From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 1999 6:05 PM 
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #141 
 
 
champ-l-digest       Saturday, January 16 1999       Volume 01 : Number 141 
 
 
 
In this issue: 
 
    Re: Attn: Steve Long/Multiple Attacks in one Phase 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was  controversial!) 
    RE: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was  controversial!) 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    RE: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was controversial!) 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Character: The Balrog  
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    RE: An idea I was given about speed 
    Re: Character: The Balrog  
    Re: Two Kinds of Damage Per Phase 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
    Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was    controversial!) 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
    Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was      controversial!) 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
    Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:47:54 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: Attn: Steve Long/Multiple Attacks in one Phase 
 
> Absolutely.  If you paid the points and the GM *approved the character* you 
> should certainly get to use what you paid for. 
 
	Ahhh.  Simple.  Any and all attack powers must add up to no more 
than 12 DC/60 AP/Whatever. 
 
> Campaign guidelines and limits are a good thing; AP and DC restrictions are 
> a good way to structure some of those limits.  But they *don't* suddenly 
> come into play in the middle of a game.  They need to be enforced when the 
> character is built.  A GM who allowed me to spend extra points for 
> something he would not subsequently allow me to *use* would seriously tick 
> me off. 
 
	Sheesh.  No SFX limitations then, huh?  There is nothing that 
keeps you from using those powers.  You can use any or all of your powers 
(SFX and other things permitting) at any time.  You can just only use so 
many points of those powers. 
 
	This limitation always applied to "linked" powers with the 
limitation.  DC/AP maxes enforced. 
 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:41:41 -0800 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
At 11:06 AM 1/16/99 -0500, Mike Christodoulou wrote: 
>BAD HABITS OF POOR GAMERS or LIMITATIONS OF CHAMPIONS MECHANICS 
> 
>This is partly ranting, and partly looking for solutions.  
> 
>I've started a list of some of the things that really annoy me about 
>Champions -- or rather I should say, really annoy me about Champions 
>players.  Some of these things can be addressed through optional  
>rules mentioned in the BBB, but I'm more interested in whether others 
>have seen the same things, and how you handle it.  (Feel free to add 
>to the list.) 
> 
>*  Firing near an innocent bystander because Champions mechanics say 
>   that you'll never hit him. 
>    
>   OK ... you could use the rule that a missed shot goes somewhere 
>   nearby, and roll a die to see where it went.  But most players  
>   will play the odds -- especially with a high OCV -- that the  
>   bystander will not get hit.  Face it ... Would Detective Riggs 
>   fire on the bad guy if he was holding Murdoch's daughter hostage? 
>   All right.  Maybe that was a bad example. 
 
   On this one I'd just say let it go, especially if the character has 
Overconfidence as a Psych Limit. 
   I mean, *really* let it go.  Use the above rule, and if the bystander 
gets hit,  well, that's the consequense. 
   If you want to press it, though, put him up against a villain who has 
Missile Reflection.  The villain Reflects the blast at the bystander, and 
then blames the hero.  Shazam -- instant bad rep. 
 
>*  Hitting an opponent with killing level damage because chances are 
>   the dice will come up in your favor. 
> 
>   This especially applies to players who take the Code Against  
>   Killing disad (apparently just for the points), but still have no  
>   problems using the big guns.  "It's almost impossible to actually 
>   kill someone in Champions, and besides, I'd have to roll all 5s 
>   and 6s." 
 
   Again, let them face some consequences on this.  In an early AC, Dennis 
Mallonee presented the Gilt complex, a group of villains tough enough to 
take anything a normal could dish out, but fated to die at any effort made 
by overzealous (and over-powered) superheroes.  You know, stuff like 2X 
BODY vs Normal Energy Attacks, Takes BODY from Ego Attacks, BODY score of 
5, and that general idea. 
   Then there's the time Professor Muerte gave a hobo a suit that looked 
just like his own, and gave him $20 to go wander around in the park across 
the street from the hero base.... 
 
>*  Ignoring a down team member because you know that he's only at -10 
>   and will be up again after post-segment-12. 
>  
>   In the movies, when your partner gets hit, you rush to help him 
>   out.  At least until he protests weakly, "I'm ok.  Go get the  
>   mad scientist!"  I suppose one way of handling it is never to  
>   tell anyone your Stun level. 
 
   That's one good idea.  Another is to enforce the END=STUN rule when 
someone gets up after negative STUN.  And another is to point out that 
someone who's down is a sitting duck for a "kick 'em when they're down" 
attack. 
 
>*  Exposing an innocent with an Ego or Stun Only blast because it  
>   doesn't really do any damage. 
> 
>   Let's say you've got an area effect stun grenade.  The bad guys 
>   have been considerate enough to group themselves together, but 
>   darn it if there isn't a pregnant mother walking into your target 
>   radius.  "Oh well ... She'll be fine after she recovers her stun." 
 
   Actually, that's what these types of attacks are *for.*  But if you 
really want to avoid this, let someone come by who happens to be allergic 
to it (via Susceptibility), or make it a point of origin for a new super. 
 
>*  Shrugging off damage to the tune of 8 BODY because you still have 
>   2 BODY left and that's enough to keep the battle going. 
> 
>   Sure, it's one thing to heroically claim "I'm hurt bad ... but  
>   I still have to save the world!"  It's another to have your  
>   enemy take you down to 2 Body, and still perform your acrobatic 
>   maneuvers like an expert.  Minuses on all your skill rolls? 
 
   I generally play that all active Skill Rolls are at -1 per 2 BODY taken, 
and I'd include OCV and DCV in this (until they equal zero or the character 
is dead, whichever comes first).  So the character who's taken 8 BODY, 
besides bleeding really bad, would be at -4 for everything. 
- --- 
Bob's Original Hero Stuff Page!  [Circle of HEROS member] 
   http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/original.htm 
Merry-Go-Round Webring -- wanna join? 
   http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/merrhome.htm 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 12:35:11 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
> I'm still new to this list, but I can't believe how munchkiny some of you 
> guys are in terms of combat.  Two attacks per phase?  PLEASE!  But I 
> digress. 
 
	Yes, we can tell you are new to this list.  You brought up a 
really touchy subject and decided to deride the half or so that find this 
to be the actual way the rules work.  This group happens to include the 
Hero Games folk.  Even though I was strongly in the "no you can't" school 
of multiple attack powers, I recognize that this is now considered the 
book ruling.  Even if I go with a house rule against it, I'll handle this 
touchy issue with much care. 
 
	But not you.  You decide to go off and call most of the people 
around here munchkins, which is quite an insult.  You don't feel the 
waters before making yourself an enemy of basically everyone on the list. 
Yes, you say you are new.  Well, then we won't miss you much when you 
leave. 
 
	Don't let the mailing list door hit you on the ass on your way 
out. 
 
	PS: When quoting messages, quote only the related parts, not the 
whole message.  It's a good way to piss people off. 
 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:32:02 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was  controversial!) 
 
At 09:27 AM 1/16/99 -0500, you wrote: 
>I realize now that my orginial estimates of LOTR power levels are way off. 
>I don't have teh MERP books (and thus the full character descriptions) and 
>I have never read The Simillarion.   
 
I, personally, cannot recommend more highly any book, including the 
Lord of The Rings, if you have any interest at all in mythology or  in 
epic tales. 
 
>Anyway, I have this question: what is a maia? 
 
 
Short version - a cross between an angel and an animist spirit.  Tolkien 
was blending Old World sagas with Judeo-Christianity.  Eru, the One, 
created the world, with the aid of the Ainur, who are of two classes, the 
Valar (formerly 13, now 12 after the revolt of Melkor/Morgoth) and 
the numberless lesser maiar (singular: maia). 
 
Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, Radagast, Tom Bombadil, Goldberry, the 
Balrog and possibly the Barrow Wight are all maia.  The nazgul are not. 
 
Sauron was originally one of the greater maia serving the Vala Aule, the 
smith.  Thus, his speciality is in created works, like the Rings. 
 
Gandalf was originally named Olorin, and spent his time learning of  
compassion in the gardens of the Vala Nienor. 
 
And like that there.  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:23:55 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: RE: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was  controversial!) 
 
At 10:38 AM 1/16/99 -0500, Scott A. Colcord wrote: 
>>> The Balrog is unbelievably powerful, something not to be  
>>> fought by mortal man.  Gandalf is by his own admission the 
>>> most dangerous thing in Middle Earth, other than Sauron.   
>>> And the Balrog killed him.  Luckily, death isn't a permanent 
>>> state for a maia, at least not one on good terms with the Valar. 
>>  
>> What's the reference for Gandalf's "admission" here?  He was  
>> delayed getting to Frodo's party and tells Frodo he was a prisoner 
>> of the Giant Treebeard for "many weary days".  In response to  
>> Frodo's surprise that Galdalf could be made a captive, Gandalf  
>> replies: 
>>  
>> "There are many powers greater than mine, for good and evil,  
>> in the world." 
>>  
>> This seems in conflict with the characterization of Gandalf as the 
>> second-most powerful entity in Middle-Earth. 
> 
>Umm, it might be time to dust off those books and give them another 
>read.  The quote from Gandalf was from "The Two Towers", chapter 5, 
>speaking to Gimli: 
> 
>"Dangerous!", cried Gandalf.  "And so am I, very dangerous:  more 
>dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought 
>alive before the seat of the Dark Lord."  
> 
>Gandalf's imprisonment was at the hands of Saruman, not Treebeard. 
>(Treebeard was one of the good guys!).  At the time Gandalf said 
>that "There are many powers greater than mine, for good and evil,  
>in the world.", Saruman was still more powerful than he.  That 
>changed after Gandalf died and was resurrected.  Note also that  
>the quote states that he's the most dangerous thing they'll ever 
>meet...there are other powers in the world (the Valar), that are 
>far more powerful. 
 
Exactly the quote to which I was referring.  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:45:07 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
At 12:35 PM 1/16/99 -0600, Tim Gilberg wrote: 
>       Don't let the mailing list door hit you on the ass on your way 
>out. 
> 
>       PS: When quoting messages, quote only the related parts, not the 
>whole message.  It's a good way to piss people off. 
 
Yeah, because Tim wasn't pissed off when he said all that other stuff, but 
he is now, you overquoter!  :-)  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:37:58 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: RE: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was controversial!) 
 
At 11:22 AM 1/16/99 -0500, you wrote: 
>> THE BALROG 
>  
><snip> 
> 
>> 36   Desolidification,Only to Fire, 0 END Persistent,Always On 
> 
>I probably wouldn't allow taking both 'Only to Fire' and  
>'Always On' for points; how does 'Always On' provide any  
>additional limitation? 
 
<shrug> he can't read the funnies without the paper bursting 
into flames?  I dunno.  It's just always on. 
 
Actually, Gandalf notes that it went out after the two plunged 
into the water at the bottom of the chasm, and that it only relit 
once they got to the top of the Endless Stair, but it seemed like 
such an infrequent thing (once in creation) that it wasn't worth 
modelling. 
 
>> 80   4,000 100 pt. Followers (Orcs) 
> 
>These are pretty beefy orcs; even the "Greater Orc" from 
>FH was only base 50 pts.  Of course, it's got some ~150 point 
>trolls too, so perhaps it averages out. 
 
Power levels are relative.  I give my orcs a lot more skills.  I figure 
they're actually 75 points, and the -250- point trolls make up for them. 
I'll be modelling orcs, uruk-hai and trolls later on for you to see how I 
see them. 
                 
>> 15   Physical Limitation,"Cannot Leave Moria",infrequently,fully 
> 
>As Damon noted, this should probably be a Psych Lim. 
 
I dunno.  If you -never- leave a place in 6,400 years, I think it's more 
than just a psych lim.    
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:57:10 -0500 (EST) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Tim Gilberg wrote: 
 
> > I'm still new to this list, but I can't believe how munchkiny some of you 
> > guys are in terms of combat.  Two attacks per phase?  PLEASE!  But I 
> > digress. 
>  
> 	Yes, we can tell you are new to this list.  You brought up a 
> really touchy subject and decided to deride the half or so that find this 
> to be the actual way the rules work.  This group happens to include the 
> Hero Games folk.  Even though I was strongly in the "no you can't" school 
> of multiple attack powers, I recognize that this is now considered the 
> book ruling.  Even if I go with a house rule against it, I'll handle this 
> touchy issue with much care. 
 
> 	But not you.  You decide to go off and call most of the people 
> around here munchkins, which is quite an insult.  You don't feel the 
> waters before making yourself an enemy of basically everyone on the list. 
> Yes, you say you are new.  Well, then we won't miss you much when you 
> leave. 
 
Gee... waht a wonderfully 'elitist' attitude.  "Hi, I'm an old time list 
member, which means what I say goes.  If you don't think like I do, then 
I will have you removed." 
 
Whatever happened to freedom of speech and expression?  Of "I may not 
agree with what you say but I will defend your right to say it?" 
  
> 	Don't let the mailing list door hit you on the ass on your way 
> out. 
 
And peopel could say the same about you, Tim.  I've seen you go off on Rat 
for being rude, what gives your the right too? 
  
> 	PS: When quoting messages, quote only the related parts, not the 
> whole message.  It's a good way to piss people off. 
 
And people wonder why no one new wants to join this list.   
 
Why not try a new tactic?  Civil discussion with out insults.   
 
Michael Surbrook / susano@otd.com  
http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
"'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:09:02 -0600 
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com> 
Subject: Re: Character: The Balrog  
 
My memory is a little rusty, but didn't Feanor (elf) get jumped by several 
Balrogs? 
He was mortally injured, but stood his ground for a while.  Or so I 
remember. 
Feanor was obviously a powerful fellow. 
I also want to say that during the fall of Gondolin the elven king went one 
on one with a Balrog.  He lost, but once again held his own for a while. 
Then again I could be wrong. It has been 10 years plus since I cracked the 
Silmarillion 
Would love to see Tolkien's elves converted. 
 
TV 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:05:38 -0800 
From: Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
At 12:16 PM 1/16/99 -0500, B.C. Holmes wrote: 
 
 
>	And that one time, the bad guy was vapourized.  With TV crews nearby, 
>and the whole thing caught on a nearby security camera.  Got the heroes 
>in a lot of trouble.  (At the hearing, the bad guy's younger sister 
>screamed at them: "He was a good kid who fell in with the wrong crowd!  
>He was *trying* to straighten up his life, and you killed him!") 
 
Anyone remember "The Gilt Complex" from the old AC? It was a scenario 
designed just for that purpose. The villains also had "Takes BODY from 
Mental attacks" as a disad. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:16:07 -0600 
From: hunsaker <hunsaker@mother.com> 
Subject: RE: An idea I was given about speed 
 
Just keep speed as is, and give all defenders of attacks a DEX check, if they pass it when attacked, they can then decide how to place their combat levels for defense or attack, which will remain as they choose at that moment until their next action, at which point they must still use this designation, but then, once their action is over, they are again in "neutral" status, and need not choose a stance again until attacked, where they make that DEX check again, allowing them to choose a stance for that attack, which again lasts up through their next action, etc.  If they fail the DEX check, they must remain with the old stance they chose and used with their last action.   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:18:15 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Character: The Balrog  
 
>My memory is a little rusty, but didn't Feanor (elf) get jumped by several 
>Balrogs? 
>He was mortally injured, but stood his ground for a while.  Or so I 
>remember. 
>Feanor was obviously a powerful fellow. 
>I also want to say that during the fall of Gondolin the elven king went one 
>on one with a Balrog.  He lost, but once again held his own for a while. 
>Then again I could be wrong. It has been 10 years plus since I cracked the 
>Silmarillion 
 
Note my writeup.  I did mention this. 
 
>Would love to see Tolkien's elves converted. 
 
I'm getting there.  I'm going alphabetically through The Lord of the Rings. 
 
I've done Aragorn, Arwen and the Balrog.  Next up: Barrow-Wight, Bilbo 
and Boromir.   
 
Although I am doing LOtR and not the Silmarillion, I will probably make 
notes for several elven kindred when I get to "Eldar, typical".  The Noldor, 
The Vanyar, The Teleri, The Sindar, The Avari, The Laiquendi, The Peredhil...  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:05:54 -0500 
From: "Ronald A. Miller" <rabmiller@email.msn.com> 
Subject: Re: Two Kinds of Damage Per Phase 
 
Guy wrote: 
>Not two attacks; one attack that does two different kinds of damage.  Say a 
lightningblast that does heat damage plus a magnetic pulse, or radioactive 
bullets that do kinetic damage plus radiation poisoning. 
 
Yeah, I think that this is fine, it's defined by special effects and 
whatever powers you want to LINK together.  I have seen too many players 
want to give the old one-two outside of combat rules, however.  I think that 
two individual attacks per phase is an artefact that was left over from the 
various T$R games.  This can be done nicely, however, with Autofire or just 
a higher character SPD (artificial or natural). 
 
Miller, Enemy of half the People (unfortunately) 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:27:50 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
> Gee... waht a wonderfully 'elitist' attitude.  "Hi, I'm an old time list 
> member, which means what I say goes.  If you don't think like I do, then 
> I will have you removed." 
 
	Elitist?  Not really.  More of a justifiably peeved at a very 
ignorant and insulting post.  I got the same my first week after 
commenting on 8+ speeds.  It happens. 
 
> Whatever happened to freedom of speech and expression?  Of "I may not 
> agree with what you say but I will defend your right to say it?" 
 
	He can say what he wants, that's fine, but he'll get these types 
of reactions for ignorant behavior.  Free Speech usually includes a 
dialogue. 
 
> > 	Don't let the mailing list door hit you on the ass on your way 
> > out. 
>  
> And peopel could say the same about you, Tim.  I've seen you go off on Rat 
> for being rude, what gives your the right too? 
 
	Cause the rants between Rat and I have become pretty much 
ritualized by now. 
 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 05:00:09 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
>BAD HABITS OF POOR GAMERS or LIMITATIONS OF CHAMPIONS MECHANICS 
> 
>This is partly ranting, and partly looking for solutions.  
> 
>I've started a list of some of the things that really annoy me about 
>Champions -- or rather I should say, really annoy me about Champions 
>players.  Some of these things can be addressed through optional  
>rules mentioned in the BBB, but I'm more interested in whether others 
>have seen the same things, and how you handle it.  (Feel free to add 
>to the list.) 
> 
>*  Firing near an innocent bystander because Champions mechanics say 
>   that you'll never hit him. 
>    
>   OK ... you could use the rule that a missed shot goes somewhere 
>   nearby, and roll a die to see where it went.  But most players  
>   will play the odds -- especially with a high OCV -- that the  
>   bystander will not get hit.  Face it ... Would Detective Riggs 
>   fire on the bad guy if he was holding Murdoch's daughter hostage? 
>   All right.  Maybe that was a bad example. 
 
This isn't particularly a Champions problem, and to be honest, among really 
accurate combatants, I've seen this sort of behavior enough in heroic media 
that I'd have trouble addressing it.  It sounds more like you have a much 
more specific idea of appropriate ranges of superheroic behavior than your 
players...and if you can't fix that by talking to them about it, likely you 
can't fix it. 
 
> 
>*  Hitting an opponent with killing level damage because chances are 
>   the dice will come up in your favor. 
> 
>   This especially applies to players who take the Code Against  
>   Killing disad (apparently just for the points), but still have no  
>   problems using the big guns.  "It's almost impossible to actually 
>   kill someone in Champions, and besides, I'd have to roll all 5s 
>   and 6s." 
 
The proper response is "And I'm sure your character is so absolutely sure of 
that that he'll be blaise.  When would you like to start paying back the 
experience for that disadvantage, now or at the end of the game when I award 
experience?" 
 
> 
>*  Ignoring a down team member because you know that he's only at -10 
>   and will be up again after post-segment-12. 
>  
>   In the movies, when your partner gets hit, you rush to help him 
>   out.  At least until he protests weakly, "I'm ok.  Go get the  
>   mad scientist!"  I suppose one way of handling it is never to  
>   tell anyone your Stun level. 
 
In the movies there's always question as to whether the partner really _is_ 
hurt.  Supers in the comics quite often comment on a teammate being down or 
rocky, but just keep fighting, unless there's, say, a romantic connection. 
I think perhaps you're being overly tight here. 
 
> 
>*  Exposing an innocent with an Ego or Stun Only blast because it  
>   doesn't really do any damage. 
> 
>   Let's say you've got an area effect stun grenade.  The bad guys 
>   have been considerate enough to group themselves together, but 
>   darn it if there isn't a pregnant mother walking into your target 
>   radius.  "Oh well ... She'll be fine after she recovers her stun." 
 
Well, unfortunately, I suspect the whole point in taking it stun only is to 
be able to do this sort of thing.  Let the IB sue them sometime.  For all of 
it's non-lethality, it's still assault.  The court might well decide it was 
justified, but at least it will make them think.  Past this, depending on 
the hero, it might well be an appropriate response. 
 
> 
>*  Shrugging off damage to the tune of 8 BODY because you still have 
>   2 BODY left and that's enough to keep the battle going. 
> 
>   Sure, it's one thing to heroically claim "I'm hurt bad ... but  
>   I still have to save the world!"  It's another to have your  
>   enemy take you down to 2 Body, and still perform your acrobatic 
>   maneuvers like an expert.  Minuses on all your skill rolls? 
 
This is the only one of these I think really has anything to do with the 
system.  I could certainly see penelties to your actions by going to half 
and 0 Body.  On the other hand, when I brought it up locally, I got 
complaints that in practice, being banged up bad never really seems to slow 
action adventure heroes down much, and they have a point. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:01:39 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
 
Why don't we drop it with an agreement that insulting list members 
is bad? 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:54:39 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was    controversial!) 
 
At 11:55 AM 1/16/99 -0800, Christopher Taylor wrote: 
>>>Anyway, I have this question: what is a maia? 
>> 
>>Short version - a cross between an angel and an animist spirit.  Tolkien 
>>was blending Old World sagas with Judeo-Christianity.  Eru, the One, 
>>created the world, with the aid of the Ainur, who are of two classes, the 
>>Valar (formerly 13, now 12 after the revolt of Melkor/Morgoth) and 
>>the numberless lesser maiar (singular: maia). 
>> 
>>Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, Radagast, Tom Bombadil, Goldberry, the 
>>Balrog and possibly the Barrow Wight are all maia.  The nazgul are not. 
> 
>Slight Correction: Gandalf, Radagast, the Balrog, and Saruman are Valar, 
>not Maia, they are sort of lesser servitors of the Maia.  Thats why Gandalf 
>had to use all his power, the power of the fire ring, and died fighting the 
>Balrog, it was his power level.  The Barrow Wights are just undead 
>warriors.  Sauron was one step up from this power level, and Melkor was 
>another step up higher.  MInd you the terminology might be wrong but 
>another name is specifically used for the wizards (and I think it was valar). 
 
No, Christopher.  You are completely wrong.  There are twelve Valar, and 
countless maiar.  Go look.  The Valar are far more powerful. 
 
And the other word for wizards is "Istari".  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:28:31 -0500 
From: "Ronald A. Miller" <rabmiller@email.msn.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
 
>Why don't we drop it with an agreement that insulting list members 
>is bad? 
 
 
Does that really need to be said?  Maybe I will leave. 
 
Miller 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:10:30 -0800 
From: Darrin Kelley <backflash@mindspring.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
Mike Christodoulou wrote: 
 
> BAD HABITS OF POOR GAMERS or LIMITATIONS OF CHAMPIONS MECHANICS 
> 
> This is partly ranting, and partly looking for solutions. 
> 
> I've started a list of some of the things that really annoy me about 
> Champions -- or rather I should say, really annoy me about Champions 
> players.  Some of these things can be addressed through optional 
> rules mentioned in the BBB, but I'm more interested in whether others 
> have seen the same things, and how you handle it.  (Feel free to add 
> to the list.) 
 
    You are brought up some excellent points. Points which have brought 
me out of my regular habit of deleting most of the posts I get from this 
list. 
 
> *  Firing near an innocent bystander because Champions mechanics say 
>    that you'll never hit him. 
> 
>    OK ... you could use the rule that a missed shot goes somewhere 
>    nearby, and roll a die to see where it went.  But most players 
>    will play the odds -- especially with a high OCV -- that the 
>    bystander will not get hit.  Face it ... Would Detective Riggs 
>    fire on the bad guy if he was holding Murdoch's daughter hostage? 
>    All right.  Maybe that was a bad example. 
 
    Ok this is a good point. And I am going to address this from a genre 
standpoint, not a mechanics standpoint. 
 
    There are a such things as genre conventions. And they do seems to 
get overlooked alot due to mechanical considerations by the all too many 
players. It has happened in groups I have been in too. It is not a matter 
of can they do it, but should they? Some genres yes, they should take the 
shot.Like if you are playing something along the lines of the  Lethal 
Weapon movies. But in a standard 4-color supers game? They would have to 
live with the consequences of a bystander that goes to the news if they 
did and face a nasty smear on their reputation. 
 
> *  Hitting an opponent with killing level damage because chances are 
>    the dice will come up in your favor. 
> 
>    This especially applies to players who take the Code Against 
>    Killing disad (apparently just for the points), but still have no 
>    problems using the big guns.  "It's almost impossible to actually 
>    kill someone in Champions, and besides, I'd have to roll all 5s 
>    and 6s." 
 
    What are characters with a Code Against Killing doing with a Killing 
Attack? Much less using it on someone? This is a heavy matter of 
enforcement by the GM. The moment they try to use a Killing Attack on 
someone, anyone with a Code Aganst Killing should be almost crippled by 
that Disadvantage. And if they are not, then the player is not playing 
their character correctly. This is definately a matter of the GM knowing 
the characters, having copies of the character sheets and making darn 
sure that the players abide by their own character concepts. 
 
> *  Ignoring a down team member because you know that he's only at -10 
>    and will be up again after post-segment-12. 
> 
>    In the movies, when your partner gets hit, you rush to help him 
>    out.  At least until he protests weakly, "I'm ok.  Go get the 
>    mad scientist!"  I suppose one way of handling it is never to 
>    tell anyone your Stun level. 
 
    Seen this done, had it happen. Definately didn't like it. Once again, 
this is a matter of relying on the combat mechanics and not the actual 
genre being simulated. It seems far too easy to let the mechanics rule. 
And that is not what is supposed to happen. genre simulation and 
roleplaying is supposed to come before the mechanics. Otherwose, you 
might as well be playing chess. 
 
> 
> *  Exposing an innocent with an Ego or Stun Only blast because it 
>    doesn't really do any damage. 
> 
>    Let's say you've got an area effect stun grenade.  The bad guys 
>    have been considerate enough to group themselves together, but 
>    darn it if there isn't a pregnant mother walking into your target 
>    radius.  "Oh well ... She'll be fine after she recovers her stun." 
 
    People who do this in a superhero genre game should be penalized. 
Definately by the amount of bad press they get. If not by the legal 
authorities. It is still assault against an innocent bystander, no matter 
what the reason seemed justified by the mind of the player or the 
character. 
 
    Also, in the example above. Pregnancy is a delicate condition. 
Miscarrage by that mother would be a definate consideration from a GM's 
point of view. Which would rain down all sorts of other ugly smears on 
that character's reputation. 
 
    My prefered method of dealing with negative behaviour of this sort is 
to nail the characters with the consequences of their actions. 
 
> *  Shrugging off damage to the tune of 8 BODY because you still have 
>    2 BODY left and that's enough to keep the battle going. 
> 
>    Sure, it's one thing to heroically claim "I'm hurt bad ... but 
>    I still have to save the world!"  It's another to have your 
>    enemy take you down to 2 Body, and still perform your acrobatic 
>    maneuvers like an expert.  Minuses on all your skill rolls? 
 
    This is a separate issue that I get to take some issue with. In some 
situations, negatives to the skill rolls at all because of physical 
condition are absolutely inappropriate. My best example would be the last 
ditch heroic effort. This is more of yet another case where I believe 
that the genre should rule more than the mechanics. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:05:17 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
 
> Why don't we drop it with an agreement that insulting list members 
> is bad? 
 
	Nope. Indescriminately insulting list members is bad.  However, 
anyone insulting Rat or Rat insulting anyone is fine. 
 
	;) 
 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:55:45 -0500 
From: "Ronald A. Miller" <rabmiller@email.msn.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor List Members 
 
>Ron, I believe that was directed at Tim, not you. 
> 
>Despite the small handful of people who look for an opportunity to be 
>offended, the list is generally a good thing..  stick around and give it 
>a chance! 
> 
>Todd 
 
Alright :-D  (I never really planned on leaving!) 
Anyway, I don't think longevity on the list has any correlation to wisdom of 
the HERO system, eh?  I've been playing Champs since the beginning, the 
mailing list is another story however.  Sooo, let's get off the subject and 
talk about the game we all love. 
 
Next subject, please:  Has anybody out there tried to simulate an attack 
that is geared around jumping (Superleaping) at an opponent, and bouncing 
OFF him causing (I'd say) Move By damage?  I would say that this would 
require some levels in Superleap to perfect the 180 degree move off the 
target and maybe an Acrobatics roll to enhance the attack's chances.  I 
think, too, that a separately bought Damage Resistance can be employed to 
minimize the Hero's damage if the Acrobatics roll is successful.  Comments? 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 17:01:47 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Character: The Balrog (And you thought Aragorn was      controversial!) 
 
At 01:53 PM 1/16/99 -0800, Christopher Taylor wrote: 
>At 03:54 PM 1/16/99 -0500, you wrote: 
>>At 11:55 AM 1/16/99 -0800, Christopher Taylor wrote: 
>>>>>Anyway, I have this question: what is a maia? 
>>>> 
>>>>Short version - a cross between an angel and an animist spirit.  Tolkien 
>>>>was blending Old World sagas with Judeo-Christianity.  Eru, the One, 
>>>>created the world, with the aid of the Ainur, who are of two classes, the 
>>>>Valar (formerly 13, now 12 after the revolt of Melkor/Morgoth) and 
>>>>the numberless lesser maiar (singular: maia). 
>>>> 
>>>>Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, Radagast, Tom Bombadil, Goldberry, the 
>>>>Balrog and possibly the Barrow Wight are all maia.  The nazgul are not. 
>>> 
>>>Slight Correction: Gandalf, Radagast, the Balrog, and Saruman are Valar, 
>>>not Maia, they are sort of lesser servitors of the Maia.  Thats why Gandalf 
>>>had to use all his power, the power of the fire ring, and died fighting the 
>>>Balrog, it was his power level.  The Barrow Wights are just undead 
>>>warriors.  Sauron was one step up from this power level, and Melkor was 
>>>another step up higher.  MInd you the terminology might be wrong but 
>>>another name is specifically used for the wizards (and I think it was 
>valar). 
>> 
>>No, Christopher.  You are completely wrong.  There are twelve Valar, and 
>>countless maiar.  Go look.  The Valar are far more powerful. 
>> 
>>And the other word for wizards is "Istari".  
> 
>Thank you for the proper word Istari :)  replace where I used valar for 
>that word... and rethink the world 'completely' 
 
Only in this matter.  The Istari -are- maiar.  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"I distrust all systematizers, and avoid them.  The will to 
a system shows a lack of honesty." 
        Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:25:35 -0800 
From: Scott Bennie <sbennie@dowco.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
>     What are characters with a Code Against Killing doing with a Killing 
> Attack? Much less using it on someone? This is a heavy matter of 
> enforcement by the GM. The moment they try to use a Killing Attack on 
> someone, anyone with a Code Aganst Killing should be almost crippled by 
> that Disadvantage. And if they are not, then the player is not playing 
> their character correctly. This is definately a matter of the GM knowing 
> the characters, having copies of the character sheets and making darn 
> sure that the players abide by their own character concepts. 
 
I can see characters with a code vs. killing possessing a killing attack 
(examples, Superman, and his heat vision; Batman and his sharp edged 
batarangs). 
 
Killing attacks cam be used against living targets with the associated 
penalties for the strength of the psych crock; ie. characters with a moderate 
code vs. killing can use them with some difficulty, and hurting someone badly 
or killing them should have major consequences. 
 
On the other hand, a GM has to be careful about enforcement, and make sure he 
or she doesn't go overboard. Telling me how to play my own character is one 
of the best ways for a GM (or another player, for that matter) to get me to 
walk out of their game. If I'm straying from what I've got down on the sheet, 
they can be diplomatic about it and we can talk. But if the GM's showing a 
control fetish to an extent where my freedom to role-play is affected, I'm 
out. 
 
Scott Bennie 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 14:37:14 -0800 
From: Darrin Kelley <backflash@mindspring.com> 
Subject: Re: Bad Habits of Poor Gamers 
 
Scott Bennie wrote: 
 
> I can see characters with a code vs. killing possessing a killing attack 
> (examples, Superman, and his heat vision; Batman and his sharp edged 
> batarangs). 
 
    Yes, I agree. But both Batman and Superman use those attacks in very careful 
manners. As should any character with a strong Code Against Killing. 
 
    But there have been all too many circumstances in Champions games where I 
have seen Killing Attacks used simply because of mechanical convenience. The 
"STUN lotto" comes immediately to mind.... 
 
------------------------------ 
 
End of champ-l-digest V1 #141 
*****************************