davy Crockett "Nuclear Bazooka" 0.1kt warhead, 3 mile range, 3 mile area effect (oops)

Re: Cool Guns for your Games I own a S&W 6906, and have fired several other S&W 9mm pistols and like them a lot. I also fired a 4506 and expected to like it, but it didn't do anything for me. I also have a Ruger P90, and have fired the SIG P220 and like both, however I have not fired a .45 auto I have liked as much as the M1911, although the Sig was close. I would like to try the Para-Ordnance LDA, since it is basically a double action M1911. I really like the M1911 but prefer a double action, so the LDA seems like a good possibility for the future.

Re: Cool Guns for your Games Snubby magnums are only insanity in game stats where you combine max power in a small package. The nice thing with revolvers is you can vary the load so much from super light to full power. A 3 1/2" .44 Mag with a light load can provide a moderately small weapon with more power and control than a full sized .45 ACP and way more power than a compact 9mm or .38 special. Loading it with a heavy bullet at low velocity (relative) you can provide a weapon with a lot of power in a modest size gun that is still "reasonable". The .454 Casull is similar being able to use loads similar to a .45 ACP up to very high powered loads. I'm pretty sure it can also chamber .410 shotgun shells. Years ago I took a firearms class and got to put a few hundred rounds through a 2 1/2" Colt Python .357 Magnum. Not only was it fun to shoot I was actually getting better scores at 40 yards with it than some of the full size handguns I got to shoot. (.357 Magnum is one of the finest handgun rounds ever invented in my opinion, lots of power, accurate, controllable). I did shoot better with 4" & 6" .357s, but the 2 1/2" was pretty accurate too. Now the typical gamer attitude of using the standard full power load in that little gun is where it gets silly, in reality there isn't enough barrel to get the full power out of the cartridge. As far as I know only Phoenix Command and The Armory actually modeled this in the rules. Some of these snubby magnums are probably just for the macho factor but that is not always the case. I'm pretty sure most of those magnum derringers fall into the macho category, I can't imagine anything larger than a .45 ACP being usable more than once. Metalstorm was really intended to compete as a point defense weapon (shoot down a missile before it hits your ship). I think these man portable concepts showing up are more of an attempt to find a use for the weapon than a practical weapon. The BAR varied by user, I forget which is which but the USMC and Army both used it, one had the standard select fire (semi / fullauto), the other had a dual rate of auto fire 350 / 600 IIRC, the slow rate made it very easy to take single shots. I'm pretty sure there are synthetic stocks for the M1, but at that point I'm not sure why you wouldn't just go with an M14 clone, basically the same gun modernized and a lot more options out there for it. The M1 is a nice rifle but I would think the two reasons you would get one would be owning a piece of history or because it is cheaper than an M14 clone.

Re: Clyde Barrow's Sawn-Off BAR It's all interpretation, I imagine bulky as appropriate for hip firing a .30 cal water cooled MG, a weapon not intended for firing from the shoulder. I'm not sure about the BREN, it was a much better LMG than the lighter BAR. The BAR was supposed to be used as a rifle, and as a light machinegun when fired from a bipod, that was why it had two rates of fire (some semi and full auto, some slow auto 300 rpm +/- and fast auto 600 rpm +/-). The first BARs didn't even have a bipod, it was to be fired from the hip as the shooter walked across no mans land in WW1.

Re: Clyde Barrow's Sawn-Off BAR I've actually seen the BAR in question, it is at the Texas Rangers museum in Waco, TX. As I recall the most noticable modification was the removal of the bipod, I don't believe the stock was removed, just trimmed down probably to fit him better. It was 10 years ago that I was there so I could be remembering wrong, they had several BARs on display. The BAR and Colt Monitor (civilian BAR) were actually fairly popular with gangsters when available because they were quite effective at taking out pursuing police cars, much better than shotguns or Tommy guns. The BAR was also known for its accuracy when fired in slow aimed fire. Personally I don't think the BAR or BREN should have the bulky limitation, they are basically just big rifles. They were part of a regular rifle squad and could keep up with the riflemen. Now I could see the Browning M1919A6 or MG42 having the bulky lim as they were considerably larger, heavier and belt fed which is one of the reasons they were seperate elements in a platoon.

Re: Cool Guns for your Games

Re: US Army CID Help

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Aftermath didn't have advantages / disadvantages just like HERO but the basic concept was there with special talent abilities and mutations strongs (sacrifice deftness & speed for added strength), quicks (sacrifice strength for added deftness & speed), smarts (sacrifice physical stats for increased wit & will) etc. Clearly not as detailed as HERO but similar in concept (sacrifice in one area for increase elsewhere). BRP and WoW were not marked as a universal system, but what else are you going to call a system that did pulp, modern, fantasy, sci-fi, supers etc with essentially the same rules? By the mid 80's you could say the same about HERO (Fantasy, modern, pulp, supers, sci-fi). Gurps came along in '86 coining the term universal role playing system, but the basic concept was already pretty well established by that point, GURPS just refined it to reduce rules differences between genres. In my experience Runequest & Call of Cthulhu were far more popular than HERO until Fantasy Hero arrived in 1985. For its first few years HERO was just Champions limiting its popularity quite a bit.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far