Doc Democracy

Re: Help w/a power

The problem I am running into is the high End cost. The base cost of 19 is bad enough' date=' but the additional 10 per phase is high as well. Granted this attack will also give End back, but I don't know if it is going to be enough to even out. [/quote']

 

If you look at it then the 2D6 transfer should give you an average of 7 points (14 END) every phase (per person) - so it more than offsets the 10 END running cost and even if you only catch one person it should return the initial investment in five phases.

 

It is a risky power - you give up a lot of END at the start in the hope of recovering it later but it takes out agents and no more.

 

I think I might be tempted to split the energy from the field into STR/END - more risky but more likely to give side benefits. Or perhaps split the END between your own and an END battery. The END battery would charge an energy blast that you could use offensively - or some other interesting offensive power. Perhaps only allowing the power to be used when the battery is full.

 

Yes, as Dust Raven said, interesting effect - and I'm only musing as to how I'd use it....

 

 

Doc

Re: Darts

Now, as some of you may or may not know, in Chinese fantasy Darts, Needles and throwing blades are a big deal. Usually thrown in 3's, they are used as distractions, warnings, and often to carry drugs or poisons to the target.

 

And so far in my HERO experience, have proven to be utterly useless. Which is why I'm asking to see if anyone else has good ideas about how to handle them in HERO.

I think that the problem here is focussing too much on how the darts actually work in real life - sharp point breaking the skin and delivering the real damage - the poison.

An example might be a killing poison delivered by blow gun. I could have the poison be an RKA AVLD - where the defence would be +1 for every point rolled above 3 and combat skill level held by the opponent - so a roll of 14 would give a defence of 11 versus the RKA. That would indicate the fact that the closer I got to 3 the more chance there was that I was able to get a good hit and deliver the poison properly.

Plenty of other ways to do it but I'd try and make armour worn by opponents part of the to hit roll rather than competing against the damage....

Re: How would I represent this in HERO

Sounds very much like a life support type power.

A limited 'Does not need sleep'.

Doc

Re: Plot device or by the rules

I've noticed on many boards that when people ask how to model an exotic effect some one will inevitably reply "Don't worry about it; it's just a plot device".

I recognise myself in that!

Opinion solicitation: How do GMs decide when to build a given effect in game terms and when to just say it happens? What criteria do you use for making this decision?

I think Zornwil and Dust Raven hit it on the head for me. If I think that the story demands that something happens then it will happen - as GM I will accept player responses and might even allow them to roll the dice but it _will_ happen. Hopefully their repsonses will elicit them information that will lead them to an eventual answer but it's not necessary.

So if a character has incredibly strong mental defenses' date=' his mind gets switched too?[/quote']

 

I used an overwhelming Mind control / mental illusion in a haunted house story. One of my players had desolid to mental powers which completely beat the plot device - I knew that and had decided in advance to allow it to beat the plot device. It would have been a less satisfying story if he hadn't in his pride switched it off again to discover that the mentalist opponent had now mind controlled him to not switch it back on!!

 

The fact that I wasn't rolling dice but just describing the effects made them more powerful for the players as I wasn't distracted by counting pips or wondering what they might do. The players recognised that once they were caught they had to follow through to get out.

 

If I had designed the power I know I'd have been tempted to roll the dice to prove it was powerful enough - without the stats I just told them it was.

 

 

Doc

Re: Alignments

What I want is a simple list of "alignment terms" to breifly describe the motivations and likely reactions of monsters' date=' creatures, and characters to the PC's. This is something I feel could have been helpful in the Bestiary and MM&M.[/quote']

 

Well, in the interests of KISS (keep it simple, stupid) I would propose a table like they had in Runequest. I'm going to do this from memory - knowing it isn't correct but the idea will be there.

 

On the top have three categories like passive, neutral, aggressive.

 

On the side have five categories like enemy, dislike, tolerate, accommodate and friend. For each of these have a range e.g. enemy would have 3-5 passive, 6-8 neutral and 9-18 aggressive.

 

All you have to do is decide for each encounter which of the five categories those encountered best fit and then a quick 3D6 roll provides a tone for the encounter.

 

The table doesn't go into detail of why an encounter would be friendly but it should be easy for the GM to apply and roll and get the tone decided. The reasons for the tone might be easy to explain or very difficult.

 

You might encounter orcs that want to be friendly because they're very hungry and not up to fighting - or because they want someone's help. You might also meet someone from your own Guild that hates you because you outshone them in front of the King and attacks without warning. The table would aid in that.

 

Doc

Re: What about the warriors

Nobody continues to improve their physical abilites forever. Quick! how many 70 year old pro boxers can you name who've got a good shot at a title? Wizards continue to improve throughtout their lives (for the most part) because their abilities are not as dependent on physical health.

This is another fantasy cliche that you might want to promulgate in your game but I think is unfair on all other archetypes. All fantasy types seemed to have unnatural longevity. Look at Conan.

Your example of a 70 year old pro boxer would be just as relevant to 70 year old scientists. Damn few 70 year old scientists produce anything like their best work in their later years. Indeed, like sportsmen, if they haven't achieved something fantastic by the time they are 35-40 it is extremely unlikely they will do so.

However, like I said, this IS fantasy and I'd allow all my players to continue spending experience - though require maturity in how they do it and how they present the improvements.

Doc

Re: A question about the origin of the term "Ultra" slot

Second I felt that Jo had developed such speed in shifting his Ultra Energy that he could switch so fast he mechanically can have two full blown paowers at one time. I am talking nanosecond switching. Thus Ultra-boy has an Enormous MP, capable of holding two powers. He SFXs rapid shift so he can go Ultrainvulnerable to take the blow and a nanosecond later go Ultrafast to pummel the Persuader with a hail of punches, and a nanosecond after that he is invulnerable for Mano's touch RKA. It shows experience in using his abilities without *totally* ignoring the concept of "One Power at One Time."

The problem with a written down construction like that is that it would invalidate the classic Ultra Boy trap - dropping a mountain on top of him. Under the mountain he is quite safe as his invulnerability keeps him that way but he can't escape as switching to strength would leave him open to being crushed by the mountain....

Not a problem for a comic-book writer but you just _know_ a player would exploit it!!

Doc

Re: Teleportation, useable as an attack...

I had a PC build a Teleport UAO once. Initially he was psyched about teleporting opponents into the air and letting them fall for damage. Then he read the rules for teleporting into objects' date=' and suddenly decided that was the way to go. I put the nix on it after that. [/quote']

 

My ruling was that the damage taken by the person teleported would also be suffered by the teleporter as backlash. It kind of put people off the idea of using it regularly as an attack form but left it open for emergency situations.

 

 

Doc

Re: Help Name an Online Superhero Magazine.

I've always liked 'Masks'.

Re: What's the best method of introducing HERO System to newbies

HELP !!! I am starting my BATTLETECH HERO campaign tonight and I need advice on introducing HERO System to newbies . They have previous RPG experience and know the BATTLETECH rules .

 

BUT where do YOU start with HERO System ???

 

Give an experienced Gm a chance to expose HERO System to new gamers !!!

My approach - and it has worked with 14 year olds - is to let them play the game before they see the system. There are obvious bits of the system they need to know - CV, DEF, STUN, BODY and END if they are going to actually play the game but everything else can quite easily be hidden.

The first game I ran with the kids had no killing attacks in it (kept away from two kinds of damage) and didn't differentiate between PD and ED.

That way they could concentrate on hitting and keeping track of STUN/BODY and END.

As Steve said - I used pre-gens for them all - though I had canvassed them on the kind of character they wanted and sat with them for ten minutes each discussing what they wanted their character to be like.

I also made up my own character sheet so that the only detail on it was detail they needed to know. I avoided mechanics based descriptions ie there was no 8D6 AP 0END, Instead it was 'Laser Blast (8D6) - halves opponents defence and doesn't tire you.'

It was only when they began to want to make their own character they needed to go into the system details and it was then I'd have appreciated Sidekick! It'll be easier next time with Sidekick as an extra small step in the initiation process.

Essentially I made it look as much like D20 as I possibly could. They took to it like ducks to water.

Re: "No Lock Can Hold Me" Power

I like what you have. It probably requires all her concentration to pick a good lock - you could add a limitation. To help out your friends, how about - the advantage "usable by others" modified by more extra time and a concentration limitation. It could keep the cost reasonable. I think bumped up lock picking skills are an essential part of this package, and the time constraints could add dramatic tension.

 

I've considered a super burglar, and I wonder if a group of supers could take him down...

You could look at the possibility of a multipower that has desolid and tunnelling (invisible power effects) as ultras and possibly other twists on the whole escape thing that you need to model. Tunnelling through a door would provide access for all those other people without getting insanely expensive. You could even limit the multipower by requiring a lockpicking/escapology skill roll on any power used.

Re: How would you write up the following power?

I had this same problem with a big instant death NND defense attack I was making which I couldn't think of a defense for. Maybe you could use NND: Defense is Appropriate Immunity and create an immunity to banishment potions which minor demons wouldn't have.

As has been pointed out before, the issue is really one for the GM to write into his NPCs. If a demon had PD/ED bought 'not versus approapriate vanquishing potion' and a 2X BODY vulnerability to appropriate vanquishing potion then a 4D6 KA would be doing on average 28 BODY to a demon. Substantial for an instant kill....

Re: Statting up NPCs on the fly.

Now for my next task - redesigning the character sheet to make it more fantasy-ish.

When I ran a pulp one-off for my (non-Hero) group I redesigned the sheet to look more D20. It seemed to work - I had no complaints about complexity or maths or anything else (though that might be due to the pre-gens).

If anybody's interested I'll post the result on the Fantasy Hero forum when I'm done.

That's be good. I would like to see a Hero Book that demonstrated various ways to present the system to players. As a toolkit a Hero game rarely has the same finish as dedicated systems and the notation (e.g. 3D6 RKA AP 0 END) enforces that perception.

Anything that improves the presentation of a campaign using the Hero toolkit has to be good.

Doc

Re: How would you write up the following power?

Excellent suggestion for the physical limitation. However' date=' how would you write up the "Create banishment Potion" power?[/quote']

 

I'd make it a talent. If you can identify the demon - lots of requirements for skills etc - then you can make the potion. The talent allows you to make potions but it doesn't give the ability to automatically make the right potion unless you have the right information.

 

 

Doc

Re: Autofire as Accuracy Booster

I might be willing to handwave a house rules saying that for every extra shot fired you gain a +1 OCV' date=' but shots used for OCV can't hit the target. [/quote']

 

As you conclude the unbalancing comes when you allow the shots to be used for two purposes rather than just one. If you decide that someone wielding a machinegun can either try to make sure they hit the target (+4 for 5 shots, +9 for 10 etc) or simply try to riddle them with bullets then it isn't really that unbalancing.

 

I'm thinking some other construct needs to be built. This sound too unbalancing.

 

What about CSLs?

 

Well. You could argue for limited CSLs. If you bought Autofire 5 you might also buy +4 OCV limited by how many bullets can hit from a burst of autofire. If one hit is allowed then all 4 CSLs will count, if two hits are allowed then 3 CSLs etc etc. I might allow this to have a +1/4 limitation on the CSLs.

 

Doc

Originally posted by tesuji

A ghost that is indestructable by any normal means but who, by finding his bones and brying them in sacred ground can be dispelled is one such example.

 

[...]

 

IMO that type of mystic adversary would be rather silly if we instituted an "oh and on a lucky enough roll with a ballbat you could kill him" so as to give "chance" its "proper" due.

IMO that ghost is a plot device that needs no statistical write-up. If there is only one way to defeat it then the scenario is about the heroes finding out what that way is. Obviously you can run combats but the ghost is quite removed from the statistical battle taking place.

A good scenario is possible from this, given the right players , but you are making a decision at the planning stage to remove any combat/power mediated means of success. Thus why invent a power for a plot device?

I know that one of my most successful games was a haunted house style adventure where the basis was an all powerful mental illusionist/mind controller. I didn't write up the powers of the protagonist as I didn't want to roll dice - it was a plot device that funnelled the players to the place I wanted them. It was an all-powerful power - virtually no defence (one player had a defence but switched it off and then couldn't switch it back on).

The players loved it because they could see there was no way round it and went with the story and trusted me not to screw them over. Your scenario would likely be the same - and still not require any new rules - there are no rules required for a plot device.

Doc

Re: Full Desolidification

Originally posted by TrickstaPriest

I'm wondering because I have an NPC here that doesn't have a mind, so he'd be kinda "unhurtable" to pretty much any ECV attack.

So how does the NPC reason then? Should you be looking at the automaton rules where the NPC would not have INT or EGO and thus simply not show up on a mentalists radar?? (I haven't played HERO since 5th edition - it does still have automaton rules doesn't it??)

It might be simpler than looking at desolid to such things.

If the NOC does reason and does think then it would have INT and EGO and you could probably assign a difficulty penalty to mentalists chances - give him defensive levels in ECV and/or Ego defence to make things that much more difficult due to the alien nature of the mind in question.

Originally posted by tesuji

Wasn't bullsye for the longest time "never misses guy"? That was his "power" as i recall. its not just DND. (Thus nimbly avoidning the notion of DND actually qualifying as GENRE by dint of the mass amount of novels and even a movie following its setting.)

Yeah, but when he came up against someone of his ability he missed. He didn't have a never misses power he just had a huge OCV that meant he had never missed before. It was his schtick and - as I mentioned later - the Gm should provide lots of opportunity for a player to exercise his schtick but shouldn't necessarily introduce a rule to make the schtick statutory.

Originally posted by tesuji

So, script the invulnerability instead of making it an actual matter of character?

That's the best way to do it. Write the power as invulnerability on the character sheet if you want with the existing mechanics you used to build that. Sometimes, in the right circumstances, that invulnerability doesn't provide total protection.

Originally posted by tesuji

Why not do both? If you are going to allow him IN ACTUAL PLAY to have the invulnerability seen often enough to make him happy, why not also let him write it on his sheet as "invulnerable: the power"? Why is it better to go to chargen extremes to avoid having a defined "invulnerable power"when you intend to script it to be that way IN PLAY?

I don't think that using existing powers is going to chargen extremes, I think that creating a new power however IS going to chargen extremes.

Originally posted by tesuji

Sure, a Gm could permit in his games an "auot hits" power and a "auot avoids" power and decide for grins and giggle not to resolve the clashh at power definition, using the SFX, but thats just a case of sloppy definition.

This is the crux of the discussion though. What possible resolution could the definitions provide. If one player has an auto hits power and another has an auto avoids, what possible resolution could you come up with that would not break the definition of one or the other??

It is better to explain to the player that he has never missed as far as he can remember and in play that he will get lots of opportunity to display what he wants to be his schtick. Also explain that against a sufficiently dextrous metahuman that he might actually miss but that will be a competition between his power and the power of the target.

Actually no different in principle from the definitions you propose but doesn't require extra powers or rules.

Doc

I think the biggest problem about ultimate powers is when they clash.

I have a power that is irresistable whereas my target has true invulnerability. Who wins? If I'm the player I want my invulnerability to be total - I don't want some half assed GM telling me that this particular NPC has a power that hurts me. I'm INVULNERABLE!!

Same with the person who has an attack that never misses coming up against someone with the ultimate dodge skill. What trumps what??

I'm not sure that the core material even merits such things. Sure, D&D has magic missile but since when has D&D been genre material? Superman is classed as invulnerable but there have been plenty of people that have damaged him some of them seriously. Essentially Superman is just VERY tough and not many people are in the same combat class as him. Put up against his peers he is just as vulnerable as they are.

I think that if a player wants a character that is invunerable you have to give him powers that make him effectively invulnerable in most situations and put him in those situations often enough that they get the kick they are looking for.

Doc

What limitation would you, as a GM, give for PD only versus small-arms fire??

It would be a decent way of providing for the extra PD needed to ignore a hail of small-arms fire but leave the character within the defence limits against supervillains.

Originally posted by zornwil

Thanks for the encouragement. You know, the funny thing is that I really am not in the "EC is broken" camp as Gary is, but given the controversy surrounding it as well as what I consider an oddity in how HERO deploys it (there are too many metagame considerations in my opinion, such as "no END powers') I do think there's room for improvement.

I've happily used and probably misused ECs since I started playing the game many years ago. I don't have any driving desire to change it but there always has to the possibility that it could be done better.

When you get to the point that you believe any system is perfect then there is something wrong. Even if it was as good as it could be it wouldn't be perfect!

Originally posted by zornwil

And in general I'm fascinated with the idea - whether it proves unworkable - of finding a way to "intertwine" the features of the various frameworks and somehow derive a system even more internally consistent than the existing additional frameworks (all 3 of which work differently).

Well, Hero is often touted as the ultimate system for tinkerers and all you are doing here is tinkering.

The system is actually labelled as a toolkit and encourages people to look at alternative ways of running the system.

In fact, I would welcome a book that provided a range of ways that the system might be changed and used as well as the Ultimate stuff and genre books. What would it be called - Ultimate Hero Alternatives???

Originally posted by zornwil

To me this is another reason to devolve the linkage into its component parts. I don't normally do it as an automatic drain, either, by the way, I do it based on SFX.

Don't want to get into the Gary vs Kristopher argument - it's obvious Kristopher sees nothing wrong with ECs and that he's not convinced that they could be improved.

However, I think that this is another reason to look seriously at this idea. If you don't like the fact that ECs get all their powers drained at the same time then this system would allow you to remove that facet and reduce the benefit provided.

On the face of it, it looks more complex but as it simply uses limitations it works the system as it normally would instead of introducing an exception (power framework) that provides benefits outside the normal advantage/limitation/disad system.

Keep going Zornwil!

I'd have thought that you are essentially looking at some kind of clairsentience - only someone who has just teleported within your vicinity and perhaps within the range of your own teleport ability.

That would provide some sense of following someone through a teleport 'wormhole' and being able to follow them - you can now 'see' the location.

You might also think about trying to stop people leaving by nullifying their teleport with your own - perhaps the GM would allow a grapple style using teleport active points instead of STR active points.

Originally posted by Kristopher

I don't even agree with having all the slots of an EC drained together. If the character with the EC is hit with an adjustment power bought with the advantage to affect all the powers of a certain FX at once, then I'd apply the effect to all the slots. But not by default.

This is another issue. The rules are quite clear though that the EC essentially represents a single power that the character is able to manipulate for different effects. Thus the fire character is using the same power source for everything and as you drain one of those things it has effects on them all.

It is consistent and it does provide a significant limitation for the cost benefit it provides.

I'm always fascinated when people do this, partly because I'd like to and never get round to it. I'm sympathetic to the way it's going though!

Originally posted by Gary

That would be a preferable change to me, replacing ECs with a -1/4 "drained together" limitation. Although you have to be prepared to make it a -0 limitation if the player also has a significant amount of power defense as well.

I'm not sure that I agree with this. The EC bonus is there regardless of whether the character has power defence or not.

Just because the character has power defence doesn't alter the fact that draining their flight will also drain their force field and energy blast...