Opal

Re: Simple questions on AP caps The point of DR is that you can take just p or e or put a limitation on it. It simulates a character who is particularly resistant to some attacks or in some circumstances. For instance, you can have STN-only DR to represent 'pain resistance' on a character who's otherwise normal in the stats department, maybe even one with NCM. DR with a roll (activation, DEX, acrobatics maybe) can represent 'rolling with the blow' or otherwise evading damage, for a character that, again, is not supposed to have superhuman stats or defenses. A fire based character can have 3/4 DRe, only vs fire. And so forth. You could probably accomplish many of the same things with higher BOD, CON and STN, perhaps bought as powers, and with Vulnerabilities. Instead of 20 CON & BOD, 40 Stun and 1/2 DRe vs Fire, you could build a fireproof character with extra resistant ED, and BOD & CON of 40, and 800 STN, and Vulnerability: takes double damage from anything except fire. But would you want to?

Re: The great debate, this time with Java! There's no question that KAs can have some whacky results, and that they are a better (if risky) bet when the DCs of the attack don't quite measure up to the defenses of the target. But, I think it helps to look at what effects of the mechanics involved are desireable - across how many genres - and which aren't: Killing Attacks: 1) can do lots of BOD to normal characters: apropriate and desireable in virtually all genres. 2) do slightly more BOD to objects: generally OK, but unrealistic in some cases (you can bash down a door a lot more easily than shoot it to pieces). 3) do fairly random amounts of BOD to normal character: desireable in some genres: a gun can kill, or barely injure with a single shot, that's actually somewhat realistic. It's less desireable when you want a fantasy barbarian or badass merc to mow through mooks. 4) do wildly random amounts of STN to normal characters: desireable and suprisingly realistic, gunshot wounds that do little physical harm can result in unconsiousness, while lethal ones can fail to be immediately incapcitating. You can even take a life threatening bullet wound and barely feel it. Again, less desireable in genres where gun or sword-armed heros are supposed to cut down enemies very consistently. 5) are more likely to do a little body to tougher (resistant def) characters: desireable in most genres, moderately realistic. 6) do no BOD to sufficiently tough ('invulnerable') characters: highly desireable in supers genre, somewhat unrealistic. 7) occassionally do massive STN damage to invulnerable characters that they can't inflict BOD on at all: Highly undesireable in supers genre. Some genres institute optional rules to address 3 and 4, making it easier to drop mooks in spite of the inconsistency of KA damage. To address 7 in a supers game, you could do away with the STN lotto - but, you loose the possibility of a non-invulnerable charcter being mortally wounded but still able to act (very dramatic), or KO'd but not that badlly injured (occassionally helpful to the story). My solution to 7 is to aply the STN multiplier only to the BOD that gets through resistant defenses. This makes 'invulnerable' characters genuinely invulnerable to low-dice, non-AB/Find-Weakness-enhanced KAs - a tremendous boon when simulating the supers genre - without sacrificing any of the unpredictiability of KAs when used against normals or non-invulnerable supers. I find this rule not only restores the valildity of the achetypal 'invulnerability' power, but also reduces the problem of KAs 'outperforming' normal attacks. Instead, KAs are balanced more by the prevelence of resistant defense - highly (if somewhat unpredictably) effective against normal targets, effective, but unpredictable against modestly armored targets, and ineffective against 'invulnerable' ones. But, I think it'd be cool to see what your Java aplet has to say on the matter...

Re: Simple questions on AP caps 250 is typical of starting values for older editions. The game was a little less restrictive with frameworks and certain limitations back then, so it would be a little hard for PCs to hit a traditional 60 or 75 Apts cap while having anything much left over for skills and backgrounds, so: 1) 60 would be typical, I'd consider pulling back to 50 (45 is a little low). 2) back when characters tended to be around 250 points, AC did a poll, and found the average DEF was around 25, though it varied quite a lot. I'd actually vary the cap: for 'low'-DCV, low SPD characters, 25; for 'normal' characters, 20, for martial artists and speedsters 15. That's a bit like eyeballing a rule of X. You can also use the same Apt cap, which'd give you a 25/25 FF or 16/16 Armor for instance. If you want to really keep a lid on things, you do that for all defense, combined (including levels, ego def, etc) 3) You don't have to, you can let exp broaden the characters rather than make thier primary attacks and defenses more powerful. If you started at 50, though, going up to 60 would be fine. If you institute a DC cap of 12, going to 75, so character can play around a bit with advantages that don't boost DC might be good. 4) :shrug: I'm going purely on experience.

Re: Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow I like SCatWoT just fine, but yes the whole thing was kinda 'neo pulp' - kind of to pulp what streamline modern is to art deco. So, it looks like pulp, unless you're really, really into pulp. Personally I found the deviations acceptable, though the pacing wasn't that great, and it never quite came together. It had very much the feel of a lot of really cool ideas for scenes strung together so that all the really cool scenes could be used. Considering that the whole venture started with the scene of robots attacking New York, I may even be right. It would probably be remembered as a revolutionary new style of filmaking, too, if Sin City hadn't come out around the same time...

Re: Is it worth it to make stuff on your free time without even playing them?

The impetus behind the story line was simply that super hero comics fell out of favor around the mid-century. I started designing the campaign with the bizarre conciet that published heros would apear when thier first book was published, but have normal life spans, de-power, or die in the course of heroing. Thus all the famous characters existed, but the earth wasn't crowded with superheros. The lull in the 50's caught me by surprise when I started researching characters' histories, so I had to concoct a temporary end to superbeings. The Batman story was the end-game. Of course, that version of Batman had additional bagage, having faught in the pacific in WWII, and passed the cowl to Robin (unknown to the public) who was murdered by the Joker after unsuccessfully battling the villain who killed Superman (I think it was actually 'helped Lex Luthor kill Superman,' actually). After the powered heros of America had met thier end one way or another, the Batman, seeing his country 'at the mercy' of the few remaining supervillains, came out of retirement and got rid of them, permanently - in stark violation of his psych lims. When the rationalization he used to get him through the task collapsed, he snapped. Whether he wasn't convicted, wasn't sentenced, was pardoned, or no DA would take the case and press charges, was just a throwaway detail, and I don't even remember which one I used. I certainly hadn't researched the law much, and had possited super-being specific laws (like supers being able to testify without revealing thier secret IDs), so I could have made the "But no jurry would convict him" mistake. The story is still part of my campaign's backstory, and, FWIW, some of my players have really liked it.

Re: Disads for Dana Scully You're obviously not an ex-catholic.... Seriously, though, any strong belief that would limit your behavior from what is the campaign normal baseline or restrict your ability to deal with some situations you encounter could be a disad. Any religion could qualify. OTOH, IRL, such beliefs can help people get through tough situations - giving a religious character a good EGO or PRE or Resistance might be apropriate, too. Also, when it comes to shooting people, Scully seems very competent and not particularly 'reluctant' (not gleeful or anything, just not enclined to hesitate or get all broken up over it after), whereas Mulder certainly has at least the default 'reluctance to kill' - and also just isn't that good at it.

Re: The Summoned Menace I like the use of BOD as durration, it's clever. Seems like taking 1d instead of 3 and having only 25 BOD might be a little more reasonable, though, 20 pts less in disads, 100 less in BOD. 25 BOD still stands up to two typical super-powered attacks - not counting the attacks that fail because they're physical - which is plenty for a summoned critter, especially if you can summon more than one. The 20 OCV might face a campaign cap or RoX issue. I'd think an Ego Attack would be a decent alternative for an attack not typically dodged - and pain hurts but doesn't necisarily kill.

Re: how do you deal with guns and superheroes in your campaign I've found this to be true even in a game. It's just easier of the world lurches on about like it does IRL, rather than trying to track all the ripple effects all the super's actions have.

Re: Superheroes and lethal force In my campaign world, most Americasn heros are part of a government sanctioned team, including the PCs, currently. (In the past, I've run PCs without such affiliation in the same world, with the official team as occasional allies or foils). Killing, thus, has consequences if it's not justified. The original team roster for this group had several Code vs Killing types, anyway, so, once the gun-wielding super-soldier was replaced, it hasn't been an issue (though one team member is still entirely willing to kill, if need be, she hasn't felt forced to, yet). More generally, I use the 'reluctant to kill' default, and encourage the 'Code,' while discouraging the reverse. I just like to run something a /little/ closer to the classic Silver Age/Saturday-morning-cartoon version of supers, in which death often threatens, but rarely occurs. That aside, 'lethal force' does not have to be a KA. A 12 EB will likely kill a normal. The difference between 2 ED and no defense at all is pretty minimal.

Re: Strength as a Figured Characteristic I do something a little like that. I have some F/X based guidelines for my campaign, along the lines of what sorts of mutations, super-tech, magic and the like is in the campaign world, and what you can generall do with them. There are a number of 'mutational syndromes' that increase STR, some quite a bit - they all also tend to increase CON and BOD.

Re: How do others deal with Multiform? None of those forms are going to be particularly troublesome. Crack open the Bestiary, write up variations on each of the three animals (with, presumably, his normal INT, psych lims, and so forth). All the multiforms should be well within your guidelines, as should the character himself. In fact, you might want to beef the bear up enough to be seriuos super-level combat form. In FRED, the main form pays for the multiform, and the forms don't, the forms don't get disads that don't aply to them, and the base form doesn't get disads that only aply in the alternate forms. Alternate forms can be more points than the base, though that really shouldn't be an issue in this case. Personally, I prefer to have every form bear the multiform cost, and conform to the campaign guidelines. I know that makes multiform characters a little weak, points wise, but if the forms are genuinely very different, it's well worth it. Often forms aren't really that different, and multiform is just an unneeded complication. In fact, that's the kind of thing that could be done pre-multiform: Multipower with Growth (turns into a bear), flight (turns into an eagle), and enhanced senses (turns into a wolf). Of course, pre-multiform was also pre-any-limitations-on-what-could-go-in-a-multipower.

Re: Homo Sapiens and their guns That makes sense in Dark Champions - the game is focused on guns, more guns, dead bodies, making more dead bodies, and the criminal, LE, and military/mercenary subcultures. Most of the 155 points are probably spent on things that the character will actually need to live up to the green beret concept. In a more silver-agey game, some of those background skills and abilities could be compressed - instead of dozens of points in specific military-related KSs and perks, he might have PS: Green Beret, for instance, he might not have as many CSLs or points in martial arts, since the normals he'd be expected to shine against are less likely to have such training. I'm not familiar with the 'grace under fire' rules, but I think Hero models a lot of that sort of thing with SPD. Normals (SPD 2), hesitate in combat, reducing what they can try to accomplish in 12 seconds. Incompetent normals (SPD 1) panic and cringe or just stare at the unfolding battle in shocked incomprehension. Hard-core veterans and superbeings who's powers have nothing to with speed (SPD 4), don't hesitate, at all. Speedsters (SPD 6+) can simply do more in 12 seconds than is humanly possible.

Re: how do you deal with guns and superheroes in your campaign On the 'arms race' issue, most campaigns have Apt, DC, DEF, caps and/or RoX implemented - there is not 'arms race' in such campaigns. Statting normal weapons and normal people and allowing resistant defenses/DCVs/other defensive powers such that normal people with normal weapons are ineffective against supers simply enables a lot of superbeing archetypes. The bullet-bouncing brick, the bullet-dodging martial artist, the bullet-deflecting patriot, and so forth. It also /doesn't/ prevent superbeing archetypes like the super-agent, the Knick Furys and whatnot out there, who have super skills combined with normal weapons, or simpy super-tech weapons. OTOH, statting normal weapons and normal people such that they can kill campaign-maximum rPD bricks and hit campaign-max DCV speedsters, does away with a /lot/ of archetypes. At that point, you're running Dark Champions, at best. I don't think you're really advocating tossing out most superbeing archetypes, Fox, I'm guessing you've got a long-running, super-cool, Iron Age Comics campaign, that was Dark Champions back with Steve Long was still a corporate lawyer. But, please, don't think that campaigns with a more 4-color or Silver Age schtick automatically fail. Personally, I've played Hero since the early 80s, also, and I /have/ noticed something of an arms race - or, really, more like inflation - going on in the normal weapon stats. In 1st Ed, the typical superhero was expected to have attacks in the 40-60 Apt range, an defenses to stand up to such attacks, as well. Today, I'd say something around 12 DCs is still pretty much the de-facto standard. Also in 1st Ed, normal weapons were statted out around 30 Apts or so. Guns did a die or two of regular killing damage, a LAW was AP (but still, IIRC, not a lot of dice). Some other Hero games come out, and, in them, it makes a lot more sense for guns to be varried and to kill people. Since you didn't buy guns, they weren't exactly Apt balanced. Increased STN multipliers, for instance, were handed out like DCs. One gun might do 2d-1 Killing, while another did 1 1/2d with a d6 STNx. The result was that some handguns were 10 apts, and others were 75 Apts - and anti-tank weapons were 200 apts. But, in the supers games, such overpowered firearms were still out, since you had to buy everything with points. Then they combined everything into Hero System - and still didn't take the Apts of normal weapons, statted out to kill heck outta people in very non-super-heroic games into account. Niether the default stats of guns nor the typical super-level attacks/defenses were adjusted to fit eachother. That's great for Dark Champions, but requires some hand-waving for any other kind of super-hero genre ("well yes, there is a write-up of a desert eagle with teflon-coated bullets somewhere as a 2d RKA, AP, 1d6+1 STNx, but that's 75 Apts, and in this campaign world, your choices are 'light pistol' (d6 RKA) or 'heavy pistol' (1d+1) or 'magnum handgun' (1 1/2d RKA), that's it, guns and killing people aren't the focus of this campaign, superheros and saving people are.")

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics The former. Costing attacks at 5 Apts per DC is simply elegant and makes using simple Apt guidelines an efficient way to keep things relatively balanced. Rather than adjusting the points, I'd prefer to adjust what the attack power in question does. Make HA do a bit more, so that it can cost 5pts/die. That sort of thing.

Re: Speculation on Hero Releases in 2099 It's not a reason to believe the opposite, just a reason to be skeptical. Someone in every generation in recorded history has found some - seemingly good at the time - reason to believe the world was going to end in thier lifetimes. My theory is that longing for armegeddon is a natural part of the human condition, a way of dealing with mortality. That doesn't mean that someone won't finally be right someday, but it does mean I'm going to look at what that someone says with a lot of skepticism.

Re: Strength as a Figured Characteristic Do you mean STN = BOD+CON/2 or did you intend to double the amount of STN that CON gets you? It's a radical change, and I don't think it really improves things, but it makes sense. BOD can represent physical size and/or health and/or will to live, any of which could also reasonably allow you to exert more STR.

Re: how do you deal with guns and superheroes in your campaign True, just because normal, real world tech is ineffective against supers doesn't mean that normals with sufficient resources (militaries, special police units, crime organizations etc) couldn't be. They just have to cross the line and give thier people preternatural levels of training or super-tech equipment. That's where 'Agents' come from. (and, incidentally, where some supers find thier origin stories).

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics If, for some reason, you were arguing that EB shouldn't cost END, yes, I'd want to know how you were going to make it reasonably balanced at a cost of 5pts, rather than raising it to 7. I see no reason to argue for that, while it does make some sense for MA DCs to cost no END (since they're 'skills' and skills don't cost END).

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics When you're desiging a character, deciding to give him a 23 DEX/5 SPD instead of a 20/5 is just a matter of re-cacluating points. Unbuying something you already have when you spend exp (instead of buying it up), though, is a little odd. It's not illegal, it's just a very minor re-build, but it is a little odd. And, if you are going to buy your SPD up, why sell it back, then save up 10 points and buy it all up at once. You get a smoother progression if you don't sell it back.

Re: Killing Damage: Adding damage, manuevers and velocity I'd interpret it slightly differently: be it STR, velocity, manuevers or MA DCs, you can't more than double the DCs of an HKA. As Thia points out, Deadly Blow doesn't add to KA, it increase the base damage of the HKA. Pretty nasty, but then, that's all it does - velocity is also a movement power, and STR, manuvers and MA DCs also all do normal damage.

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics The math is perfectly clear. I'm talking something more like 'sticker shock.' And, just the way people tend to treat SPD. For instance, if you had a character at DEX 20/SPD4 with two 5-pt levels, you might conclude that 6 more points of DEX for 'only' 12 points after selling back SPD (2 net of the levels) would be a pretty good deal - and you'd be right, resulting in a DEX26/SPD4 character. Ever seen one of those? Not likely. More likely the character's SPD would be taken up to 5, total cost: 22, 12 net of the levels. If you're talking exp, a character is even likely to buy up his DEX a point or two at a time, and not sell back the SPD, since he also plans on buying it up. Now, decouple them. The cost of a CSL is now directly comparable to the cost of 3 points of DEX. If 3 points of DEX cost 6, then a 3pt level is a decent idea, but a 5pt level, well, you might as well spend the extra point and get both OCV and DCV. SPD stops entering into it. 36 DEX/3 SPD? No problem, they're not related. The math doesn't change, but the the psychology of buying up DEX, and thus the game, does.

Re: Homo Sapiens and their guns

Re: how do you deal with guns and superheroes in your campaign That's politics, too, at least in the sense I meant, as in 'office politics,' for another instance. Gaming groups can suffer from it too. I considered using a broader term like 'interaction' or 'manipulation,' but I didn't think it'd've carried the propper sleazy connotation. The importance of a higher belief in wielding power responsibly (or, indeed, at all) is a theme I've tried to inject into my current game - with absolutely no success. A lot of people just don't think that way anymore, and it's hard to frame without sounding 'preachy.'

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics Yeah, except 6 and 7 aren't 5. Yes. De-linking SPD and DEX mechanically would have the psychological result of making High-DEX/low SPD characters more acceptable. Currently, it's rare to consider buying up DEX and sellying back SPD - you typically buy up both. Thus when you up your DEX, you usally pay not only the 3:1 for DEX, but throw a few more points to SPD, rather than sell SPD back. That does impact the consideration of DEX vs levels. No value judgement meant there, just 3:1 is a good cost for DEX compared to levels, figured characteristics or no, because it's so useful. The usual, refraining from breathing. Plus a few oddities, like shrugging off a drug effect, CON check as a substitute for LTE in a game not using LTE, and uh, well 'performance.'