Doc Democracy

Like the others said, I'm not sure I would use multiform for the purpose though I might under certain circumstances. You can achieve what you want using a multipower and if you wanted even more variability - flying form/brick form/speed form/etc then you could consider a variable power pool for the changing abilities. I think multiform comes into its own when you want to change disads etc. If you were thinking that you wanted to change disads for each form then I think you would be better going for the multiform. But yes - you have to sort the character out from the ground up each time (the pilot is part of the form).

Well in the last edition - and I have been presuming they remained the same in this one - you get the points for the disad and then the points for selling back the inherent running etc. So, Unable to walk - severely limiting, frequent might gain you 20 points. You'd then get another 12 points from selling your 6" running back.

I think that transform is probably overused and would support the EB solution. If the uncontrolled is a problem then simply add the triggered advantage which would restart the uncontrolled attack every time the victim entered sunlight. Essentially the power is a GM fiat thing anyway - it's nice to point it out but the points aren't going to make any real difference to whether you use it or not!

Re: Horror Hero Sanity Loss This really depends on what you want to do mechanics wise. One way would be to have all things related to sanity to have the same transform attack. It is cumulative and when it overcomes your body you gain a 20 point disad. This is a more permanent action. You could accomplish the same thing using the Aid mechanic whereby every encounter with eldritch stuff causes the character to gain points towards a PSYCH disad. You could buy down the recovery rate to however long you wanted the player to take to psychicly (sp?) heal the damage done to him.

I have recently increased the cost of STR to 2pts but also changed the damage to 1D6 per 3 points. 15 STR now costs 10 points and gives 5D6 where before 10 points got you 20 STR and 4D6. 30 STR now costs 40 points and gives 10D6 where before 40 points got you 50 STR and 10D6. 45 STR now costs 70 points and gives 15D6 whereas before 70 points would have given you 80 STR and 16D6. I've only used it with Justice Inc so far and it has given the characters a bit more granularity as far as their fighting stuff goes. The players were also less inclined to demand higher strengths. Obviously it works out very similar at higher strengths and I haven't yet noticed any real imbalances using martial arts etc.

I have just run a Justice Inc game for my group based on the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. They aren't really pulp fans and so were struggling for names and I wasn't feeling very creative. As I was doing my daily SPAM delete I noticed one of the names on the spam was Ulysses Hope, to my mind a fantastic JI name. I also gleaned Avalanche Gifts and Mavis Quick over the next few days. At last, I believe I have found a use for the spam that I recieve...

What I want is the kind of thing I'd see in a Referee's Manual. I'd like to see some discussion of how to present the game to the players to make the system more conducive to the genre being played. Last weekend I ran what was essentially a Justice Inc session but designed the sheets myself to make them more friendly to people that lean heavily towards D20. I presented all of the stats and skills with bonuses, e.g. STR 20 (which gives a STR roll of 13) was presented as Strength +3 and similarly any points of skills were presented as bonuses. So 3 pts spent on Climbing got Climbing (STR) +0 - the STR indicating they should add the STR bonus. 5 points would give Climbing (STR) +1. I presented the combat and skill resolution system as having to beat 10 on 3D6. The roll is modified upward by a characters combat bonus (OCV) and modified downward by the targets defence bonus (DCV). Similarly skill resolution required 3D6 to beat a roll of 10 where the roll is modified upwards using relevant skill and characteristic bonuses and downward by difficulty factors and/or resisting skills. I simply wrote out the Astounding Talents each of the characters verbally without ever referring to game mechanics other than END cost. It all went very well - with no-one asking how good a particular skill or ability was. And this was from a group that profess to dislike the complexity of the Hero System. It would be interesting to have a handbook outline how presentation can spectacularly influence the acceptance of a game - and then describe how that might be done. (I reckon a thinnish book and CD-ROM would be sufficient!)

Did you come up with anything. I am just about to run a steampunk game for my group - almost all non-comics readers and so am using the War of the Worlds story from the second book as a base for their first adventure. I'm planning on a Pirate story for the second. I just think that Iron John Roberts sailing the seas on a steampunk'ed pirate ship would be a fantastic tale for my Union of Astounding Companions.

Re: Biochemical Body Control? No added ideas but Stryer's Biochemistry is a very good, readable book that you should be able to pick up cheap second hand. A better solution might be Schaum's Outline of Biochemistry which is essentially a study guide to biochemistry and so should give you all the techno-speak without the 'unecessary' detail! A quick look on Amazon showed it to be available for $12 new and $8 used. If you are in a university town you might be able to pick it up even cheaper - or just consult it ad hoc in the library.

Re: Power building help I just thought I'd add something to what people have already said. When you first come to Hero it can be difficult to get into the mindset of how the toolbox works. It is easy to get caught up in the names of the effects in the toolbox rather than their game effects. You moved away from the aid to DEF because it didn't seem to fit the 'transformation' style of the power. But, the power as initially described was exactly that - increasing the DEF of inanimate objects. The transformation of a baseball bat to a lead pipe would be the special effect of the power - people would notice that a power had been used and the object would be tougher than it originally was. I still have problems with this sometimes when the name of the effect in the book keeps me locked in with what I wanted. My biggest triumph with this was constructing a character whose powers were based on making duplicates of herself without ever using the duplication effect described in the book.

I've never played Nephelim - just to make that clear - but I thought I'd answer based on the question. I think it would depend on how you plan to effect the change of host effect. If it is simply a game effect then you can ignore it. The character would transfer bodies and would take with them the INT and EGO they had in the old host body. I would average the PRE of both hosts - to reflect the influence of attitude and image and any powers associated with the original host. Physical attributes would remain with the host body. So everything else stays there. If you had spent points on running then they'd be lost (though I might be persuaded to allow 1/2 of the points to be translated as knowing how to run as much as developing the necessary musculature). My heroes would be based on incomplete stats - I think rules for these were out there somewhere - perhaps in Horror Hero. But the host bodies would essentially be like items picked up in a Fantasy Hero game - something you use and cherish but don't get _too_ attached to! At the start of the game you might tell the players that they have their point quota that they can spend as usual - with the warning that points spent on physical developments could be lost forever if they switch host bodies.

Re: It's coming...get out of the way!!! You could simply give those it is aimed at a bonus to their dive for cover - the bonus being the same as the range penalty for the firer. This bonus would only be available if the target was aware of the attack though. I'm thinking of +1/4 perhaps +1/2.

Now that's a simple, and elegant solution, if you want to use STUN. I assume you believe this to be a -0 limitation?? If you wanted to introduce the death potential then you could make the damage cause BODY and give a limitation to the power. What, something like -1??

You could set up and END reserve that only recovers when you lose STUN/BODY - though the limitation will depend on how easy it would be to recover that lost STUN/BODY. To give an idea of costs, I'd give a +2 limitation on the recovery cost of the battery if, by almost killing yourself - or taking yourself to the limits of consciousness - you would be able to fully charge up the END reserve. The player would be able to decide how far they wanted to go in charging up their blood magic by how much BODY/STUN they were willing to risk. (I wouldn't allow the blood magic to address the problems of BODY/STUN unless it was through a BODY/STUN transfer from someone else).

The eternal quest for the unbeatable power. I think I'd be leary of allowing a does BODY flash to affect the entangle as entangles are either opaque or transparent. If transparent the flash and BODY would pass through with no damage and if opaque the DEF would count. (in my game obviously though I might discuss with the player). Anyway. I think I'd come back to the all or nothing advantage to the entangle then. I think I'd be inclined to make it a +3/4 or +1 advantage as it does provide a substantial advantage to the entangle. This way the DEF+BODY has to be overcome in one segment or the entangle remains intact (or rebuilt as per the special effects). This removes the need for extra speed to have it regenerate every segment or continuous on the power with the need to feed END or make it 0 END and have to set limits for the maximum BODY that might accumulate over time. I guess it all depends on the special effects of the power as to what mechanics make it work most true to conception but I like to keep powers as clean and lean as possible.

Yeah, but the idea of a High Def/1 Body entangle gives that effect - if you don't do enough damage to get rid of it it stay there. The special effects aren't a a tough shell but one that gives a bit and then rebuilds, the game effects are the same - you are back exactly where you started. This depends on special effects I suppose but why shouldn't a single penetrating attack destroy it, or a NND - does BODY. Each of those are particluar attacks that might circumvent the mechanism by which the entangle rebuild itself. I understand that in some circumstances this wouldn't make sense but in others it would be fine - the penetrating attack produces a deep, fatal flaw that cannot be repaired while the NND causes a flaw deep inside that spreads outwards making the whole much easier to break out of. Even by disrupting the mechanism that is normally protected by the entangle. What special effects were you thinking of??

Re: Continuous Entangle and SPD Hmm. Essentially what you want is an Entangle that is all-or-nothing. If you don't break out of it then you don't do it any damage. Yes? I'd have thought that continuous Entangle is an odd construct for that. Personally I'd be looking at an advantage on the Entangle that makes it all or nothing. That way you don't have the question of whether the continuous slowly increases the amount of BODY available or how often the entangle goes off etc etc The special effects are that the entangle is continually be ing rebuilt. As to the cost of the advantage, I've no idea. I'll leave that for someone else to speculate on but surely this is a cleaner way.

Re: Merge Ability Wouldn't the simplest way to do this be for each character to buy Multiform with the limitation that they need to be touching to transform. Each character would bear half the cost of the multiform which would be determined by the cost of the merged creature. It might not be 100% kosher but it sure is a lot simpler than the numerical nightmares that I've seen here so far. This has the advantage that it is easy to see the rationale - both characters (I assume different players) pay something towards the cost of merging and for the loss of two characters the team gets one more powerful one.

To allow you to target stuff onviously! This is a difficult question because of the way it approaches other existing powers. Mind Scan is the way you target people out of the line of sight for the use of mental powers. Allowing targetting would step on Mind Scans toes but I feel, like Agent X, that this power should be allowed. Might I suggest that the targetting allows the use of non-mental powers to be targetted and that if the player wants to target mental powers that he use mind scan. He could even put them in a multipower - low level scans (detect minds) allow him to locate minds and shoot guns or direct remotes towards those people but does not allow him to utilise his mental capacities nor to be attacked that way. A high level scan opens up both him and his target to the use of mental powers. A reasonable compromise??

Re: Physics Check Good point. I think we were looking at game mechanics that might be used for heroes that were based on density decrease - which like you say may or may not involve elements of desolidification. This is one of the areas where Champions powers and effects become quite tricky to disentangle. That is what I have been talking about. I guess that at low levels you might call gravel a 1 or 2 DEF barrier and allow you to flow through it - like that fluidification power you were asking about... This looks like it could possible be a list of small powers in an EC, potentially with related disads (vulnerability to KB and such). Easier to model - less interesting to talk about! Which is of course why you play champions!

Yeah - I think if I was using it regularly I'd encourage the player to use the 1DEF/inch per D6 unless they wanted to push it. The roll at 10D6 will come up as 10 so often the player will tend to do that anyway but the dice roll as an option is worth it, IMO anyway. It's when I come to these wrinkles I often give up as it never seems to balance very well. I'm very tempted to stick with the D6 for a D6 which makes it very useful for a desolid character fighting someone with a killing attack (as long as they too aren't using a killing attack). That fits with my 4 colour tendencies though. The more balanced approach would be to consider DC versus DC so 2D6 desolid would reduce the attack by 2DC. It all gets very complicated though!!

I've been thinking of a density decrease power for some time and wanted one that was scalable rather than absolute. What I cam up with was density decrease - you get 1D6 per 5 points and for that you can avoid 1D6 of damage when somone shoots at you but lose 1D6 of damage when you shoot at someone else. In addition you can move through a substance if you can overcome its DEF on a roll. For example if you had 10D6 Density Decrease you would roll 10D6 and count BODY. Rolling the average of 10 you would be able to move 5" through a DEF 5 substance, or 9" through a DEF 1 substance but would be unable to penetrate a DEF 10 substance. I haven't yet tried it in play but think it is as good as anything else that I've seen so far.

Re: Random thought I've avoided this by essentially allowing smaller powers into the EC but only by paying the base cost. Adding the 20-AP power would cost the same as adding the 50-AP power. That keeps the EC intact - doesn't increase the price and allows the player, if he wants to put it into the EC to do so. I prefer Dust Raven's suggestion though. I might suggest this in future. I do like the idea of a unified framework rule though. I might even get round to thinking about it and making some suggestions.

My favourite villainous act in a comic was a short five pager at the end of a Superman comic. Lex Luthor is in a diner in the middle of nowhere. He offers the waitress a ridiculous amount of money if she'll come to Metropolis and essentially be his mistress. He says he'll wait in the car park for ten minutes for her to make up her mind. He knows she's married due to her wedding ring. She's actually married to the man who was the high school quarter-back - now gone to fat and drink. As she agonises over it Lex drives off before the ten minutes are up. Now she will never know if she'd have betrayed her husband. Pure evil. True villain.

One more thing One of the things that I remember doing badly when we first started playing Champions was disadvantages. Because teh rules said we HAD to balance all of our points with disadvantages and experience and that we could use up to 150 points of disads, that's exactly what we did. We spent 250 points and found 150 points of disadvantages whether or not they were in character or not. And we had some pretty screwed up characters because of it. As we got more used to the game and the ideas within the game we found it easier to describe disadvantages that actually rounded the characters and embedded them into the campaign. My advice is don't sweat the disadvantages on the first few characters. Give them a few that definitely seem to fit the character - hunteds are often easy - as are psychological disads such as heroic and code against killing. But if you can't think of enough then don't worry too much about it - you might get ideas when the characters are in play.