torchwolf

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

When the Fantasy Trip came out those many years ago I discovered low roll and have been in absolute love of the mechanic ever since.

Same here, actually. TFT is where I also learned you can put on so much armor you can't be hurt but you can't hit anything either. Made me appreciate the movie "Excalibur" in a very special way...

As for the OT, those gamers coming in from only high-roll game systems might expect that same way to roll, but I've never had this issue with fresh gamers - they usually go "OK, low roll for success, high roll for effect, lets play."

Re: Icons Earth: The Heroes

All of these characters are of course total wimps in normal form - but that's the point, as I understand it.

I particularly liked extensive use of Proficiencies and minor Talents in the writeups, very nice details.

Reading the character sheets for players might be easier if you edited the OIAID Limitation text fields in some places, to distinguish more clearly which abilities added to the Icon form, or to the normal form. No big deal, and it's not hard to figure out, but Murphy tells me it _could_ slow down the game when quickly looking up something on the sheet.

Gatekeeper:

• "Mystic Lightning" will do max damage and STUN equal to a 12 DC normal attack, but much more often (about 1% of the time, twice as often as a natural 3 attack roll). You're probably aware of this, just mentioning it since it can definitely KO opponents more often than expected (just like the KA discussions here usually bring up).
  
• "Magesense" might benefit from Discriminatory given that he has Analyze Magic.
  
• "Nearly Ageless" might receive a greater Limitation bonus depending on how much of his time he will spend in respective identity (if about equal time, the ability is effectively halved in effect to prolong his life, the primary purpose of the ability, even if it provides a special defense). Still, up to the GM, since aging is rarely an issue in a superheroic campaign.
  

Golden Dragon:

• Not much to comment on, except that his linguistic ability is more efficient than Gatekeeper, so that might steal some thunder unless the players are fine with it.
  

Panzer:

• I think the Cramming Skill would be really useful for this character, maybe reduce Flight speed or something at the start (for later upgrade), but that of course depends on how useful Skills will be in the campaign and how interested the player would be in using such a thing. To a lesser degree this might apply to Golden Dragon as well. Also, given Gatekeeper's and Golden Dragon's linguistic abilitíes, it might be cool for Panzer to pick up an unusual language temporarily just to have hard-to-decipher communication with them available, if not to assist in deciphering strange, ancient documents.
  
• "Heard Every Line" Talent would be almost mandatory if Supernal is playing in the same campaign.
  

Supernal:

• I can't really see that the Always On Limitation for "Charm the Ladies" is worth -1/2, other than the character getting a bit blasé with the ease.
  
• "Black Book" ability: it technically can't be used to summon specific people which might not make sense over the long run (as the player would get to know some NPCs better, he might prefer calling those). If I were the player I'd might ask where everyone in the book lived to figure out which ones to call first. For those reasons I'd do it as an Organization Contact instead ("Women In The City (World)" with Very Useful Abilities and Very Good Relationship, allowing for one step up or down in those categories for select individuals), and add Well Connected and a few permanent Contacts with points left over.
  
• I really spent way too many words on "Black Book" above, since you're the GM and can adjudicate the effects. The current writeup is clever, defines exactly the resources the player can expect, and should work fine - how it works out in play depends mostly on how well the player 'gets' the part that is up to the GM.
  

Cannot comment on the Followers, of course.

Well that's just my long-winded fraction's worth of a Euro (FWIW next week?)

Re: Hero In Two Pages - Complete

Time for periodical bump.

Re: Questions about the Champions 6E core rules book

Okay I just got home from work, sorry for the delay, to answer the one question, no I don't even know what FLGS is as we don't have any in my neck of the woods, I live in the land of independent game shops, or Amazon.com if said shops don't have what we wanted.

 

Maybe, and I mean this sternly maybe, I'll give the books ago, I'm going to want to borrow them from someone at this point first so I can read them and make that decision, hard to do considering in my local gaming group none of us are Hero System players. This is because I don't honestly have allot of trust built up for the company at the moment. I'm willing to buy into say... White wolf, or Fantasy Flight Games blind, because I've bought there products before and usually had good experiences with them.....

 

Hero Games and I have clearly started off very rocky so I'm probably not going to make the mistake I made here and go off book cover alone this time around.... At this point when I see my gaming circle tomarrow, this experience is probably going to come up since I didn't try to find a copy of "Silver age Sentinels" at a used book store and insteed tried the "Long running and still published" I'm probably going to get a combination of "Really? holy crap." and "Wow I told you so".

I'm sorry you feel mislead by the back cover text. Still, the book is good value and (while I might be partial) you might want to give the system a chance.

If you just want an idea of how it works in general, there's this intro completely free for download:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/77944-Hero-In-Two-Pages-Complete

Re: Scale of Detail in HERO gaming

The problem is, there is no natural detail with the powers. Only those with a Required Roll (inlcuding all Attack Powers) might have some inate detail.

But most other details simply don't show up on "Valuable Limitation" radar. The entirety of "Real Weapon" is only a -1/4 (and that includes the "no more than double DC rule").

Many things that would have an effect on Power/Spell cost in different systems, are simply not enough to get you any points back in Hero.

 

Hero focuses entirely on the balance/big scale of cinematic things. It has a very high "upper limit" (nearly infinite or at leastaround 1.000), wich automatically means it has a high lower limit it can detail. It may have values for low powered normals, but at that level the limits are son confining that they can hardly diversify much.

Repricing might solve this, but that's a rather long discussion in itself which has already generated more than a few threads here, so that might derail the thread a bit.

As for Skill Detail:

That will cost a lot with RAW. 3 character Points may be less than 1% of a Superheroes Starting Points. But it is easily 3% for a 100 Point normal.

A character that buys 20 Skill on Characteristics based Roll spend 60(!) character points on this. And he still needs the characterstics to make them more than 11- Rolls.

Repricing of Skills, changing how much they are based on Characteristics, and expanding/subdividing Skill functions are extensively discussed in Hero System Skills (and in the 5E version Ultimate Skill).

As Ice9 mentioned in another thread, an optional way to encourage the use of "Background Skills" would be to add a pool of 20-30 (or more) only usable for purchasing non-combat, background related Skills.

Re: Scale of Detail in HERO gaming

Again, realism and detail are related but distinct.

5e Ultimate Skill deals with many of the issues you raise as well. If it is ever updated to 6e I plan on buying it.

Yes, that book is the most detailed handling of Skills I have seen

(in the decades I've spent comparing this aspect of various games).

Hero System Skills is the 6E update (only in pdf as yet, but still):

https://www.herogames.com/viewItem.htm?itemID=251552

Re: Alternate Sexualities in Champions and Supers settings

Interesting discussion, to which there is no easy right or wrong answer, except that of course everyone should ideally be represented - but is it practically feasible?

Personally, I think there is a critical difference between the source literature and books produced for RPGs - it seems to me that the RPG industry will always be lagging, erring on the conservative side, simply because you have different problems to face.

Reading a comic does not involve any personal opinions or concerns, while including an issue such as alternate sexual orientation, religious beliefs, or whatever cultural framework is predominant - in an RPG, this gets very much more personal.

Also, RPGs have historically been, and are still, even likelier targets for popular movements along the "our kids are being indoctrinated, we must ban this" lines.

As for RPG products trying to handle these issues, White Wolf has apparently been fairly successful in doing it without repercussions among consumers - or is that because those consumers represents the segment of the market that would buy those products exactly because they expected to get those issues handled?

If so, there might be a commercial risk involved for many RPG companies in "testing" what the tolerance level is of their consumer base.

In the case of Hero Games I don't think it's much of an issue; more likely it simply hasn't been focused on that much - until this discussion at least.

In the current super RPG market, there is this example I stumbled across, for Icons: (according to the review, at least, this is a good example of how _not_ to include minorities in a game. I have not purchased it myself, since I'm not that interested in the system itself)

http://www.rpgnow.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=53163&products_id=92737

To view it another way: within a majority, a diverging opinion, orientation, or belief would constitute a minority. Outside of the majority, the term "minority" would be pretty pointless.

As people interested in a superhero RPG, we are a minority and should know what it means to be part of one. That said, dealing with interpersonal or social issues is not necessarily what everyone wants enjoy in RPGs.

No easy answer on how to do this except "do what makes you happy".

All the books do say, do what you like with this material.

Re: Where to get: Hero Designer

Not certain if this is an option in Germany, but I usually use semi-temporary e-cards issued by my Swedish bank for international online purchases.

HeroTina is usually quick to give you a nice and practical answer though.

Re: you cannot make this up: Swedish man arrested for trying to split atoms in kitche

Think it came from a wall in Göteborg. My danish cousin sent it to me she's one of those Feminist Party radicals. Get stuff like that from her side of the family every couple of years. Beats the stuff I get from the other side of the family, you can't hang cheese on a wall very well or for long.

 

~Rex....will shoot her an email and see where she swiped it from....warning....she's blonde....and a Dane.....well Half Dane Half Icelandic so....bit of an attention span issue. Good kid though...

Well I've seen a few weird signs on bar toilet doors here in Göteborg/Gothenburg.

Apart from Urban Legends, we do seem to have a disproportionate amount of robbery attempts made by perpetrators wielding axes. Then again, very few are made using automatic weapons. Just the occasional driveby.

FYI - just like L. Marcus, I stand up. Even in Gothenburg.

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

There is a Power in the 6E rules we haven't considered to any great extent yet, though Hugh brought it up way upthread: Damage Negation.

At 5 pts per DC which can be applied vs a specific sfx, it is very cheap - essentially, it provides:

*3.5 PD

*3.5 ED

*-2m KB

*3.5 Power Defense (vs Drain BODY and Drain STUN Only)

Adding in a similarly discounted Flash Def and expanded Power Defense, the result would be an expanded DN, and the whole thing would be something based on the RAW.

However...

Should a defence have an effect on other kinds of powers - personally I do not think so.

In some cases, it probably should. I'll get to that.

I think I agree with Markdoc in that the construct should be purchased by the character who is supposed to alter the way a power that would affect him applies.

(apologies if I misread the point)

Would-be attackers should not have to purchase their powers specifically to affect a type of target in a way that exploits classic weaknesses.

There are several precedents for this philosophy: demons should have the appropriate Complications to be affected by the classic holy ground/true names/whatnots; vampires should have the same vs holy symbols/holy water/etc...

Getting back to the "non-attack" powers issue: This affects attack powers used in unusual ways as well.

Classic sfx example:

A character is immune to fire damage. He has purchased "sfx defense" to a ridiculous level (it's a high-powered campaign), but is attacked in an unusual way by a fire-user:

Change Environment (-4 DEX Rolls), defined as "I make the ground so hot, that people can't stand still on it". (yes, I know my example is silly, but there are easily many other reasonable variants that can be expected to be used)

An "SFX Defense", even if including all common defenses as well as LS, cannot counteract a CE. Markdoc's build can.

So, the only way to achieve across-the-board resistance to an sfx, is to use a construct that reduces Active Points affecting the character

The question is: Should "SFX defense" only protect against directly damaging effects?

If yes, it can be built by either

a) arriving at a reasonable number (though if that number is too small, it will likely unbalance a lot of other game mechanics unless kept under tight control), or

using DN as a basis and add other defensive powers to it, using a similar cost scheme, or

c) adding together all applicable defenses and applying the appropriate Limitation, or

d) a method not yet considered.

If no, Adjustment Powers is probably the most consistent way to go, since all Powers use Active Points.

EDIT: Deleted an issue that was already answered upthread. That'll teach me to post when tired, sorry.

Re: Few questions about point costs

I thought I'd share some stuff I've figured out after some playtesting, I don't think it should cause any issues but maybe I'm missing something:

- going below 0 BODY will be houseruled to give the character 1/2 base DCV and halve his movement rate (for 20m running paid for, your move is actually only 10m) and give -1 SPD from the start of the next turn - this makes dying less artificial (with the moment you start to reel from wounds / fall apart instead of "I am standing fully functional, bam, I am dead") and my players asked for that in addition to possibility of being stunned / knocked out. The 1/2 DCV penalty can be eliminated by declaring that the character will only take a half-phase. [it is a rip-off from GURPS rules, where having 1/3 or less of your HP halves your dodge and movement]

If you haven't already, have a look through the Impairing / Disabling Rules in 6E2, which is essentially the Hero System's representation of diminished abilities from wounding.

I've run some mook vs. mook combat for myself and I even figured out the CSLs / CV values. It seems like HERO is a perfect match for my "cinematic" level of GMing.

Nice to hear you feel at home with the system.

From reading this thread, you apparently already have, as you say, a good feel for the 3d6 "bell" curve, which in itself gets you halfway there.

You've already received excellent advice so I'll just mention that if you're interested in game mechanics detail, consider the Hero System Skills pdf, which goes to some amazing lengths in presenting options (alternatively the Ultimate Skill for 5th edition if you want a book version; identical to HSS except for some minor changes and updated equipment).

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

The base cost for a defence against SFX is 2pts/+1. The assumption is that this SFX will be used against the character at least once per session.

This cost seems fair, whether we call it SFX Defense or Unified Defense.

Additional details I'd suggest, just to clarify it:

*SFX Defense protects against all attacks using a specific SFX, but is neither Resistant nor Hardened; this would be purchased as Advantages to SFX Defense.

*SFX Defense provides no benefits that would fall under Life Support; this is purchased separately.

*KB Resistance can be purchased separately, versus SFX, at 1pt/-2m (half of normal cost is what I'd suggest, assuming SFX Defense costs 2pts/+1).

If the SFX is more common than this' date=' the cost would be 1pt/+1[/quote']

...wouldn't this become 3pts/+1, if the standard cost is 2pts/+1?

 

If the SFX is less common then the cost would be 1pt/+2

This is the trickiest part to cost out. The effective usefulness of SFX Defense drops _hugely_ with frequency, so 1pt/+2 (effectively a -3 Limitation) might be reasonable. A more moderate 1pt/+1 (corresponding to a -1 Limitation) might be too expensive; it would likely be much more limiting than "useful half of the time".

 

The GM may believe that an SFX is likely to come up vanishingly rarely in a campaign. I would expect the GM to cost it as 1pt/+10. This would allow the the player to easily buy effective invulnerability to something that 'might' never come up in gameplay.

Such an invulnerability might even be granted for no points, though that might prove to be a loophole in practice.

 

I think that this combines a general level of affordability along with some nod in the direction of how common particular SFX are without getting into huge rafts of detail about rarity etc. The more complex something is the less it is likely to be used.

 

Good compromise?

Seems very good. I agree about detail rafts, though those float well while still paddling towards the Reasonable Numbers Islands.

 

Some might like a Frequency Limitation chart instead, though doing it that way will also implicitly generate some extra work for the GM, often without significantly improving game play. I'd think "talk to the GM" would generally work better.

 

Vulnerabilities are easier to evaluate than defenses. Glowing green rocks somehow become much more frequent when someone is vulnerable to them, and silver is worth much more once everyone notices what it works against. You can't use Defenses actively, though.

If you know you're pretty much invulnerable to the Gravity SFX, you can stand in front of gravity manipulators and hope they won't get the idea to make the roof above you extremely heavy. Sure you can sign up to take down Gravitar, but once she's imprisoned, then what? Increase the value of your Frequency Limitation?

 

In most superheroic campaigns, where there is fairly large number of sfx, but which are also all used fairly frequently, the above structure seems fine.

 

For more general use though, I think Hugh made a very important point about frequency of sfx (my apologies to Hugh if I misinterpreted or misrepresented this point):

*in a campaign with a limited number of common sfx, as might be the case for most Heroic-level campaigns, uncommon or rare sfx should be cheaper (since the most common sfx would tend to be used _much_ more frequently that uncommon). Most characters would tend to spend points to protect against the most common types, or even buy equipment with money or Resource Points instead of Character Points to do so (if allowed in the campaign).

*in a campaign with a huge number of sfx, uncommon or rare sfx should be cheaper (since the frequency of a specific sfx would effectively be lowered by the existence of a large number of available other sfx). Most characters would tend to use generalized defenses almost exclusively.

 

EDIT: Hugh actually brought up most of the points I was about to make before I posted this.

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

The idea of a single SFX based Defense has been discussed before. Coming up with the sweet spot for pricing is tricky

 

Links to a couple of older related threads

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/55605-New-Mechanic-Meta-Defense

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/55352-Sooo...-Immunity-to-magic

Very good points brought up, thanks for reposting those links.

I would suggest' date=' rather, that even an extremely common SFX merits a significant limitation, unless the game is one where there are very few valid SFX for anything. The Fantasy Hero suggestion for Arcane Defense prices this at 2 points in a game system where Magic will be an extremely frequent SFX. If we extrapolate from 7.5 AP, that’s about a 2.75 total limitation. That would be -1/4 for Unified Power, and -2.5 for Extremely Common Special Effect.[/quote']

This may be overvaluing the frequency of Magic as SFX. I'd think Magic is merely Common in fantasy, except maybe in high fantasy or urban fantasy. In any case, more on Frequency Limitations below.

 

Of course' date=' using limitations in this fashion, there would be virtually no incremental savings moving down the chain, but we could establish that an extremely common SFX defense costs 2 points, with very common perhaps costing 1.5 points, common costing 1, uncommon 2 defense per 1 point and rare 4 defense per 1 point.[/quote']

I think that extremely common might be nearly indistinguishable from generic defenses, and maybe that category should be dropped.

 

 

Create a new Defense Power - "Special Effect Defense" - it works against a chosen Special Effect, only that Special Effect, but in whatever form that Special Effect takes place.

 

We can kind of gather a baseline by adding up 1 point of each Defense - 1PD + 1ED + 1MD + 1PwrD + 1Flash (I'm just treating Flash Defense as one entity for simplicity, I'm not really in the mood to do the Hero Equivalent of String Theory). 5 Points pretty much covers all the basic defenses.

 

Special Effect Defense

5 Points per +1 Defense, Defense is NonResistant.

Persistent, Doesn't Cost END, yada yada.

 

Choose a Special Effect (Fire, Evil, Bavarian Cream, Sonic, Light, Fire, Magic) - no matter how that Special Effect is employed against you, this defends against it.

I’m unclear how this differs from Torchwolf' date=' other than making it a new power. My teammate spends the same 5 points and has nonresistant PD, ED, Sight Flash, Power and Mental defense which works against all attack forms. It seems pretty clear the pricing favours generic defences by a wide margin, relegating SFX defense to a very expensive flavour power commonly purchased by those who are OK being one trick pony sidekick characters.[/quote']

I reasoned from the Adjustment Powers modifiers. I think ghost-angel's approach is better, though more on pricing below.

 

Pretty much - because Effect Defense should be more expensive that standard defenses IMO' date=' it takes into account all possible forms of attack - from "Mind Control: you're on fire" to Mr. Flames actually lighting you on fire.[/quote']

"Unified Defense" from Ultimate Energy Projector (p14) suggests a cost of 1 pt for PD and ED, vs a specific sfx, but then again, that might be too cheap.

 

1 PD + 1 ED + 1 Mental Def + 1 Power Def + 1 Flash Def [Active Points: 5], Unified Power (-1/4) [Cost: 4 pts]

 

It seems a bit high, but may be about right.

 

Depending on the concept, should this include:

*Hardened? (Damage Negation effectively does this)

*Resistance? (Damage Negation is Resistant by default)

*KB Resistance? (Damage Negation includes -2m per DC)

*LS: Safe Environment in appropriate cases? (might be included for free, but that would also make SFX Defense a bit cheesy at low levels)

 

If you want to get even more of a breakdown it can take the following Limitations:

-0 Common Defense

-1/4 Uncommon Defense

-1/2 Rare Defense

-1 Very Rare Defense

 

Or possibly... (adjusting from my suggestion towards UEP p14; superheroic examples)

-0 Very Common (any physical attacks)

-1/4 Common (any energy attacks)

-1/2 Uncommon (Electricity, Fire, Magic, Sonics, Telekinetic, blaster pistols)

-3/4 Rare (Ice/Cold, Light)

-1 Very Rare (Gravity, Magnetism, Time, Vibration)

NOTE: GM permission might be required for Very Common

For comparison, I'd think "Only vs Fire" would rate (-1/2) in most campaigns.

However, both the "Unified Defense" and Damage Negation (when purchased to only protect against a specific sfx) effectively cost about half of normal.

To end up with a similar pricing structure for SFX Defense, Frequency Limitations need to be about doubled.

 

-0 (Very Common)

-1/2 (Common)

-1 (Uncommon)

-1 1/2 (Rare)

-2 (Very Rare)

 

 

Using the Special Effect Defense suggested, that would mean:

 

Cost per 1 SFX DEF (SFX Frequency) [5 Active Points], Unified Power (-1/4)

[rounding arbitrarily for increments]

 

4 (Very Common)

3 (Common)

2 (Uncommon)

1 (Rare)

1/2 (Very Rare)

 

These values seem about right to me, and also falls in the cost range suggested for Arcane Defense in FH (2 pts, possibly up to 5 pts).

 

EDIT: Unnecessary application of Persistent deleted...

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

NOTE: Mostly, I'm summarizing and restating much of what's already been said, for clarity purposes, and throwing some numbers into the air:

Simplistic suggestion for sfx-based defenses (assuming either PD, ED, Resistant Protection or Damage Negation as a base for the SFX Defense Power):

Advantage and Limitation below would modify final sfx-based defense cost.

1) Expanded Defense Advantage to SFX Defense

*Defense protects against multiple Effects vs a specific SFX (+1 per Power Category)

(Attack Powers PLUS 1 of Adjustment Powers OR Sense-Affecting Powers OR Mental Powers etc.)

*Defense protects against all Effects vs a specific SFX (+4)

(Attack Powers PLUS Adjustment Powers AND Sense-Affecting Powers AND Mental Powers etc.)

2) Limited Defense Limitation to SFX Defense (expanded categories from APG)

*Extremely Common SFX (-0)

*Very Common SFX (-1/4)

*Common SFX (-1/2)

*Uncommon SFX (-1)

*Rare SFX (-1 1/2 to -2)

For Uncommon or Rare SFX (necessarily campaign-dependent definitions), this would not necessarily be unbalancing enough to count against campaign DEF limits.

Quite likely, Extremely Common, Very Common and possibly also Common SFX Expanded Defenses needs to be carefully monitored.

This approach still requires some consideration of the frequency of various sfx within a campaign. Also, Flash Defense, Power Defense (etc.) would be rendered superfluous.

However: all sfx are not equal in practical usefulness.

Nor are they equal in frequency!

It would be an interesting but strange campaign world if they were.

SFX frequency:

Since PCs would not usually fight each other (in most campaigns), they might not directly affect sfx frequency - though indirectly they would, as GMs would likely design some NPCs to challenge PCs with similar or diametrically opposed powers, especially in a superhero campaign, and likely also if there were PC magic users in a fantasy game.

Exact values of any Advantages and Limitations need to be applied in a campaign context, of course, but will likely need periodical review to remain fair.

I still think a GM needs to have a general idea of sfx frequency within a specific campaign, though it's hard to define even loosely by just genre.

Re: Hmmm. More on Special Effects

If we accept that' date=' for defensive powers, changing from "all attacks that work against this defense type" to "all attacks that have this SFX" is a +0 advantage, then we have a starting point. We can always quibble over pricing (ie should this be an advantage, or a limitation; should it depend on how common that SFX is - but we don't make that distinction for adjustment powers), but we have the basis for a mechanic.[/quote']

Hero System (Champions) started out with the implication that attack powers should have an sfx, but while it might also have been implied that defense powers should have an sfx (and so work vs a specific sfx), this wasn't enforced very explicitly.

Possibly, a generic "ED" should really be an Advantage in many campaigns, much as a "Variable Special Effects" attack.

 

 

Which begs the question why we cannot simply apply that same logic to other defensive powers' date=' such as ED, Damage Reduction or Resistant Defense. I'd still suggest a sliding scale based on frequency, but for a common special effect, the same cost as "all attacks against one specific defense" seems reasonable. Given we now have a precedent in the rules, why not extrapolate that to other forms of defenses and move on.[/quote']

Something along the lines of a universal defense was suggested in Fantasy Hero (p81 in 5th Ed, p111 in 6th Ed):

 

Arcane Defense (AD). Although discussed primarily as a Characteristic, it would apply in general and could presumably be purchased as a Power.

As suggested in FH, it would protect against anything with the magic sfx; attacks against PD or ED, Drains, NNDs, Transforms or what have you.

Because this would be so universally useful, the suggested cost is at least 2, perhaps 5. This would correspond to an Advantage of maybe +1 to +4, which puts it in the general range of similar modifiers for Adjustment Powers... which seems to confirm what's been noted about looking at the Modifiers for Adjustment Powers.

 

Being resistant to one specific special effect is a very common ability in source material for multiple genres. A simple' date=' elegant way to simulate that in-game is desirable - which, to my mind, is why Damage Negation mentions the possibility to start the ball rolling. Extrapolating from that suggestion seems the most reasonable approach.[/quote']

Personally, I think Damage Negation is the most interesting and promising game mechanic to base sfx-based defenses on.

 

However: all sfx are not equal in practical usefulness. Even in a generic superheroic campaign using superheroic physics, most GMs would occasionally allow some secondary effects:

a fire-user might put things on fire using his powers; water projectors might short-circuit electrical devices; etc.

 

The sfx discussion in Ultimate Energy Projector uses an Adder and/or Advantage for various sfx to determine how useful it is against other possible sfx.

In a pick-up game, it may be useful to have a standardized list of the most common sfx in the campaign, and how useful they are against each other.

If nothing else, it might give the specific sfx used a bit more detail that helps distinguish characters from each other, especially if there are a few Energy Projector PCs in the game.

 

 

A thought on campaign design considerations (at least concerning the always-recurring sfx issue):

In relation to source literature, there were also two fairly useful (but now semi-defunct) game systems which used mechanics to deal with sfx with a different game design philosophy:

 

*MSH (Marvel Super Heroes by TSR) used the concept of sfx-based "Power Stunts" (in Hero System terms, this would be using the Power Skill to achieve temporary effects appropriate to the sfx (and likely adding slots to a Power Framework for "learned" Power Stunts).

Defenses just stated the sfx and left application up to the GM to adjudicate (not so difficult in the MSH system). There were generally few generic "energy" defenses (though the design philosophy left many characters without defenses, instead using Health Points in a D&D-like fashion to survive fights, in addition to a Karma system slightly similar to HAPs).

 

*DCH (DC Heroes/MEGS by Mayfair Games) used a list of ways an sfx-defined Power could be used in game terms, and set the cost of the Power based on how many different applications the sfx had (in Hero System terms, you purchased pre-built Power Frameworks).

Defenses were handled much the same as in MSH (again, different design philosophy, integrating some defense mechanics into Attributes, together with a Hero Point system slightly similar to HAPs).

 

Of course, the Hero System doesn't put as much emphasis on a particular defensive solutions - having defenses limit damage taken, or being able to take a lot of damage, or avoiding being hit in the first place, etc. - there are several legitimate and effective ways to survive in combat.

 

(yes, I'm aware many of you reading this already know these systems, just describing some elements here for comparison purposes)

 

A way of handling how to define sfx (and for that manner, defense costs) would be to define beforehand which the common sfx in a campaign will be, and just evaluate any newly established sfx in comparison to (and possibly by how well/poorly the new sfx fared vs previously established sfx).

 

 

Just a few thoughts on related matters.

Re: STAR HERO Cover Sneak Peek!

To me, this image evokes elements of E.E. Smith, Asimov, Babylon 5, old-school Traveller... all in all, I like that space has three dimensions here.

Striking.

Re: Inverting Limitations

Also complications can dictate how available a power is. So PA girl has her SA only when out of armor, has instant on armor. If she also has Social Complicaion (Secret ID).

That means that while she COULD turn off her armor in an instant she can and will be in situations that render that impossible due to that Secret ID. It means that over 80% of the time the Character is being played she is in said Armor. So the limitation will be much higher than if she has instant on/off armor and a Public ID. With a Public ID the Limitation would be worth -1/4, With a secret ID it's as high as -1 1/2 to perhaps even a -2 if she's never out of the armor during play.

 

When it comes right down to it Hero could ditch all but Limited power and Conditional Power, all other limits are just Steve saving us time by giving us canned values for common power limitations.

 

Tasha

Exactly. To look at it another way, if the player wants to put a large Limitation on those abilities, she's also effectively asking the GM to limit their use appropriately to the value of the Limitation. Or, should at least be expecting that to happen.

Re: ADVANCED PLAYER'S GUIDE II -- What Do *You* Want To See?

One thing I've noticed about Mental Powers based on the discussions I see - they seem to be hard to balance. Either they come out too powerful and people complain that they're combat-enders' date=' or they come out too weak and the complaint is that they seem to do little or nothing.[/quote']

 

This is definitely part of the problem. If the mentalist's targets pretty much always break out' date=' the mentalist's player feels ripped off. If mental powers are highly effective, the players are unhappy when their PC's are targeted by mental powers.[/quote']

 

Anything that gets the "All or nothing" Part out of the Mental Powers is a good thing.

 

Ultimate Mentalist books (both the 5th edition and the earlier for 4th edition) detailed some Mind-To-Mind/Mental Maneuvers, and used the "Incremental Effect" idea for Mental Powers. Something like that (or just a brief discussion of the concept) would make roleplaying the effects more interesting (for both Mentalists and their targets); possibly, just a variation of the PRE Attack table might suffice.

Re: Nebula from Conquerors, Killers, & Crooks p.184-186

Several good and interesting suggestions of how to run Nebula has been put forth already. Some other ideas for Nebula:

• the recurring Star Trek plot idea of Paradise achieved only draconian measures (death penalty, personality wipe, etc.), traditionally resolved with a philosophical argument (though not always to mutual satisfaction)
  
• the classic "alien justice" plot (Marvel Universe examples: Kree Empire (Ronan the Accuser); Shi'Ar Imperial Guard; judgments on Phoenix or Galactus; etc)
  
• plot device character for weeding out villains (Nebula as NPC hero/villain methodically removing unusable villain concepts from the campaign world)
  
• does the Republic has a Prime Directive of non-interference with primitive cultures, and if so, does Nebula in effect violate it?
  
• what if, for budgetary or whatever purposes, Duress officials decides all Earth criminals should be returned to their place of origin, being a local problem rather than a concern of the Republic?
  

I would think that any attempt at using characters strictly as written invites both inconsistency and logical disconnects with other elements of a given campaign world, even within the Champions Universe itself. Depending on GM ambition, logic should probably not be strictly enforced on every aspect of a superheroic campaign world if it is supposed to emulate the genre faithfully, but consistency in the presentation of characters becomes in some ways more important with some loss of logic.

As has been stated, interpretations of characters and writeups will invariably produce different results from any given GM. Even with extremely elaborate descriptions, there is still the GM's interpretation of how any given character will be represented in a specific campaign.

In general, I would think that extremely powerful villains (and, for instance, Nebula; characters neither heroes nor villains but operating by an alien or divergent moral code) would often be more concerned with achieving their own goals than simply fighting heroes.

Given that Nebula wants to enforce her particular, slightly mosaic, brand of law enforcement, and provide an illustrative example of how superior her own methods are, she would likely use her investigative skills to prioritize her own "wanted list"; at the very start of her Background/History description in CKC, she obviously interviews "snitches and lowlifes", so she cannot be as uncompromising as it might seem, rather being draconian mainly in her view of herself as both enforcing the law and administering justice (with extremely harsh judgments as part of her native penal code). She may even consider herself in a position close to a nineteenth century US Marshal on a trek to a lawless region; not opposed to cooperation with locals, but wary of their motives and methods.

Many will disagree with these words and my interpretations, which is as it should be; it's up to the GM to interpret how NPCs act from their personality and motivation, but every character writeup I have ever seen still leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and/or re-imagining. Personally I think that revamping character writeups (not at all necessarily having anything to do with numerical representations), whether for published characters or for lackluster homemade characters, is one of the most essential, and one of the more enjoyable, parts of my job as a GM.

Your Mileage Will Vary From Your Selected Routes

Re: How Do You Build Sneezing Powder?

Another possibility might be NND vs Self-Contained Breathing, Only To Check For Stunned Condition (-1), possibly with Time Limit for a continued effect.

With a 4-5d6 NND, this would likely incapacitate an unprotected caster temporarily, with recovering from sneezing being the sfx of Recovering from being Stunned.

While temporary incapacitation might not be exactly what was asked for, it would be consistent with most other gas-based attacks in how to defend against it.

Re: 1d6x2 attack

Well' date=' it's intended more for general purposes than a specific build, but the particular circumstance I'm looking at is being able to Drain 1d6 BODY rather than 2d6 Active Points worth of BODY.[/quote']

Of course, if this is used for a Drain, the Recovery Rate would be the slightly awkward 2.5 pts of BODY per Recovery time increment, which might either increase or decrease the advantage of multiplying the one d6 rolled, depending on any Recovery round-off you might also want to impose.

Re: Mongol Ninjas!

[sidetrack thread]

Scythians and Amazons:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previous_seasons/case_amazon/about.html

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/aegean/amazons/amazonarchaeology.html

(even if not explicitly connected to the Mongols, being the subject of this thread, there might be some cultural connections between Scythians and Mongols as well)

I now return you to your regular programming.

[/sidetrack thread]

Re: Infrared Perception (Hearing Group)

Even if that is not the case' date=' then any movement in the air will cause problems, overshadowing the tiny sound Brownian motion makes: it would be like trying to listen to a crystal radio inside the speaker stacks at a Metallica concert.[/quote']

You could of course by using some extra application of rubber-science propose that the reception of specific sound frequencies of Brownian motion vibrations in the atmosphere can be selectively amplified - the principle for detecting those vibrations would be similar enough to a sonic motion detector.

(on a related note I suppose such a motion detector can be tricked into falsely registering a target moving in a specific direction by changing the heat emission of its target, applying the same notion behind using a Brownian motion detector to sensing temperatures)

 

Other problems would include the fact that air density and composition would affect the perceived temperature - if there is a lot of helium in the atmosphere' date='for example, the Brownian motion will be more rapid as helium is lighter, giving a higher pitched sound and making the area seem hotter than it is.[/quote']

Yes, gaseous effects and multiple moving heat sources in particular would make things tricky - not to mention rain and other condensation effects.

 

None of that matters - it is a superhero game' date=' and you can do what you like, based on an idea or extrapolation of an existing idea, but, if you want to play it as a rubberscience realistic power, then all the problems mentioned and more will be encountered. If you just want to play it 'straight' as a Hero mechanical construct, then you can hear the temperature here, there and anywhere you can hear, and you don't need to worry about whether it would work in practice any more than you need to worry if your team mate can actually teleport.[/quote']

Yes... does your team mate actually teleport?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prestige_(film)

Re: END Reserves in 6e - why bother?

Not so very long ago (July through August), there was in-depth analysis in this thread:

What do you think of Endurance Reserve in 6E?

Re: Complete Newcomer to the System

You know you've really fallen into it when you watch TV and movies and are figuring out how to stat it in Hero.

Deep in it, back in the days, me and friends used to sit at coffee shops, watch innocent passers-by, stat them out, and turn them into NPCs. Great fun until the staff inevitably asked us to leave.

Of course, I'm now supposed to be too mature for such pastimes.