zornwil

Scare - or excite?

I know a gamer who bathed every day but had an odor problem. The only reason I know he bathed was that in college one of the guys on his floor regularly witnessed that he did (communal bath area, individual stalls - so I suppose technically he could have been avoiding the water while standing in the stall, but that seems pretty unlikely). Unfortunately a few people just...smell. I would think there'd be some easy sort of masking treatment, like perfume, but I get the impression that it tends to make things as bad or worse. Although your friend was cruel (I mean it's not like he knows the guy or his circumstances or anything), on the other hand so many people never say anything that I'm sure some people with odor problems might go a long time not realizing the magnitude.

I know this is OT to this thread, but as you mentioned it, actually I met the group I'm in now essentially due to a newsgroup "cattle call". It worked out great, though I was somewhat nervous about it. It was the first and only time I've responded to such. So just mentioning good things can happen. Also, I think if you're new in an area at least you can make connections that way, even if the group on a whole doesn't work out or some of the people in it don't.

Re: Breaking Personality Stereotypes for the Archetypes Okay, here's a shot - Maybe a wealthy closet-gay sex addict who fronts as a hetero playboy who doesn't look strong and doesn't "act" strong. These come in so many shapes and sizes, like bricks, it's hard to get around a "stereotype" because there isn't much of that anymore. I'd try a slow-witted clumsy child-like bufoon who is well-intentioned. This is good. Also, he could be very gregarious and back-slapping, always joking and never working. What he does comes naturally or - wait - maybe somebody else does it entirely! He actually doesn't make any gadgets, he just fronts for someone that does but puts on a convincing front. I'd pick a stoner slacker who gets very confused much of the time. Or flip this one with the gadgeteer above, make the gadgeteer a stoner slacker and the martial artist a cheesy fake whose martial arts powers aren't really martial arts at all or if they are, then they are dumb luck. That's another great one, I'd go for that. Maybe add that the mentalist is actually very gullible and lacks his own willpower on day-to-day matters (as opposed to combat). Wasn't that guy whose body was all sorts of different chemical parts very pragmatic and efficient? I'm not sure. Anyway, another thing could be a reluctant metamorph, I haven't seen much of those. This one hates to stand out and never uses his powers except in necessary situations (even in Hero ID). He is trying to find a way to fix his form - even though there's nothing wrong with him, his morph abilities are entirely healthy and not hurting him in any way (other than his perception of social standing or some mental block). Maybe an animal, literally, with a mental grasp between that of the normal animal of their class and human, such that they are well sub-human. They don't understand human situations well and require direction. Sort of like a familiar but instead this is the heroic star and the hero team struggles to keep the animal on the right path. Maybe somebody who lacks confidence and is chronically depressed, but still does their patriotic duty? I don't recall seeing any quite like that. But I'm not that well-read in regular super-hero comics. The rogue type is a good choice. Or could be some poor person who is extremely confused - say someone with something similar to Alzheimer's. They think the powered armor is their workfare job and they tend to it as such. As they fight crime, they keep asking for money "for doing my workfare." Yes, you can remind them, but they'll forget. Very confused, very poor. You could match up the suit such that it has all sorts of capabilities - maybe a VPP - but the person cannot operate it predictably. They could still be very useful in combat as they always hit the "attack" button (labeled as such) to attack, but they don't understand or keep forgetting the many nuances of that button, that if you push up you get a firebolt and push down you get an ice volley. So they do use attacks but sometimes not the best or sometimes something overly effective. Maybe a bipolar schizophrenic?

I think it's something like a Transform to "same being with physical limitation" (or social limitation if that is the effect). At least in superheroic games, in heroic games I think you can base it pretty well off of critical hits and such.

I'm mostly electronic, the exception being maps for battle/scenery (with counters), pictures, and dice, I think. At home, the session non-dice physical material (maps I think are applicable to this game, a box of cardboard pieces) sit mostly behind me in plastic shelving that happens to be behind near where I sit. Less used material (generic maps, maps for areas we've been but aren't likely to visit, photos of characters used in the past and not likely needed) sits in a stack that right now is very messy but is supposed to be organized by scene and character. By the way, for the box of cardboard pieces I use a plastic divider box normally used for needlepoint thread, with the PC and prominent NPCs in a couple sections, and generic different types sorted appropriately in other sections (police, gang-like people, bystanders, super-looking characters, etc.). Dice sit on the table. Photos sit under the laptop or equally nearby face down for new characters to be introduced/shown when appropriate. When traveling I bring the appropriate physical material and a few generic things in case, ensuring all are sorted carefully so even if I have to scramble through the generic stuff it's in sections. As above, mostly just divided by character and then scenery. On my PC, I have essentially 3 things always open during a game. First is a Word doc that may have some of the last game's notes but most importantly has this game's various plot notes (including things that we may not talk about but are going on independently) all put together. I make many notes as the game goes directly into this Word doc and eventually the campaign writeup is made from this. Second is an Access app that allows me to run combat, with characters in DEX order and flagged as their SPD occurs. It allows me to track STUN and BOD and such. Third is MetaCreator which sits open with various NPCs that are likely to be in combat. Not open but "handy" are all PC and NPC electronic characters so they can be referred to if necessary. Also I cache all the web pages about the campaign (since that is the real history for reference), as well as sometimes applicable other pages I might need for reference.

I think if it were defined suitably enough to be interesting and if the player and GM agreed carefully on how it worked it wouldn't be a problem. If it's based on how the victim feels consciously and if the players and GM are mature, it shouldn't be an issue in that instance. Even based on subconscious feelings it shouldn't be a problem if maturity is present. I think it just becomes troublesome if by "guilty" you mean in the legal or moral sense regardless of the person's feelings, and then it becomes to be a sort of "counter-plot" device wherein the GM has to reveal whose actually guilty of a crime through a player's actions, and in that case I think it's very difficult to implement in an RPG.

And it's REALLY a limit if it means the victim must FEEL guilty, which many psycho-super-criminals will not.

I had an NPC a long time ago (in fact I think I should revive him) who was this dual-personality liberal defense attorney in one guise (yeah, cliche, I know) and in his other personality was the Grim Reaper, a deadly assassin of the evil. He had this amulet that would glow on a 14/less for bad guys. If it glowed, he chopped them with a massive supernatural killing attack, otherwise he could only do slight damage. If it glowed, furthermore, he was COMPELLED to kill, whereas if it did not he was compelled NOT to kill.

Re: Thank you D-Man Sounds like his wife is in a really awkward position, I feel sorry for her.

Re: Take the easy way out Nah, don't feel bad, I just wanted to check myself. I didn't mean to make it sound like a "RTFM" comment, we all miss stuff from the books on occassion. I just didn't want somebody to come along and then be proven wrong myself so took a few minutes.

Killing is a severe psych addiction for serial killers - I agree, I think the issue is they'd be a killing super hero, either in super hero guise always in the name of justice or (more realistically) still killing in their "off" time but a great hero otherwise. I sort of think that's what Lord was saying, but he'd have to answer that.

I've heard of this, pretty tragic. They strongly suspect it's become a sort of magnet for killers, that the many failures of local authorities first to respond and then to do so in an effective manner has encouraged others to go down there for "killing vacations". There was apparently some bus drivers that were arrested but their convictions failed purportedly due to police procedural problems. Allegedly the bus drivers worked in a ring where they would cover for each other; a bus driver would take any sole passenger who stayed on until the end of the line and instead of letting her off the bus would drive somewhere secluded to rape and kill her, apparently with some other members of the ring. But even this case, if in fact it wasn't entirely mistaken, only accounted for a minority of the killings.

That's a really interesting idea for an NPC (a bit too dark for my tastes for a PC), a "reformed" serial killer whose reformation started merely as a "I have powers, let everyone know how great I am!" and transformed over time to "Oh my God, I'm sick, I need help," (whether he's seeking help or not) particularly if set in the kind of world that tolerates Punisher-style "justice" so that the character's killing in the name of justice, which also allows him some psychological/possibly sexual gratification, is not immediately obvious as the severe pathology that it is. Lot of food for thought.

Re: Obnoxious Player Moves Just a brief comment - I think rewriting on the spot in reaction was entirely fair. I've never seen anything quite as you described but pretty much because I don't use published characters. Most players I've had have been very good about not using OOC info, but a few have. I have found it easy to just say, in a friendly way of course, "Come on, how would your guy know that?" Sometimes they actually have a good reason, other times they go, "Oh yeah, I guess they wouldn't." Then again, other times, I forget myself. Did you ask the player, "Wait, why are you looking at that? Your character wouldn't have the info, I think it would be better if you stayed away from it."

Sort of on-topic, there's a Hellblazer from its early years where Constantine goes after this killer called the Family Man who likes to kill families. It is probably in a trade paperback - I could tell you issue numbers if interested. The killer is normal, no special powers. Constantine if I recall uses a few magical tricks but not much and in fact...well this gets into spoilers that I shouldn't if you read it and haven't yet. Anyway, it might give you some good ideas on this.

He has 3 off-hands, but if he buys ambidexterity ALL are ON-hands. Page 112 of 5th ed. verifies this, I looked it up, it's under the Extra Limbs power.

I think the best thing is to mutate the disadvantage appropriately. Perhaps he gets a reputation or perhaps, if he does this again, he starts to develop an "instrument of death" disad. This can't/shouldn't be against his will - you should discuss a bit how his character feels/acts, or make a judgement and then present him with your idea on how the disad really works/what it is. I ran a game where a character went from a CVK to being veangeful (not murderous) because he couldn't control his own anger at some villains' murderous actions on him and would launch attacks that were either deadly or in support of others' deadly attacks. The player didn't think about it, he just reacted. So I explained to him here's how I wanted his character to "grow" - or he could buy off the disad. It was more interesting for him to have the retribution disad and he played it that way.

You could go so far as building the construct as a very limited Follower. Then allow the characters to add their points as an Aid to one character's base follower perk, so that the +5 doubles powers.

Sounds interesting, it wouldn't "bother" me to play in such a game. I'm not interested in trying it out only because I don't have any issues with the current methods that would motivate me to change anything just now. But it sounds valid.

Well, I belive the poster did not want the "as many dice as hit with" limitation and he wanted to ensure the actual attack reflected, with all its advantages and limitations.

Well, given you (and I think I) part company with HERO on the cost/utility, this would in fact seem to be "one of those rare cases". I am guessing the reason Steve feels melee reflection would be costly is that in superhero games hitting/melee is very common, arguably massively moreso than specifically ranged combat that missile deflection/reflection guards against. If you do feel it is massively more common, than this power in melee would be massively more useful and open to abuse. I don't think I feel that way but then again I am a very liberal constructionist of HERO and part ways with a lot of its presumptions. Still, trying to set aside by bias (don't know if I'm doing so successfully), I do think you have a philosophical departure on this one area with HERO which justifies house-ruling and/or a new limitation/advantage on missile deflection/reflection (I put "and/or" as I'm not sure whether you view the latter as a true house rule).

FWIW, I favor the approach of a +0 lim/adv on Missille Reflection/Deflection or the +20 adder to Missile Reflection/Deflection (although then you have a real limitation offsetting the fact it is no longer useful against missilles). To steal (I think) Geoff's sig, the rulebook does say not to get hung up on "the right way" and this is direct and seems to be in the ballpark being looked for. Because it is really reflection/deflection, it reflects the attack with all its pluses and minuses. I think it's less kludgy, even if less "mechanically correct" (and I leave the "if" in there for a reason), then Agent X' proposal, with all due respect to Agent X (as I do think it's a very good suggestion and has interesting possibilities of its own). I understand Yamo rejected this, so that's why I say "FWIW" (which isn't much).

I'm just guesstimating purely on time - lemming as you play in my game you're welcome to correct my guess, it's pretty hard to pin down.

Setting aside the overlap, I'd say it's probably 60-40 RP-combat respectively, but it's hard to say. The last game had no combat (although it was really a smaller scope game with 2 players), but the one prior was mostly combat (again, setting aside any overlap and calling any combat just "combat" and no RP). I think overall though there's a little more non-combat time, and mayve it's even more than I've written here. It does vary an awful lot though.