Haerandir

Re: Evil Businessmen. Well, I'm certainly not Martha's biggest fan, but methinks she's been overdone. I think that if I were to use her in a Champions game, she'll be a superhero. The whole 'perfect homemaker/entrepreneur' image would be her answer to the Bruce Wayne 'billionaire playboy' cover.

Re: Glad to be back ... Forgot to mention your concerns on Flight... Again, by the standards of a 'normal' Champions campaign, 10" is a little low. However, given what you say about scaling it to your Running, it's not treasonously bad. A couple of suggestions: 1) The CoH 'Flight' power (as opposed to 'Hover') is probably best represented as 'using Non-Combat Movement' in Hero. By this logic, your actually looking at moving 20" a phase, which is perfectly respectable for 'getting around town' purposes. 2) Very few people are wasting Enhancement slots on their basic 'Sprint' power in CoH, at least not if they're planning on taking a real movement power. Conversely, many who do take a real movement power are going to Enhance the heck out of it. I know I'm planning to. I managed to get Flight with 2 DO Flight Speed Enhancers in it during the beta, and it makes a difference. For higher level characters, Flight really is significantly faster than running. Of course, since you're modeling a starting character, that's not 100% relevant, but it's something to think about for advancement purposes. 3) More point-efficiency considerations: Were I you, I'd take my Flight up to 11", rather than leave it at 10". Odd numbers are better (you get the extra round-up inch on your Half Move), and the extra inch of movement won't increase your END expenditure, either. Also, I notice that your current build appears to be 285 total points, which is an unusual number. Were you specifically aiming for that amount, or are you planning on refining him until you hit one of the more traditional superheroic starting values (like 250 or 350)? We might be able to give you some additional advice on things that you can afford to trim (if you're shooting for 250) or things you could add (if you're heading up to 350).

Re: Glad to be back ... Well, obviously 'high vs. low' damage comparisons vary by campaign. In the game I'm playing in, we've got characters who can sling up to 21d6 damage. But that's an exception, rather than the rule. Most campaigns conform to a 10d6, 12d6 or 15d6 standard. However, given the nature of defenses in Hero, an attack that delivers 1/2 the DC's is going to be less than 1/2 as effective against the same opponent. 12d6 = 42 Stun/12 BOD on an average roll 6d6 = 21 Stun/6 BOD on an average roll Now, if we take a look at your character, a single successful hit from an average Power Bolt is pretty much guaranteed to drop you, while a single hit from a Power Blast or an Energy Torrent will take only 8 STUN. Even if you jackpot on the Power Blast attack roll, you're only looking at 24 Stun, compared to 29 from the 12d6 attack. (As an aside, you really ought to consider raising your defenses. I'm playing a blaster in CoH myself, and fragile though he is, he can take more than one attack from an equal-level opponent.) Now, in a game where people are built to a more traditional Champions standard, you'll see people with 12d6 EB's going up against opponents with 40 STUN and an appropriate defense of 25 or 30 pretty routinely. In that campaign, you might as well not have the 6d6 blast, as it will generally not penetrate your foes' defenses. When I'm designing characters, I tend to set my 'main' attack at whatever the standard value for the campaign is (10d6 or 12d6 usually), and pitch my 'secondary' attacks to approximately 75-80% of that value. I wouldn't consider an attack at half the standard campaign damage classes viable unless it went against an exotic defense (Ego Attack, NND or AVLD, for instance) or was specifically designed for taking out large numbers of wimpy opponents. That's where I base my comments about your Energy Torrent and Power Burst. They're fine for taking out mooks (or Minions, to use the CoH term), but you'll want to ignore them when fighting Lieutenants and Bosses. Of course, in the case of Energy Torrent, that's true to the CoH genre, but Power Burst probably should be more of a staple power. I'd make it a 9d6 1/2 END EB, myself, and handwave the recycle rates. It's really not 2-3 times as fast as Power Bolt. That would necessitate tinkering with the points in the MP pool (take them up to 62, I believe). I believe that a Multipower is the perfect way to model CoH-style Blaster powers, by the way. It very nicely models the 'switching between appropriate attacks' effect, and is the only rational way to model the fact that you tend to gain lots of new powers fairly often (at least at low levels). It's good for just about all of the 'click' powers (as they're described in the manual). The 'auto' and 'toggle' powers are better bought individually or in an Elemental Control. Speaking of Elemental Controls... Having a given Power Set is probably sufficient special effects justification for buying an Elemental Control, if you're concerned about that. The Power Sets are all pretty internally consistent. If you decide to go that route with any of your characters, though, be aware of the rules regarding Elemental Controls and powers that don't cost END. Also, as regards your Sniper Blast... I'm not sure an RKA is the way to go. City of Heroes distinguishes between normal physical damage and 'lethal' damage, much like the Hero System does. I believe that all of the Energy Blaster powers do a mix of 'normal' (or physical or bashing or whatever it's called) and 'energy' damage, so Sniper Blast should probably be built the same way as the rest of your blasts (save the KA's for Claws and Assault Weapons characters). If you want to make it more damaging than your other attacks without being forced to increase the size of your MP pool, consider making it an NND or AVLD, or buying some additional dice of Energy Blast (outside the multipower) that are Linked to the Sniper Blast slot. I'm at work, so I don't have my rules or HeroDesigner available, otherwise I might be able to put together a writeup for what I'm about to suggest. You could probably even dispense with the Sniper Blast slot altogether, and simply buy the extra dice outside the multipower with the 'Sniper Blast' limitations (i.e. Extra Time and Extra END) and link that to your Power Bolt. Thus, the attack is a Power Bolt normally, but you can take the extra time and pay the extra END to 'convert' it into a Sniper Blast. But that's kind of a wonky construct, I wouldn't blame you for not wanting to clutter up your character sheet with something that complex.

Re: Glad to be back ... Looks like a decent character. Your secondary energy blasts are a little light, but if you only use them for mook-sweeping, they should be fine. You really don't need 15 BOD, though, unless you're expecting to play him in a very lethal campaign. Even then, I'd be more concerned about his defenses than his Body score. Shifting 10 points from Body into, say +5 Strength and +3 Constitution would be more efficient. You'd end up with more Stun and Endurance for one thing, and I think it makes a better blaster concept than a high Body score (To me, 15 BOD says "Big hulking brute", whereas similarly above-average STR & CON says, "He may be small, but he's wiry!"). I realize that I'm talking about turning 10 points into 11, but such are the magical powers of STR and CON. You'll be able to more than make up the extra point by not spending as much on END, REC, PD & ED. I wouldn't recommend this kind of point-fiddling if I thought it would go against your character concept, of course, but it doesn't look like it will.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? Well, depending on what your perspective on the comic book is, either yes or no. If you want to read the Authority to see them use their 'kewl powerz' to blow up entire countries, then the act of addressing the consequences of their actions is anathema to you. If you want to read the Authority in order to encounter a thought-provoking treatment of the cognitive dissonance between superheroes' possession of great power and their apparent unwillingness to use it constructively and proactively, then the failure to address those consequences is a failure on the part of the authors to follow through on their stated intentions. Given that the entirety of this debate has been about whether or not the book lives up to that second premise, I believe it did need to be addressed. This is why I consider the Authority to be 'disappointing'. Ellis had a clever idea: "What if the most powerful superheroes in the world, the equivalent of the JLA or the Avengers, really tried to use their powers for the common good? What would that be like, how would it work?" This was when he wrote the "Change or Die" storyline for Stormwatch. Which worked pretty well, because it was a limited story arc that was about actual characters and, you know, focused more on their personalities and stuff, and less on their 'kewl powerz' and ultraviolence. Then he decided he wanted to take that notion into a continuing monthly title and created the Authority. And the Authority comic book stuck with the original premise for almost half an issue, before it was completely sidetracked by the need to kick things off with a bang in order to generate interest in the brand new book. Frankly, I don't think the Authority ever recovered from this compromised beginning. Eventually Ellis, faced with the limitations imposed on him by the ongoing monthly format and Wildstorms' (however minimal) need to maintain some sort of continuity, pretty much gave up on the whole mess, gave it half-hearted attention for about a year and then shuffled the whole thing off to Millar with nary a tear of regret. The biggest indictment I can think of regarding the whole "launching Italy into space" scenario is this: The Doctor and the Engineer have, individually or in tandem, the power to kill every single alien dictator in Italy, leaving any innocent human slaves alive, via magic, tailored nanotech viruses, or any of a dozen other methods I could think of without half trying. Instead, they chose to chuck the whole mess into space and let God sort them out. Why? At a guess, because the author thought chucking Italy into space sounded more impressive and made a better visual. Because, in short, it was "cool". That's pretty much when the Authority proved that they were just another adolescent power fantasy, and not some sort of "new wave of comic book heroes". Thus, my objection to the Authority is not that they kill people, not that they espouse radical left wing politics (with which I can sometimes agree in principle, if not in their extremity), not that they engage in witty action-hero banter while killing their opponents (I like Die Hard and Dirty Harry as much as anyone, and I don't particularly object to the combination of humor and violence a priori), not even that they're ridiculously powerful. My objection is this: the author attempted to sell me one story, and delivered another. The fact that the story that was actually delivered is as full of plot contrivances and as devoid of real characterization as any mainstream superhero comic on the market adds insult to injury, but the final insult is having to listen to legions of fans gush about how "original, realistic and thought-provoking" it all is. Failed promise is nothing new, cartoonish violence and a litany of unchallenged success is hardly realistic and the only thought the later issues of the Authority ever provoked in me was, "Why am I still reading this dreck?" Plus the art got steadily worse with each new creative team. Of course, I haven't read the Authority in well over a year. Maybe it's a shining example of all that is good and true in comics now. But I have my doubts.

Re: How do you get players to role play the genre? Well, it sounds like you've got a dual-layered problem. A) You and your players have different expectations about how to play the game. You and your players have different expectation about the genre. Essentially, the problem isn't that they don't understand the conventions of the genre or know how to 'roleplay', it's that they're more interested in the tactical game elements and don't like the genre. Even if you can browbeat them into conforming to your idea of 'role-playing' (bearing in mind that there are many different intepretations of that word), they're not going to be happy forcing themselves into both abandoning their favored style of play and living up to your conception of the genre. Unhappy players means nobody's having any fun, not even the GM who is theoretically getting what he wants. Frankly, given that you can't just magic up new players or use psionic surgery to turn them into good little Silver Age roleplayers, you're going to have to take the long view. I recommend that you (initially, at least) make a concession to them on gameplay style. Just run a few combat-oriented scenarios ("As you're sitting around your base/patrolling the city/whatever, you hear an explosion! Evil Dude is attacking the bank!"). Don't try to make them role-play out non-combat scenes which bore them. However, make a point of rewarding appropriately 'Silver-Agey' roleplaying in those combats. They'll probably accept that fairly easily, as you're catering to them on the "can we just cut to the fight scene" front. Offer an extra experience point to the player who makes the best in-combat soliloquy. Give the player who saves an innocent bystander a free Contact or a few points towards a positive Reputation. Once someone has a positive Reputation, make sure to point out that it gives them an extra +1d6 on Presence Attacks. Create opportunities for characters to use non-combat skills to give themselves advantages in combat ("Everyone make a Deduction roll. OK, Billy, your character deduces that Evil Dude is trying to block everyone's view through the vault door while he fights. Maybe there's something going on back there." Then, when he goes back there, he finds a bunch of agents struggling to set up a portable energy howitzer or something.) Emphasize (subtly, if you can) the ways in which good roleplaying allows them to 'game the system' for advantages. Then, after a bit, start calling for them to use non-combat skills in non-combat situations. Allow them to use Deduction and Streetwise to find the villains earlier in the session, before they attack the bank or kidnap the mayor. If one of them comes up with a clever plan or description, be sure to give him a bonus to any roll. If the primary issue is that your players really are more interested in combat than interaction, they should quickly take advantage of any bonuses you provide, and go looking for more. Let them think that they're abusing your pathetic desire to elicit any kind of role-playing at all from them. Over the course of many sessions, their combative/gamist playstyle may eventually drift into something a little more like your simulationist/genre-focused preferences. The goal is to use a positive reward system to shape their behavior with the carrot, rather than the stick. Look for ways to get the system to encourage the kind of play you prefer. Also, keep in mind that there will almost certainly never be a magical day when they all play the game exactly the way you want them to. We're mostly hoping for an approximation here. And, ultimately, you may derive as much satisfaction from exploring the system as you would from convincing the players to comply with your vision of the genre.

Re: Help: Sniper Syndrome I like the body-switching idea. It has the virtue of not feeding the sniper's paranoia, and creating more fun for the entire group. In addition to varying the tactical situation and designing counter-sniper opponents, you should look into more strategies for involving the whole team in the solution. See if you can't identify a tactical weakness in each team member, and design a threat to exploit each of them. If your sniper player sees the other players struggling to handle opponents designed to counteract their strengths, he's less likely to feel like he's being punished, and more likely to see the benefits of occasionally playing against type. Handled carefully, you should be able to pitch it as the old "these guys are too powerful/well-prepared for us to fight individually, we'll have to work together as a team!" trope. I think that you should definitely be careful not to give the impression that you're singling the sniper player out for special punishment. If, as RDUNeil suggests, it's a GNS issue, then allowing the situation to devolve into a personal struggle between GM and player is not going to help. In any contest between a GM (who controls the environment) and a player (who controls only a single character), the single player is bound to lose, and that can only lead to hard feelings and a fragmented group. Also, time devoted solely to modifying the behavior of a single player leaves the rest of the group just as bored and out of the loop as time spent gratifying the ego of a single player.

Re: Quick question on the forums... Huh. The boards used to display how many times a file had been downloaded right next to the link, but a quick glance at your Project XIII thread and Storn's art thread show that that's no longer the case. Maybe there's an option for it in the User Control Panel. I'll poke around a bit.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? Rene has pretty much summed up my opinion of the Authority. There was, very breifly, a point during which I actually thought Ellis might be on to something, but he couldn't sustain it. Since then, it's mostly been pretty average, with the occasional intriguing idea or witty remark which is quickly buried in mediocrity again. The Authority is neither as good as its ardent fans would have you believe, nor as bad as its most vehement detractors claim. The strongest emotion it has ever aroused in me was disappointment at opportunities squandered.

Re: How would you do it? That's what I was thinking of, but I'd also tack on Limited Power: "Only to Prevent Damage" (-1). After all, "Invulnerability" doesn't allow you to walk through walls (short of Tunnelling) or make you immune to KB or TK or non-damaging STR effects (such as being picked up and stuffed in a giant's pocket).

Re: Math is hard... I've found that this complaint commonly comes in two varieties: A) "Everyone tells me you need a slide rule and a scientific calculator to play Champions/Hero. I don't want to do that, so I guess Hero isn't for me." It's hard to blame them for having been told something, and if they're happy playing some other game, more power to them. Someone who genuinely wants the combination of flexibility and balance that Hero aims for will generally be easily convinced that they were minsiformed. "I don't want to think out my character and build him from the ground up, detail by detail. I'm not actually incapable of doing the math, but I'd rather tell others (and myself) that the math is what drove me away, rather than the fact that I either didn't understand the character creation process or didn't want to make the effort." In other words, it's the sheer weight of options and details, and the implied responsibility to choose amongst them that they don't want, rather than the math. Again, there's nothing wrong with the fact that they don't like Hero. If they prefer a system where some character design choices are pre-made, or a simpler/less precise method of describing a character, that's a personal, subjective choice and I support it. You don't need to justify it to me. But, often people feel the need to justify their actions to themselves and others, and sometimes saying "Math is hard!" is less of a self-esteem hit than saying "I'm too lazy and/or uncreative!" (or thinking that someone else will say it about them). So, they build up a sort of Calculus-Chimera in their minds and use that as a justification for going with another system, when there's really no need to justify it. Then, of course, they have to defend their self-justification to everyone else, lest one of their friends discover Hero, realize it's not really any more math-intensive than D&D, and blow their cover. These people, of course, are the ones who create group A, by spreading horror stories about the sheer quantity and complexity of the calculations necessary. Maybe it's just my 'armchair psychologist' side, but that's my take on the phenomenon. Of course, I suppose there are some people out there who are confused by any math more complicated than simple addition and subtraction of single-digit numbers, and are actually incapable of playing any game that doesn't feature 'pick from a list' or 'choose some adjectives' character creation and single die rolls for resolution. But, frankly, even if they do exist, I suspect that they're a vanishingly small percentage of Hero detractors, much less roleplayers in general. Again, this is not intended as an attack on those systems or the people who prefer them. Quite the opposite, in fact. I'm asserting that the people who prefer 'math-lite' or 'rules-lite' systems are perfectly capable of playing a more complex game, they just don't want to. And I'm cool with that. I just wish they wouldn't try to impose their preferences on others, intentionally or otherwise.

Re: Calling all Mages... Do you only want current 5th ed. canon characters, or are you going for a more inclusive 'all editions' approach? Some of the characters on your list predate the current CU, and I'm not sure they've all been mentioned in the new edition yet. If you're taking previous editions characters, there's a bunch in Creatures of the Night: Horror Enemies (from 4th ed.). The ones that spring to mind are: Archimago (the arch-lich) the Devil's Advocates (Demonologist, Golem, Granny Hex, Brother Bone, Apollonius and Maze, IIRC).

Re: Fantasy Art Thread

Re: Character Concept Question: Jack Hawksmore?

Re: Concept using multiple characters I've considered doing something like this for a modern espionage campaign. Each player would create a primary secret agent character and several specialist support characters (hackers, drivers, soldiers, investigators, etc.). On any given adventure, one player would play their primary character and the others would play his support team. So, the players would get to take turns being the cool, hypercompetent "James Bond"-type character who was good at everything, but no one would be put in the position of having nothing to do or feel like his favorite character was being overshadowed by someone else's. Of course, the game never got off the ground, so I haven't had a chance to test it. I can see both benefits and drawbacks for you trying this in your first campaign. It's a little ambitious, and most people who are just starting out with the system find it challenging enough to master one character, let alone several... On the other hand, having a choice of characters available means that if someone finds that they're not satisfied with their original character concept, they have some ready-made fallback positions, and it should help in discovering the depth of flexibility available in the system. I say, "Go for it, and let us know how it works out..."

Re: Immortality The thing that I wound up doing with my character using this concept was, as has been suggested, lots of skill levels and skill enhancers PLUS a small Multipower of powers that simulated skills (i.e. Clinging to represent enhanced Climbing, various attack and defense powers to represent Martial Arts, Shapeshift to represent Disguise, Invisibility to model Stealth, etc.). The idea here was that for many skills, he had been practicing so long and gotten so good that he was operating beyond the realm of normal human capacity. Other possibilities include using various Talents (such as Cramming, Luck, Danger Sense, etc.) with the justification "It's not Luck (or enhanced senses), it's skill." He should also consider leaving some points unspent after character creation to allow the character to pick up skills he'll need during the course of play (especially if you, as the GM, will allow him to spend those points during a play session, on the justification that "He's known this skill all along, but it hasn't come up before now.") This way, he doesn't have to agonize over whether to buy KS: Ancient History or KS: Modern Literature while he's creating the character, he can just pick them up as he goes along, in whatever order he needs them. As long has he keeps a few unspent points around, he'll never be left hanging. Of course, this requires careful GM observation and control, or he'll simply overshadow all the other members in the party. You may want to impose some sort of limit on how often he can do this little trick.

Re: Tricks vs Attributes

Re: Character Concept Question: Jack Hawksmore? Well, in the writers' defense, Tokyo is the perfect choice of city to be worn as a living battlesuit to combat a giant improbable monster that has no business attacking it (assuming, of course, you would actually want to do such a thing). After all this time, being repeatedly stomped into the ground for no good reason, Tokyo's hungry for vengeance. It's got that 'Eye of the Tiger' drive going for it. Well, it would certainly help. I've got the TPB of The Secret History of the Authority and I strongly suspect the whole thing would read better if I was, shall we say, "medicated" appropriately. Sadly, the most rational story in the whole book involves a teenaged Jenny Sparks encouraging a young Adolf Hitler to go into politics, and the ancient Tibetan egg from which Swift would eventually hatch. Really, I can't recommend reading the book except as an exercise in post-Iron Age surrealism. As for the other explanation, there was an alternate-universe Stormwatch story in which Jack Hawksmoor (who was the Weatherman in that universe) had been modified by the Kherans as an experiment in creating an anti-Daemonite super-soldier, but nothing much ever came of it. Essentially, the story only existed to point out how much it must suck to be Jack Hawksmoor, doomed across an infinity of realities to always be the subject of radical and undesired experimental surgery.

Re: Starter Characters (Critique/Steal)

Re: Starter Characters (Critique/Steal) You've got the values for 'defender DCV' and 'attacker OCV' reversed. According to your formula, a high OCV makes it harder to hit things. It should read: 11 + attacker's OCV - defender's DCV. I noticed this in both writeups. Otherwise, these appear to be pretty good efforts in creating an introductory scenario. You might want to go through and standardize your explanations for combat mechanics. I noticed that your explanation of Speed, for instance, varies between writeups. I like the one you use on Chango's sheet better. Also, your explanation for various mechanics appears in different places in each writeup. A more standardized format might make it easier for you to direct the player's attention to the right section. Like TaxiMan, I'm at work, so I can't give a more detailed treatment of powers, etc. I'll leave that to someone with more time on their hands...

Re: Questions about Energy Blast Essentially, I can think of two main ways you could handle it. If Starfire has a Power skill that applies to her Energy Blast (perhaps 'Power: EB Tricks' or 'Power: Tamaranian Energy Manipulation'), then she could announce her intention to use her Energy Blast to seal the door, and the GM would call for a Power skill roll, perhaps at a penalty if he felt it would be particularly difficult to seal the door. If you were feeling really anal retentive, you could write up a 'door-sealing' power and assess a penalty based on the points in the power, but most GM's will prefer to simply make a roll and move on, in my experience. Alternatively, it's possible that Starfire's Energy Blast is in a Multipower or Variable Power Pool, in which case she might have a slot devoted to a pre-built 'door-sealing' power (possibly an Entangle or Transform). In the case of a VPP, of course, she could make up such a power on the spot. There's also a chance that Starfire's GM prefers a fairly free-form style of play, in which case he may simply have allowed her to seal the door on the theory that it was a clever application of special effects. This is allowable in the rules, but is largely a matter of GM preference. Some GM's will think, "Sure, Starfire's energy blast appears to have a heat component, so there's no reason she couldn't use it to melt a door shut." Others will be more likely to think, "Well, Starfire's Energy Blast is pretty destructive, and the door isn't all THAT strong, so she's far more likely to blow it up than to seal it." If you know your GM, you can tailor your character writeups to the style of game he prefers. When I'm designing a character, and I expect to want to do wacky power stunts, I prefer to have something on the character sheet that allows me to do so, just in case my GM doesn't see things the same way I do. Sometimes just the fact that your character sheet represents greater control and/or flexibility is enough to convince a GM to let you do something outside the norm.

Re: Help with Ego powers, please. If you take the Limitation, then buy Mental Awareness on the cheap, then the Limitation no longer limits you. A Limitation that doesn't limit you isn't a Limitation. I would disallow this construct if it was presented to me for that reason.

Re: OIHID & Focus : Mutually Exclusive? My feeling is that the risk of blowing your Secret ID doesn't qualify you for OIHID. To me, that constitutes double-dipping (you're already getting the points for SID, any inconvenience that arises from that is created by the SID, not another Lim/Disad). When I'm running a game, you only get OIHID if you are actually incapable of using the power outside of your Heroic ID for some reason, not simply inhibited. That can mean a required costume change or a physical transformation of some sort, or even that the effects of your powers constitute your Heroic ID so that using them automatically puts you in that ID (which is functionally very similar to 'the only problem is that it blows your Secret ID' but subtly different enough for my purposes). So, in your example, I wouldn't allow Frank Castle to take both OIHID and Focus on his gun, because the gun does not, in and of itself, constitute his Heroic ID and there's no physical limitation preventing him from using the gun while wearing civvies. If, on the other hand, we're discussing a character for whom the Focus provides him with his powers and defines his Heroic ID (like, say, Iron Man, or better yet, the Mask) then you could make a case for both, as long as your GM felt that you were living up to the spirt of both Disads, of course. Supreme Serpent appears to be doing a better job of making my point. Ignore me.

My group's membership has changed a lot over the years, but has consistently averaged around 5 total members. Right now we're at 6, but we've gone as low as 4 and as high as 7. Personally, I prefer to have no more than 6 players + a GM when I'm running. I've tried running larger campaigns and it's just too much for me to keep track of.

Hm. PSI already has that paradigm in the CU. Might be too much of a good thing.