Doc Democracy

Re: New Advantage: Painful

Though for what I've been thinking' date=' I suppose a BOECV Entangle with the SFX of "paralyzed by pain" would work just as well.[/quote']

 

This is what sometimes makes me want 10th Edition...

 

The effect is probably exactly what is needed - a power that prevents the victim from moving - SFX that the pain overrides all other thoughts.

 

The porblem is that to affect the person you are having to overcome their EGO, why? You probably just fired a pin at one of their exposed nerve clusters - where does ECV come into that?

 

I guess that you want an entangle where the effects are mental even when the targetting is physical and that can be broken out of by immense force of will or when the pain fades (I don't think I'd allow an entangle that erquired high Ego damage to linger until broken). Is this book legal now?

 

 

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Painful

What's inelegant about it? You want an attack that does X damage' date=' but Stuns as though it did X + Y damage. Buying Y dice Only To Stun is simple, clean, easy to understand, and introduces a minimum of new concepts. Isn't that what "elegant" means?[/quote']

 

Not necessarily. Like a lot of stuff in Hero it looks cludged together (though in many cases that is a matter of presentation and a strength of the system).

 

I've never been convinced of the model that says pain = Stun damage for all things and all situations. I like the use of a feature of the system in a novel way that looks more streamlined and does not necessitate the throwing of more dice. That's more elegant to my eye in this situation though it looks like I'm in a minority...

 

 

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Painful

"Painful" strikes me as SFX.

 

As for how to represent that SFX, I'd go with the extra dice + Limitation method already mentioned.

Either it is SFX or its not. If it is SFX then there's no need for extra mechanics, if its not then I'd like to see something a bit more elegant than limited damage.

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Painful

Rather than Painful simply doubling Stun only for purposes of Stunning a target; what if a successful CON roll totally negates the effect? So even if the attack penetrates the victim's defenses; a character making a CON roll takes no Stun at all. Also, by definition this attack does no BODY. That way this is much more of a specialized NND attack; but with a defense anyone has.

 

Additional levels of Painful might each provide a -1 penalty to the CON roll, so for example a 5d6 Painful X2 (+1) gives the victim a -1 penalty. A typical hero with a 20 CON would thus need to roll a 12- or take double Stun on 5d6: 35 Stun. Ow!

This would work for me. It provides a defence and should answer some of the balance points.

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Painful

To be honest' date=' this strikes me as just "gaming the system." If you want Stun someone, just do more STUN. [/quote']

 

Surely THAT is gaming the system - increasing the damage of an attack simply to achieve a stun result.

 

If an attack is exceptionally painful what is the game effect that would best describe the reult of such an attack? I think FenrisUlf is right - a painful attack is more likely to result in that lost moment of time and thus a painful advantage should make stun results more common but not increase the move towards unconciousness.

 

If I have an attack that I think should be more painful than normal then buying such an advantage is not gaming the system it is modelling my power. Buying more dice to get the stun result is gaming the system as I am not modelling pain - I am modelling a bigger attack...

 

 

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Painful

The big problem of course is when you have Advantage Stacking or with a nonstandard attack.

 

A 5d6 NND Painful would be 62 pts, within standard campaign limits, but would Stun anyone with less than 35 Con on average. A 4d6 Ego Blast Painful would be 60 pts and Stun anyone with less than 28 Con on average.

 

With Standard Attacks, Painful isn't a problem due to the way defenses in Hero operate.

Good points, can always rely on Gary to see the detail.

Still, I like the idea of this. I think it might, due to the examples above require that painful on non-standard attacks be +1.

Painful attacks _should_ stun people more often, it is the whole idea of the attack but I would like to know what would defend against this advantage - like hardened defends against AP.

FenrisUlf?

Doc

Re: Ultimate Customisation

I think that everyone is focussed on house rules here.

Personally I would like this book to be a discussion about how certain feels can be achieved by using or banning certain aspects of the game.

This wouldn't necessarily be fifteen ways to achieve a body jack power but discussion of how removing END from the game would affect the way the game played and guidance on what you might want to tinker with for particular genres.

Possibly this should be more of a chapter in the genre books - a bit more focus on the practicalities of setting up your game.

Hyperman in Zornwil's thread mentioned that there are few games where the GMs have to set the standards before the players can participate. It would be nice somewhere to have discussion of what you might want to consider and how to customise your game.

Doc

Re: Has HERO achieved maximum desirable complexity?

Hmmm. Maximum desirable complexity? I'm not sure that there is such a thing.

I suppose there is a level of detail that provides enough control over the feel of the game beyond which you have detail that requires the GM and possibly players to make too many meta decisions before they get to the good stuff.

If I'm playing a game I don't want it to be difficult (a commonly used synonym for complex), I want it to be fun.

I'm not sure that some aspects of Hero haven't fallen down that side of too much to think about.

Like everyone else who has posted so far, I wouldn't mind a bit more broadbrush basic Hero system with guidance on how to go into detail if necessary. (Personally I think this is simply a book along the lines of the one Sean was suggesting in another thread).

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

from the 5ER rules FAQ:

Q: Could a character receive the same or similar powers from two different characters using Usable By Other? For example, could Character A obtain a Force Field (6 PD/6 ED) from Character B, and another Force Field (6 PD/6 ED) from Character C, so that he could activate both and have, in effect, Force Field (12 PD/12 ED)?

 

 

 

A: There’s nothing in the rules, per se, that prohibits a single character from receiving a similar or identical power from two people using Usable On Others in some form (though in many campaigns the GM will have some concerns, and rightly so).

Well. That one slipped past me. You think that if character A had its own 6/6 force field then it would have 18/18?

Makes usable by others much more valuable than I imagined.

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

Not really. Usable by others doesn't allow two characters with 8D6 EBs to combine for a 16D6 blast.

Re: Comics that I miss.

I miss DC's Earth-2, for a long time my favourite titles were All-Star Squadron and Infinity Inc....

Doc

Re: Is Hero too preditable?

There's nothing wrong with predictable. I've run several games over the years using average damage [10d6 = 35 stun' date= 10 body] instead of rolling it, and then just giving extra damage for a to-hit roll of 3 [+10 stun, +3 body] or 4 [+5 stun, +1 body]. By doing that I was able to speed up the game and give a "crit" factor without really changing the system.

I kind of like this, though I think I would make the extras relative to the to hit roll - +10 STUN for rolls 8 less than required, +5 for rolls four less than required.

I did a version of that but I lost all the fun of rolling fistfuls of dice and have recently decided that I would add 1D6 to the damage dice for every 2 I rolled below the to hit number (but retained a maximum STUN and BODY based on the original dice).

That had the side bonus of adding to the number of dice being rolled but didn't change the extreme ranges in anything but probability - the randomness of the 3D6 to hit roll was counterbalancing the tendency to the mean of the 10+D6 damage rolls...

Doc

Re: Negative Experience

It's a sad fact of the HERO system that situations that other games would highlight as fabulous roleplaying opportunities are instead discussed in light of docking XP or adding disadvantages.

It's a sad fact that you don't look on the ability to add disadvantages like Hunteds or Reputations or Watcheds as anything other than roleplaying opportunities.

If GMs and players can be more flexible on the whole disad part fo the character sheet it would be an excellent way to drive character and game motivations and keep a record of what's what.

Other games wouldn't highlight them as fabulous roleplaying opportunities - they probably wouldn't mention it never mind provide a game level structure.

Anyway - if you are in the system discussion forum expect a system style answer! So there!

Doc

Re: Negative Experience

You guys are mean!

Re: Negative Experience

Doc: subtle

I once handed out a Hunted: [campaign megavillain] and never had him turn up before taking the disad away.

It made the player very cautious about bad-mouthing and challenging the man on TV! It also made his conduct over the few sessions where the disad was written on his character sheet very different from what it would normally be.

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

the original description does not indicate that the effect is one shot only.

I didn't say it wasn't either Poor drafting.

I guess I never thought out the details completely. It was so clear in my mind about two characters combining their attacks in a particular phase that it never occurred to me that it could work differently.

Doc

Re: Negative Experience

I'm not that keen on ADDING disads to characters' date=' and ost disads work out at round 5 point breaks, so they are not the subtlest tools.[/quote']

 

It's only five points if the points count.

 

I've handed out 20 point disads and removed them three or four sessions later. They can be as subtle or in your face as you want them to be.

Re: Negative Experience

In a game with all of the tools available for in game punishment you are thinking of opting for negative experience?

Personally I would be looking at giving them one or more disadvantages (which I suppose are like negative experience but far more story positive).

The company may hire someone to embarrass the heroes (Hunted: CLOWN 8-), provide the media with hints about them (Watched: media 11-) or simply do a PR job on them (Reputation (bad) 11-).

All of these things could have in game consequences on the characters and they could spend experience to remove them but you should encourage them to play it out and then remove the disads when it is story appropriate to do so.

I definitely would not play out the court room drama unless there was going to be fireworks in there (I did a whole session as a courtroom drama on the arrest of a hero about the murder of a henchman - I played it out up til the end when the players became jurors on the basis of the evidence given to them - then reversed their decision as the hero's arch enemy mind controlled them to convict him as guilty in the first degree).

You could use the court room as a background disad ao that whenever the hero needs to be somewhere he has to roll on whether he is needed in the courtroom at that time (8-)??

Doc

Re: Resource Question

Do any of you know of a good resource for D20 Classes and Prestige Classes? I'm not a fan of the D20 system but they generally have great concepts for classes and prestige classes.

 

I'm trying to find a book or two that is dedicated to that topic so that I can steal idea's from it.

Mongoose published Ultimate Prestige Classes and Ultimate Prestige Classes II that contain compilations of prestige classes that have been published in other sources.

I think the first book is currently out of print - not available via Mongoose's website - but you might be able to pick it up on ebay or somewhere.

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

IOW' date=' a slow character using Stackable to assist a fast character is vastly more effective than the other way round. I think that's the point BNakagawa is making.[/quote']

 

I had to think hard about this! :-)

 

In the event that the SPD 2 character wanted to boost the attack of the SPD 8 character then the SPD 2 character would be able to boost twice per turn (segments 6 and 12). That is when SPD 2 guy can act.

 

SPD 8 guy can act on segments 2,3,5,6,8,9,11,12 and so SPD 2 guy could boost any one of the attacks on 6,8,9 and 11 and also on 12.

 

I think that the misconcpetion is that the boost is constant, like Aid but my idea of the advantage is that it would be like the two characters combining (stacking) their attacks. It is more like a super co-ordination than aiding another's attack.

 

My first answer to BNakagawa may seem to contradict that as the SPD is done over the full turn but I don't see a simple way around that unless you simply allowed one phase at a time to be used to boost the others actions.

 

I also think that for a constant power (like force filed) you would have to boost over phases (so SPD 2 guy would stack his force field for six segments at a time - good for the recipient who gets extra protection for several phases but pretty dangerous for SPD 2 guy who is without his force field for those same six segments).

 

The devil really is in the detail! This is really useful - thanks everyone.

 

 

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

not my point actually. The point is that there is a big discrepancy between a slow character boosting a fast character's attack power and vice versa.

There would also be a big discrepancy in the points paid by the characters. Surely that goes without saying?

The SPD 4 character would be spending 20 points to boost someone else 2 SPD and the SPD 8 character would be spending 40 points to boost someone 4 SPD.

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

Interestingly I was thinking about a new way of doing coordinated attacks - basically add the attacks together the way you would strength, so two coordinated 12d6 attacks would be one 13d6 attack, 4 would be 14d6 and so on.

 

It is certainly not such a take down special as the current system, but it is balanced (IMO) and allows you to do more BODY damage. Didn't think it was worth a thread on its own but I thought I might mention it here...

Wouldn't that logic say that there would be no point in co-ordinating attacks unless they were equal in power?

Doc (I don't care if he does hijack my thread!)

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

Happy New Year' date=' good Doctor.[/quote']

 

Happy New Year to you. You've been a bit quiet since the holidays - I've missed your morass of ingenuity and so had to go thinking of stuff for myself...

 

Maybe you could make it +1/4 not +1/2?

 

Then 12d6 stackable would cost 75 points, the equivalent of a 15d6 attack, for an 18d6 attack, which is probably reasonably balanced against 2 x 15d6 attacks.

 

As you might have seen from my last post I was considering perhaps a cheaper version where both participants required the advantage and a more expensive where only the person stacking needed the advantage...

 

 

Rather than having an adder for extra participants I'd be inclined to say you need twice as many, so to add an additional +12d6 you would need 4 participants, to add 18d6 you would need 8 participants and so on. It would still rapidly get very nasty, and I'd probably be inclined to stop at 2 for most purposes.

 

Anyway, interesting idea.

 

Possibly - I'll have a think about how that could be worded.

 

 

Doc

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

What happens when you let somebody with a SPD 4 boost a teammate with SPD 8?

As a GM? Well, first I wonder why mr stackable SPD bought 4 SPD as stackable rather than SPD 6 and then whether I allowed him that because he had good SFX for being able to stack with someone else's SPD.

My initial thoughts are possibly the spirit transferring from one body to another so that more actions are available to the stacked PC while the other stood effectively lifeless and defenceless.

Seems fair to me that two PCs who have paid enough points in SPD to have SPDs 6 and 12 get to take 10 actions between them...

Doc

PS: this is making me consider whether both the stacker and the recipient should have the advantage on their power. In some cases it doesn't seem that there should - but that should be more expensive for the stacker.

Hmm.

Re: New Advantage: Stackable

Now' date=' its more like a Stop Sign. For me, this comes down to the same problem as Absorption into an attack power. A REALLY bad idea. The thing with Absorption is that it has other uses. Stackable doesn't...or does it? Can you use it on FFs? What about Shrinking? Flight?[/quote']

 

The obvious place would be for attack powers but I don't see why you couldn't have (with good SFX justification and the points spent) several PCs stacking their forcefields to allow one of their number to venture into a dangerous area - leaving themselves vulnerable while they help their colleague.

 

I was wondering how it would work with flight coz they'd be unable to use their own flight while stacking with someone else's - this would be more open to abuse than EBs I think though not as game affecting.

 

I'm not sure how the SFX would justify the stackable shrinking but if there is someone with greater imagination than me - then by all means go for it.

 

I think it would allow for situations that the system just doesn't at the moment. Sacrificing the use of your own power to aid a colleague's attack, defence or some other power.

 

I came up with it for my own FH purposes rather than superhero ones - but if it doesn't work generically then I'll have to come up with something that does...

 

 

Doc