Doc Democracy

Re: End Reserve and alternate REC for it Hugh's right, the way it's set up you are encouraging more rolls as this makes it more likely you get more back. You could go the ways suggested previously or, if you are looking to replicate that blow your spells and go rest up, you could try something different. Rather than limiting the roll dependent on the time chart you could limit according to the number of END recovered per point the roll is made by. If you were going to allow mages to meditate at certain times of the day for one hour (e.g noon and midnight) you might allow 1 END per point on a straight roll, -1 for every x2 END. Failure means no recovery for at least 12 hours. You might be able to boost the roll by meditating in relevant locations, e.g nodes of ley-lines. Obviously details can be changed to reflect the number of END you'd like mages to be able to recover... Doc

Re: Would you consider this an abuse of the system? If not going down the multiform route then I would say that one set of powers needs to have a limitation on them and, to me, it would seem to be the brick powers that should get it. When the character is in its 'base' form it has a focus and divine powers but there must have been points spent on the brick powers that cannot be used. They _are_ limited - possibly only like -1/4 as per OIHID but limited nevertheless. It's almost like an anti-focus for the brick powers as much as a focus for the divine powers. Personally I find multiform to be a bit of a drag but it looks like the best bet. Removes any argument about what powers get the limitation and how much it should be. As suggested the focus is then simply part of the special effects of the transformation from one form to another. Doc

Re: Help with Armor-wearing character To address the question of only having three configurations available I would probably use the original multipower But I would put a limitation on the reserve - only three configurations possible (-1) that would take the cost of the reserve down to 20 points. I would allow the player to have the three configurations written down and be able to change those configurations between scenarios to reflect the tinkering that such gadgeteers always seem to be making. Doc

Re: Need help with an inherent power I like the idea of this power but like most other people I think it is worth more than 3 points. I'd make the character pay points for the weapons and limit it as suggested by OddHat. I think it'd be really cool. HolyJoe is locked in the King's dungeon, stripped of his weapons by the efficient city guards. He lies on his bunk and notices that it rocks. Looking for the answer he finds that a long sword has been tied to the leg of the bunk, making it unstable. He is able to use the long sword to gain access to the keys to his cell and finds that the plate and chain mail stored in the room is a perfect fit. He KOs the guard outside the room and takes his stilettos, bow and arrows. Coenthryth has proved his Love for HolyJoe once more. Doc

Re: Trailer for a superhero movie that may never be made Should have thought of that... http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20987

Whoops - wrong forum - have moved to NGD....

Re: Sell me on Hero! Not sure what you want to know that'd sell you on the system. If it is a supers campaign you want to run then Hero has a scalability that is excellent and there are a host of features that might sell you. What I will do is tell you what sold my friend on the game. I presuaded him to try it out and was running the first combat where three heroes were stopping Titan from robbing a bank. My friend had a martial arts based character called Black Ninja or something equally naff but Titan kicked him. I described how he flew backwards into the wall of the bank - hit the first wall crashed through it and the second one before landing in a heap against the outside wall which was cracked and broken from the impact. He was devastated and as I turned to him and said: "So what do you want to do?" he looked puzzled. "Can I do anything?" Sure - the damage was mainly STUN - hadn't knocked him out and so he was still in the fight. That, to him, was so comic book-y that it became his favourite supers game. He loved the idea of crashing through walls and coming out fists flailing, still in the game. Doc

Re: Cellular Phones Personally I haven't charged for mobile phones unless they were substantially better than something that you could get after 10 minutes in a shop filling in a form and promising to pay them £10 a month. For some other equipment I've charged a 1pt perk to get access. Partly this was to avoid the whole comparison of real world technology with the cool stuff I want them to pay points for and partly because I couldn't be bothered with the details. Doc

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] OK. I think I promised this yesterday but it took a long time to convince myself to stop trying to explain everything. This is a summary of costs that are in the core idea. It would be fantastic if some people could use them to convert one or two of their own characters to see how it works out point wise. FRAMEWORK POWER: Costs Reserve 1pt per point Slots 2pts per slot Power Effects Defined Static (Active Points/10)/(1+limitations) Fluid (Active Points/5)/(1+limitations) Undefined Fundemental Static (Active Points/5)/(1+limitations) Fluid (Active Points/3)/(1+limitations) Universal Static (Active Points/3)/(1+limitations) Fluid (Active Points/2)/(1+limitations) Definitions Reserve: the pool of points from which slots draw when they are active. Slots: where the power effects reside. Defined power effect: power, advantages and limitations all defined and fixed. Only one power is active in the slot. Undefined power effect: these slots are bought as an active point limit and may contain several active powers at any one time. Fundamental power effect: powers, advantages and limitations within a tightly described power effect such as flame projection and plasma guns Universal power effect: powers, advantages and limitations restricted only within the broad scope of the framework power and slot definition, such as gravity tricks and flame manipulation. Static: when active the slot draws the active points of the slot from the reserve whether or not the powers are used at full power. Fluid: when active the slot draws only the active points actually being used from the reserve. Possible changes Making the reserve more expensive, perhaps charging 5 points for four points in the reserve or 3 points for two points in the reserve. This would be an easy way of restricting the number of powers active in the framework power at any one time and/or increasing the cost of powers bought through the framework. Limiting the number of powers that can be active within an undefined slot at any one time. It would be possible to put limitations/advantages to limit/increase the number of powers. Zornwil suggested a system earlier on. This would increase complexity but would also better define the differences between fundamental and universal slots. Change the name of fundamental slots. They aren't really fundamental and I wanted to avoid using elemental, perhaps partial or flexible would be better names. Introduce a way of having always on powers in the framework, for example armour from power armour that would be limited if someone was to disrupt the power armour. These would be a better type of fundamental slot.

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] It's all to do with the water anyway. Despite not being a drinker I have a long background in the alcohol retail business (family pubs!) and an interest in biotechnology led to several visits to breweries etc. I've found, through this time that the beers originally brewed in particular areas are always 'better' 'more stable' etc in that area than anywhere else. It essentially comes down to the fact that the brew was tailored to the local water supply and its particular chemistry. It's difficult to replicate those undefinable traces in water elsewhere. So, even here in the UK people are convinced that Dublin Guinness is better.

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] I will post a condensed version of the costs later today along with some of the issues outstanding in my head. I think it really needs as many people as possible to tug at the construction and see where it falls apart. Doc PS: keep downing the Guinness Zornwil - it's good for you...

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] I thought that's what Zornwil's last post was - an updated version of my first post... I think we've stalled a bit as the next thing to do is convert several characters from the current frameworks to the new one. I will see whether I can come up with a nice condensed version with numbers in it. I'm looking at characters just now. I may look at a few of my own so that I can post all the stats at once rather than 'discussing' published characters powers in CKC. Doc PS: nice bump.

Re: Things that work in comics but don't work in Champions Before I get into this in any significant (forgive the pun) fashion let me say that I agree with Brandon in the majority of what he's been saying, such as

Re: So I'm thinking of running a Western HERO scenario... I think the trick is to give the cowboys other perks that allow them to shine in other phases of the game. I Protagonisti are (should be) pretty one dimensional kiling machines and suffer social consequences. Obviously no-one will want to play a peon. I guess everyone can be I Protagonisti in a one-off Magnificent Seven style scenario...

Re: So I'm thinking of running a Western HERO scenario... I love westerns an understand what you mean about the gunfights. However - as has been pointed out - if PCs get killed lots they often don't enjoy the game as much! I played a fantastic skirmish game called Once Upon a Time... which was a fanatastic simulation of the Old West - we played out the final scene of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid on tabletop - they got away... Anyway - that system used three kinds of protagonists in the game: I Protagonisti - like the "Man with no name", and the "Old Man" and Sundance Kid. These are the main men and everyone knows who they are. They are quicker, more accurate and more durable than everyone else (the superheroes of their day) Cowboys - like Butch Cassidy and other competent characters but not real gunfighters. These are the guys that get everything else done and support the gunfighters with rifles behind barrels. Peons - everyone else - the nameless hordes and townspeople that are only fit for rifles on rooftops - guaranteed to die if they get involved in any gunplay. I'd suggest having different rules for different roles. If a player wants a steely eyed gunfighter then he should be playing an I Protagonisti but shouldn't be much use for much else - there should be a maximum of two of these in any party. All of the rest of the group should be cowboys. I Protagonisti should not die with one shot - these are the characters in films that get hit at least twice before they die - unless it is the final duel - one shot should always be enough there - though an I Protagonisti should always get an opportunity to spit out a curse or a question before they gasp their last. Cowboys should not die with one shot but should often be taken out of the fight for a prolonged period of time. They often are able to bringthemselves to at opportune times to save their I Protagonisti from being shot int he back by some sniper or another - though rarely from an opposing I Protagonisti. Peons die when they are shot. The mechanics? Personally I would use the hit location chart and allow the players to alter the hit location by one for every one that they score below the required to hit roll if they are I Protagonisti - for every two if they are cowboys. If they have points over after getting the location they want then let them use the points to add 1 BODY for every two points - or even to alter the hit location of a shot hitting them... I would also allow the heroic healing mentioned earlier. In the films the healing time was rarely mentioned and often glossed over when another fight started. Have them put in bed in bandages for a couple of days before they get out - completely healthy (or perhaps with a temporary physical limitation - gimpy or can't use left hand) I think the major thought has to go into the duel. I can't remember the Western Hero options being that cinematic. I'd probably try to come up with something similar to the aerobatic rules in Justice Inc where they manouever and stare before going for the draw. It shouldn't come down to damage and BODY totals - simply who wins - both gun blaze and after staring a bit more one of them falls over. Not sure how I'd do it though... Doc

Re: Golden Age GM Wanted

Some comparisons OK I've tried to convert some of the power sets from CKC to the proposed system. Personally I think the exercise has highlighted some structure concerns. I'll come to those later. THUNDERBIRD Thunderbird is based around weapons and has two multipowers, one for blasters and one for grenades. In addition he carries a back-up blaster bought straight and a combat knife. This comes to a grand total of 164 points... Under the new proposal Thuderbird would have a weapons framework power with four slots, two static defined and two static fundamental. A 90 point reserve. An 80 point blaster static fundamental [OAF] costing 13 points and two for the slot. A 90 point grenade static fundamental [OIF] costing 20 points and two for the slot. A 60 point static defined slot for the back-up blaster costing 3 points and two for the slot A 30 point static defined slot for the combat knife costing 1 point and two for the slot. This cost 135 points, 29 points cheaper and a bit more flexible than the original. The converse argument is that the new situation requires skill rolls and if the slot costs were doubled to remove the need for skill rolls (x1 advantage) then that would cost 37 points - bringing the cost to slightly more. THORN Thorn becomes a man-plant hybrid with plant features and an ability to control and manipulate plants. In his original form he has a Plant Attacks multipower and a Plant Control EC with a series of powers that didn't fit in either framework [bark-like skin, burrowing, tendrils and vines, rapid growth]. all these powers were OIHID. This cost a total of 171 points. After due consideration I thought that the whole bundle of powers could easily be converted into a 130 point reserve and three static fundamental slots [60pt Plant attacks, 60pt plant characteristics & 70pt plant control]. That cost a total of 154 points, if skill rolls were required to change powers and 204 if no skill rolls were required. GRAVITAR Gravitar is a high point villain - I thought it might be instructive to see what might happen at high levels. She has a gravitic powers MP,a gravitic mastery EC and two powers that did not go into either framework - Gravitic manipulation (large TK based power) and Gravitic defence (missile deflection). This cost a grand total of 571 points. Using the new framework proposal I decided on four static fundamental slots (I've found myself repeatedly using them which might indicate something wrong somewhere). Three of the slots are 135 point slots and the fourth is 90 points. Gravity Field Manipulation, Tidal Stress, Gravitic Shields and Gravity interaction manipulation. I found that some of the powers would be grouped differently under the new framework than under the old set. There is a slight limitation on the nuimber of powers available at any one time but far more flexibility. The reserve would have to be 360 for the power set to work. The whole thing came to 467 points with skill rolls, 558 with no skill rolls required. DISCUSSION So. The cost structure of the new framework would appear to be fairly good. It has a cost roughly similar to the old system but I have seemed to overuse the fundamental slot - especially the static form of it. I have also noticed that I'd rather have a big slot that could contain a couple of powers than a couple of slots containing just one - the problem there is that it makes the slots large enough to have bigger powers. In the case of Gravitar I had to have a slot of 135 for the TK power when most other powers would be 90 active points - increasing the slot also provided opportunity for other powers to be bigger. I propose that one good use of static defined slots would be to provide for higher cost powers that are manifest in fundamental or universal slots. I'll have a look at the costs etc but I think there is a definite need for something like this. Anyway. So far so good. Will try other power sets to see what comes up. I haven't done anything that has a VPP yet. Doc

Re: What do you think is the best way to balance armor use? I always thought that Fantasy Hero was the most fantastic system I ever used for balancing heavy armoured types versus light/no armour swashbucklers. Do you use Long Term Endurance rules? That was the most insidious penalty on heavy armour users - the longer they fought the less END they had available to them - even if they were recovering all of the END they actually used. If the swashbuckler could prolong the fight he was almost certain to win!

Re: Your superhero games, comic-based or comic-opposed?

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] I am now convinced that we should allow multiple powers in undefined slots. I also think we should limit the number of powers by making more powers more expensive - there should be a breakpoint somewhere that would make two slots cheaper than continually increasing the number of powers you can have in one slot. I think I'll have to convert a few characters before going any further on this... Doc

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] The reason for that being that the reserves are combined into one and the benefits of having a large reserve realised by the larger powers in the EC. I understand why the powers in the EC got cheaper, and understand that using the system to replicate an EC directly would result in higher costs but the system would discourage anyone from taking a straight EC and suddenly the character gets more powers for less points - it just seems contrary to the whole basis of the system where you pay for functionality. Now frameworks are also contrary to this but they provide a way of tying together powers in a coherent fashion - a bonus for having a good consistent theme for your superhero. I was trying to avoid increasing the benefits provided while streamlining the frameworks into a single construct. Doc

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] Gee Zornwil - you were doing fantastic until you got there!

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] Like I said - Zornwil envisaged more than one power per slot. Taking the simple example of a 60 point VPP and a framework power with a single slot. 60 point VPP -3 worth of limitations costs 90 points. 4 powers going at once. Framework power 60 point reserve 4 point slot 60 point static universal slot with -3 limitations 60+4+8 = 72 points More limited (possibly) but 18 points cheaper. I'd be inclined to suggest it should not be this much cheaper - neither should it be as bad as you suggested. We need something in between - though closer to what I suggested than what you did... Doc

Cost comparison I thought that I should look at the costs of 60 point active powers within a range of slot types: combined limits sequential limits static defined, OAF 60/(1+1+9) = 5 (60/(1+1))/(1+9)=3 static fundamental, -1 limitations 60/(1+1/2+4) = 11 (60/(1+1/2))/(1+4)=8 static universal, -1 limitations 60/(1+1/2+2) = 17 (60/(1+1/2))/(1+2)=13 fluid universal, -1 limitations 60/(1+1/2+1) = 24 (60/(1+1/2))/(1+1)=20 Now that I have come round to having more than one power in a slot I envisage that a framework power would have one universal slot and a range of defined and fundamental slots. I was considering making slots cost 1 point + 1 point for every extra power that a character would want to include in the slot. So a two point slot would allow two powers, a three point slot would allow three powers etc etc. I was thinking about Hyper-man's example where all the powers were 50 active points except for a TK AA grab weapon manuever that cost 100. In my vision of Hyper-man he would have a 100 point reserve, one defined power of 100 active points and two 3 point universal slots of 50 active points. That would give him an option of using the 100 active point power or the two universal slots that allow six powers at any one time. Costs? Well a 100 point VPP would cost 150 points - I suppose maybe 125 after limitations. The framework power? reserve 100 slot 1 - 10 points slot 2 - 17 points slot 3 - 17 points 151 points plus 7 slot points - so 158 - more expensive than the VPP and more limited.... What about in real life Hyper-man? You done a conversion? Doc

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG] Well Tom - I like the idea up until the EC part of it - you can see that all of the cost savings come from making the EC powers cheaper. The main problem with that is that all of the complaints about frameworks tend to be about how ECs are too cheap... If you can sort that aspect out then I reckon you're framework is better than ours. The cost of the free slot needs to be almost the same as normal buying of powers - I'd probably limit the powers by making them subject to the adjustment powers for -1/4 or -1/2. That might actually work out not too bad. Doc