assault

I was trying to avoid house rules like the Physical Complication.

Also, most villains who were combat capable at all were mirror images of the heroes in terms of power level. Taking on the Joker with a 6 DC attack doesn't seem like a good idea.

My other assumption was that it was Champions, not Pulp Hero. Characters are built according to superheroic standards, even though some of them are at the bottom end of that.

I mentioned that I think that Golden Age characters were very Cookie Cutter. Here are some of what I think are their common attributes.

All of them are two-fisted adventurers. The only exceptions are people like Rex Tyler (Hourman), who is useless outside his Hour of Power.

This means that they can have non-combat powers, or none at all, and still be effective. Air Wave is an example. Being able to make a phone call from anywhere is not a combat power – but he can still clean up a roomful of thugs.

There are degrees of effectiveness. Some blaster types placed less emphasis on fisticuffs, but were still ready to get stuck in. Others were basically brawlers with neat powers – Alan Scott (Green Lantern) is an example.
 

Mystics were typically brawlers too. (Zatara, etc.) These probably fall into the “less emphasis” category in most cases.

There are cases of characters with little justification for their combat skill. Many of these are women (Phantom Lady) or kids (most sidekicks other than Robin), but it also applies to many adult males.

It seems that being a Red Blooded American (or the equivalent) was enough.

Combat styles, even for trained fighters, were largely based on Boxing, Wrestling or simple Brawling. Judomaster was a Silver Age character, despite his stories being set during WW2.

This provides a basis for characteristic sets. Characters, without considering powers, grade from Teenage Sidekick to Heavyweight Champion of the World. Or, in other words, Robin to Wildcat. (Star-Spangled Kid to Stripesy, if you prefer.) All of these are viable player characters.

All should have Martial Arts (Comic Book style is appropriate), probably with a couple of additional Damage Classes. This allows the lower end characters to throw, say, 8 DC Offensive Strikes – probably the minimum necessary to be relevant.

There’s no great difference in other characteristics, once superpowers are ignored. “Normal” superheroic characteristic levels are fine.

Skill sets aren’t all that different either. Give them some basic detective stuff, and some specific things to make them Scientists, Mystics, Great Detectives and so on, and you are good. Batman was both a scientist and detective, and wasn’t unique in this, so you need to allow for that. On the other hand, even Batman’s “detective work” was pretty basic when you get down to what he actually did.

Starting skill sets don’t need to be overly complex.

Disadvantages/Complications can be tricky, but there are a lot of characters that can be “Secret Identity, Psych Limitation (usually some kind of Heroic Code), a Hunted, a DNPC (often a Romantic Interest, but not always) and not much else”. The frequency at which they occur would depend on the number of PCs in the group. (Higher for small groups, lower for large ones.)

I'm not sure that Super Patriot is even worth points - it's pretty much the default. Codes versus Killing tended to be flexible, especially in war zones. "Heroic Code" can cover them both.

Ultimately, the main difference between characters lies in their powers/equipment/whatever. (This includes characteristics beyond those I described above.) This will still be a large chunk of points that needs to be allocated, but is a less complex task than starting from scratch.

The other issue is: what are the actual differences between the templates? There's no benefit in multiplying categories that aren't actually distinct.

Apparently the ban has been overturned. But morons, moron-ing.

OUTRAGE as Anh Do’s books are banned from US schools

Many years ago now... meaning before 6e happened, I did an analysis of Golden Age characters. This involved reading all the Golden Age comics I could lay my hands on.

The main conclusion I drew was that most Golden Age characters were incredibly cookie cutter, and that the key difference wasn't their skills or characteristics, but their powers.

So the differences between Batman, Sandman, Green Arrow and Green Lantern were those between the Utility Belt, the Gas Gun (and mask), a bow and fancy arrows, and an Awesome Magic Ring. Otherwise, they were pretty much interchangeable.

Better yet, in their first adventures, the differences between those weren't all that significant in point terms.

Ultimately, I built them all from one single template. I called it "Generico". I even had disadvantages based on this generic character.

It was surprising to me how well this worked. Yes, Superman and the Flash didn't look much like Generico once I had finished with them, but it was still a useful starting point.

The only major character I couldn't work out was the Spectre - but he was a notable outlier even back then.

On 8/28/2022 at 1:18 AM, Scott Ruggels said:

So, people are really going back to clunky OD&D OSRs as their “go tos”?  The whole reason Champions was so attractive was that it wasn’t D&D, with its classes and random character generation and funny dice. 

The simplest OSR games are so short you can easily turn them into the game you want.

For example, Swords and Wizardry Light does the first three levels of D&D in four pages.

It would be a piece of cake to turn it into a point based game, and you could even make it something you could use with Melee/Wizard with.

And still have it short enough to actually read.

He's right about the archer thing though.

One of the tragedy of Australian superteams is that we tend to have boomerang throwers instead.

4 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

and subsidize them with the films and merchandising so they don't cost so damned much.

Obviously this part wouldn't happen.

Management and accounting would look at you like you had grown another head.

I greatly appreciate characters with full Disadvantage sets. Thank you.

Nah. Just make the two statements compatible with the characters.

58 minutes ago, batguy said:

Can darren watts'golden age champions be used with champions now?

With a bit of conversion.

Much of it is system neutral.

53 minutes ago, L. Marcus said:

All the hoons and the wazzas.

And Bazzas.

4 hours ago, Logan.1179 said:

Well, that was not something I expected to read about today. 

 

 

Straya!

Everything wants to kill you.

Residents of coastal town scared to leave house due to kangaroo attacks

4 minutes ago, steriaca said:

Quite odd for me to call you "old tymer", considering I'm 52 myself and started with 4ed...

Youngster!

And only starting with 4ed!

DragonQuest. No advantages compared to D&D, plus clunky complex rules.

Space Opera. Gratuitous complexity, plus a default assumption that all the massive range of mutually incompatible technologies would be thrown in together.

I'm still wondering why this is even an issue. Why would you ever want to do this?

According to Michael Meeropol, one of the Rosenbeg children, (they were subsequently adopted by Abe Meeropol), Ethel was in fact innocent and was executed because she wouldn't roll over on her husband, who probably was guilty.

25 might be a bit much. A core membership mightn't be a bad idea, so no competition over the Big Three, but it could be fun to leave Green Lantern slots open, for example. (Possibly even compulsory? No. It's enough fun if it's optional.)

Australian researchers develop new communication system inspired by rare NT Aboriginal language Jingulu

Australians facing $15 pints as largest beer tax hike in decades looms

I threatened a long time ago to run a Pulp Fantasy game. Recently, since I can't find my copy of the original Fantasy Hero, I've been creating fantasy characters using Justice Inc.

It's easy, except for Disadvantages. That's the bit that takes time and thought.

Disregarding edition issues, I need to be able to suggest appropriate Disadvantages and Complications in a way that allows characters to be built very quickly.

So that's my question: how do you point new players at a disadvantage set that doesn't result in them sitting about scratching their heads?

On 7/30/2022 at 9:49 AM, unclevlad said:

b)  even if it is, who says man's actions are contributory?

We get an extra argument in Australia: even if we reduce our emissions, it won't make any difference, because there are much bigger polluters, so we needn't bother trying.

This also works by excluding the emissions caused by the coal and gas Australia exports. Australia is a major producer of both of those commodities, but if they are used elsewhere they doesn't count.

OK, so despite my semi-regular mild depression, I've managed to put the rosters together. (Second post on the first page on this thread.)

There may be some errors, and of course people might want to add last minute picks.

But aside from that, we should be about ready to go to the poll.

The question is: what categories would be appropriate?

There hasn't been much weirdness, so a straightforward: "I would prefer to read/watch/play this" could be an option. Or we could get fancy. What do people think?

---
(It hasn't the most successful draft, IMHO, but at least there's been some interesting entries.)

I haven't done anything of the sort but...

Obviously they were originally designed for a superheroic campaign, but they wouldn't be too overpowered for the right kind of FH game.

I'd replace the X Ray Vision with something with a more magical feel.

I'd consider some limitations on their other abilities, but I might not be too strict.

I'm not too fussed by their power level. They would be burning a lot of points just on their basic stuff alone. That wouldn't leave a lot for everything else.