On 3/31/2024 at 7:36 PM, Sketchpad said:

Do mutants have common abilities in your campaign? 

Yes, sort of?

I created a longish list of known mutations and 'syndromes,' and a shorter list of super soldier serums and other mutates.

I did a similar thing with super tech. And an even sketchier one with magic. 

Together they constituted loose campaign limits based on the most common special effects.

But they werent binding or anything, a mutant that didn't fit into an existing category just expanded the list. 

(You could've done Hex & the City, a team of hot vigilante witches in NYC.)

I initially assumed that the stun multiplier was applied to the BOD damage of a KA after defenses.

9 hours ago, unclevlad said:

But it's uncapped.

 

If you have 20 defense, it takes off 10.  If you have 70 defense, it takes off 35.  There should come a point where it maxes out, based on the power of the underlying attack.

There is. The point where the defense is twice or more the damage you rolled.

On 10/2/2023 at 3:29 PM, unclevlad said:

AP has a massively horrible design feature:  the better defenses the target has, the MORE effective AP becomes at removing them

That's not the whole point?

Ok, no, wait I phrased that incorrectly. 

That's the whole point of AP.  An attack that gives up some damage to unprotected targets to do some game to heavily protected targets. 

On 9/24/2023 at 1:09 PM, unclevlad said:

The tone of general comments is that the mindset for the earlier editions is limiting things mostly by the dice...not necessarily thinking 12d6 AP is too much for a 12d6 game.

That is absolutely bizarre.

And I dont see how, even if anyone thought an 18 DC attack was 12 DC because of the dice, that misperception would be helped by discounting it to the cost of a 15 DC attack. 

32 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Why can't I add a 2d6 RKA on to my Blaster with a 12d6 FireBlast and get 4d6, instead of 2d6, RKA?

You can put them in a multipower and add a 4d RKA, for 12 pts instead of 30 :shrug:

32 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I can get a 4d6 HKA for 30 points, and make a Combined Attack of 12d6 Strike and 4d6 HKA..

Combined attack is after my time, I guess, but, if you can apply your STR twice in a combined attack, does that mean you can do 12d twice? If not, why can you apply it to both the strike and the hka?

I suppose that's rhetorical.  

I'm trying to remember the great linked debate, now (which I don't appreciate), because it seems like combined attack may have been rooted in it.

Back in the day, it was (debatably) only possible to combine two attacks if they were Linked (and it was only  worth it if one went vs no defense the target had, and each did different sorts of damage - otherwise more dice of the larger power was generally much better... thus, perhaps, the limitation.)

Combined Attack invites you to take the same deal for no limitation. 🤷‍♂️

3 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Exactly - there is no reason to use the RKA no Range (or HKA no STR Adds) if you game the system by purchasing half your HKA as STR.

4d RKA no range is 40 pts.

30 STR + 2d HKA is 50 pts.

Now, if your character design calls for more pd,rec,&STN, instead of more attack powers, STR is the more efficient way to go, if the reverse, RKA is. 

9 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Your example illustrates the 20 points of free STR exactly the same way.

Yes, and the example of 4d RKA, no range vs 30 STR +2d HKA, the latter costs 10 more points, that's not getting anything for free, that's spending 10 more points to still do 4dK.

With the campaign limit multipower, the 30 STR+HKA character is spending 19 points more than the RKA/no range character, for the same campaign-limit attack options... he can also do a 6d punch...

...but, it's never free, just different, the second character is spending actual points to "save" theoretical points.

Like what if the two characters don't just face the same campaign limit, but the same point totals, and they're otherwise topped out buying DEX/SPD, armor, levels, etc?

Now the alternative to the 4d RKA no range is 25 STR +2.5dHKA, 3d+1 total. 

Cost breaks have never been free points.

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

1e, many, if not most, published Bricks had 1d6 HKA.  That was the minimum you could buy.  And why not?  Tack on your 60 STR and you had a 5d6 HKA.  That was "free KA"

🤔 15 pts was 1/4 the Apts of a 60 STR, 1/5 that of a 5d KA.

Multipower slots were 1/5th the Apts of the powers in them, 1/10th for an ultra. (And it was unclear how limitations interacted with that. Iirc)

By the rough, not exactly vigilant for optimization shinnanigans, standards of the day (with the figured char loopholes wide open), doesn't sound insane.

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

But if he had a 38 STR (28 points; +2d6 AP HKA) he could buy a 2d6 AP HKA for 37 points.  He has an extra 19 STR.  What did he pay for it?  Nothing - the same 65 points were spent.  So I would call that 19 free STR

So that's 6th, which 🤷‍♂️ idk?

But say in an ed I do know, you had a character in a 60apt limit game, with 10 STR and 3d+1 hka vs one with 30 STR and a 2d hka? 20 pts free STR?

Say they both want an EBe?

HKA goes in a multipower,  10d Ebe for the first character, 6d for the second.  

Now, the second character could just pump up the slot, by 20 pts.

If they want a third power, the higher STR character could pump up the reserve, instead, but the campaign limit caps the KA.

STR has efficiencies, multipower has different ones.

Or, consider the first character just takes a 4d RKA, no range. There's 20 points "free" to spend on anything.

"Free" is never really free, cost breaks always had strings.

On 8/6/2023 at 12:30 PM, AlHazred said:

Relevant xkcd.

Looks like the unspoken assumption is that humans will always order robots to kill humans.

Which would imply that, sans robots, humans are always trying to kill each other (just less efficiently than if they had robots).

Which checks out. 

I'm not that familiar with 6th, so just a tad shocked at AP being 1/4 

It does remind me of a very early realization, that, for attacks, there were two distinct types of advantages.  Those, like AP or NND that made them hit harder, and those like Explosion, Autofire, or even reduced END, that let them hit more.  And, that it wasn't quite right that it wasn't quite right that a 4d NND AE cost the same as a 6d N AE.  

Some edition made Reduced END a "power modifier" that was applied after all advantages.  Maybe AE & Autofire needed a similar treatment...

On 9/21/2023 at 11:14 PM, Gauntlet said:

3-1/2d6 HKA which is a devastating attack. Much more devastating than an 11d6 normal attack

I think that's a different problem.  11 DC should be equally devastating.  11 DC, normal or killing, is going to be attempted murder when applied to 2 Def normal, for instance... 

...and I thought 6th fixed the StunLOTTO?

I never saw why HA & EB shouldn't both be 5pts/die, when HKA & RKA are both 15pts/die.  Of course, I'd also expect to be able to do energy or stun-only with an HA and add STR to it, so I may just be weird 

The debate on the "doubling rule" confuses me.  Especially characterizing converting STR's normal damage to killing damage as "free STR?"  Isn't it "free" KA? And how is it free, when you've paid for both the STR and the HKA?

It's like complaining the second slot in a multipower gives you the first slot free.😕

I'm not sure I really followed that, Duke, Im pretty sure i agree with a lot, but the "immune to (almost) all attacks is 20 points" bit doesn't work for me, since it comes with "can't make any attacks (at all)." 

With a campaign or practical limit on how big your attacks can be, a +2 advantage means you can pay for a campaign/point-total-appropriate attack, for the privelege of being unable to make any *effective* attack, instead.

And, like, Desolid w/Affects Solid World +2 on your attacks seems like a loosing proposition compared to regular defenses and Affects Desolid +1/2 :shrug:

The point of the +2 seems to be avoiding saying "no, you can't" (which is what the game did for a long time) and instead say, "okfine, you can, but you suck so hard at it there's no point" (npi)

In essence, old Desolid (pre-attacks-affect-solid), was a sorta time out from combat button. So were (and are now) a few other things, I guess.

I suppose it's one little weird combo of move through solid barriers, be (almost) un-attackable, and can't attack, because two of those things don't work so well separately. 

(Move through solid barriers is otherwise similar to Tunneling.)

On 7/22/2023 at 1:32 PM, Scott Ruggels said:

In the old days (1981), Disads were an eye opener, and they were looked at as something to increase the points budget for your character. Two Hundred and Fifty points was the upper limit, but to get there was a lot like scrounging for change in the couch cushions, so I tended to build up to around 220, and then carefully add disads to increase the budget. My most successful Champions character started at 241 points. Careful selection of Disads really forced one to think about the whole character. Not just the powers.

Disads in the early game presented an interesting RP/Story dynamic that was missing from other games, precisely because they were a player decision. 

D&D had a brutal psych lim called Alignment restrictions, but it was imposed by a few classes. (D&D also had limitations, like spells all were 1/day, but they were also just foisted on you.)

With disads not only did you choose difficulties for your character, yourself, you influenced the world and stories they'd be in.  Hunteds were the most obvious example, of course.  

What I found as I delved into building characters with the original Champions, was that building powers, then "paying for them" with disads resulted in either an unfinished character or one that was less fun to play. While if a character idea quickly filled out disads, it was an easy build and more fun to play.

Another thing I noticed as revs rolled was that the original 100pts and declining value disads lent themselves to "balanced" characters, while the ever higher point totals of successive eds necessitated hard campaign caps (which everyone would touch)...

I don't get the basic idea of what it's claiming to be.

The joke is fairly obvious, if not actually very funny, but the set-up snuck right past me...

"Supposedly, Champions was one of the first games where you designed a character first, then “bought” powers and skills for it."

I can't think of an earlier one off the top of my head, but the concept didn't seem new or surprising at the time. 

9 hours ago, Alcamtar said:

What's the difference between "multi-genre" and "universal?"

A universal system stays the same system from one genre to the next, a multi-genre system changes as you do so.

Multi-genre is their term, I prefer "core system," but I guess that's a bit more not-universal, since it means a whole new game, not just a new worldbook.

Like Hero before the BBB was a core system. Champions, Espionage, Fantasy Hero, etc, were separate games.  BBB on, universal. (Though there's a few arguable variations, like hit locations or not; or skills)

GURPS is self-admittedly "Multi-Genre" rather than Universal.

Fate & Savage Worlds (and PbtA, BRP, even d20) are Core systems individual games are built around. 🤷‍♂️

On 4/24/2023 at 2:45 PM, Cygnia said:

Magic publishers sent Pinkerton agents to a YouTuber’s house to retrieve leaked cards

 How have they even kept the "Pinkerton" name all this time?

I mean, do they have a balance statement item for "Bad Will?"

Any system can be powergamed.  It's just less corrosive the better balanced the system.

On 4/18/2023 at 2:21 AM, Ninja-Bear said:

Well, that’s a good thing isn’t it? At least I would think so.

I mean, I'd think it's vital - that's what an RPG *is*.

I guess one way to put it is:  imagine the only valid genre is Isekai.  Like,,you jump into another world and another body with physical abilities, muscle memories, supernatural powers - but your own mind,,thoughts, and memories.  You're yourself with different abilities.

So you have an authentic experience of having those abilities (not of acquiring them, but), you explore what it's like to cast spells or leap tall buildings or whatever.  And, you experience the setting and/or influence it from your own perspective.  

So, for instance, riding a flying mount would be a wondrous experience for you, but if they were common in the world, and you were playing a character that was native to the world and a customer to it, you'd have to shelve that and be blaize about it.

Or, if you're able to cast spells, you could do things with them a native caster might never think of.  Like,,hey, I can build a Turing machine using lots of magic mouth spells....

6 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

How does Social Mechanics make the world anymore or less malleable than it already is? I’m confused on that point.

They let you play a character different from yourself, interacting with a character different from your DM.

22 hours ago, assault said:

I don't have as clear an image of the ornithopters

If they're sufficiently bird-like, magical ornithopters might be able to roost on the spars and take off and land (alight) from there?