Doc Democracy

Re: Advantagous sfx I'm not with the chorus here. I can see Sean's point. The fundamental point of Hero is that the mechanics are the mechanics and the system used the mechanics to determine game effects. SFX were to be the added extra that overlay those mechanics and gave the game colour. Obviously the game designers said that particular SFX should possibly provide added benefits and drawbacks but these should be effectively +0 and cancel out. Firestorm might launch his Fire Bolt down the dark tunnel, light the place up and burn anything flammable at the endbut he would also suffer in the rain as it made his fire less fierce. Evens. And all about negotiation between the GM and the player in the spirit of making the game seem more realistic. I think what Sean is concerned about is for some of the SFX stuff being hardwired into the system. Fundamentally it is overlaid just now but the example put forward there hardwires it in. From what I've seen so far people here would like the system to hardwire more SFX into the system. After all - we're here to play powers not numbers right? Doc

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

Re: Changing speed mid turn tables It does seem kinda slow to kick in when you're moving from the extremes of the SPD table! If you were switching from SPD 12 to SPD 2 on phase 6 then it would again take six segments to change which makes even less sense.... ...'specially seeing as I've allowed it to happen instantaneously for characters in danger of drowning etc. Doc

Re: Changing speed mid turn tables SPD 7 characters are not restricted to moving in the first segment of their phases. If SPD 7 character had acted in segment 4 then the next available segment would be 6 but that gets delayed as SPD 3 does not move til segment 8 and so the segment 6 phase is lost as segment 7 signals a new phase and the character can act in segment 8 of the phase that started in segment 7. Is that clearer? Doc

Re: An Overall Evaluation of Fifth Edition I'd call it convergent evolution...

Re: An Overall Evaluation of Fifth Edition Shame on you Zornwil, getting Sean thinking. He's got enough problems with that as it is! As for the analogy - it is strikingly similar to RDU Neil's sports car analogy. I think that there has been a lot of talk about this recently that I have been involved with. I think that my view is that it might be impossible to get a pure toolkit for this kind of thing. It would have the same lure as a C++ developers kit compared with the cool games that the developers make. Right now Hero is a decent compromise of providing a comprehensive ruleset that can be brought to bear on a campaign premise. GMs can make their games different by changing which rules they will use and which they will change slightly or ignore toget different game feel. I would subscribe to a developers toolkit but I'm not sure that enough people would to allow it to be economic. I'm going to write a system for Glorantha Hero and put it on a website - this is how Hero geeks like us can support the development of sports cars. Doc

Re: Changing speed mid turn tables

Re: Target dependent effect I was looking at the VPP kind of like a wand of wonder where the user fires it without actually having any control of what comes forth. In this case the user fires the power and the effects depend on the target (thus the no control over power switch). So the target determines the effects like a random roll determines the effects of a wand of wonder. Doc

Re: Target dependent effect

Re: Target dependent effect Sean I think that Derek had the right idea without realising it. What you are talking about is a severely limited VPP limited in that there are only three powers available and you have no control over when they change. Haven't got my book in front of me or time away from my toddler to work out the costs but this would probably be more book legal/satisfying than anything else. Doc

Re: Limitation Boondoggles? Zornwil asked for further comment on this, I'm still not sure whether I can make 'Doc's Theory of Cost Relativity' as Sean called it any more comprehensible. So what did I mean? I'll take an 12D6 energy blast limited by 'not versus heat based defences' which the GM has given a -1/2 limitation. The accountants view of this would be that the GM has decided that this limitation will come up every third scenario as it saved the hero a third of his points. He spent 40 points rather than 60. If the hero has also taken another -3/2 limitation due to limited charges or extra time or some other combination then the 'not versus heat based defences' then the hero has spent 20 points rather than 60. The not versus heat based defences is only responsible for 1/4 of those savings (10 points). As such the accountant GM will ensure that the hero encounters such defences one in every sixth scenario. The same limitation, with the same value causes the accountant GM to ensure that the situation comes up at different intervals. It is that logic that says to me that the limitations are relative and cannot have any definitive absolute value in game terms otherwise they would all be based on fixed proportions of the base cost. Not versus heat based defences would be 20 points worth for 12D6 man regardless of other disads - but with such a system you could eventually get powers that provided you with points rather than cost you them - four -1/2 limitations would each provide a 20 point cost break resulting in a 12D6 EB that provided you with 20 points to spend on something else!! It gets silly very quickly.... Doc

Re: Limitation Boondoggles?

Re: Limitation Boondoggles? Not sure I want to! Will look and see whether I can put more words together that will make more sense than the ones that are down there....later.

Re: Limitation Boondoggles? ...and that's how he ended up in Dr Lights Bulb of Doom, needing to break through the foot thick safety glass before the electricity arced through the vacuum he was standing in....

Re: Teleport catcher

Re: Limitation Boondoggles? I think you also have to remember that a -1/2 limitation on its own might (accountant style) be expected to come up 1/3 of the time as it saves you 1/3 of the points. It probably shouldn't come up 1/3 of the time when it is combined with a -3/2 limitation. The total -2 limitation saves 2/3 of the points and (accountant style) you might expect the power to be limited 2/3 of the time but possibly only 1/6 of the times would be accounted for by the -1/2 limitation. Due to the way the limitations and advantages work, when you start combining them they should occur less frequently if you want to compare them point for point.... Doc

Re: When sfx become an advantage

Re: Teleport catcher Ooh, ooh. Can I be the first to mention Transform? Essentially the power that is being sought will redirect any teleport in the vicinity of the character to somewhere next to the character. Surely this is a classic case of transforming a power. I'm not sure whether I'd call is minor or major trasform but I'm thinking area effect changing the teleport to be limited to one floating location - 1" in front of the catcher. Whadda ya think? Cool huh? Doc

Re: Teleport catcher I think you're first problem to solve is how the teleporter is targetted. Doc Anomaly started a thread about detecting a memorised location for a teleporter and this covers the same kind of territory. You might want to go look at this thread. If you can detect and target the teleporter then I think that you could use a +0 advantage on telekinesis - only to grab someone in mid-teleport. Then it is a simple matter of hitting them and reeling them in.... Doc

Re: Something I just noticed and dislike about multipowers Isn't he a nice man?

Re: Something I just noticed and dislike about multipowers

Re: Something I just noticed and dislike about multipowers The question is whether they are addressing your problem. What do you think of the potential solutions proivded. I was taken with the thought that a 12D6 EB couldn't be in the same MP as 12D6 EB with similar advantages and limitations. Hugh asked whether that same MP should be able to accomodate a 24D6 EB with similar limitations to the 12D6 EB. Same real points. My ersponse to this would have been no and my instinct would have been to base things on base cost. What about you - same response or different? Doc

Re: When sfx become an advantage This is why any GM would have to think very carefully about the whole thing. The misleading efffects advantage is a good one and might put players off but a good player would realise the GM was providing them with the liberty to use the SFX liberally. Without the advantage the GM has the obligation to the players of ensuring that they are aware of the options open to them as well as the ones that are not. With this kind of power all of that becomes more difficult and, as Sean points out, is more commonly fatal to games where immersion is important. Doc

Re: When sfx become an advantage I had to go back to the original thread! You are right - that was a question about ninjas that would stick around and fight for you and if this was done as continuing charges then they should have the physical manifestation to allow them to be targetted or be obviously beyond damaging by direct attack. Slightly different from the slip from the shadows and attack one off that I've been talking about. However I can still go with the EB if there is the obvious connection with the old man - ninjas appear from the mists that emanate from his hands but not outside the mists. Something that indicates to the player that he is being attacked by the old man rather than the ninja. Anyway - it's always a pleasure arguing with you Sean - you know your onions as well as your ninjas. Doc

Re: Something I just noticed and dislike about multipowers