Kdansky

Re: Personal Sacrifice I would assume that for a Side Effect KA to actually do Body, it would need to have Does Body +1 since it technically is NND. At least, that is how I handle it.

Re: Personal Sacrifice Then I will assume that was just a bug. It looked Hero-Designer-ish to me, so I was a bit baffled by finding such an obvious calculation error.

Re: D&D 4th

Re: Personal Sacrifice Eh, this is what I found: Variable Power Pool, 50 base + 10 control cost, Powers Can Be Changed As A Half-Phase Action (+1/2) (87 Active Points); Limited Class Of Powers Available Limited (Blood Magic Only; -1/2); all slots Each Use Inflicts 1 BODY Damage, Unpreventable (-3/4), Extra Time (Full Phase, Only to Activate, Delayed Phase, -1/2), Restrainable (Must Let Own Blood; -1/2), Incantations (-1/4), Requires A Blood Roll (Active Point penalty to Skill Roll is -1 per 20 Active Points; -1/4) Why does that cost 87 AP? Shouldn't that be 50 + 10 * (1+0.5) = 65? (Yes, you can consider that a rules question) And that guy looks eeeeeeeeeeevil.

Re: D&D 4th You are playing into my hands, you know And that was just not possible in 3.5. No teamwork required, due to the mage being a team of his own. Now, we have tactics. In short: You are using my line there

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs My "fix" for KA would just be: Make it a Normal Attack, but handle it like AVLD. After all, that is what it is. Yes, values have to be reevalueated (no pun intended this time around).

Re: D&D 4th Now imagine playing an archer in 3E, compared to a mage in 3E. Doesn't that feel kinda unfair? As if the mage had a 150 point Cosmic VPP, and you only an EB 12d6. At least the ground is level now. I assume the obligatory supplements will add loads of crap for everyone. Currently, it's very bland, but there is only so much one can fit into a single book. So after half a session of 4E, you could play it as fast as 3.5 (in which I guess you have a lot of experience). That implies that 3.5 is a lot slower than 4 if you are equally used to both. That seriously sounds weird to me, after reading through the rules. How will a fighter ever achieve a rogues damage if the rogue can Sneak Attack constistently? But then, you might have played a party of similar classes. I can't tell. Chances are, you are just way to inexperienced with the new tactical options. It took me years to be able to play HERO well... On the other hand, if you do calculations like "because I got combat advantage, I was able to Flank for 239847 damage, but I only got CA because of the fighter, therefore half the damage should be attributed as his", and then end up with same amounts for everyone, that would just mean that you have a very well balanced game.

Re: Personal Sacrifice You can definitely Heal it. That's one of the two things (overpriced) Healing can do.

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs Exactly. The point is less the points (yay for puns). It's "which gives me a good story when I play the game." The random KOs happening from good rolls of stun modifiers are nearly always detrimental to the game. - PC gets KOd early: Very bad, due to unexpected TPK risk and boredom for the particular player. - Random Thug bites it: Irrelevant. - BBEG gets slaughtered segment 12 (lucky hit, 20 on my 4 1/2 d6 HKA, x5 stun, resulting in (holy cow!) 100 stun pre defenses, after I subtract the BBEG evil defenses of 35 (ludicrous in a 60 Ap game), he still takes 65, is definitely stunned and probably even KO'd). Sure, I can add 50% DR to his defenses, but that is not a solution, that is a band-aid. I could also just give him 100 CON. Bandaid! - PC consistently rolling horrible 1's and getting nearly killed by mooks. Also not good for fun.

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs If you look at the numbers in my old thread (page 5 of this thread for link) you will see that hit locations don't change the facts much (a bit, yes), they are extremly similar in effect to rolling 1d6-1 for stun modifier. So the "using hit locations makes the problem go away" is purely anecdotal, or rather, an urban myth, so to speak.

Re: EC's cannot have non-END powers!!!!

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs I have done *extensive* analysis on how KA vs EB is in favour of KA. Just search through the posts I have written, I think the thread is called something with the phrase "unrefutable" in it. Download my Java code and test it. KAs are just better.

Re: Personal Sacrifice I still like mine best Also: Steve, what did you come up with?

Re: D&D 4th Well, if you did not have the problem that wizards became too powerful, your players are the anti-munchkins that I despise so much. Those players that go: "OMG, you cannot have Fireball!!!!!!111 That spell is munchkin and way too broken!" Look, it the rules say that Invisibility is a common, second level spell, then I will try to get it for my character at some point. And at that point, suddenly a rogues hide and move silently becomes quite moot. To translate into Hero: He has Stealth on 17- (9 points or so?), I have Invisiblity with no fringe or end cost (35 or 40 points?). Guess which one is better. And then they get Stoneskin at level 4. And they get Fly at level 4. Oh, and Teleport at 5. And they do 10d6 damage per round without even braking a sweat (level 3 Fireball at level 10 does 10d6, and all the fourth and fifth level spells you can cast do even more). At that point, Wizards have the "I Can Do Anything"-Sthick, and everyone else does not have a Sthick anymore. If the other guy can do more damage, hide better, take more hits, talk better to people and has more other utility (lockpicking spells, teleport, ...), what does your guy do? You can still roleplay. But you will have less fun than if your character's powers had some meaning. Multicasting Madness? Take a look at the Mystic Theurge Prestige Class. Basically you get the full spell repertoire from Wizard and Druid. Oh, or just any plain Druid. Shapeshift into some animal. You now got strength, dex and con of a fighter, but you keep your Int and Wis, you can still cast all your powerful spells. Or just turn into a elemental or Dire Ape (able to wield magical weapons and magical armor for bonuses to boot). Quintessence: You don't have to try to break 3E to do it. If you pick the classes Druid, Wizard or Cleric, you are quite perfectly way more powerful than any barbarian, fighter or rogue could ever imagine to be. But if you want, you can do some seriously crazy multiclassing. I only encounter two kinds people who play DnD. Those that play it RAW, and munchkin. That is fine in it's kind of way. You know, you can munchkin and still have a good roleplaying experience. It's like munchkinning a 375cp character so he is as powerful as a 1000cp one. You can also play a 1000cp one to start with. The game does not get worse (if *everyone* does it). The other kind uses heavily modified rules (no multiclassing, no additional source books, no rule x, no spell y, ...........). You can still houserule 4, that system is not worse for it. And I also played hero usually without a map. Yes, it works. No, it's not very tactical. Knockback works badly. So does Shove (Push) and Shift in 4E. But I'm sure you can still play it without a map. It's just a different game. 3.5 without a map is as bad as 4. Whom does your fireball hit? Who is close enough for Cleave? Everyone has AoE too, so that problem does not get worse in 4th. It's the same. And then some things people write are really not on topic at all. "I prefer cool characters to cool ability sets." Now where does 5ER offer *any* cool character? Uh, it does not? Now that is astonishing! One might just think those books (4e php and 5er) are rulebooks, and not theatrical advice. A class is meant to be bland, so you can fill it with something. How boring would that be if every cleric was identical in looks and mindset to any other cleric? Really, that sentence was just flaming the book because you decided in advance you didn't like it. I play ADnD right now, and that group would NEVER EVER EVER switch to 4E. Because they decided months before the book was even published. That's called "Prejudice". Roleplaying being part of combat or not: Depends on the group, not on the rules (although the rules can support either direction, 3E definitely was about rolls more than about roles, I feel 4E does this a lot better by making the choices clearer). This is the Champions Board? No, seriously, I hate the campyness. Even a overconfident character is not stupid. Sure "I don't dodge" is Overconfident, and that's ok. But when a Dragon is Move-Throughing you, even the most Overconfident fool will be afraid and not do silly things. "I don't dodge" is fine. "I dodge" is fine too if the character has already taken a hit or two and is not looking good. "I Move-Through too!" is not overconfident. That is plain suicide and the character KNOWS IT! That's like attacking a tank with bare fists. Nothing Overconfident there, only stupidity. So the battle can still be tactical AND heavy of roleplaying.

Re: Brooklyn Rage! If there was no annoying maximum Effect rule (or if the Maximum Effect was a crapload higher), one might actually make a very cool Battlerage: Assume: Incredible Maximum Effect (+1): has no maximum effect, or something along the lines of "dice maximum x3 per turn". Just very big. 4d6 Absorb, half into Stun, half into END. +1 IME. 40 cp. Every time you get hit, you gain 4d6 END and 2d6 stun. Kinda neat. The more you get attacked, the more you can Sweep/Autofire with any END costing ability. I might actually allow something like this... I mean: 0 END for 80 AP is also 40 cp. And that would be better nearly always, I'm sure.

Re: D&D 4th I am not sure how much 4th is a "MMORPG". I actually read through the rules (php, dmg, mm) and I have to say: The dmg is *great* for beginners. Campaign design, flavour, encounters (combat and other) and lots of good advice. The rules itself are incredibly lightweight and look very balanced. + Wizards/Spellcasters dominating everyone: gone + Fighters being booooring: gone + The game became a lot more tactical. Yes, you have to use a map. Guess what, hero is the same. + Multiclassing madness reduced (have to take a feat) + Cool classes (if you have them, better make them cool) like Warlock and Warlord. + No crappy Instakill spells anymore. "You are paralized for 8 rounds" - as if that was any different from Save-Or-Die. I really like 4E, much more than ADnD (which is horrible) and 3E (which is bad, due to non-balance).

Re: EC's cannot have non-END powers!!!! I try to not flame you, but I disagree on roughly every word ECs do *not* promote a good concept. They promote a shallow concept where any power is somehow justified by one single SFX. I never understood why Firewoman (from Spiderman tv shows) could fly. Even when I was 6 years old I didn't see why "fire" makes one fly. Certainly didn't work with matches. So yeah, you can call that "Good", if you like, but that's horribly subjective. The rules should not do that. I mean: We all agree that a Multipower gives *some* limitations for *some* points. We can disagree on how much that is worth for how much, but we will not disagree that there is a fundamental limitation involved, namely the inability to use two powers at the same time. With EC? Zero Limitation (except for the Drained thing). END cost in ECs. It is completely and utterly arbitrary. I can put Force Field inside the EC. I cannot do so with Armor. I can put Healing in there. But not Aid. Shapeshift is fine. Multiform is not. Force field with +1/2 zero End is fine. Armor with -1/2 Costs End is fine too. Honestly: WTF?! None of this makes sense. Try Unified Power (-1/4) instead. Slap it on all powers you deem "they are basically one thing, and if one gets drained/shut off, they all are affected". Makes great sense for mentalists or magicians. And if the Brick wants to slap it onto his STR, please, be my guest. After all, if you have "mutant supermuscles", then draining your strength might affect your 15/15 Steelskin (Armor), 20" Huge Jump (Leaping) and WhatDoIKnow (WhatDoIKnow) too.

Re: Personal Sacrifice I would also go with Side Effect, but not Drain, instead RKA, Does Body. So the Life is lost and won't come back so soon. And as stated, slam that onto "some more END" which cannot be accessed without triggering the side effect. My main problem: how do I get these 60 second in there. The only thing we have to work with is charges. NPA 0 END up to 180 AP (three powers worth) +1/2. One Continuing Charge, lasting 1 minute (would be -1). Recovers every 5 minutes (results in charges having +1/4 x4, so in total -0), Side Effect: KA BODY, Does Body +1, Always Occurs (-1 or so). Expensive? Yes. But pretty good I think. I'd use it a lot if I had it Another write up: Pay With Life Force Naked Power Advantage: No Endurance Cost (+1/2) for up to 120 Active Points. 60 AP Charges: One continuing charges, lasting 1 minute recovers every five minutes (4 steps on time chart) (-0) Major Side Effect, 30 AP: 1d6 KA, Does Body (+1), fixed stun multiplier (-0), Always occurs (-1) Active Point: 60, real cost: 30 Not bad actually. Can power up to 120 Active Points for a full minute. Powers with increased END cost are a bit problematic though. Just don't allow those on the same build, or reduce the value of the limitation by 1/2 while this is active.

Barbarian Rage! Well, that was the reason I thought about it. I wanted to build a "Rage Up" ability. You know, something every other system (especially That Other System) has. So I played around a bit and realized "Hey, none of my characters ever used Absorption, this is the perfect opportunity!" 5 pts: 1d6 Absorption, choose whether this is against Physical or Energy damage. Adjustment Power rules apply. After building a couple different powers I realized: This power is not worth it's cost. AT ALL. Assume 50 points to burn. I can either get 10d6 Absorption (let's say: into BODY), or buy 25 points of BODY. Now 10d6 has a Maximum Effect of 60, so I can get 30 BODY at best. But that is only a minor improvement over the 25 I can get without any powers involved at all. Those don't fade. And to make matters worse: I get a free 25 stun too. Or (assuming I'm not selling REC already, as I often do), I can just sell 15 stun and buy 35 body (+ 10 free stun) for the same 50 points that would get me 30 points of non-persistent body. So why exactly should I ever use this power? Aid has the same problems (10 points for 6 Maximum Effect), but you can us Aid on all four team-mates, giving you 30 Effective Maximum Effect for 10 points. That's not so bad. Also: Increased Maximum Effect (1 cp for +2 max) is great for transfer, good for aid and horrible for Absorption (3 points for +6? I can get 1d6 for 5, that's not so different, it's basically a -1/4 limitation). I propose exactly that: "Only to increase Maximum Effect" should be a -1/2 Limitation on the die, or even better: Double Maximum Effect should be a +1/4 Advantage. And for those who will suggest "In a 50 AP game you can Absorb to get higher Max-AP": No, you can't. I won't allow a 50 AP Absorb (into STR) if you already have 50 STR, because that would give you 20d6 in my 10d6 game, one-shotting everyone. I will allow you to have +10 Limited Strength about as likely as I will allow you to have 2d6 Absorption. Only, 10 Limited Strength is usually not more expensive than absorb (nonpersistent -1/4 makes it same price) and gives figureds to boot. But let us assume figureds don't matter much for the discussion, I'm mainly interested in how to make absorb workable. I was thinking about using it into END/STUN, but one still runs into Maximum Effect rules there... And for those not getting the title: http://www.yugiohtheabridgedseries.com/

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs No, it's not like that. The thing is: You do not need to roll a x5 (or rather: 6+6 in this case), it's often enough to roll a x4 (or even x4.5 if you accept half numbers). So it comes up way more often than only in the x5 case. Even x3 might be very big (4d6 -> 20 body -> 60 stun, try to roll 60+ on 12d6, that will take you a couple minutes of constant rolling). So yes and no, it's mainly the maximum height, and not how often it comes up. Even if that's rare, it sucks each and every time.

Re: Can you look this character over Add a good helping of strength, the character will get a few points cheaper (and harder to grab). Same holds true for CON. As long as you don't start selling REC, STUN, PD and ED, it's cheaper to add primaries instead of secondaries. Yes, it's a flaw in the system. But you cannot convince me to pay extra for less. If I can either pay 20 points for 20 str or 15 points for 30 str, Ill take 30.

Re: Defences against the stun of KAs I have tried that for a game. It was horrible. It slows down combat significantly (try to do (9/2 -1) * 17 quickly) and does not alleviate the problem at all. Instead of having a instakill result once every couple phases, you only have about one per turn. Which is still too much. I will try x2 or 1d3 next game. Probably x2 for HKAs improved by strength (because those are always HUGE), and 1d3 for RKAs (since these tend to 20% to 50% smaller).

Re: How do you handle healing? Noncombat Healing is completely irrelevant, honestly. Even the smallest amount of regeneration will very quickly recover all damage for any amount of points. 60 real points or 10 real points don't really make much difference there. The same goes for Healing (once per Minute, 1d6: 20 points or so?). Incombat is much more interesting, but a lot harder to use due to how it currently works. A rework might be interesting. I'm thinking DnD, yes, where you have a "Healer".

Re: How do you handle healing? I go with Maximum Effect. If a healer can Heal for 6d6, that means he can restore a total of 36 character points to anyone per day. Usually, that gives anyone two uses, since you roll about 3.5 / 6 per die. I am not yet sure how I will manage multiple healers, I think I will just let them work in paralell. So if three party members can Heal (simplified), for 3d6, 6d6 and 4d6 (+20 maximum Effect as with adjustment powers, = 10 cp adder) respectively, that means they can heal for 18 + 36 + 46 total. Allowing more maximum for less dice works well I think. I hope it does not get out of hand. Similar Question: If I Aid/Succor Stun, how do you handle it? Base 30 stun, currently 22 stun (lost 8 due to an attack), succor/aid for + 20. Possible solutions: 42 current, 50 maximum. (both get the +20) 42 current, 30 maximum. (only current gets the +20), this means you cannot REC the +20 gained. 22 current, 50 maximum. (only maximum gets changed, makes this a long term buff, not a heal spell) 32 current, 40 maximum. half/half or any other distribution that you agree to beforehand. 36 current, 36 maximum. 8 points of 20 got used to bring them to equal value (30), and then one point each for current and maximum. I think those ideas cover all. So?

Re: Willpower Sean is completely right. Never add additional rolls to combat if there is another way which is just as clean. I recently wrote up a "unstable" desolid. In the end it became 75% DR which works just as well but requires me to roll roughly a hundred dice less per battle.