Doc Democracy

Working my way through things still.  The core classes are not terriby difficult to deliver a kind of class like advancement and to take the old level descriptors. 

My current thoughts are focussed on druids.  I am quite keen to get druids away from being a kind of cleric.  I was wondering what folk thought were the core identifiers of druidism.  My intention is to work through the special abiities in the PHB and use that as the core advancements. 

So, Nature sense and animal companion to start - can innately identify plants and what can be eaten and whether water is drinkable.

Woodland stride - not inhibited by natural growth etc when travelling

Trackless step - cannot be tracked through natura grounds

Resist nature's lure - +4 versus abilities of woodland creatures

Then progressing power of Wild shape

Venom immunity - immunity to organic poisons (those from animas/plants)

More Wild shape steps

A thousand faces - can change appearance at will.

Then more wild shape steps.

It seems like a druid is more about shapeshifting than manipulating natural forces (or anything to do with the elemental planes).  I can live with this as the additional spell stuff pulls more to nature bits.

I think, therefore that wild shape is a key feature of being a druid in Greyhawk.  My concern is doing this in HERO, I was reaching for multiform but you need to pay for each form individually.  It is not shape-shift because he gains abilities like flight and enhanced strength, vision and other natural abilities.  I am therefore thinking it needs to be a heavily prescribed VPP?? 

10 hours ago, unclevlad said:

The value of negation relative to other defenses is a PITA.  Negation works against AVADs, Drain STUN, and Drain BODY.  Which opens up a massive rules question:  if I have, say, 5 DCs physical and 5 DCs energy negation, with no limitations, then what's my defense against

 

--AVAD Power Def?

--AVAD Mental Def?

--AVAD Flash Def?

--NND LS: Cold?

 

Is it really applying to ALL of them?  If I buy it as STUN Only, does it still apply?  What about BODY only?  That's a poor choice, but still allowed.  Or, is it AVAD vs. Resistant PD only?  That seems to contradict the "apply the DN to an AVAD even if the char lacks the specified defense."  

I like using DN/DR as a special effect specific defence.  If a character should be more resistant to fire then I want a defence that works against all those attack forms regardless of how they are built.

I don't think it us entirely RAW but in my games, that is the very specific use I put such things to.  🙂

I think @Hugh Neilson nails it.  There is no right or wrong answer as long as the playing group is bought in and the GM is content to enforce the limits within the game.

I tend to set the game so that toe to toe fights tend to be over quickly, slightly higher attacks, slightly lower defences on average.  It means players are incentivised to think about combat options, dodging, recovering, teamwork to gain CV and damage advantages, and thinking about how to tactically approach a fight.

When I want the villains to win a fight, I put more detailed thought into the set-up of the combat, for example, which PC needs to go down quickly and whether the villains need an edge for this one that puts a thumb on the combat scales.

5 hours ago, Mr. R said:

(name): Electromagnetics.  Electric blasts, Flight, FF.

The obvious one us Spectrum, or Van Allen (with a belt focusing his power)

5 hours ago, Mr. R said:

(name): Radioactive decay.  So a lot of drains.  And flight.

I like Entropy for this one. 

6 hours ago, greypaladin_01 said:

 

I knew about this one from BBB, but was trying to figure out if 4e had the more detailed breakdowns that 5/6e did.     Seems it only did the general guidelines.

 

Thank you!

Ah!  Thst will teach me to read things properly.  😁

Yeah, this is the batural progression along making a truly universal offering, the need to deliver more and more guidance on how to use the system to design your game.

The mistake Steve made was trying to get all that guidance into the core rulebook.  I reckon the 6E could be 1/4 the size it is.  The discussion of powers and talents and everything else would then be stuffed, in a more focused way, into the genre books like Champions and Fantasy HERO.

Page 11 in the BBB.

If I remember properly thus might have been the first time such a table was produced as this was the first step in a unified HERO Sytem rather than a bunch of books with similar mechanics.

I wasa putting things into HD and discovered lots of places where I have adopted 6th edition thinking.  So I was wrong in some places.  Flight would be only 26", and so the move through would ony be 11D6, I was tragically mixing up the 1pt/m and 2pt/" and delivering massively out of proportion damage.  😞 

I also played with putting everything into a bigger EC but that meant either having +10 SPD, cost END to activate, or simply giving him SPD 5 - which feels a bit more boring.  🙂

If he is to be less gonzo, then he needs something funky that emphasises the weed in a powersuit, and fills a gap other characters could not occupy.

I am waiting for inspiration to strike.

The SPD thing is easy, you give it cost END and buy Reduced END, 0 END.  It means you have less SPD and it costs less, not a terrible thing. Down to +6SPD.

The ACV is indeed a 6th Edition thing but Hero Designer can accommodate a custom advantage.

The move through is the big thing, you said 14D6 was fine, and did not give me any caps to use.  If you were to use the whole 20D6 damage, your OCV, would be 4 below campaign average.  Quite a massive hit, 7 or less to hit on average.  To get back to campaign average you would have to bring it down to 16D6.

I didn't say your campaign was overpowering, I said it had higher levels of power than my campaign, and many others I have come across at these point levels.  It is also why questions like this need a clear outline of those campaign guidelines, unlike (for example) D&D, we can't just say it is a 6th level campaign.

I might have another go.

I would argue with a high SPD stat being for speedster.  He does not use a high SPD stat for anything beyond attacking really. And he has none of the speedy things a speedster might otherwise gave.

The flight is to provide him with the ability to move around the battlefield and allow him to utilise that high SPD to regain END and STUN, hiding, taking a recovery and getting back to the fight.  It also allows him to keep other people at a distance,  it us not supposed to be a way of getting around but he does a reasonable 80 mph or so.

The flight is also so high to allow him to use it as a weapon -

You do not need persistent with always on.  Persistent means that it stays on even when unconscious and persistent requires 0 END.  In this scenario, if he is conscious, he has it on and if he dies not consciously reduce his SPD then is using 10 END a turn, barely balancing that REC of 10.  It also makes a secret ID essentially impossible.

That second Force Field is the one that does the move through thing.  🙂

Of course, nearly all of that was distorted to fit it all into the 40 point EC....

It would probably not cost much different to pack the native powers into the EC, leaving him nothing but a high CON, high EGO normal.  You could put the CON and EGO into adrenal enhancers, that he triggers in Combat and take a limitation on those to save points.  I was suffering from too high cheesy levels already though, so left them native.

Doc

Hmm.  Definitely we'll out of practice at this!!  I am sure I was once able to make ECs and multipliers dance to my tune....

Anyway, I followed the theme and may have come up with a character that your GM might balk at but should be competitive in the game you were talking about.

Forgive the lack of fancy character sheet, I did it all pen on paper while watching a TV documentary about the Troubles.  Recommended on iPlayer "Once upon a time in Northern Ireland".

Anyway, I spent 20 points on CON, 3 on DEX, 3 on INT, 20 on EGO, 8 on REC and 15 on STUN.  I then remembered this was still 5th edition and CON is king.  So I upped the CON to a 60 point spend, saved the 8 on REC, 10 of the STUN spend and sold back 20 points of END.  2 points more but now with END 40 rather than 20 and much less easy to STUN.

I then toyed with a variety of different structures.  I came down on having some core abilities, STR 15 telekinesis, 3D6 Energy Blast, 5" Flight, 5PD/ED Force Field.  The TK and EB have Alternate Combat Value (they apply versus ECV rather than DCV (a sixth edition advantage, but you could try selling it to your GM). The EC powers can only be used with the smaller "native" powers and so I have taken Linked on the smaller powers for a 1/4 limitation.  I have judged this a disadvantage because the larger powers are 0 END while the native powers cost END.

Then we have the powersuit, that focuses and amplifies his telekinesis. I finally settled on a 40 point EC - all powers have at least IIF foci (+1/4)

Power 1 - +45 STR telekinesis.  0 END, ACV. (IIF - gloves)

Power 2 - +9D6 EB. 0 END, ACV, indirect. (IIF - lenses, beam, lockout on TK)

Power 3 - +52" Flight. 0 END. (OIF - flight harness, no NCM)

Power 4 - +27 PD/ED Force Field. 0 END. (OIF - powersuit, always on)

Power 5 - 54 PD Force Field. 0 END. (OIF - powersuit, only for move through)

Power 6 - +8 SPD (IIF - head-mesh)

Power 7 - 14PD, 8ED Force Wall. 0 END. (OIF - powersuit, no range)

I kept your skill set as on the character sheet except the Combat skill, I replaced that with +10 to move through.

I also kept the slots on the HUD.

Now I figure that coming out to 321 points compared to the 332 of your original.  There is room for manoeuvre. You might use it to buy some additional DCV.

I need to say that I would not accept this character in my game, it breaches too many of my game's red lines.

The key place it does that is the +8 SPD.  It gives the character 10 SPD and us supposed to represent him acting at "the speed of thought", the suit feeding his power back through him.  I find higher SPD characters overly powerful, with careful play hey gain back STUN  and END really fast and they can pile on lots of damage due to the potential.

You would need to play this guy carefully, he moves fast and often.  Standing still, he would raise his Force Wall which protects from any one decent hit in a single phase. His EB has mental power style range, so keeping his distance gives him an advantage, opponents need to move or take range modifiers, he should be easy to hit but possibly difficult to damage.

He can move through for big damage.  The Flight is 62", which gives upto +20D6 damage but at upto -12 OCV. A decent attack when an opponent is unsighted or stunned and the additional forcefield mitigates the move through damage he might take.

This not a polished character but I think better reflects the idea of a telekinetic in a suit.

Doc

19 hours ago, greypaladin_01 said:

I agree 100% that not every Talent / Skill / Perk / Power is appropriate for every genre, at least not without major GM/Player coordination.  But that does not mean that codifying everything, very clunkily often, makes things any better.  HERO has fully committed to the Toolkit approach for the bulk of it's history now, but has lost much of it's ease-of-use in the process.   My Instant Change example above, how Transform was altered from a single power into Linked Drain/Aid and if I pulled my books out I could probably find dozens more examples.

See, that is where I think Complete books should diverge from the toolkit books.

Instant change should be a talent presented as a "thing" in Champions.  Pay the cost, here us what it does, in text, not gamespeak.  Each genre should gave a chunk of things like that which are just given a cost and an explanation in the rulebook.  There can be an annex showing how it was put together (for the toolkit-interested).

Doc

15 hours ago, Strand said:

You got me thinking about this. My original idea for the character was Armored with TK outside of the armor. It would be like giving Professor Xavier powered armor. (I always thought one Plot Bullet would kill most comic book mutants)

I always like to hyperfocus on a core schtick with superheroes.  It does give them vulnerabilities but you should consider how you play due to those than seeking to patch all the weaknesses. (That depends on the style of game you play on though, if a GM is ruthless about exploiting weaknesses, you will indeed try to be wholly defended).

I like this thought you have about an armoured Professor X. I did not pick up on that vibe, or even the Great and Powerful Turtle from the Wild Cards books, from the character sheet.  Tonight, I will take your campaign style guide (14D6 attacks, 25-30pt defences, CV 9, SPD 5) and see what I come up with. 

Doc

16 minutes ago, Strand said:

So, Multi power for Metallica, no more focus. 

That's not what I said, I said don't make everything the same focus, not everything should be armour.  You might have headgear for some stuff, ankle and wrist rockets for another, just so the loss of one focus does not lose you almost every power you have.

Foci are the most common way for this kind of character to save points.

As far as campaign standards go, it is always worth stating them upfront, then everyone can see how your numbers compare to the campaign averages and maximums.

The problem with high caps, or no caps is that everyone needs to invest in high numbers, leaving little left for colour and breadth.

Doc

I had a look at Metallica.  I really think we need to know the game standards.  Your character is running at SPD 5, hiding behind 30 points of defences (25 resistant), with a CV of 9 and throwing 14D6 attacks.

You seem to be wanting to be an expert of all trades, combat-wise (that is a common desire in point buy systems but it does tend to mean all characters are somewhat same-y.  It is also always going to be expensive.  In my games characters can work at the highest SPD range and attack damage but compromise on CV and defences.  Only two of those four can be at, or close to maximum.  I like there to be distinct differences between the characters and for them to make choices in Combat, but that is my game, what is yours?

One thing pops out at me, everything on the sheet is OIF but doesn't say what the focus is.  If it is all the armour, then, reasonably often in my games you would lose access to ALL those abilities and that leaves you pretty exposed and helpless.  I would, for your own benefit, be having at least three or four foci so that you can lose parts of your power when the GM decides it is focus complication time. 🙂 

Doc

Just remembered that this thread was supposed to be about Metallica rather than Mysterio! 

Do you have any colour text/context for Metallica?  It helps me to think about the best power constructs when I can visualise the character..

1 hour ago, assault said:

If you are already playing the character, any modifications need to be passed through the GM.

I reckon he knows that. 🙂 Not a gaming newbie. 🙂

I am going to have to think how I would have built the character.  It has the classic bunch of tools approach which is always more costly.

@Strand My instinct is that you are frittering away points in characteristics.  179 points, more than half, for a character whose schtick is shadow powers and detective skills.

Does he really need to be at normal Maxima in most of those?  Once you invest heavily in stats you tend to go down the martial arts/brick route.

I need to think about what I would do.  Instinctively I think there are only minor gains to be had in skills and powers...

Strand, I'm sorry if this all came across as criticism rather than discussion, the guys almost never (we are all flawed, so we do sometimes) talk down other people's games or styles of play.

What was missing was the context, to give real advice on a character rather than mechanical, "this is what a 'standard' game looks like", they need things that breathe life into the bunch of numbers.

Upfront say, "I have this character in a campaign, played for a while. The campaign runs with attacks of xD6 and defences running around x points.  I don't think I am using the system efficiently and might be missing out on cool stuff because of that."  Then tell us what you just told us about Mysterio - the quirks, the description, the gameplay (especially the emergent stuff that the group likes).

I feel like I know the character now, and the game he is supposed to sit inside. 🙂  I am sure others will feel the same.

Doc

Go look at KawangaKid's blog on his combined campaign....

The problem is that democracy is hard and asks for effort that we are often too lazy to put in.  We find it difficult to even commit to voting once every four or five years.

It isn't mandatory voting we need, it is a requirement to participate right from the very grass roots, to make people the numbers that count instead of dollars.

5 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

OK If I was going to make this work, I would multiply everything by 10.  So you build characters on 1000 points, not 100, Strength costs 10 points per 1 STR, not 1, and so on.  Then if you spend 1 xp to adjust a roll, that investment feels doable, its not that penalizing, but does involve a cost.

But there is no need for that.  Award HAP instead of XP, used HAP become XP and you can buy powers with XP and HAP.  It delivers a little extra flexibility for players.  If you want that in your game, the opportunity is already there.

On 5/30/2023 at 11:00 PM, Christopher R Taylor said:

This kind of post always puzzles me, maybe I'm just too old and too much a grognard to really understand.  People are learning to play stuff like D&D every day, young people.  They do not seem to have a difficult time learning how to use the skills, or the characteristic rolls, or the saving throws, or the combat system even though each is different.  Yet somehow when it comes to Hero all this stuff is too hard?

I dont think anyone here would disagree with you but reputations are not gained through untruths.  HERO, at the very best, appears complex and difficult to enough people that it has a reputation for complexity.

As you say, there is probably more complexity in D&D but, as a player, you do not need to deal with that and, if the group is not a hardcore one, it probably does not hugely impact your gameplay experience.  The questions you are asked are steeped in the flavour of the game or setting rather than system.  Do you want to be an elf, dwarf or human? A fighter, rogue or magic-user? Will you be good, evil or neutral? Your choices put flesh on the skeleton these big choices provide.

In HERO, the skeleton needs to be built from scratch, you dont roll your dice, you choose everything and you are having to do that when you have no appreciation of what is good or bad.  The player needs to engage with what, for many, is overwhelming detail, all upfront.

It is not about how much, it is when the complexity is faced, the detail being asked for and the sheer quantity of it all.

Doc

2 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Surprise kiss on the mouth?

 

It works for me, usually.

You have just used a PRE attack, made your opponent hesitate or worse and taken advantage of that...

3 hours ago, Grow-Arm-Hair Lad said:

Like, looking back at Christopher R Taylor's example of the cool moment that was ruined by rolling all ones, if his character had 3xp that he hadn't spent, and he saw those ones and the GM said, "Hey, if you burn those 3xp, I'll let you have your moment," I'm thinking some players would take that offer. 

Hmm.  I think that I would be loathe to burn 3XP on that.  I might want to ask Christopher if he REALLY wants to make this work.  If so, the dice say he doesn't but the universe might simply be saying he doesn't get it without cost - what lasting damage might result from it.  We could agree that, after the session we could sit down and consider a complication we might add to the character sheet (we can work out if he also gains some XP to spend due to the additional complication).

Doc

Gonna have to wait until I get home to my computer with Hero designer on it...

In an arm wrestling competition, possibly the definition of STR vs STR, how often do you think a STR 10 character should beat a STR 30 character?  Definitely not as often a 1 in 33 attempts...possibly never.