Jump to content

Derek Hiemforth

HERO Member
  • Posts

    10,582
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Derek Hiemforth

  1. Change Environment is also better than Darkness for this purpose because Darkness doesn't penalize perception... it prevents it. I would use Change Environment with the PER penalties bought per Sense Group, but instead of the Sense Group being defined as "Sight" or "Hearing" or the like, the Sense Group would be "Scrying Senses." This eliminates the need to guess whether the scrying power is built using Clairsentience or Mind Scan (or whatever other sense, as long as the special effect is "scrying").
  2. Ignoring the fact that many games that came out after Champions would never have existed (or would have been very different) because Champions was so influential, I would say definitely DC Heroes/Blood of Heroes. In fact, although it may seem heresy to say so, I think that in many ways, if you're only playing superheroes, DCH may actually be better than Champions...
  3. As with any other object, a breakable focus's PD and ED are Resistant unless noted otherwise (see Breaking Things, 6E2 p170 or Champions Complete p142).
  4. For the 6E core books, I don't know; but for Champions Complete, they're listed in the colophon on page 1 of the book.
  5. If a character attacks on their Phase at EGO 25, and then is attacked on DEX 15 of the same Segment, then the character cannot Abort. Per 6E2 p22, "Once a character has performed an Attack Action or otherwise used his full Phase in a particular Segment, he cannot Abort to any Action until the next Segment." No, they cannot move at DEX 12, because attacking ends your Phase (see Attack Actions on 6E2 p18). Yes, this means that if the character wants to move and attack, they have to wait to use their mental power until after their DEX comes up in the combat order and they're able to move. As noted on 6E2 p19, acting after attacking can cause game balance issues, and is not allowed in the normal rules as written, so if you're allowing it, then it's up to you to decide how/whether that works with using mental powers at a higher EGO and movement powers at a lower DEX. A post on the HERO System Discussion forum might generate some thoughts on that if you're seeking advice. 🙂
  6. In my "defense," I copied this error over from Champions. So while it's definitely a mistake, it's not my mistake (at least, not originally).
  7. Hey, now! If I have to provide the game books, then it hardly seems fair that I also have to provide the U-Haul...
  8. Not sure what softcover you're referring to (as far as I know, there was no softcover of 6E Champions), but the ISBN number on the hardcover I have is 978-1-58366-125-3.
  9. The last paragraph in the description of Costs Endurance on 6E1 p374 is an accidental holdover from 5E, when Powers that cost END were perceivable by three sense groups by default (see 5ER, p98 and p289). Disregard that paragraph. In 6E, as stated on 6E1 p124, whether a Power is perceivable does not depend on whether it costs END. If you want an otherwise-invisible or inobvious Power to both cost END and be more perceivable, take both the Costs Endurance and Perceivable Limitations.
  10. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it will sometimes depend on the SFX involved. For example, if the effect is atmospheric (e.g., the Range Penalty is increased because visibility in the area is bad), then shooting through the area is just as bad as shooting into or out of the area. But if the effect is, say, magical, then that might not be the case; instead, perhaps it's a curse that only affects people within the area. In other words, it might affect X attacking Y, but not Y attacking X or Z attacking A. So as always, SFX are a key determinant. However, in general, yes, a line of fire passing through a Change Environment will usually have to deal with the applicable effects of the CE (if any). So Y-X would be affected, and Z-A would be affected. Whether Y-A would be affected, I'm going to leave to a GM call based on how pinpoint precise they want to be about areas of things. Typically, if Y-A's line of fire is just outside the CE area, then it would not be affected, and if it's just inside the CE area, then it would be. As a final side note, I'll observe that I don't think that, as a GM, I'd personally approve Only versus attacks based on sight group for a -½ Limitation, given that, for almost all characters, Sight is their only Targeting sense for ranged attacks anyway. If non-Sight Targeting senses are unusually common in the game, I might give it -¼, but this Limitation seems like it usually wouldn't affect play. 🙂
  11. Yes, if you want to bypass obstacles entirely (e.g., reach through walls), then you need the Indirect Advantage. I can't really tell you what level you need; it depends on the SFX of the power and what you envision being able to do with it. I recommend working it out with your GM, or starting a thread in the HERO System Discussion forum if you want to discuss possible builds. However, for the martial artist punching in the back of the head that you described in your earlier post, if you wanted them to be able to reach through a wall or similar barrier while doing that, you would need at least, "Source point is not the character, but is always the same (+¼)," and, "Path of Power is not directly from Source Point to target, but is always the same (+¼)," for a total Indirect value of at least +½. Note that even though Stretching has some indirect aspects to it, those do not lessen the cost of Indirect (6E1 p. 286). The level of Indirect you need is still based on what you want the source of the power to be, and what path you want the power to take, without factoring in Stretching. On a personal note, I have a PC whose SFX are based around teleportation and portals and "reaching through the void," and she can do things just like you're describing. She can create a portal and have her arm appear anywhere within her Stretching reach, and oriented so the strike can come from any direction. Her build uses Stretching, Doesn't Cross Intervening Space (+¼), Fully Indirect (+1).
  12. Assuming 2m is enough Stretching to reach the back of your opponent's head, then yes, that would work. You do not need to buy Indirect. However, remember that Does Not Cross Intervening Space does not grant any Indirect properties that Stretching doesn't already have. So if there's an obstacle, you can't just ignore it; you have to "reach around it," even if it doesn't look like you're reaching around it in SFX terms. And if you can't reach around the obstacle (such as a wall or other barrier), then you can't reach the target; this doesn't allow you to just bypass an obstacle in the same way that fully Indirect does. In other words, you have to still plot out the same "movement path" of your Stretching, in order to avoid obstacles and reach your target, as you would need if you didn't have Does Not Cross Intervening Space. So your 2m build will generally work for ordinary HTH combat situations, but even a relatively minor obstacle might put the target beyond your reach.
  13. Generally, the answer is "yes and no." Yes, they have to pay the cost of Duplication (if they didn't, they would end up with extra CP to spend), but no, they don't actually have the Duplication power (i.e., they cannot create additional duplicates of themselves). This is the answer for identical duplicates, equivalent duplicates, and "greater" duplicates. For "lesser" duplicates, determine the base character’s Total CP minus the cost of Duplication. If that number is higher than a lesser duplicate’s total cost, then the duplicate does not “pay for” Duplication as describe above; if the number is lower, it does.
  14. I've noticed that too, but I was speaking less to the quality of the connections and more to the habits of the participants. It feels like many folks continue to talk simultaneously when they are talking, and not go on mute when they're not talking. I think it's a matter of learning the different rhythm that conversations have online, and of sticking to the etiquette of talking one person at a time, more than it is a technological hurdle.
  15. 1 gets the vote, but 3 is close behind. I'm particularly surprised at how 1 continues to be an ongoing issue. Like, it's impossible to imagine that the missed communications due to excess background noise from unmuted folks, or from folks talking over each other/the GM, isn't bothering everyone. And yet, it persists, even among player groups where everyone is tech-savvy, and they all are used to teleconference norms from online meetings, etc. Seriously, people... if you aren't speaking, mute yourself! And learn that you can't just talk over each other like you might in person (though frankly, this is a pet peeve of mine in person, too). It's not just a problem in hearing everything clearly... it's also a problem in that it leads to better-behaved players getting less playing time because they don't just blast over people. As for #3, I'm grateful for having online gaming as an option, and it's definitely much better than nothing (something I was skeptical of, pre-pandemic). But it's still not nearly as good as being able to really socialize in person with folks.
  16. Most folks seemed to be settling on -¼ anyway. That's another part of why I suggested just having this be an application of Limited Range: because it's already the right value.
  17. It's really a question of how far you think it's worth getting into the weeds. I guess I don't see the value in it for this application.
  18. I kind of feel like we might be overthinking the plumbing, here. This just sounds to me like a slightly unusual version of Limited Range (-¼). It's not as bad as No Range; it's not as good as standard range. To me, that sounds like Limited Range. Granted, it's limited in a different way than the typical application of Limited Range, but the fact that it can (eventually) get out to standard range is offset by the fact that it starts out at No Range, and has to take time (and the cost of Mobile Perception Point) to get out to the full range. So I dunno... I think I'd just build a Clairsentience with Mobile Perception Point, slap Limited Range on it, and call it good.
  19. <NITPICK> An 8- roll is about 25% success, and an 11- roll is over 60% success... </NITPICK> I agree that it's a sizable swing, though.
  20. If "count the BODY" became a core mechanic, I think it might drop Hero below a reasonable amount of variability in the dice. For example, some folks already struggle with the fact that, in practical terms, you're likely to see fewer results with a 3d6 roll (most results will be between 6 and 15) than with, say, a d20 (where all results from 1-20 are equally likely). Obviously, this is a bit of apples and oranges because one is a curve and the other is flat, but still... About 85% of the time, a 3d6 roll is only going to give you one of 10 results (with the middle of even that range coming up much more than the ends). With "count the BODY," we'd see even fewer distinct results. Instead of only 6 possible outcomes on each d6 (all equally likely), we'd have only 3 possible outcomes, and 2 of them would only come up 1 time in 6. Part of what I like about Hero is that characters seem pretty competent, and that I as the player can gauge my chances of success pretty well (i.e., it's fairly predictable). But I wonder if this approach would make characters seem too competent, and make results too predictable...
  21. Per the rules as written, a character operating a vehicle uses his OCV or the vehicle’s, whichever is lower. Obviously, you can vary from that in an individual situation if doing so seems more logical to you, but that is the normal rule. Personally as a GM, in the specific examples of a motorcycle and a hoverboard, I would follow the default rules. In neither case does it seem to me like the attacker would be just as capable while also controlling the vehicle as they would be "under their own power." They don't have full freedom of movement within the constraints of staying on the vehicle, dealing with the vehicle's Turn Mode, etc.
  22. For anyone interested in the Bear-Bull-Bee-Butterfly martial styles mentioned above, here's the write-up I did back in 2000. This was (of course) for 4E. KillerBs.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...