Tonio

Re: Philosophical: The Meaning Of Active Points And Real Points I'd say Real Points are a measure of the level of impact an ability has on the campaign on average, not under the worst of circumstances. For example, a 12d6 EB, Conditional Power (Not at Night; -1) is worth 30 Real Points, but under the worst of circumstances (i.e. at night) has no impact on the campaign. I think Advantages and Limitations should be further divided as you propose. This is partially accomplished by the Damage Class mechanic, which subdivides Advantages into those which affect the damage done by a power and those that don't.

Re: Is it Flash or is it me?

Re: Adaptive Invisibility

Re: Is it Flash or is it me?

Re: Is it Flash or is it me?

Re: Is it Flash or is it me? That makes no sense to me... a power should be Constant before being allowed to be made Persistent. Makes little sense that Continuous does less and costs twice as much!

Re: Adaptive Invisibility I have serious reservations with allowing SFX to affect the character this much, though. Seems unfair to give someone with a "mystical" SFX on his Stealth to be stealthy towards all senses, while someone with a "I can move really quietly" SFX only towards normal hearing, without some sort of Limitation involved. =/

Re: Simulating Drowning with Images Just wanted to point out that making someone feel like they're drowning isn't very heroic, either. In fact, it's one of the most cruel things you can do to someone. =/

Re: How to write up this power BLANKIE!

Re: Help with the Regeneration Power? I do think there's a difference between "EB costs 5ps per 1d6" and "Healing works like so, except when it's Regeneration". The former creates a rule where there was none, while the latter modifies an existing rule. From an extreme point of view, they're both "fiat", yes, but there are degrees of fiat (so to speak). The reason, I think, Regeneration bothers a lot of people is the same reason why some people are bothered by the Armor vs FF deal (the one where you get free IPE from Armor, or no Limitation from Visible for FF, depending on PoV). When you buy Healing with this particular combination of options, you get something "free" (or at a reduced cost) out of it. The reason, I think, why the Regeneration issue comes up more often is that Armor and FF are split as two different Powers, while Regeneration is presented as an optional variant of Healing. I believe if Armor were presented as an optional variant of FF (when you buy 0 END and Persistent for your FF, you get a free IPE), people would bring the issue up more often.

Re: How to write up this power This presumes you will use your EB every single Phase, though. Having a slightly larger reserve with a smaller REC will probably do, most of the time, and be cheaper. Also, this is clearly not a case for END Reserve! Well, yes... but that requires you to fudge a Limitation value. Although it might still be a better idea (to use a Limitation rather than an END Reserve, that is). I guess it's case-by-case thing; can't really make a blanket rule (suprise surprise).

Re: How to write up this power Tsk tsk, Sean... you're not paying to limit the power. Your build has the fireballs costing personal END, while the END Reserve build costs no personal END. END Reserve END is cheaper than personal END. It does feel like you're "paying to limit the power", since you're paying for the END Reserve, but now can't use the power as often... but you have to consider the 0 END-like component. In that vein... an END Reserve should never cost more than buying 0 END for all the Powers it powers, since it would then really be paying to limit the power.

Re: Money Perk As is usual for most things HERO, the Money Perk has no default SFX, meaning it doesn't represent how or why the character has access to that money / spending power. As for a Disadvantage representing a job... I believe most characters are presumed to have some sort of non-adventuring obligations (not sure on that), but if your character's obligations are a significant problem, then sure, I'd say a Disadvantage would be appropriate. =)

Re: "Stun Target" power -- what am I doing wrong? Well, I wouldn't use it for two reasons. First, I'd rather use the built-in Limitations rather than the catch-all "Limited Power" and "Conditional Power" Limitations (that is, the "custom" Limitations). Second, adjudicating how much of a limitation value to assign to "to stun only" can be iffy. On the other hand, the STUN Suppress, Instant, uses only built-in Limitations, so there's no need to eyeball any values. But that's just me... I'm uncomfortable with eyeball values, and try to avoid them whenever possible. I'm not suggesting you, or anybody else, should.

At the top right of 5ER pg 248 it says: Does this refer to using the One Hex Doubled (2") option, or the entire One Hex construct?

Re: Area Effect TK As I read it, what you cannot do is use the +3/4 "One Hex Doubled (2")" option if you'd get the same area as Area Effect (Radius). I'll ask Steve.

Re: Area Effect TK Meh! You're right, of course. It's just wrong!

Re: Area Effect TK Worse even... 2" radius is the area described by a center hex and all hexes not more than 2" away, so it's really 19 total hexes. On the other hand, while it's really like that many instances of 20STR TK, they all have to be used for the same purpose, in the same way. That is, while you will be able to lift a lot more, total, you can't manipulate individual objects separately. Just like buying AE for your EB; it's not the same as being able to fire an EB into every target in the area, because that would mean you could spread as desired for each target, you could decide whether to target certain targets or not (you can do this with selective, though), you could choose to use less dice for certain targets, etc. As to being able to lift larger objects easier... isn't it the same thing for damage powers vs. large objects? You'd reduce a building to rubble faster with an 8d6 AE EB than with a straight 8d6 EB, and probably faster than with a 16d6 EB, too.

Re: Area Effect TK Officially, it's 400kg total, and you can pick up 2" radius worth of objects. That is, you can lift a 400kg statue that occupies 1 hex, or four 100kg people packed into a 2" radius circle, but not two 400kg statues, each occupying 1 hex, in contiguous hexes. I don't like that rule, though. I'd probably allow 400kg per hex. In the case of large objects, I'd determine the weight per hex, and allow lifting it if that weight is 400kg or less. Then again, I haven't playtested that... it could end up being horribly overpowered, hehe!

Re: Mixed Movement Assume appropriate SFX. I had not considered that. It'd work for Tunnelling, but not as a general rule involving multiple modes of movement. Which might not be a bad thing... the issue could be complicated and infrequent enough not to warrant a general rule, but rather a case-by-case GM adjudication, taking into account he usual suspects (SFX, situation, dramatic sense, etc.).

Re: Mixed Movement

Re: Mixed Movement Well, yeah, given the appropriate situation... but consider a translucent wall (to allow PERceiving both it and the target), 1 meter thick (i.e. half a game inch), 4 meters (i.e. 2 game inches) away from the character, and a target, say, 10 game inches away from the wall, in the other direction. The character wants to Tunnel through the wall and shoot the target with his blaster. Strictly speaking, he can't, since he can't Tunnel through air, and can't Run through the wall, and can't shoot after doing two half-moves. I'd think it logical and balanced that the character could Run 2" to the wall, Tunnel 1" through it, then shoot, given that he has at least 8" Running and 4" Tunnelling.

Re: Mixed Movement Actually, on the Running+Tunnelling example, I wasn't referring to a velocity-based damage maneuver, but, say, a regular Strike. I can half-Run, then Strike, or I can half-Tunnel, then Strike, but I can't quarter-Run, quarter-Tunnel, then Strike, which would be needed to move 1" or 2" to a 1/2" wall, then Tunnel through it, then Strike at someone on the other side.

Re: Mixed Movement

Re: Mixed Movement Yeah, I was thinking about house-ruling something along those lines.