Jump to content

assault

HERO Member
  • Posts

    7,469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by assault

  1. Oh, and some more space based series: L.E.G.I.O.N. '89 Omega Men Plus, for LSH fans, their very first appearance can be found here: http://superman.ws/tales2/lsh/ The same site has various other science fiction-y Superman stories, include the first appearances of Brainiac and Mon-El, plus the first of the very cool "Nightwing and Flamebird" stories, where Superman and Jimmy Olsen get to play Batman and Robin in Kandor. Alan
  2. People seem to be forgetting that a significant part of the Legion are people like Phantom Girl, Shadow Lass, Shrinking Violet, Invisible Kid, Dream Girl and so on. Not an attack power between them, but they are serious characters. Then you get people like Lightning Lad, Lightning Lass, Sun Boy, Star Boy, Polar Boy, Cosmic Boy and Magnetic Kid, who are all essentially normals with crunchy attack powers. There are even midranking bricks like Ferro Lad and Colossal Bore. None of this lot are particularly powerful. Sure, you could burn a lot of points building them, but they would largely be wasted. 350 would do nicely, with another 100 points worth of standard equipment (flight rings, etc.) Hmm. So, yes, they would be 450 point characters - tough, but not overwhelming. Oh, and some of the "silly" characters could be surprisingly nasty too, so just watch out. Alan
  3. My favourites: http://www.reading-room.net/ (Mostly very early Silver Age, but some Golden Age). Includes Detective #27!!! http://superman.ws/superman-comics/ A mix of Golden and Silver Age. Some real beauties... Enjoy. Alan
  4. Another : The Silver Scarab, from DC's Infinity Inc. They just keep getting churned out, don't they? Alan
  5. He was a bit of a wise-cracking swashbuckler before he became comic relief, though. The change wasn't that dramatic. He just became a little less competent. Hmm. I haven't reread the '80s BB series for over a decade. It must be time... As I recall, the series was a little flat. It had more potential than was developed. Same old, same old... By the way, the next character I create for Champions is going to have a name of the form: So far I am considering "Blue Banshee" and "Scarlet Spectre", although the latter is a bit too "Commie"-sounding. I might go with "Crimson Spectre" - the loss of the alliteration is worth it to tone down the excess connotations. has a long tradition, doesn't it? The Green Hornet, the Red Bee(!), Blue Beetle, Scarlet Scorpion... No doubt there are others.
  6. Ah yes, the "Jean-Paul Sartre Brigade", aka "Descarte's Demons", aka "The Black Berets". It's been done, but not in Champions, that I know of. Alan
  7. It was something of an alliance. The Nazis were a mass movement based on bits of the middle class threatened and terrified by the post-WWI chaos, plus lots of thugs and criminals and general riff-raff. The industrialists (and bankers, generals and whatnot) had resources, but little mass support. The two groups got together to smash the labour movement (Social Democrats, Communists, and so on), who were to one degree or another threatening their interests. This "smashing" involved systematic terror, and the establishment of a dictatorship. Once the dictatorship was established, a lot of the "mass movement" element of the Nazis was eliminated. Not coincidentally, a lot of the "radical" rhetoric of the early Nazi movement was ditched at this time, when it might have been possible for them to have attempted to put it into practice. In this situation, the Jews, Gypsies and so on were just the usual scapegoats targeted by German reactionaries. If it had been the US, different groups would have been the primary targets... In practice, the Nazis were more or less simply a more than usually violent example of a "typical" capitalist dictatorship. The only things that could be called "socialist" about them were their early populist rhetoric - ignored in practice, plus their authoritarian statism - which was the traditional practice and ideology of most early 20th Century European states, and which could only be called socialism by people shaped by the political culture of the USA. In this thread, I've included a couple of nasty comments directed at the US. I apologise to anyone I've offended. The most important point of them, however, is to suggest that fascism picks up characteristics from the society in which it emerges. It makes very little sense to pick up on the "national socialist" tag, and call the Nazis "socialist". In many respects, they had more in common with very individualist, "freedom loving", anti-statist, and Christian groups in the USA - like the KKK. OK, that's it. I'm not posting again on this thread. Alan
  8. Just messing with you... Just for a laugh, consider the following: Many costumed adventurers from the US were fighting fascism BEFORE December 7, 1941. Many were even doing it before September 1939. Have you ever wondered why end of the Golden Age coincided with McCarthyism? Could it be because a significant proportion of the Golden Age "heroes" were: "Premature Anti-fascists"? Just messing with you. Oh, why not? Consider the following, too: Most anti-mutant propaganda comes from the far right. What is the far left's response? How many "Commie Mutant Traitors" are there, out there? Alan
  9. Oh boy. Let's see: Fascism (more than just the Nazis, BTW) was supremely opportunistic. Its ideology was essentially just spin. (This is true for Stalinism, too, of course, but that's another question entirely.) Every essential element of Nazism was present in the pre-WWI German state: statist nationalism, "Church, Kitchen and Children" for women, militarism, anti-semitism, repression of workers' organisations, and so on. In short: Bismarckism. The difference was that the Bismarckian system had collapsed at the end of WWI, was replaced by a weak and chaotic system, and "needed" to be forcibly restored. This was achieved, in the end, by a repressive force that emerged outside the confines of the state apparatus - the Nazi stormtroopers. The "radical" elements of Nazi ideology were essentially suckerbait for these clowns, and was mostly ditched after the Night of the Long Knives. In fact, the latter was precisely a purge of those elements that took this stuff seriously. The "old school Junkers, industrialists and nobility" despised the Nazi upstarts, and this was, to some extent, reciprocated. On the other hand, the Nazis were perfectly willing to suck up to them at every opportunity, like the petty little social wannabes that they were. The Nazi system was perfectly profitable while they were winning - a few bombs didn't change that. It only became a problem when they took on people that could fight back. As for Nazi control of the economy: most of this control was of the labour force. It's true, various Nazi officials wedged themselves into the economic system, trying to make fortunes for themselves. That was because they wanted to become part of the system that they were defending. They were opportunists and parasites. The industrialists were willing to tolerate this as long as they delivered results: new resources, captive markets, the elimination of competitors, and a pacified workforce. Centralised control of industrial production really only emerged late in the war, in response to the prospect of defeat. Prior to that, the German economy was still to a considerable degree operating on a peace-time basis. This wasn't a good thing while fighting a total war! Companies like General Motors, Ford and Krupp make immense fortunes from the Nazi regime. Some of this was lost with the Nazi defeat. If the Nazis had been prevented from taking power, ALL of it would have been lost. Incidentally, check out Spain for what fascist governments become over the long run. Remember: there has been no purge of fascist elements there. The current Prime Minister was a member of Franco's political organisation, or at least its youth wing. His party is one of the successors of Franco's organisation. Radical, my foot. Fascism, generically, is a brand of terrorist dictatorship, that uses massive violence to repress threats to social order. Its ideology typically involves conservative nationalist values. Its governing form is typically dictatorial, although there are not-dissimilar "democratic" forms, where violence is "only" directed against the poorest sections of society and dissidents. Examples of this include: the southern states of the US after the failure of Reconstruction! Yes, the bedsheet brigade were the true American equivalent of fascism, and yes, they did run parts of the USA. And yes, they did so "democratically". And lynchings were excuses for family outings... One of my favourite alternate dimensions in Champions 3-D was Confederate World. I'm going to post this, though I probably shouldn't. These boards are usually pretty good at staying on topic, so I'm even more reluctant than usual to post flamebait. Anyway, I can see that I am going to have to consider running a Golden Age campaign. That's a little difficult in my usual Australian setting, which was (a) too small at that time, and ( too deeply involved in the war from 1939 onwards. Of course, a US based campaign run by me would be a bit odd, since I haven't been to the US for 25 years, and then only for a few weeks. Still, very few of us have ever been to the US in the 1930s and 1940s, so I guess I mightn't be at too much of a disadvantage. Lucky nobody from the US would be able to hear the accents I would be using. I've been looking at various golden age Superman and Batman comics that are available on the net recently (Google is your friend), and it's true that the early versions of these characters can be built on very few points. Unfortunately, they both rapidly gained huge power levels, and many of the characters that followed them tended to match their extended, rather than initial levels. On the other hand, there were plenty of low powered characters too, so I can't complain. Anyway, I've digressed wildly from the original topic of the thread, so I will stop here. Alan
  10. At this point I have to say that I thought Danger International did this perfectly well, and I preferred Dark Champions as the "street-level" Champions subgenre... But, that's just my opinion. Feel free to ignore it. Alan
  11. Well, in my world, "clean(ing) up the drug cartels and marxist insurgents" wouldn't be quite so simple... The cartels would try to find themselves new corrupt relationships to carry on as before, or move somewhere else. The Marxists would probably regroup and return, possibly with sympathetic supers on their side, or, more likely, in a more covert manner. Of course, in my world, there is an unspoken agreement that minimises the amount of metahuman involvement in international conflicts. This agreement goes out the window when supervillains start taking over countries. Respectable superheroes start changing into the other costumes they keep at the back of their closets... Alan
  12. No, there is a fundamental difference. Fascism is a means of preserving the pre-existing patterns of property ownership, while communism seeks to radically change it. That means, for example, that Nazi Germany was run on behalf of companies like Krupp and Ford, while a hypothetical communist Germany would have nationalised them. That's _why_ Krupp and Ford supported the Nazis - to crush the communists! This is a hot-button topic, so I won't comment further. As for likely candidates for takeover: the main problem is, of course, that the target is most likely already going to be in somebody else's "sphere of influence". This would mean that the existing power would have to be initially willing to support the new regime, or at least unable to do much about it. It can't be too significant, economically, or it wouldn't be handed over to loose cannons, unless the loose cannons were operating behind more respectable proxies. Of course, it could (should) become more economically significant, once the presence of "super-stuff" is detected, or at least openly admitted. I can't see a new country being established from "unoccupied" land, since there's no such thing, and the residents of "unoccupied" lands tend to get a bit irritated when they get invaded. So, that scraps the "Aryan homeland" idea, IMHO. I would go with a fictional country. Of course, that usually does mean cutting some bit out of a real world country, but that's easier than trying to do it in-game. Alternatively, draw some islands onto the map. The idea of artificially creating some in your gameworld is OK, too, even though its been done before. (Malachite!) In fact, this might be the best, since even fictional countries or islands logically should be "of interest" to someone. In any case, of course, any government that gets set up would have to be recognised by other governments. Without that, the diplomatic immunity thing wouldn't apply. I don't know. It's tricky. The best option might be to have the Nazis being a power behind the scenes, perhaps with one being "democratically" elected, and others being appointed as diplomats by a legitimate government. Of course, diplomats can, and regularly are, expelled from their host countries, and if they systematically engage in illegal activities, diplomatic relations could be cut off. Of course, that could jeopardise access to "super-stuff", but there still would be a point where relations would be broken off, and efforts put into place to remove the "unacceptable" government. In fact, any PCs who interact with such governments would probably be best off feeding evidence against them to outfits like the CIA. That way, they become deniable sources, and can possibly weasel out of any issues with their secret identities. I dunno. I'd really like to play in a game like this. Smash the Nazis! Yeah. Assault would get into that. Of course, he probably wouldn't like the government that replaced them, either... Alan
  13. I have a theoretical answer and a real one. The theoretical one is "about one in a million". There are skewing factors to reduce the influence of countries like India and China. My games are based in Australia, so there has to be enough supers to support them. I roughly go with about 20 or so active supers in Australia. More supers may be active at any time, but a lot of those are rampaging monsters, visitors and flunkeys with gear. The real answer, however, is: exactly as many as my campaign needs! This typically includes a few "off in the distance". So my actual answer is the twenty+ in Australia, and maybe another dozen or so, plus any extras I feel the need for. Alan
  14. Oh yeah. This is the version of Hawkgirl with the "likes to hit people with a mace" limitation, isn't it? Alan
  15. Oh dear. I've been playing Champions since February 1982. I've just organised my 40th Birthday party... Anyway, back in the world... Two DC masterminds: Vandal Savage Ultra-Humanite Both work for me. By the way, if anyone is interested in Doctor Doom, see: http://www.reading-room.net/ Dr Doom rolled up in Fantastic Four #5. It was a seriously good story. No, really. Juicy time travel plus... You can actually build the not-so-good doctor on 350 points! I feel better already. Alan
  16. Definitely Golden Age. Bondage covers were one of the pretexts for the Comics Code. Then again, I suppose I could live quite happily without any bondage covers at all. Alan
  17. Marvel: Bullseye!!!! DC: Solomon Grundy Bolt Plastique and the other one... the one whose name is only whispered... (cowers in terror) LOBO!!!!! Alan
  18. The definitive comment on roleplaying teens: http://www.somethingpositive.net/sp06212003.html Alan
  19. I would consider buying your character's permanent (non-focussed) DEX up to 20, and probably drop her CON to 18. You would have to recalculate her Synaptic doodad, but I think it's worth her while having a 7 Combat Value outside her focus. It's just too useful. Oh, here is something that I would have to look up the rules for: I've just noticed that her Hand to Hand Attack is versus ED. I'm not quite sure if that would add to her Martial Arts and Strength damage. It's late, and I can't remember... Anyway, she's looking quite interesting now. Alan
  20. I would consider making her a bit more combat capable. Otherwise, she will hit a fight scene, and you (the player) will spend a lot of time twiddling your thumbs. Yes, she is useful out of combat. Other characters may encroach on her shtick though, and still be better fighters. Clearly, you have built her as a non-powered "normal", with the appropriate characteristic limits and all that kind of thing. What I would say is: don't. She can still be a "normal" (although a very exceptional one) and still go over 20 DEX and 4 SPD. Her CV is good because of her skills, but I would definitely consider pushing up her SPD a little, if only to ensure you get a bit more of the GM's attention in combat. Similarly I would extend her ability to inflict damage a bit. At the moment she is only barely able to take down tough normals. Her martial arts can be used to set up attacks for other characters (reducing Combat Values and so on), but that's still a rather limited role. Regretably, all Champions characters need to be able to usefully engage in combat. Being the gadgeteer that whips out the Deus Ex Machina device is good in the comics, but it's not usually viable in a game. Alan
  21. Personally, I am rather fond of the recommended limits, but that is because I enjoy the solitaire aspects of character design, and you need some kind of "rules" for that. So if "the book" suggests 125+75 points for teen supers, I run with that and see what can be done. I also build 250 or 275 point characters as more experienced "X-Men" types. But that's just for my solo projects, which are about background and origin writing more than actual play. Of course, in theory, some of this stuff will eventually appear in an actual campaign... In real campaigns, in my experience, character growth is actually fairly slow. 1 or 2 points per session is fairly normal, and for older folks like me, sessions aren't quite as frequent as they were way back when. So characters tend to stay pretty much how they start, which means that the players have to be happy with them. The points total for a game should allow that. Because I have been playing "for a real long time", I'm fairly fond of 250 point characters. On the other hand 275-300 points gives a little more elbow room, especially for characters in teams that have a bit of standard equipment, plus some standardised training. At that point, there is no particularly obvious point to not going for 350 point characters, but these will tend to have considerably more power, rather than being merely more experienced versions of low-powered characters. So, go with whatever you think is best. Of course, for character design exercises, go with strict limits so you are forced to learn to maximise what can be done within the system, preferably without resort to munchkinisation. And of course: "Silly GM, points are for players". Alan (Almost happy with my 250 point Rogue-homage...)
  22. Since it's entirely fictional, your guess is as good as mine. I don't think 'Z', the vague real-world analogue did. Alan
  23. assault

    DC Assault

    A soft option If you don't want to kill your PCs off, you can have them get thrown out by an independent hero team. Something like a thinly disguised version of the X-Men (preferably one of the "classic" lineups) would be appropriate. Of course, the PCs would then be handed over to the government, who would take a very dim view of their activities, but escaping isn't necessarily impossible. At that stage, you will be running a supervillain campaign. I have to say that it sounds like your campaign is spinning out of control. It might be time to negotiate an end to it and start again. By negotiate, I mean, convince your players that it's time to retire their characters after a Last Big Epic, which hopefully won't involve their ignominious deaths. Sod it. It's time for an Alien Invasion. All of humanity versus the Slimy Bug-Eyed Monsters. That should flush away most of the anti-mutie stuff. Alan
  24. assault

    DC Assault

    I'd go with short, bloody and memorable. If you do it right, the players will remember this game in twenty years time. Yes, that's a vote for "kill them all". Just do it right. Alan
  25. Re: Re: World War 2 Ideas, please I wrote: Thinking about this some more: This guy is a Nazi sympathiser. He isn't going to get along well with the African-American hero. Here is a chance to play up the latter's disadvantages. So, don't just kill off the Nazi, leave him around long enough to show what a jerk he is. A more general regional encounter: In my Champions Universe, Australia had a super-commando group called "X" Special Unit. This is modelled on an actual historical Commando outfit called "Z" Special Unit, which specialised in operating in Japanese held territory. "X" is the group tasked with countering the efforts of Japanese metahumans, ninjas, sorcerors and suchlike. It mainly consists of former pulp adventurers, plus the odd superhuman. Its members generally don't wear costumes, but rather Australian army uniforms. Most are NCOs from various services, with a scattering of officers. "X" could be encountered by any group operating in the South Pacific, particularly if local knowledge and contacts are involved. A typical "X" operative would be a 150+ point normal, with standard military weapons. Most would have codenames. For example, one operative in my game was named "Alpha". Coincidentally, "Alpha" was Assault's grandfather, and may have been the source of the mutant genes that Assault inherited. Alan
×
×
  • Create New...