sbarron

Re: Sin City I agree, sort of. I agree DC games should play more like movies or short novels. A lot of detective novels work well like this. The detective gets hired for lots of jobs, but most are mundane stuff and happen before the book starts or off screen. But then along comes a serious case. It pushes the detective to his limits, very well may get him killed, and could change his life or the life of the people around him forever. That case is the story that gets told. I think DC should work the same way. If your PCs are a SWAT team, you don't need to worry about playing the 6 months between dangerous missions. Maybe have an off session where players talk about what they do over those 6 months (spending their experience?), then right back into another "big" mission, 6 months later.

Re: Two Books... If you're willing to buy damaged copies, right now it could get you a heck of a lot. All damaged books are half off. 2 books can easily become 4!

Re: Spiderman Vs. Firelord I just re-read those books. Here is a list of the damage Firelord took before the beatdown. 1. Firelord does a full move-through at Spidey, misses, and crashes through 3 apartment buildings, which stuns him. 2. Dives into the East River to retrieve his staff. The effects of this may be negligable, or may have some impact we don't see. I like Darren's idea, but who knows? 3. Spider-man makes Firelord crash head-on into a speeding subway train. Firelord says he heated up his body to slip through the weak metal. But he also says, "ARRGH!," while doing it. It must have hurt somewhat. 4. Spidey tricks Firelord into getting caught in a 8 story building being demolished. Firelord got hit with explosives then barried in the rubble from the collapsing building. 5. And finally, Spidey tricks Firelord into causing a gas station he is near to explode. It says this explosion flattens more than an city block. Firelord is prone after the gas station explosion, though apparently playing possum (he certainly must have taken some damage from the blast, though). Once Firelord starts to get up, Spider-man springs on him full tilt for the beat down. As an additional note, it looks like events 4 and 5 might happen within a few seconds of each other. Firelord bursts out of the rubble from the collapsed building, gets hit with a big chunk of building Spidey throws at him, fires a blast at Spidey, gives chase for a phase, then blasts the gas station. That looks like about 4 phases to me, between getting caught in the explosion and subsequent collapse of the building and then getting caught in the gas station blast. Plus, he got hit with a man sized rock mixed in there. I think that could have sufficiently weakened Firelord enough to give Spidey a shot during the beat down. Of course, I'm a total Spidey fanboy.

Re: Spiderman Vs. Firelord I havent' read Spider-man in a while, but I do remember a couple of occasions where he really gets pissed and "cuts loose" on somebody, with the result being similar to the Firelord fight (Iron-man 2020 anyone?). I would argue that Spider-mans powers seem to be very much linked to his psyche. Most of the time, he's pretty happy, feels sorry for his opponents, and cruises around at about 10 tons STR. But occasionally, if he gets pissed or pushed too far, he can turn it up a notch. Ok, a couple notches. I suppose its kind of like pushing. I mean, the guy can hit hard, right? He must have martial skills, levels out the wazzoo, and many, many villians can't even lay a glove on him. He toyed with Titania during Secret Wars. She's a heavy brick. Swatted away the whole damn X-man team during the same stretch. He shattered Iron-man 2020's armor (sorry, I love that comic, "malfunction...malfunction...impact rating at..."). He is just not a mid-level combatant in Marvel. Further, I think he did pull all his tricks on Firelord if I remember right. Dowsing him in water, stealing his staff, stuff like that (I'll check when I get home). I mean, maybe those things had an effect on how tough Firelord was at the time of the final beat down? It's comic science afterall.

Re: Moving through the crowds Why's that?

Re: Implications of single-aspect magic on game worlds I could easily see the people who could create or use gates forming a guild similar to the Spacer's Guild in Dune. The guild would regulate all use of gates, and probably place themselves outside (above?) of any political or national relationships. In this way, they could control trade, could make or break any nations during wars, and pretty much make everyone pay through the nose for their services. Just thinking out loud here.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I have a feeling the Harbinger of Justice might have both. His 4th Ed versions had both FW and +4 OCV vs. Hit location mods. Has anyone seen the Dark Champions manuscript? My permissions have expired.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? This is good to know. Your examples in the link are how I have been doing FW. There was an example earlier that calculated what and how to halve defenses differently, and it made me doubt my method. Thanks, Zanthis. Now if we could just figure out whether you can have sectional and limited activation roll LoW, we'd be all set.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? How does it being a football helmet change anything? All resistant defenses, or all normal defenses, are affected by FW. If it's a football helmet that provides additional normal defenses, then the PC with FW would have to use FW on the normal defenses to halve them. I don't see how that changes anything, much less make my argument "break down."

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? Here you go... So in the example we were using at the time, the one where Sectional Man had armor on parts of his body but not his hands and feet, obviously the PC with FW would use FW on either the resistant defenses (the armor) or the normal defenses (the hands and feet). If the PC halved the armor, but then hit the hands, the defense of the hands wouldn't be havled. I think the subsequent example you came up, the helmet with FW, may be flawed. Lack of Weakness's description starts "a character with Lack of Weakness is tough - it's harder for an opponent to find a weakness in his defenses." Buying FW for specific pieces of armor might be taking FW and LoW too far. Finding weaknesses or having a lack of weaknessnes seems to deal in characters total resistant or total normal defenses, not in specific peices of armor. I think I would rule that you couldn't have sections of armor with LoW and others without. PCs either have LoW or they do not. The problems you are having with find weakness now are because you are trying to make LoW only apply to sections of armor, and only with an activation roll. If the character had LoW for all defenses, without an activation roll, there wouldn't be a problem. But that's me. I haven't seen an official ruling on this, so maybe you can have sections of LoW armor. As a quick aside, having full suites of fitted armor have some LoW might be a good way to encourage PCs to not put together piecemeal suits of armor. But that is for another thread... If you can have sectional LoW, then I'm going to agree again with Zanthis and also Dust Raven. I think you make the rolls when the FW is used, and just make a note of it.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I'm going to agree with Zanthis, the FAQ does clear this up somewhat. I obviously need to read the FAQ more often. It deals pretty well with Sectional Defense guy that has Lack of Weakness on resistant defenses, but gets hit in his undefended hand.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? That's just it. Who said that FW only finds an overall weakness in one type of armor? Or only uniform types of armor? FW finds weaknesses in opponents, and those weaknesses might be his armor, it might be the way he fights, it could be any one thing, or could be several things at once. FW is the ability to find and exploit weaknesses. How that actually happens will vary from opponent to opponent. That's why saying you've covered each of the examples I gave earlier misses the point. FW can and does do all of those things at once. It can have the effect of AP, by describing it as taking advantage of some flaw in the armor. It could be similar to analyze style, in that you take advantage of the way your opponent moves. It could be similar to hit locations, in that you target a weak spot. FW gives the character the ability to notice all of those things at once. He finds the weakness. You're sectional armor example is no different. By making his FW roll, the PC might notice weaknesses in the armor plating that Sectional Man is wearing. He also might notice that Sectional Man moves in a way that can be taken advantage of to half his defenses, even if he is hit in the hand where he has no armor. And if Sectional Man has a partial coverage Force Field, then the PC might notice fluctuations that can be exploited in that, too. The weaknesses he actually finds are up to the GM and the player. But FW is the ability to find those weaknesses, whatever they might be.

Re: Deadly Blow talent too powerful? I really like the inclusion of these new ideas. They have expanded the borders of my Hero imagination ten fold. Reading about Combat Luck, Deadly Blow, and "divide by 3" felt like I was having blinders lifted off after years of looking straight ahead. The options seem even more limitless now. And while it may be more difficult to exclude stuff that's "in the book," it's still possible if you don't like it, right?

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? If you haven't seen it, I think it's because you are looking for the wrong thing. As I stated above, Find Weakness is not just finding gaps in armor. From your posts, I get the impression you see FW as finding a weak (hit?) location in armor and then targeting that weak location. Which does seem very similar to hit locations. So in your mind targeting the unarmed or lesser armed hit locations, or just targeting the head or vitals, is the same thing as FW. But I think that's the wrong way to look at it. Finding a weakness could mean anything. A disadvantage in the way your opponent moves, the fluctuation in his force field, or as above, weak spots in his armor. Try stepping back from looking at the armor actually defending the opponent. It's not important for FW, other than to help describe the FX of the weakness. FW allows its user to makes his opponents armor less effective. How it does this in game will probably depend on the type of armor, or lack there-of, that it is being used against. But again, that is just FX.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I have read the entire thead, a couple of times actually. It was very difficult to figure out exactly what your point is in all of this. I thought I had distilled it down to the quote I used above, but I guess not. At first your position seemed to be that it was double dipping to have FW and hit locations (or could be). Then you said the effect of FW can be replicated by AP. Here you're saying you can get a similar effect out of analyze style. It's interesting that you've had 3 or 4 people describe FW as a power that is similar to analyze style, except that it's more powerful. Analze style can get you what, +2 levels total? That is a long way from FW's Halving Defenses. So in a sense, I guess FW could be considered the powered up version of analyze style. Do you see above how you lumped halving armor and damge that is modified by hit location into being the same thing again? They are not the same thing. FW is about making armor less effective. Why it makes it so is completely unrelated to hit locations. Attacks that have more energy, find weak spots in armor, or whatever, are just the special effects of how FW works. And yes, you could have one character with FW who is very effective against bricks, and another character with a boat load of CSL that uses hit locations to beat bricks. You could even have a character with both. There are many ways to represent abilities in Hero. Here is a place with some overlap. I don't see the problem.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I think you should keep halving armor from FW and modified damage from hit locations seperate. Combining them as you have here is confusing the issue. As others in this thread have pointed out, Find Weakness is not any one thing. One player could make his FW roll to notice gaps in armor plating against one character, fluctuating weak spots in a force field against another, and determining the pace of a third character, allowing the player to time his shot just right for better damage. Actually hitting a weak spot in armor, which seems to be the way you think of FW, is only one possible option. Remember, this is Find Weakness, which isn't necessarily the same as find gaps in armor, or find weak spots in force field. Though it could be, depending on the FX of the defender... Since you asked for an example... An attacker with a bow and FW makes his FW roll. He notices a tendency in the way his opponent with sectional defenses moves in combat, and can take advantage of this fact with his bow. So he attacks and hits his opponent with sectional defenses just as the opponent is moving towards the attack. This increases the amount of energy in the attack and decreases the effectivness of any armor against the attack. So even if the attacker hits the toe or finger, the movement towards the attack still causes any armor to be less effective.

Re: Hattori Hanzo Steel

Re: DARK CHAMPIONS: What Do *You* Want To See? I hope that Dark Champions stays true to the stated genre of modern-day action-adventure. I consider costumed vigilanties Champions characters with guns. The book should focus on spies, cops, and military action, with Costumed vigilanties sprinkled in. And I hope that the art (cover art especially) is more along the lines of modern-day action-adventure. Nothing will send the wrong message on the switch of focus in Dark Champions like a picture of Nighthawk fighting terrorists. Swat teams vs. terrorists or something like that would be better. Trying to be helpful.

I'm thinking of creating a wizard "race" for a FH game. They would look obviously different than normal humans with freakish physical features. Becasue of their distincitve look, they will have difficulty disguising themselves. People will fear and shun them almost without exception. They would be hunted by all the major powers in the campaign world, to either be converted to some cause or destroyed. Also, because of how they are sought after, normal people would consider them a bad omen, a bringer of bad luck (as groups seeking them would go to great lengths to aquire them). So I have distinctive features, hunted, reputation, physical limitations, and maybe even social limitations? Are all of these appropriate? I suppose I could use mutants as a model (at least ones that are obviously mutants). It seems like you might get a lot of points in disads for just being one of these wizards.

Re: Old Hero gamer looking for a GM I live in DC. I might be going to UVA in the fall, but looking at a map, that's still 1 1/2 hours from Harrisonburg, Virginia. That's too far for me, even if I'm in school.

Re: Sleep spell - one GM's take

Re: Translating Magic Resistance I have done it as damage reduction vs magic. Costs the same as regular damage reduction. Since not all attacks do damage, you just have to do the math on things like flash, drain, etc. Fortunately, since you buy it in 25%, 50%, and 75% increments, that's not too hard.

Re: Weapon Style Creation I think the creation of new manuevers is covered in the Ultimate Martial Artist (as you feared). I have never found the need create new manuevers, so I have never used them. Sorry I can't help with that. However, if you would list some of the ideas you are looking to simulate, I'd love to help...

Re: Weapon Style Creation You use the word "style." And also "power system?" What do you mean by those? Are you looking for new martial maneuvers (e.g. marital strike)? New marital art styles (e.g. karate)? Or some kind of unique, power like abilities for different characters types (e.g. deadly blow)? If it is martial maneuvers, maybe you could give an example? I think that most offensive and defensive moves are already covered, though you may have to think about them creatively. If it is a new martial art, that would be easy enough. And you wouldn't have to be too concerned with balance, as PC will have to pay points for what they get. Maybe the two sword character's fighting style relies on offense and quickness. So he would by lots of martial strikes, maybe some levels of lightning reflexes, and avoid defensive moves like block and dodge. Maybe the heavy fighter goes the other way, with lots of defensive moves. If you meant power like abilities, again, it would help if you could give some examples of what you are looking for. And by the way, you will never, ever regret getting a copy of the Ultimate Martial Artist if you plan to use martial arts in your game. It is easily one of the most useful books Hero puts out.

Re: Limits on CSL's? General consensus? I've considered a couple of different systems for controlling combat skill levels, though I've never implemented them. The first (and my favorite) involves buying certain skills and KSs to increase CV beyond a certain point. These would be campaign specific, and might look something like this: 1-8 CV: None 9-11 CV: WF w/Com Melee, Tactics 11-, +1 w/H-to-H, KS: fighting styles of City 12-13 CV: WF w/Com Melee, Tactics 12-, +2 w/ H-to-H, KS: fighting styles of Region, KS: Anatomy 8- 14-15 CV: WF w/Com Melee, Shield, Tactics 13-, +3 with H-to-H, +1 All Combat, KS: Fighting styles of Region, KS: Anatomy 11-, etc... My thinking is to make it cost more points for PCs to buy up their CV beyond a certain level, and force them to be somewhat well rounded combatants without putting arbitrary limits on things. PCs wouldn't be able to just buy 15 2pt levels. In my setting, you couldn't get that good in a vaccuum. PCs would have to improve their overall understanding of combat and improve many different skills in order to have a 15 OCV. Once I win the lottery, I'll have enough time to come up with levels for all of the various profession my PCs might pick in my hypothetical campaign. Until then... The other method is similar. You can never have more than 3 of any type of level. So, the progression would look like this for a PC who primarily uses a short sword... Start: +3 w/short sword. Next level: +1 w/swords, +2 w/short sword Next level: +1 w/swords, +3 w/short sword Next level: +2 w/swords, +2 w/short sword Next level: +2 w/swords, +3 w/short sword Next level: +3 w/swords, +2 w/short sword Next level: +3 w/swords, +3 w/short sword Next level: +1 w/ H-to-H, +3 w/swords, +2 w/short sword etc... This one is similar to the first, in that it forces PCs to get better at a group of things in order to get better w/ one weapon. This one is simple, and doesn't require as much forthought as the first example. Hope these help.