Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 254
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 6:00 PM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #254
champ-l-digest Tuesday, March 30 1999 Volume 01 : Number 254
In this issue:
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Toomerang-Zoomerang-Boomerang!
Re: 2 Rules questions for you rules wizards ...
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
MAGIC CHECKLISTS
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: MAGIC CHECKLISTS
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: Swingers
Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: No Conscious Control
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Re: Real American Heroes (American Themed Heroes)
Re: No Conscious Control
Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
superpatriots and other madmen
[Fwd: Absorbtion (Always On) <-Is this a crock?]
Re: superpatriots and other madmen
Re: Real American Heroes (American Themed Heroes)
Re: [Re: Absorbtion (Always On) <-Is this a crock?]
Re: Melissa Virus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:07:14 -0800
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
> >5 u - Disintigrate: RKA: 1d6, AVLD: Power Defense (+1 1/2),
>Does Body (+1), END 6
>
> This' actually the only slot I had a question about - it seems to me
>that if you're modeling a power that either turns you to dust or does
>nothing at all, you might be better served with a very large RKA that has
>some sort of "All or nothing" Limitation on it. That way, if it failed to
>generate enough Body to kill the target outright, nothing happened.
>[Replicating the "I made my Save!" moment from AD&D]
Sounds like a Transform to me
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:07:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Michael Surbrook wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Hudson, Robert wrote:
>
> > >I was messing around with some ideas and started tinkering with
> > converting a few amusing creatures from the old Monster Manual into Hero
> > terms. First up is the Beholder. This is a rough draft and feed back is
> > greatly appreciated.
> >
> > >5 u - Disintigrate: RKA: 1d6, AVLD: Power Defense (+1 1/2),
> > Does Body (+1), END 6
> >
> > This' actually the only slot I had a question about - it seems to me
> > that if you're modeling a power that either turns you to dust or does
> > nothing at all, you might be better served with a very large RKA that has
> > some sort of "All or nothing" Limitation on it. That way, if it failed to
> > generate enough Body to kill the target outright, nothing happened.
> > [Replicating the "I made my Save!" moment from AD&D]
>
> Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
> destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
> nothing" be on the RKA?
This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
"partial disintergrations."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:17:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Toomerang-Zoomerang-Boomerang!
Going along with my "weapon sthick" villans...
The boomerang villain.
Here's is a proposed write up.
5d6 EB, AoE: Any (+1), Selective (+1/4), Autofire: (2 shots) (+1/2)
Indirect (+3/4) [Limitation on Indirect: Can not penetrate walls; only to
represent arc's return path going around and not through (-1/2)], Reduced
END: 1/2 END (+1/4); OAF (-1), Range based on STR (-1/2), 1 Recoverable
Charge (-1 1/4), Charges cost END (-1/2) [Limitations on Charges, Charges
Cost END: Requires Skill Roll: DEX, or appropriate Skill to catch to retain
Recoverable Charge [-1/2] Limitation: Charge only if hitting solid barrier,
striking dead on, or caught/deflected [-3/4]], Limitation: Set Effect:
Must travel from user in an arc consistent with boomerang travel (-1/4)
Active Cost 87
Real Cost 26
The Area of Effect represents the weapon's flight path, which is
either an arc or ring. It's selective because the person throwing it
(assumably) has enough skill to have it rise or dip at the specifically
targeted hexes and not throughout the entire flight.
Because it can arc around walls and strike opponents from behind
(thus granting a possible surprise maneuver), I gave it a limited form of
Indirect... which can't travel through walls, but can go around them.
It costs END to throw, but since a Boomerang is light, I slapped
on Reduced END.
The Range is based on STR. The boomerang is both balanced and
aerodynamic.
I figured the best way to represent the Boomerang was with a
Recoverable Charge with Limitations. First, the character must be able to
"catch" the boomerang or he looses the charge. Second, the character will
loose the boomerang if it smacks flat into something. I would suggest
assigning a penalty to hit an object and have the flight unobstructed (as
a "called shot"), or use the optional hit location table. If it is
caught, blocked, or otherwise obstructed (with Missile Deflection), then
the charge is also lost. (Consequently, Missile Deflection makes an
excellent "complimentary" power).
I was thinking of how to make the boomerang catchable on the next
phase, but this proved to be too difficult for me to figure out.
Do you think it would take a 1/2 Phase action to catch the
boomerang during it's return flight? (Which would essentially negate
movement in that phase). If not, then I would assign a penalty to catch
the boomerang if the character did not "pre plot" his flight path and
movement, or negate the possibility of catching it all together.
Any and all comments are appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:40:34 +1000
From: "Lockie" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: 2 Rules questions for you rules wizards ...
um. . guh? since when is the focus being hit at all, in an attack against
the character?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Cc: Champions <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Wednesday, March 31, 1999 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: 2 Rules questions for you rules wizards ...
>On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Lockie wrote:
>
>> he means that damage reduction does not function as a defense for a
focus,
>> while pd and ed do.
>
>I disagree. Rat is stating that DR is figured *after* damage gets through
>defenses, but that any foci is hit *before* defenses (in general), meaning
>that (according to Rat) the DR is rendered useless. Persoanlly, I
>disagree with this view of DR when bought via a focus.
>
>> >>| I disagree. Penetrating damage takes effect regardless of the
defenses,
>> >>| including the defense of Damage Reduction.
>> >>
>> >>Damage Reduction is not strictly speaking a defense, it is an 'after
>> >>defense defense'. Case in point: put Damage Reduction in a Focus.
Ponder
>> >>that for a few minutes and I think you'll see what I mean.
>> >
>> > I was right with you up until your example.
>> > Rat, you have *got* to get into the habit of explaining your logic
for
>> >things up front instead of letting people guess.
>
>--
>Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
>
> "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands,
> raise the skull-and-crossbones, and begin slitting throats."
> H.L. Mencken
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:06:06 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:
> > Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
> > destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
> > nothing" be on the RKA?
>
> This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
> happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
> This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
> be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
> Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
> "partial disintergrations."
Except one shouldn't use Transform to simulate another power. What you
are describing is basically a very large Killing Attack.
- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands,
raise the skull-and-crossbones, and begin slitting throats."
H.L. Mencken
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:18:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Michael Surbrook wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:
> >
> > This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
> > happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
> > This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
> > be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
> > Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
> > "partial disintergrations."
>
> Except one shouldn't use Transform to simulate another power. What you
> are describing is basically a very large Killing Attack.
Disintergration is an all or nothing attack which disappates a
character into "nothingness."
The mechanics of the AD&D power is an all or nothing attack (save
or no save).
Transform is the one of the few "All or Nothing" mechanics I know
of in the HERO system. Also, by placing a Limitation of All or Nothing on
HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY, you're saving points by creating a
Limitation on an all ready existing power; this power replicates
Transform.
The mechanics of Transform are more convient and effect a target
similar to what you have written up. Also, Transform can be used to
'simulate' all ready existing powers to some extent: "permanent" blindness
being one example given in the book.
Of course, this in and of itself brings up the debate of Transform
effecting point costs of a character...
Blindness is a Physical Limitation,
as is Disintergrated (Greatly, Always). :)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:53:09 -0600
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net>
Subject: MAGIC CHECKLISTS
For some time now I've been thinking about formulating a kind of "magical
traditions" checklist as a shorthand way of noting the differences between
the different magic-using societies in my game worlds. I envision this as
some kind of checklist, where you check off all the options that apply.
Some of the criteria I've noted are:
1) Use of magic is based on: gender; bloodline; birth order; random
selection; magical aptitude ("Magic skill"); inborn magical "gift";
selection by supernatural entity.
2) Magic source is: internal; external
3) "Spells" may be learned by: oral traditions; notes or texts;
experimentation; communication with supernatural entity; meditation
4) Magician's duties are: full time; part time; require no extra time
5) Magician's upkeep is based on: community contributions or taxes;
begging; commercial; subsidized by patron.
6) Spell variety:
a) Is not restricted in learning types of spells (fire, healing, mind
control, etc.); i.e., you can eventually learn to cast any kind of spell
you can think of.
b) Limited only by selection available (i.e., you must be able to find
someone to teach you, or find the spell in a book)
c) Limited by local custom (e.g. In Garamantia, the Red Wizards may only
cast spells of fire and hunting, though some of them secretly learn healing
magic as well);
d) Limited by the nature of the magic (e.g. In Garamantia, Green Wizards
may only cast spells of Healing and Fertility magic, and are unable to
learn Death magic).
I think there's room for much more development here, and could use some
more input in developing this further. I don't recall seeing anything much
like this, but it seems like it could be invaluable to a GM.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:43:46 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
At 12:07 PM 3/30/1999 -0500, Jason Sullivan wrote:
>> Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
>> destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
>> nothing" be on the RKA?
>
> This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
>happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
> This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
>be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
>Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
>"partial disintergrations."
I don't think you could Transform "people into atoms" any more than you
could Transform "people into corpses."
I think that Dispel BODY might work for this, though.
- ---
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: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:06:39 -0600 (CST)
From: Curt Hicks <exucurt@exu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: MAGIC CHECKLISTS
> From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net>
>
>
> 4) Magician's duties are: full time; part time; require no extra time
>
> 5) Magician's upkeep is based on: community contributions or taxes;
> begging; commercial; subsidized by patron.
>
These two seem to assume that 'Magician' is a sufficient job description.
Maybe there should be an earlier checkpoint on whether just being a
magician is all you need to make a living...
Curt
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:04:36 -0500
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@fmco.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Dispel BOD? Really? How does that work? All-or-nothing BOD Drain at 30% of
the cost? I'm taking out my magnifying glass.
] I don't think you could Transform "people into atoms" any
] more than you
] could Transform "people into corpses."
] I think that Dispel BODY might work for this, though.
] ---
] 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: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:56:30 -0500
From: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Swingers
At 08:24 AM 3/30/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>A little of both.
>>Swinging os really just a limited version of Flight. So is Gliding. While
>>a character might buy Hang Gliding skill and a hang-glider, Gliding as a
>>power means he can fly (with or without a focus) at a given speed, but may
>>not gain altitude and/or whatever limitations there are on it. Champions
>>prices things based on _game_effect_, not on real-world logic of use.
>
>Yeah, but do you see that neither one belongs as powers even on that basis?
> They are simply powers that could be built without needing to be written
>up (flight with modifiers), so even on your description they are
>uneccessary. I don't know why people argue this strongly as they do, I
>suppose any suggestion of change seems like an assault on the rules, but it
>is very clear to me that swinging is a skill (anyone can do it, it requires
>some training to do well) not a power (you can do it as a reflection of
>your personal ability, physical or genetic nature).
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even if the power is redundant, it should not be made a skill. Swinging is
Flight: Only where there are things above to swing from. The skill of a
gymnast to swing from trapeezes is different, not redundant, and
inappropriate for many settings where the game effect is better simulated
through a Power.
============================
Geoff Heald
============================
In search of the perfect .SIG file.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 11:13:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Bob Greenwade writes:
> I don't think you could Transform "people into atoms" any more than you
> could Transform "people into corpses."
Transform 'people into corpses' is a perfectly legitimate transformation,
though there's the minor problem that they'll get better given time (or some
specified method of reversal).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:10:47 -0500
From: "Scott C. Nolan" <nolan@erols.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
At 09:43 AM 3/30/99 -0800, you wrote:
>At 12:07 PM 3/30/1999 -0500, Jason Sullivan wrote:
>>> Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
>>> destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
>>> nothing" be on the RKA?
>>
>> This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
>>happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
>> This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
>>be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
>>Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
>>"partial disintergrations."
>
> I don't think you could Transform "people into atoms" any more than you
>could Transform "people into corpses."
> I think that Dispel BODY might work for this, though.
Tch. "Transform" -is- a Killing Attack with a special effect. Nothing else.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:12:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Scott C. Nolan wrote:
> >>> Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
> >>> destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
> >>> nothing" be on the RKA?
> >>
> >> This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
> >>happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
> >> This would be an "all or nothing" Transform. The treatment would
> >>be Ressurection, Reincarnation, or Reintergration. You could even buy it
> >>Cumulative, or link it to a HKA (Ranged), NND, Does BODY to represent
> >>"partial disintergrations."
> >
> > I don't think you could Transform "people into atoms" any more than you
> >could Transform "people into corpses."
> > I think that Dispel BODY might work for this, though.
>
> Tch. "Transform" -is- a Killing Attack with a special effect. Nothing else.
I starting to think I should leave the power as is and put a note at the
bottom that people way want to use Transform instead depending on the end
result desired.
- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands,
raise the skull-and-crossbones, and begin slitting throats."
H.L. Mencken
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:29:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
Here is my solution for the varied DEF of the Beholder and its eyes:
68 Eye Blasts Multipower: 120 Point Pool, Multipower has a Limited
Arc of Fire, each slot can only affect targets in a 180 degree
arc, arc varies per slot (-1/4), Individual slots can be disabled
with called shots, Anti-Magic Stare is -6 OCV, all other slots
are -8 OCV; Slots are not fully protected by Beholder's defenses,
the Anti-Magic Stare is DEF 4 / BODY 3, all other slots are DEF 6,
BODY 1 (-1/2)
How's that?
- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands,
raise the skull-and-crossbones, and begin slitting throats."
H.L. Mencken
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:43:55 -0500
From: "Scott C. Nolan" <nolan@erols.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
At 03:29 PM 3/30/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Here is my solution for the varied DEF of the Beholder and its eyes:
>
>68 Eye Blasts Multipower: 120 Point Pool, Multipower has a Limited
> Arc of Fire, each slot can only affect targets in a 180 degree
> arc, arc varies per slot (-1/4), Individual slots can be disabled
> with called shots, Anti-Magic Stare is -6 OCV, all other slots
> are -8 OCV; Slots are not fully protected by Beholder's defenses,
> the Anti-Magic Stare is DEF 4 / BODY 3, all other slots are DEF 6,
> BODY 1 (-1/2)
>
>How's that?
Sounds good to me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:23:19 PST
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: No Conscious Control
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
>When I played AD&D the GM ran clerics that, since their spells came
from
>their god, sometimes they didn't get exactly the spells they prayed
for.
>Like, if you said "today I'm gonna take 3 Cure Light Wounds" he might
say
>"2 Cure Light and one Turn Dead." Usually, you'd run into some undead
a
>day or two after this.
You know, I've always wondered why D&D didn't run their clerics this
way.
>What Power Limitation would best reflect a power like that? If I have
a
>Multipower with No Conscious Control on changing the slots, I roll
randomly
>to see where the points are today. If I have Activation Roll on
changing
>the slots, I can fail my roll and be unable to change them. But what
would
>say that I usually get what I want, but sometimes they change to things
I
>didn't ask for?
How about an Activation or RSR (PS:Cleric) with Side Effects? No, wait,
that's no good because the Side Effects wouldn't be disadvantageous, if
they represented your deity looking out for you. Scratch that. Are you
willing to bend the rules a bit? Put an Activation roll on the No
Conscious Control limitation, reducing it's 'value' in a manner similar
to putting a Limitation on an Advantage.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
And, yes, Rat, I know that Limiting Limitations isn't in the rules, but
sometimes you have to improvise.
jrt
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:30:53 -0600 (CST)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Michael Surbrook wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:
>
> > > Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
> > > destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
> > > nothing" be on the RKA?
> >
> > This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
> > happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
>
> Except one shouldn't use Transform to simulate another power. What you
> are describing is basically a very large Killing Attack.
Hmm. But where does the line get drawn?
Transform Human to Stone is a classic example of the Transform mechanism.
RKA: With a good enough roll, it turns someone into an immobile, unliving
object.
Transform Human to Stone: With a good enough roll, it turns someone into
an immobile, unliving object.
So should Transform Human to Stone be bought as an RKA? No, I don't think
so. First off, having the Transform go against normal defenses is silly -
no amount of armor is going to protect you when the medusa locks eyes with
you. Second, you're looking at an all-or-nothing effect - either the
victim becomes a statue or he doesn't - there's nothing in between.
Similarly, if your conception of Transform Object to Atoms says that it a)
shouldn't go against normal defenses and b) is an all-or-nothing effect,
then Transform is the mechanic you want to use.
J
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:12:10 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: RE: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
>On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Michael Surbrook wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> > > Hmmm... that would work. I was shooting for some sort RKA that would
>> > > destroy anything given time. Still, what sort of lim would "all or
>> > > nothing" be on the RKA?
>> >
>> > This construct sounds suspiciously like a Transform waiting to
>> > happen. The target would be "people" and the result would be "atoms."
>>
>> Except one shouldn't use Transform to simulate another power. What you
>> are describing is basically a very large Killing Attack.
>
>Hmm. But where does the line get drawn?
>
>Transform Human to Stone is a classic example of the Transform mechanism.
Personally, given the basis of Transform...which was originally modelled on
Killing Attack...I've never particularly hesitated to use it for effectively
lethal attacks. Like Body Drain, it's such a bloody inefficient combat
power in many respects that the fact it's one of the better ways to outright
kill someone just doesn't overly disturb me in a system where the way to win
fights is really to knock people out.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:32:48 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
> On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Bob Greenwade wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > What, no Umber Hulks? ;-]
>
> <shrug> I guess I could, if you want to seem them. How do you do
> 'confusion' as a power?
If one used the Negative Characteristic rules, that would be an Intelligence
Drain or Suppress.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:43:07 PST
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
>From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
>>From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
>>And ideas on how to simulate lopping off the small eyes? I was
thinking
>>of going for a 'OIF' lim on the multipower, inwhich the -1/2 lim
wasn't
>>for a focus per se, but to represent the fact that the eyes are
'outside'
>>of the base DEF.
>
> A Focus can be Grabbed and taken away. I'd call this a Limitation
on
>BODY (make all but one BODY "Not on Eyestalks").
Well, Bob, I don't know about that... How firmly are these eyestalks
attached? Perhaps they *can* be taken away during combat. That could
be another use for the 15 STR. This might even justify an Independent
limitation to represent the fact that once removed, they can't be
reattached/grow back. Think about the role-playing possibilities...
The party fights a Beholder, but it gets away after they relieve it of
one of it's eyes. It becomes a recurring villain, seeking revenge on
the ones who maimed it... Better than a pirate with a hook, if you ask
me... Plus, I'm sure they make great spell components.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 16:46:01 -0500
From: Glen Sprigg <borealis@cois.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Real American Heroes (American Themed Heroes)
In my Canadian Champions campaign (with the Borealis-Invictus conflict the
central theme), Invictus has a cadre of super-patriotic followers named
Manifest Destiny. Some of the members include:
American Flag (from an AC issue)
Eagle
Gunslinger (wild-west motif)
Minuteman (high-tech equipment, looks like Revolutionary War soldier)
I envisioned the team as a bunch of fanatics who follow Invictus' dream of
conquering the whole of North America under the US Flag (and Invictus'
leadership), but they could be modified to be a straightforward
superpatriot team in American-based campaigns (like Executive Sanction).
Glen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:52:50 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: No Conscious Control
From: Mathieu Roy <matroy@abacom.com>
>
>
> Bob Greenwade wrote:
>
<snip>
> > I think I'd just make it a -1/4 or -1/2 Limitation for "Divine
> > Overruling."
>
> Actually, if the overruling is generally used to benefit the priest using
> information the deity has and the priest doesn't (like the example above),
maybe
> it should be a -0, or even an Avantadge.
Agreed. Possibly along with Danger Sense or Precognition, limited to
warnings in the form of spells that give you clues about the future.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:58:51 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: CHAR: Beholder (rough draft)
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@fmco.com>
> Dispel BOD? Really? How does that work? All-or-nothing BOD Drain at 30% of
> the cost? I'm taking out my magnifying glass.
Agreed. It could work, and I'm not certain it is abusive, but I'd want to
take a good look at it.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:16:37 -0500
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@fmco.com>
Subject: superpatriots and other madmen
My buddy played a character in Chris Hartjes' game that was an interesting
slant on the whole super-patriot archetype. He was this survival nut from
Montana that lived under the belief that the US government had strayed from
the spirit of the constitution. He was one of those paranoid lunatics who
used his libertarian ideology to justify all kinds of antisocial behavior.
The easiest way to come up with superpatriotic heroes is to look at
superpatriotic villains and change their costumes to the right colours.
Golden age comics are filled with nazis and commies and whatnot whose
methods and character would hardly change if you swapped their ideologies
with whatever American virtue you care to promote. This will work as long as
the character looks good on TV.
Although created in an English comic, Judge Dredd has always been my
favourite American superpatriot. Beside Dredd, Captain America looks like a
liberal.
Brian Wawrow
Financial Models Company
Love is like racing across the frozen tundra on a snowmobile which flips
over, trapping you underneath. At night, the ice-weasels come.
Nietchze
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 23:27:27 +0100
From: Chris Brecken <christopher.brecken@sunderland.ac.uk>
Subject: [Fwd: Absorbtion (Always On) <-Is this a crock?]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------40D3CDDE8691729176A387C3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- --------------40D3CDDE8691729176A387C3
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <3700CF8A.27B15662@sunderland.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:20:11 +0100
From: Chris Brecken <christopher.brecken@sunderland.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Absorbtion (Always On) <-Is this a crock?
References: <Pine.PMDF.3.96.990328115316.543231112A-100000@Mail.NJC> u> <3.0.5.32.19990330012729.014f1320@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sorry, im late to this thread, so i may be way off base, but how about Absorbion
always on, and Change environment, create low resistance path from Higher
potential objects to yourself (always on as well)...
Just my 2 Pence.....
Chris.
geoff heald wrote:
> At 07:11 AM 3/29/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >> On a similar note, what sort of Limitation would "attracts
> >>electricity" be? Those glass electrical orbs would explode when you touch
> >>them, sparks would fly out of sockets if you had your hands near them,
> >>light bulbs and other devices would dim (like a brown out), you'd be a
> >>living lightning rod, etc. ?
> >
> > I don't think that's a Limitation per se, unless it's Side Effects from
> >using a Power. I'd call this a combination of reduced DCV vs electricity,
> >Distinctive Features (the sparks and the light bulb thing), and *maybe* a
> >Susceptibility or Physical Limitation.
> >---
> >
> I think I see the effect you're going for here.
> On the TV show Misfits of Science, one of the low-rent heros was Johnnie
> B., a rock star who was changed by being struck by lightning. He can now
> drain electricity (like grabbing onto a high voltage transformer to power
> up) and can fire lightning from his hands. On the down side, he moved to
> the middle of the desert because of how he attracts lightning storms and he
> can't even ride in a car for very long because he drains the battery and
> drains off the alternator until the car doesn't have enough electricty to
> fire the spark plugs. This last part is like a Drain, Always on but that
> doesn't cover Phys Lim: Attracts Lightning.
> I'm not sure how to write it up, though.
>
> ============================
> Geoff Heald
> ============================
> In search of the perfect .SIG file.
- --
- --------------------------------------------
Ride against the wind born to lose the fight
Magnum - How Far Jerusalem
- --------------------------------------------
Christopher.Brecken@Sunderland.ac.uk
- --------------40D3CDDE8691729176A387C3--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:23:30 -0500
From: "Scott C. Nolan" <nolan@erols.com>
Subject: Re: superpatriots and other madmen
At 05:16 PM 3/30/99 -0500, Brian Wawrow wrote:
>My buddy played a character in Chris Hartjes' game that was an interesting
>slant on the whole super-patriot archetype. He was this survival nut from
>Montana that lived under the belief that the US government had strayed from
>the spirit of the constitution. He was one of those paranoid lunatics who
>used his libertarian ideology to justify all kinds of antisocial behavior.
>
>The easiest way to come up with superpatriotic heroes is to look at
>superpatriotic villains and change their costumes to the right colours.
>Golden age comics are filled with nazis and commies and whatnot whose
>methods and character would hardly change if you swapped their ideologies
>with whatever American virtue you care to promote. This will work as long as
>the character looks good on TV.
>
>Although created in an English comic, Judge Dredd has always been my
>favourite American superpatriot. Beside Dredd, Captain America looks like a
>liberal.
He is. Or rather, he's a cardboard cutout of what a liberal thinks a 'good'
conservative would be. Isn't it amazing how often Cap is confronted with
the godless corrupt government? The droning antigovernment nihilist
crap that ruined Captain America also ruined Green Arrow and many
other formerly entertaining comics by turning them into soapboxes for the
politically trite.
Dredd isn't a conservative, he's a nazi.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:32:36 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Real American Heroes (American Themed Heroes)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
>
> I'm trying to come up with oodles of American Heroes.
<snip>
> Any other heroes, already existing from other RPG sources or comic
> books (no matter how silly or stupid sounding) would be appreciated.
Captain USA, from an old AC. His offensive abilities were limited to Martial
Arts, which he was only fairly good at. However, he had massive Charisma,
enormous Resistant Defenses, and Full Life Support, making him extremely
difficult to kill. When ask about himself, he always made pronouncements
such as, "The world needs me, for only I can save it!" He was a glory hound,
a thorn in the hero's sides, and frequently captured by villains, who
released him to escape his constant rhetoric when they couldn't kill him. He
would then brag to anyone he could find about his heroic escape. He always
was impeccably turned out; if dipped in tar, it wouldn't even mess up his
hair. Heroes and villains despised him as annoying, often of limited use, a
braggart, and impossible to get rid of. He had 3d6 Luck, with +3d6 Luck,
"Only for finding out where the action is". If the heroes tried to ditch
him, this last ability would allow him to find them, looking stern, sun at
his back, cape gently flapping in the breeze, regardless of whether or not
there was a breeze.
The only way to get rid of him (short of nuclear weapons or sealing him in
concrete) was to take away his media coverage. If there were no cameras to
mug for and reporters to regale with tales of daring do, he would eventually
leave to find someplace else to tell people how great he was.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: 30 Mar 99 15:53:55 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: [Re: Absorbtion (Always On) <-Is this a crock?]
arcus@webtv.net (chrisopher spoor) wrote:
> wouldn't an Always On Absorbtion vs. electricity make you take painful
> shocks from static electricity everytime you are in contact with metal,=
> no rugs needed. or would that be no metal needed, you complete the
> circuit yourself. =
I think what you're getting at is that you'd always act like a grounded
conductor? So, things like lightning bolts might have an irrational
prejudice agianst (or rather for) you? =
I think what you're absorbing to, and whether or not you can turn /that/
off, makes some difference. For instance, at the moment, I'm playing
a character who has a persistent Damage Shield that he can't turn on or
off himself, instead, when he absorbs points to it, it automatically =
goes on. The Absorbtion is always on. So, whenever he gets hit by
an energy attack, he heats up and starts burning anyone he touches...
(the character is made of iron - energy attacks can heat him up a lot,
even if they don't hurt him that much).
Other examples would be always-on Growth with always-on Absorbtion to
Growth, or a full-power-only EB with always-on Absorbtion to EB...
Also, if you have a secret ID, you Absorbtion could compromise it...
> personally I see a lot of AOs as an advantage of never having to
> activate a power because there are no drawbacks. does Persistant really=
> cover this or is there a better advantage =
Persistent covers it. And, things like Absorbtion are already persistent=
=2E
You'd think that some things would never be a disadvantage. Damage =
Reduction, for instance. When would it ever /not/ be desireable to =
be hurt less by attacks?
(Now that I think about it, there was a Red Dwarf episode where they
figured out the baddie drew on thier own abilities, but only while they
were conscious - one of the characters couldn't be knocked out...)
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D=
1
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:03:13 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <dufus@deskmail.com>
Subject: Re: Melissa Virus
And if you updated yesterday, guess what, there's already a new variant to
update against.
Filksinger
- ----- Original Message -----
From: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
To: <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Sent: Monday, March 29, 1999 10:45 PM
Subject: Melissa Virus
> >Mailing-List: contact mektonz-help@mecha.com; run by ezmlm
> >Reply-To: mektonz@mecha.com
> >Delivered-To: mailing list mektonz@mecha.com
> >X-Sender: nemo@mail.psn.net
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
> >Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:38:17 -0700
> >To: mektonz@mecha.com
> >From: RAKnotts <rknotts@psn.net>
> >Subject: [MZML] Melissa Virus
>
> Since we all got nabbed by Happy99 a while back, I thought I should
forward
> this. It's another virus that's touring the mailing lists because it
> emails itself out.
>
>
>
> >
> >>Please visit the attached web site concerning the Melissa Virus
> >>
> >>
> >>http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-99-04-Melissa-Macro-Virus.html
> >
> >This has also been reported on CNN today.
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: mektonz-unsubscribe@mecha.com
> >For additional commands, e-mail: mektonz-help@mecha.com
> >
> >
> ============================
> Geoff Heald
> ============================
> In search of the perfect .SIG file.
>
>
>
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #254
*****************************
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 01:13 PM