Tonio

Re: Creating Spells in Hero Designer ... which just proves my point. No, not the one about Compound Powers, but the one about what happens when you assume... you make an ass out of u and me. =/

Re: Telekinesis Super. I think you're entwining mechanics and SFX here. Just like you can have an Energy Blast without having a character based around the manipulation of energy, or a Ranged Killing Attack without having a character dedicated to killing people at range, you can have a character with Martial Arts who is nonetheless not dedicated to the art of physical hand-to-hand combat. Martial Arts as a game mechanics concept involves the use of certain maneuvers which are slightly to significantly superior to the basic usage of the attack in question. Martial Arts as a special effect, or character concept, involves a dedication to a discipline. The name could've just as easily been "Advanced Combat Maneuvers", or maybe even "Custom Combat Maneuvers". Hell, the book even mentions how you could use MAs to build some animal's fighting style, I believe. A maneuver which enhances a Strike by adding DCV could represent some sort of guarded punch in some martial art, but it could also represent a 4-legged creature's attack where they flatten out while lunging to avoid being hit.

Re: Creating Spells in Hero Designer I'd always assumed Compound Power was created to allow partially limited powers, and the "linking together to fit in a framework slot" thing was a side effect. Lists, on the other hand, I assumed were for just grouping together multiple powers (not Powers) which shared a common SFX, origin, or general concept. For example, a gem which allowed its wearer to breathe underwater, protected his mind from assault, and offered avoidance of physical attacks would be built with three powers (Life Support, Mental Defense, and DCV Levels), all with OIF, and all grouped under a List for clarity, while a Lightning Bolt which cost increasingly more energy to cast as it gets more powerful would be built as a Compound Power, adding dice of EB with increasingly higher Extra END Cost. Just a different point of view. =)

Re: The great debate, this time with Java! Damn, all this Java talk makes me wanna write up my own, for no particular reason other than me not wanting to do the work I'm s'posed to be doing. =/

Re: The Ultimates Bundle Those "new rules", though... they're not essential to gameplay. They're entirely optional. In many cases, they're not "new rules" but "new takes on old rules" (e.g. the Speedzone thing... it's a fleshing out of a dimension that can be travelled to with EDM, or the UEP's SFX Advantages, Adders, and Limitations... they're really encapsulating certain concepts that were already there and repackaging them... the "Lightning (+1/4)" SFX Advantage (please note, I don't have my book with me, I'm making the number up) is really like saying "+XX Active Points, Limited Power (only vs such and such SFX's)" plus "Explosion, Limited Power (only in such and such conditions)" plus "Limited Power (loses YY Active Points vs such and such SFX's)", and as far as I can tell, you don't have to use the SFX modifiers across the board or not at all... you can certainly have only one power on one character use 'em). I dunno, I've always seen this type of book as pre-packaged, pre-built ideas and house rules, not much different at all from scenarios or campaign settings.

Re: The Ultimates Bundle

Re: The great debate, this time with Java! Dunno... is that "average damage" calculated "per damaging hit" or "per hit"? If it's "per hit", then I think you might be misinterpreting the stats. With the EB, you'd get a KO in 3 shots... and so would you, probably, with the KA. Not as likely as with the EB, but pretty likely. Sure, a little less than half the shots will do no damage (plinks), but those that do hurt will hurt for more than the 17 STUN (it must be so, to get a ~17 average per hit). Moreover, you're likely to get a Stun, which will help you hit, help you not get hit, and might have other effects (for example, you might decide to Rapid Fire your KA to take advantage of the lowered DCV, which means more STUN). The more hits you need to KO, the less helpful consistency becomes. If a single hit from a "standard effect" EB will KO a target, then using anything that has any chance of not KO'ing the target is a worse idea, since any "extra" damage will be unneeded. But as the number of hits increases, variable damage's total will start evening out, and the added chance of Stunning wins.

Re: The great debate, this time with Java! The problem is that given than below a certain threshold, all results are equally undesirable, and given that there are special effects that only occur given a high enough damage, variability can become an advantage. A highly consistent attack is useless if its average damage is below, or close to, defenses, since that means that it'll usually do no, or nearly no, damage. On the other hand, a highly variable attack with the same average damage will do damage more often. This is true as long as defenses as high enough to cover most of the consistent power's average damage. The fact that high damages can result in stunning also favor variability, as long as the average damage isn't enough to stun the target. A highly variable attack will result in stunning more often than a consistent one. Remember that the expected result is not necessarily the result of the average outcome. Consistently doing 7-8 STUN per attack, with little or no chance of stunning the target, can be substantially inferior to doing 1 STUN per attack on average, but with a nontrivial chance of stunning the target, since stunning the target can completely change the contest (it can cause the target to drop nonpersistent defenses, which might drastically raise the average STUN of the attacks, it will probably lower the DCV of the target, which will raise the effective average STUN by making more attacks hit, it reduces the damage done to the attacker by not allowing the target to retaliate, it leaves the target open to other, situational, effects, etc.). Finally, remember that for a highly variable event, the "average" outcome for one event might not be as relevant as the "expected" outcome for multiple events. (That is, to more accurately judge the effect of being hit 5 times by a KA, don't calculate the average KA hit, then apply that 5 times in a row.... rather use a model to determine how likely each outcome is, and use that information instead.)

Re: 8pt CSL Yeah, I'd totally spazzed on the ECV thing. That helps balance it out nicely. Also, 6pt levels... TUS? Not in 5ER; at least I can't find 'em.

The 8-pt CSLs for "All Combat"... do they still apply to OCV or DCV? Or to both OCV and DCV? I'm thinking they work just like the 5 and 3 pointers, for either OCV or DCV... but it seems too expensive then, since for 9 pts I can have +1 to both at the same time (not considering NCM). Is the balancing factor just that, NCM? Or the fact that I can turn 'em into damage?

Re: An observation on two systems Huh... I replied to a post on some other thread and somehow it ended up here... odd!

Re: Musing on Movement: Is Velocity "Persistent" Yeah, think so. Well, take these two together, and it can work. You do a full move this Phase. This means you accelerate to your full combat move as a 0-phase action at the beginning of your phase, then take your full move. You're now moving with a velocity equal to your full combat move. Next phase, you decelerate back to 0" as a 0-phase action at the beginning of your phase, then take whatever actions you were going to take this phase. Unless you were moving this phase, in which case you wouldn't decelerate back to 0", but rather accelerate to up to 2 x full combat move (if you're going for non-combat movement), decelerate to half-combat speed (or less) if you're doing a half-move, or decelerate less than that (including not at all) if you're doing a full move. Basically, your velocity gets changed only at the beginning of each Phase. Hm, would make sense, I guess. At least if you're going for realism. The current system works for a more cinematic feel (that way you can Haymaker Mr. Speedy and hope to knock him out of his path), I think.

Re: The book I want more then any other.... Chargen is usually takes days with us, hehe. We swap .hdc files via email back and forth, tweaking and commenting on each others' sheets, until we're happy with the result. Each iteration usually takes between 10 minutes and an hour, depending on how big a change it is. But then, character generation is over half the fun for us. I think we'd be OK with not playing, just making characters up. It's just sometimes fun to see what the character you just wrote up can do, hehe.

Re: Are Heroic Characteristics Realistic?

Re: Mental Defense for the Dead He's only mostly dead.

Re: Modeling Parkour/Free Running Yeah, I'd call it just high Acrobatics and Breakfall skills.

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics You don't have to be non-unique to not qualify for freebies (say, a super-skilled Batman type), and you can qualify for freebies and still be somewhat unique (a character based on, say, directly manipulating spacetime, I dunno... just pick an SFX that hasn't been done much and build a character around it, including an EC and/or a MP). The problem, then, was not including Figureds in the complaint.

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics I don't buy this. Having a "predictable" power set is a campaign thing. In a standard supers campaign based on a standard world, maybe. But not only are there plenty unpredictable things you can do with strength, but there are other plenty other predictable powersets that don't get cost breaks like Bricks do. Additionally, EC-based characters have an added disadvantage: draining one power drains them all. Draining a Brick's STR doesn't touch his PD, REC, STUN, or Leaping. Also, the problem still exists for non-Brick characters who choose to have a high STR. Or worse still, for those that choose to have a high PD, REC, STUN, and Leaping (or some combination thereof), who nonetheless want a low STR, concept-wise. They can choose a low STR, or they can save some points by getting a higher STR. Odd, usually getting more utility COSTS you points. Oh, yeah... I didn't mean you could build him with the same amount of points. I realize I shoulda been clearer on that, sorry! And yes, he's now more expensive compared to someone with an EC. But that's appropriate; the guy with the EC has reduced utility. His FF costs END and is Visible and nonpersistent; your rPD is END-free and always on. Um... that's the only difference, I think. You can get an HA in an EC. You can put Leaping in there, too. What other wonderful toys does the guy with the EC have in his EC that you don't get?

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics When you say it makes Bricks "ordinary", I think you mean "as opposed to other characters, which are extraordinary". If so, then they're still "special", as in "they're a special case". Again... why? Well, Bricks CAN put STR in a multipower, it just means they don't get any extra PD, REC, or STUN. EPs can put EB in a multipower, it just means they don't get any extra FF, Flight, or END. The "plain old Brick" you're describing would still be humongously easy to build, too... You just need to buy extra PD, REC, STUN, and Leaping, and voilà, you've got a Brick like you used to have. Package deals... well, I do liked them, because they encouraged getting "useless" skills like PS and KS... but the fact of the matter is that there should be other reasons to get those, not cost breaks.

Re: Ground Tentacle Attack! It's thin and smooth enough not to rumble?

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

Re: Teleport Tactics

Re: Autofire Option Please don't take this as a personal attack... but if the Ultimate series bothers you so much, why not start a thread about it, instead of making posts complaining about it in all sorts of other threads? I find it somewhat disruptive to be reading a discussion regarding some subject (in this case, Autofire), and then suddenly seering a sarcastic, acerbic, or otherwise negative post regarding the Ultimate series.

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics I'm not much concerned with how things used to work, except to point out how cost breaks that didn't bring with them a reduction in utility have been eliminated: EC, Package Deal Bonuses, to some extent MultiPower Attacks. Saying having only fire powers reduces your utility because you might come up in a situation where fire powers aren't very useful, and therefore should get a cost break... well, I might point out how you could also come up in a situation where fire powers are especially useful, or you could team up with someone with an Aid All Fire Powers Simultaneously, or whatever... that's a conceptual choice, not a mechanical one. If it's that big a deal, use the rules from Ultimate Energy Projector, which give Limitations, Adders, or Advantages depending on SFXs, based on how extra-useful the SFX is, and how often that extra utility comes up.

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics But now you're reaching for rationalizations, and still basing it specific SFXs. The added REC means that while I don't have more stamina, I DO recover form exertion faster. I get tired as fast as anybody else, but I come back from it faster. Why? And assuming you're gonna buy you CON up is just depending even more on SFX. Based on your argument, shouldn't you get free CON out of higher STR anyway? So why do I get more resistance to my own punches? I'm sure if I'm strong enough, and if I can overcome certain ingrained reflexes, I can knock myself out with a single punch.