Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 299
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 1999 5:10 PM 
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #299 
 
 
champ-l-digest        Wednesday, April 28 1999        Volume 01 : Number 299 
 
 
 
In this issue: 
 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: Intelligence & Such 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    RE: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming]  - verbose! 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: CHAMPS: 09 House Rule #1 
    Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
    Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
    Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
    Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
    Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: Intelligence & Such 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Revamping Secondary Characteristics 
    Re[2]: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: Re[2]: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming]  - verbose! 
    Re: Revamping Secondary Characteristics 
    Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
    Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
    Re: Intelligence & Such 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:43:10 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Lance Dyas wrote: 
 
> This does nicely make the HERO mechanics fit the verbage and would support 
> Michaels otherwize ludicrous idea that Einsteins INT could easily have 
> been 10. 
 
Yes, his INT could be a 10.  His IQ is a different matter. 
 
- -- 
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
 
      "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
                               in the mail." 
                               Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:45:58 -0400 
From: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us> 
Subject: Re: Intelligence & Such 
 
At 12:29 PM 4/28/99 -0500, Lance Dyas wrote: 
>> Anyway, intelligence is far too complicated to be modeled with one 
>> simple stat. 
> 
>Mathlematical, Verbal, Mechanical 
>just to name a few varieties of intelligence one might start with 
> 
 
The most popular current model of multiple intelligences lists (as I 
recall) Mathematical, Verbal, Mechanical, Musical, Spatial, Interpersonal, 
and Intrapersonal. 
 
I've mentioned on this list before that PRE and EGO are pretty good 
representations of interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence, respectively. 
 
The Concentration/Attention split Lance suggests for PER is a useful one. 
As an absent-minded intellectual, I myself have lousy PER rolls, but - I'd 
like to think - a respectable INT. Memory (long-term and short-term) is 
still another intelligence characteristic which could be defined separately. 
 
Considering what a complicated task it is, I think the Hero System does a 
decent job representing mental qualities through INT, EGO, & PRE. I do 
think the definition of INT differs quite a bit from its implementation, 
though. In practice, I use it to represent more than speed of thought; I'd 
probably give Einstein a 30 INT. 
 
- - Bill Svitavsky 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:48:30 -0400 
From: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 01:43 PM 4/28/99 -0400, Geoff Speare wrote: 
>Want to play the methodical, yet slow-thinking scientist who doesn't have 
>PER worth a darn?  
> 
>Buy your INT with Extra Time. :) 
> 
 
That's not a bad idea, actually.  
 
But could a mad scientist buy it with Side Effects? 
 
- - Bill Svitavsky 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:53:48 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: RE: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming]  - verbose! 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Brian Wawrow wrote: 
 
> ] Yes, IMO, an INT of 5 is 'dull'.  But a dull mind and a smart  
> ] mind aren't 
> ] on the same track.  The question is about how fast you think, not how 
> ] smart you are.  In Hero, a high INT indicates faster  
> ] processing of data. 
> ] So, Einstein can have a superhuman IQ, but that doesn't mean he has to 
> ] have a superhigh INT score.  The two are totally different. 
>  
> So, if we agree that some people are smarter than others, how do we reflect 
> that. To my mind, all else being equal, someone who's very clever has a 
> greater probability of understanding a problem than someone who's not. Of 
> course there are variables, like time to think about things, previous 
> experience and training, etc. So, let's consider a situation where Bruce 
> Banner [I'm not a FF fan]is looking at a problem at the same time as, say, 
> Juggernaut and the GM decides that either one can figure out what's going on 
> with a successful INT roll. Obviously, Banner has a higher INT than the dim 
> witted Juggernaut [at least I think so] and has a greater chance of success. 
> Now, Juggernaut might figure it out just as quickly but that's not so 
> likely.  
 
Correct.  But, Banner is a comic scientist and almsot *all* comic 
scientists are able to comprehend and analyze new data very quickly. 
  
> The question of time in solving the problem is just a modifier. It's the 
> same as having a complementary skill or extra information. Characters with a 
> high INT are more likely to figure things out in a short time because they 
> are smarter. 
 
Yes, than can be the case, but that's not a hard and fast rule. 
  
> ] > Certainly, if anyone deserves to have a super human INT,  
> ] it's Einstein. 
> ] > Otherwise, how do you build Einstein and not have him end  
> ] up being an 
> ] > average, everyday physics prof with wonky hair? I suppose  
> ] you could just 
> ] > crank up his Inventor roll but I just don't buy it. 
> ]  
> ] Because average, everyday physics profs don't have 17s, 18s and 19s in 
> ] thier Science Skills. 
 
> There's a difference between knowing vast amounts about an existing body of 
> knowledge and being able to push the boundaries of that knowledge miles into 
> undiscovered country. It's the difference between knowing a lot of poems and 
> being a really good poet. It's about creativity and insight, not training. 
 
Which (IMO) is an intangible that you can't assign a stat too.  A 30 INT 
won't give anyone creativity.  Hell, I've known very smart people that are 
about as cretive as a lump of coal. 
  
> ] I never said that Reed as *more* intelligent.  I *said* that  
> ] he has a 30 
> ] INT because of his ability to *instantly* comprehend the  
> ] situation.  Once 
> ] again, an INT of 10 does not (and should not) indicate  
> ] intelligence, it 
> ] indicates speed of comprehension. 
 
> I see what you're saying here but I think you're reasoning is backwards. 
> Instead of seeing INT as a measure of only the speed of mental processing, I 
> see INT as a measure of raw intelligence. There are several things that come 
> with a high INT, quick thinking being one of them. Creativity, insight and 
> retention are also characteristics of a high INT but do not, in themselves, 
> define INT. 
 
And there is the rub.  I've always worked off the book presentation of 
INT. 
  
> ] This is the like the fact that in D&D, Charisma was used to  
> ] indicate (in 
> ] popular conception) physical appearance, despite the fact that it was 
> ] pointed out that Hitler, who was of average appearance, had a  
> ] Charisma of 
> ] 18 (or better). 
>  
> Well, it's a good thing we have PRE then. I wouldn't want to have only 
> beautiful people good at oratory. I'm assuming that PRE is a measure of how 
> much your presence impresses people, here. 
 
Yes it is. 
 
- -- 
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
 
      "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
                               in the mail." 
                               Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:06:47 -0400 
From: Geoff Speare <geoff@igcn.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
>That's not a bad idea, actually.  
> 
>But could a mad scientist buy it with Side Effects? 
 
A friend of mine had a character with a Phys Lim: Migraine Headaches, 
whenever he rolls an 18 on an INT roll. 
 
Geoff Speare 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:25:54 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 09 House Rule #1 
 
At 11:34 AM 4/28/1999 EDT, Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
>Its been less than an hour since the first post of a 2009 message, and  
>already weve been able to work out a nice little house rule! 
 
   Oh, wonderful.  And I didn't even get to participate! 
 
>Characters start with Normal Human Maxima disadvantage and recieve no points  
>for it. If a character wishes to buy off the disadvantage, they must do so  
>for each individual stat.  
> 
>Example: A character who wants 40 STR for some reason can go about it two  
>ways. They can either pay 20 points to remove the Human Maxima:STR, than pay  
>30 more points to have STR of 40. 
> 
>Or they can buy theyre STR up to 20 for 10 points, than up to STR 40 for 40  
>more points. 
 
   In my view, this works out to the same thing.  For that reason, under 
normal NCM rules, I allow no more than 20 points worth of above-max 
Characteristics for characters with NCM (either as a standard rule or a 
Disadvantage). 
   Even in a supers game, I require a logical reason for a character to not 
take Normal Characteristic Maxima (though I'm pretty lenient on what 
constitutes a "logical" reason). 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:04:46 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
 
At 10:35 AM 4/28/1999 EDT, Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
> 
>Ok, what do you guys think of this? What type of technology do you guys 
think  
>we in the RL will be sporting in 10 years? Dont feel too restricted, cause 
im  
>thinking of things like brain/comp interface experiments, clones, nanotech  
>experiments, and the like. lets hear the stuff. :) 
 
   Here's a list of a few things that have actually been developed, or are 
in the process of development and expected to be ready by that time: 
   - Flying cars.  See www.moller.com for details. 
   - Electronic photoreceptors made of -- I kid you not -- spinach. 
   - True cermet (ceramic/metal composite) with a greater resilience than 
titanium. 
   - Bacteria that absorb toxic and precious metals, and enzymes that 
release these metals (biomining!). 
   - Computer memory which stores each bit of data on five individual 
molecules (actually, this should be nearing readiness at about 2009). 
   - A "wearable" computer for industrial use, with a tiny monitor on a 
headset, keyboard strapped to the left forearm, and a mouse on the main 
unit, which is worn at the right hip. 
   - Prosthetic arms and legs with tactile feedback for texture and 
temperature. 
   - Gross organ transplants -- meaning (for example) an entire limb 
transplanted from one body to another. 
   - Active camouflage.  This is a full-body suit, or a system for a 
vehicle, that basically works like Invisibility as described in HSR (with 
the Fringe effect). 
 
   Two good websites to track these developments are www.discover.com 
(Discover magazine) and www.discovery.com (the Discovery Channel).  About 
half of the above was, or could be, gleaned from these sites. 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:53:08 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
 
At 11:23 AM 4/28/1999 EDT, AndMat3@aol.com wrote: 
>In a message dated 4/28/99 10:48:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, geoff@igcn.com  
>writes: 
> 
>> Good call, if you are just starting out. Don't feel obligated to restrict 
>>  your NPCs in the same way though. :) 
> 
>this is wrong. it's like having two sets of building rules for players and  
>non-players. 
> 
>allow me to repeat. this is wrong. 
 
   No, this is *right.*  NPCs are frequently allowed to do things that PCs 
are not allowed to do, just as antagonists in fiction frequently have 
things that would (and should) never be available to the protagonists. 
This has been done since the early days of Champions, when villains like 
Mechanon, Doctor Destroyer, and others were published with Villain Bonuses. 
   Fantasy Hero even has two Spell Colleges (Demonology and Necromancy) 
that are explicitly presented as being intended for NPC use only. 
   And it is not like having two sets of building rules for PCs and NPCs. 
It *is* having two sets of building rules for PCs and NPCs. 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:55:31 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
 
At 11:49 AM 4/28/1999 EDT, AndMat3@aol.com wrote: 
>i'm not looking for people to agree with me. most GM's do not; but 
>that's ok. this is an opinion and therefore, open to debate. when you 
>disallow a power for a PC and then allow it for an NPC the player (or 
>maybe its just me) sees that and say "ah! the GM is cheating." 
 
   It's just you.  :-] 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:09:48 -0400 
From: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us> 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
 
At 11:04 AM 4/28/99 -0700, Bob Greenwade wrote: 
 
>   - Gross organ transplants -- meaning (for example) an entire limb 
>transplanted from one body to another. 
> 
 
Ooh, that *is* gross. (Sorry. Somebody had to say it.) 
 
- - Bill Svitavsky 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:12:19 EDT 
From: Akirazeta@aol.com 
Subject: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
- --part1_aa14f812.2458a983_boundary 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
 
In a message dated 4/28/99 2:11:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Akira zeta  
writes: 
 
<< Ok. So lets see here. First off, we have the fact that the DEX game  
mechanic that is totally and utterly messed up, and abused almose to the  
point of universal abuse.  
  
 And we have INT, which is stated to be one thing in the manual and than used  
in a complete and contradictory way within the actuial game mechanics. 
  
 And we have STR, which is a practically a free stat that apparent doesnt  
follow the same scale as the other stats, and is abused almost as much as DEX. 
  
 How has CHAMPS been so successful than? SOunds to me like its pretty  
unworkable. >> 
 
 
- --part1_aa14f812.2458a983_boundary 
Content-Type: message/rfc822 
Content-Disposition: inline 
 
Return-path: Akirazeta@aol.com 
From: Akirazeta@aol.com 
Full-name: Akira zeta 
Message-ID: <aa14f812.2458a95b@aol.com> 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:11:39 EDT 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
To: nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us 
MIME-Version: 1.0 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4 
Reply-To: Akirazeta@aol.com 
 
Ok. So lets see here. First off, we have the fact that the DEX game mechanic  
that is totally and utterly messed up, and abused almose to the point of  
universal abuse.  
 
And we have INT, which is stated to be one thing in the manual and than used  
in a complete and contradictory way within the actuial game mechanics. 
 
And we have STR, which is a practically a free stat that apparent doesnt  
follow the same scale as the other stats, and is abused almost as much as DEX. 
 
How has CHAMPS been so successful than? SOunds to me like its pretty  
unworkable. 
 
- --part1_aa14f812.2458a983_boundary-- 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:18:00 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Bill Svitavsky wrote: 
> At 01:43 PM 4/28/99 -0400, Geoff Speare wrote: 
> >Want to play the methodical, yet slow-thinking scientist who doesn't have 
> >PER worth a darn?  
> >Buy your INT with Extra Time. :) 
> That's not a bad idea, actually.  
> But could a mad scientist buy it with Side Effects? 
 
	I have sketched out several "genius" characters.  One of which was 
The Master of Sound, who had "bursts of inspiration."  I bought his INT 
with No Concious Control. 
 
	I also made a mad genius gadgeteer called Circuit Breaker (who 
looks like Thomas Dolby, I'm in the process of polishing him up), who has 
a number of wacky, seemingly Kirby-esque gadgets at his disposal (VPP), 
and levels of +10 INT Linked, with Burnout, up to 50 (base 20, when he 
tries to use all of his INT, it is likely he will futz himself up, leading 
to INT lock out, and a side effect of intense migrane headaches and a 
Vulnrability X2 STUN when ever someone clocks him in the noggin). 
 
	I also have plans to make a character who has a 100 INT... 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:22:10 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: Re: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
 
> << Ok. So lets see here. First off, we have the fact that the DEX game  
> mechanic that is totally and utterly messed up, and abused almose to the  
> point of universal abuse.  
 
I'm not certain what is 'totally and utterly messed up' about DEX.  And as 
to being abused... well, that depends on viewpoint. 
   
>  And we have INT, which is stated to be one thing in the manual and than used  
> in a complete and contradictory way within the actuial game mechanics. 
 
Possibly. 
   
>  And we have STR, which is a practically a free stat that apparent doesnt  
> follow the same scale as the other stats, and is abused almost as much as DEX. 
 
The STR argument has gone around and around.  It works great for 
superheroic level games, not so well for more 'normal' games. 
   
>  How has CHAMPS been so successful than? SOunds to me like its pretty  
> unworkable. >> 
 
Perhaps you should try GURPS of Fuzion? 
 
- -- 
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
 
      "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
                               in the mail." 
                               Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:26:14 -0400 
From: Geoff Speare <geoff@igcn.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
>	I also have plans to make a character who has a 100 INT... 
 
I made a character with 98 INT or so, but never had the courage to submit 
him to a GM. :) (It was a multiform character with about 4 different forms; 
the base wizard character had 98 INT, Danger Sense, and loads o' skills.)  
 
Geoff Speare 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:29:14 -0400 
From: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us> 
Subject: Re: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 02:12 PM 4/28/99 EDT, Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
>In a message dated 4/28/99 2:11:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Akira zeta  
>writes: 
> 
><< Ok. So lets see here. First off, we have the fact that the DEX game  
>mechanic that is totally and utterly messed up, and abused almose to the  
>point of universal abuse.  
>  
> And we have INT, which is stated to be one thing in the manual and than 
used  
>in a complete and contradictory way within the actuial game mechanics. 
>  
> And we have STR, which is a practically a free stat that apparent doesnt  
>follow the same scale as the other stats, and is abused almost as much as 
DEX. 
>  
> How has CHAMPS been so successful than? SOunds to me like its pretty  
>unworkable. >> 
 
Keep in mind that these complaints are coming from Hero afficionadoes 
quibbling over the fine points. I see DEX as more an abused mechanic than a 
flawed one. STR works quite well for superhero games, and GM's can make it 
work in other genres. INT really isn't that much of a problem in normal 
use, though a more consistent definition would be nice. 
 
I can't think of a system with a better set of characteristics than Hero, 
and I can think of plenty with worse. 
 
- - Bill Svitavsky 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:36:34 EDT 
From: Akirazeta@aol.com 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
<< Perhaps you should try GURPS of Fuzion? 
  
 -- 
 Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html >> 
 
It was a choice for me, to buy either GURPS core book and GURPS Supers, or  
the BBB. I picked the BBB because I figured that a game designed for use with  
Supers would have better mechanics than one that only had Supers as one of  
many ill thought out Plug-Ins. 
 
As for Fuzion... It is little more than CHAMPS with a "divide everything by  
2" rule. INT has the same description and game use, and dex and str is just  
are abused.  
 
My chosen Favorite system is the Silhouette system, written by DreamPod 9,  
and implimented in both Heavy Gear and Jovian Chronicles. Unfortunatly,  
neither of those settings are all that appealing, although JC does have its  
moments. Also, the rules are sort of a practice in realism and modern  
physics, so Supers would not fit it well. 
 
As  a side note, on the JC/HG Mailing list, we are currently working on a way  
to make supers using the rules that are set for making Gears and EXO's (think  
macross or almost any other anime) 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:45:15 -0400 
From: Mathieu Roy <matroy@abacom.com> 
Subject: Re: Intelligence & Such 
 
Ben Brown wrote: 
 
> And we're not even getting into one of my favorite gaming topics: 
> can one really play a character that's more intelligent than one's self? 
 
It's difficult, but I think it's possible. There are various ways to help simulate 
it: 
1) Science and other intelligence-based stuff is usually already covered by very 
high rolls; 
2) The addition of Lightning Calculator, Eidetic Memory, and similar advantadges; 
3) Taking more time to make decisions the character makes in a split-second 
(easier to do in PBeM); 
4) Receiving extra information from the GM as 'brillant deductions'; 
5) Having a bit of GM help when you're about to do very stupid things your 
character would know better (also useful for when the character knows more than 
the player, such as about the way the GM's world works.) 
 
And so on. Most of them require the GM's help, but it can be done. 
 
Mathieu 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:30:54 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 12:27 PM 4/28/1999 -0400, Brian Wawrow wrote: 
>I call 'bull$#it'! 
> 
><rant> 
>Einstein with an INT of 10? You guys can haggle over how fast Darth Vader is 
>all you want but this has gone too far. 
> 
>To me, this is pretty simple. Smart guys have big INT's and stupid guys have 
>small INT's. It is possible for someone with INT5 to have the same 
>SS:Theoretical Physics as someone with INT20 but it costs them more points, 
>thus reflecting that they've had to work harder to overcome their dull mind. 
 
   Brian, 
   Please reread the description if Intelligence in the HSR (page 14). 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:32:14 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 11:47 AM 4/28/1999 -0500, Lance Dyas wrote: 
>Show me the game mechanic that has a high INT character able to think faster? 
>Coming to decisions quicker? or perform a complex analysis in a shorter 
time base? 
 
   The game mechanic that has a high INT character able to think faster is 
INT itself. 
   Like I told Brian, reread the description on HSR page 14. 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:33:42 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 01:25 PM 4/28/1999 -0400, David A. Fair wrote: 
>lancelot@radiks.net writes: 
>>Now lets redefine SPD as being based on the average of INT and DEX boy 
>>would you 
>>hear bitching about that idea, why? Take a guess. 
> 
>I use the formula SPD=(DEX+INT)/10 and have had no complaints from the 
>players... 
 
   You wouldn't hear any from me, either. 
   I wouldn't even mind seeing that formula in HSR5, at least as an option. 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:36:15 -0700 
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
At 01:48 PM 4/28/1999 -0400, Bill Svitavsky wrote: 
>At 01:43 PM 4/28/99 -0400, Geoff Speare wrote: 
>>Want to play the methodical, yet slow-thinking scientist who doesn't have 
>>PER worth a darn?  
>> 
>>Buy your INT with Extra Time. :) 
>> 
> 
>That's not a bad idea, actually.  
> 
>But could a mad scientist buy it with Side Effects? 
 
   Hmmmm... how about Side Effects on his Science Skills?  The Side Effects 
only take effect when the Skill Roll is missed, but it's a Cumulative Major 
Transform into something horrible (like a wearwolf or a ghoul or an 
insurance salesman or something). 
- --- 
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: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:53:19 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
 
> << Perhaps you should try GURPS of Fuzion? 
>  
> It was a choice for me, to buy either GURPS core book and GURPS Supers, or  
> the BBB. I picked the BBB because I figured that a game designed for use with  
> Supers would have better mechanics than one that only had Supers as one of  
> many ill thought out Plug-Ins. 
 
Ahhh... Yes, well GURPS and superheroes don't do well from what I've 
heard.  Did okay with Wildcards though. 
  
> As for Fuzion... It is little more than CHAMPS with a "divide everything by  
> 2" rule. INT has the same description and game use, and dex and str is just  
> are abused.  
 
Actually, DEX is now two stats in Fuzion, so it might work a little 
better. Also, abuse depends on what the GM allows.  So, if *everyone* 
considered a DEX of 18 to be minimum for a superhero, how is that abusive? 
It's the majority's vote and opinion, right? 
  
> My chosen Favorite system is the Silhouette system, written by DreamPod 9,  
> and implimented in both Heavy Gear and Jovian Chronicles. Unfortunatly,  
> neither of those settings are all that appealing, although JC does have its  
> moments. Also, the rules are sort of a practice in realism and modern  
> physics, so Supers would not fit it well. 
 
Well, there you go.  Hero started out as a supers game and added rules for 
more realistic content as it went.  It doesa great job of simulatingwhat 
most people call "cinematic" games. 
  
> As  a side note, on the JC/HG Mailing list, we are currently working on a way  
> to make supers using the rules that are set for making Gears and EXO's (think  
> macross or almost any other anime)  
 
- -- 
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
 
      "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
                               in the mail." 
                               Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:58:39 -0500 
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net> 
Subject: Revamping Secondary Characteristics 
 
I had a thought awhile back about secondarycharacteristics and how they're 
computed. Let me toss it out to everybody for some feedback.  This has not 
been playtested. 
 
Currently, most secondary characteristics and character-based skills are 
computed based on a single characteristic (except, of course, for Recovery, 
Endurance, and Stun).  What if we reworked that a little bit so that the 
other Secondary Charcateristics and the Characteristic-based skills were 
based off of more than one characteristic? 
 
PD=(STR+BODY)/5 
ED=(CON+BODY)/5 
SPD=((DEX/10)+(INT/5))/2 (INT doesn't contribute as much to SPD as DEX 
does, but it's a component) 
 
CHARACTERISTIC-BASED SKILLS 
 
INT-BASED SKILLS: Remains 9+INT/5 
 
AGILITY SKILLS: 9+(DEX/5+EGO/5)/2 
 
COMMUNICATION SKILLS: 9+(PRE/5+COM/5)/2 
 
This system gives COM and EGO a bit more to do, as well as helping (to some 
degree) the granularity of the point breaks at heroic levels, or so it 
seems to me. 
 
Feedback is welcome. 
 
 
- --_ 
Guy Hoyle (ghoyle1@airmail.net) 
At first I thought, "Mind control satellites? No way!" 
But now I can't remember how we lived without them. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:56:14 -0500 
From: cweible@cdsfulfillment.com 
Subject: Re[2]: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
comments below 
 
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ 
Subject: Re: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
Author:  Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us> at INTERNET 
Date:    4/28/99 1:29 PM 
 
 
 
 
 
 
       At 02:12 PM 4/28/99 EDT, Akirazeta@aol.com wrote: 
       >In a message dated 4/28/99 2:11:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
       Akira zeta 
       >writes: 
       > 
       ><< Ok. So lets see here. First off, we have the fact that the 
       DEX game 
       >mechanic that is totally and utterly messed up, and abused 
       almose to the 
       >point of universal abuse. 
       > 
       > And we have INT, which is stated to be one thing in the 
       manual and than 
       used 
       >in a complete and contradictory way within the actuial game mechanics. 
       > 
       > And we have STR, which is a practically a free stat that 
       apparent doesnt 
       >follow the same scale as the other stats, and is abused almost 
       as much as 
       DEX. 
       > 
       > How has CHAMPS been so successful than? SOunds to me like its 
       pretty 
       >unworkable. >> 
 
       Keep in mind that these complaints are coming from Hero 
       afficionadoes 
       quibbling over the fine points. I see DEX as more an abused 
       mechanic than a 
       flawed one. STR works quite well for superhero games, and GM's 
       can make it 
       work in other genres. INT really isn't that much of a problem 
       in normal 
       use, though a more consistent definition would be nice. 
 
       I can't think of a system with a better set of characteristics 
       than Hero, 
       and I can think of plenty with worse. 
 
       - Bill Svitavsky 
 
 
     ---begin comments--- 
     I couldn't agree with Bill more.  But please bear in mind that CHAMPS was 
     designed to be a SUPERS game, and was adapted to other settings. Other 
     systems (like GURPS and Fuzion) were designed to be multi-genre from the 
     beginning.  I've been playing CHAMPS since the first boxed set, until 4th 
     came out I had all the rules and power costs memorized. 
      Nothing bugs me more that players who abuse the system just because they 
     can.  I don't let characters into my campaign unless the player has a solid 
     idea of the character concept and all the powers fit that concept. 
 
     Chris Weible 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:10:28 -0400 (EDT) 
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> 
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Fwd: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 cweible@cdsfulfillment.com wrote: 
 
>Nothing bugs me more that players who abuse the system just because they 
> can.  
 
I agree totally with this.  basically, if you think something is abusive, 
don't allow it in your game. 
 
This is similar to the tales of the guy who goes from 1st level to 9th 
level in a single night of AD&D gaming.  You can do it (maybe) but what's 
the point?  
 
- -- 
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
 
      "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
                               in the mail." 
                               Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 19:38:40 GMT 
From: mhoram@relia.net (Curtis A Gibson) 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming]  - verbose! 
 
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:42:32 -0400, you wrote: 
 
 
>] Because average, everyday physics profs don't have 17s, 18s and 19s in 
>] thier Science Skills. 
>There's a difference between knowing vast amounts about an existing body= 
 of 
>knowledge and being able to push the boundaries of that knowledge miles = 
into 
>undiscovered country. It's the difference between knowing a lot of poems= 
 and 
>being a really good poet. It's about creativity and insight, not = 
training. 
> 
 
Or the difference between KS poetry and PS poet. 
 
I'd just give Albert a 3 point int based skill varient of deduction 
that we call 'scientific deduction'. Buy that sucker up to the same as 
his Physics roll  and there you go. Maybe add a few esoteric KS,PS or 
sciences to get similar skills for the esoteric stuff, and you have 
someone that gets really creative with a 10 int. 
 
We use the book definition of INT in our campaign... 
"The characteristic represents the ability to take in and process data 
quickly. Int does not neccisarily reflect knowledge. ...a brilliant 
scientists who thought slowly might have a low INT" 
 
To judge IQ we use a number of factors, INT, certain talents 
(lightning calc for example) and certain int skills (say KS logic). 
Seems to work. 
 
- -Mhoram 
"I think not."  --reputed last words of Rene Descartes 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:35:46 -0500 
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net> 
Subject: Re: Revamping Secondary Characteristics 
 
On 4/28/99 at 3:23 PM David_A._Fair@fc.mcps.k12.md.us wrote: 
 
|ghoyle1@airmail.net writes: 
|>Currently, most secondary characteristics and character-based skills are 
|>computed based on a single characteristic (except, of course, for 
|>Recovery, 
|>Endurance, and Stun).  What if we reworked that a little bit so that the 
|>other Secondary Charcateristics and the Characteristic-based skills were 
|>based off of more than one characteristic? 
| 
|>PD=(STR+BODY)/5 
|>ED=(CON+BODY)/5 
|This will have the effect of raising every average persons Defenses by 
|anywhere from 2-4 points. If that is what you want, fine, but I think 
 
Well, my math skills suck, which is one reason I wanted some feedback ;-) . 
 
 
|PD & ED are OK as is. 
|>SPD=((DEX/10)+(INT/5))/2 (INT doesn't contribute as much to SPD as DEX 
|>does, but it's a component) 
|This takes a character with straight 10's to a SPD of 1.5, and one with 
|straight 20's to a SPD of 3; Also, the character with a 10 DEX and 20 
|INT has a base SPD of 2.5, while the 20 DEX/10 INT guy has a base of 2. 
|I don't think you want to do that. If you want to muck about with 
|SPD/DEX/INT, and want INT to mean less, then you might want to 
|use(DEX/10)+((INT-10)/10). See Chart: 
| 
|Lets call your method "A", the formula above "B", and (DEX+INT)/10 "C" 
|10 DEX/10 INT	Hero:2 SPD, 	A:1.5 SPD,	B:1 SPD,	C:2 SPD 
|10 DEX/20 INT	Hero:2 SPD,	A:2.5 SPD,	B:2 SPD,	C:3 SPD 
|20 DEX/10 INT	Hero:3 SPD,	A:2 SPD,	B:2 SPD,	C:3 SPD 
|20 DEX/20 INT	Hero 3 SPD,	A:3 SPD,	B:3 SPD,	C:4 SPD 
| 
|I personally don't want to drop people to a 1 SPD, I like "C", but "A" 
|does the opposite of what you want it to... 
 
"C" looks pretty good to me. 
 
| 
|>CHARACTERISTIC-BASED SKILLS 
|>INT-BASED SKILLS: Remains 9+INT/5 
|>AGILITY SKILLS: 9+(DEX/5+EGO/5)/2 
|Why would EGO help on a Breakfall roll? Don't tell me it has to do with 
|keeping your cool, that would be part of learning how to Breakfall. I 
|just don't see how this makes any sense. 
 
Since EGO represents, among other things, strength of will, I figured that 
it qualified as a "test of willpower". 
 
|>COMMUNICATION SKILLS: 9+(PRE/5+COM/5)/2 
|Hmmm, while finding something for COM to do seems like a good thing on 
|the, pardon the pun, surface, I would be against this as well. Plenty 
|of ugly people can be persuasive, seductive, and confident. 
 
True. I'd still like to see COM as a component of this, however. 
- --_ 
Guy Hoyle (ghoyle1@airmail.net) 
At first I thought, "Mind control satellites? No way!" 
But now I can't remember how we lived without them. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:26:38 -0500 
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net> 
Subject: Re: say INT ain't so [was Powergaming] 
 
The only real problem I see this is the statistics costs would make 
Intelligence the favored stat for speedsters ;) Honestly this isnt that hard 
to fix. 
 
Change dex and int cost to 2.5 or try this idea SPD = DEX/8 + INT/12 
 
Can anyone else think of other implications of making int more important in 
this way? 
 
Michael Surbrook wrote: 
 
> On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, David A. Fair wrote: 
> 
> > I use the formula SPD=(DEX+INT)/10 and have had no complaints from the 
> > players... 
> 
> That sounds like a workable idea.  I don't know if I'll use it, but I'll 
> certainly make a note of it. 
> 
> -- 
> Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html 
> 
>       "I registered my copy of the Bible.  I'm hoping to get an upgrade 
>                                in the mail." 
>                                Darren Hansen 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:24:16 -0700 (PDT) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: 2009 
 
>ok... allow me to re-state this. [note: this is an opinion. not a fact.]  
>i don't mind that players and non-players have different point values. 
>i do mind that they don't have access to the same power list. 
> 
>either something is ok... or it is not. decide and then make the list 
>available to all.  
> 
>i'm not looking for people to agree with me. most GM's do not; but 
>that's ok. this is an opinion and therefore, open to debate. when you 
>disallow a power for a PC and then allow it for an NPC the player (or 
>maybe its just me) sees that and say "ah! the GM is cheating." 
> 
 
I'm somewhat on both sides of this issue; while I'm suspicious of abilities 
that are reserved for GM characters only (in terms of quality not quantity) 
it can be the whole point of a campaign that some abilities are only in the 
hands of NPCs.  I don't think it's at all reasonable in an alien invasion 
campaign to say that anything the aliens can do the PCs should be able to. 
The fact the aliens have various edges can be the whole _point_. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 16:07:14 -0500 
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net> 
Subject: Re: Intelligence & Such 
 
Bill Svitavsky wrote: 
 
> At 12:29 PM 4/28/99 -0500, Lance Dyas wrote: 
> >> Anyway, intelligence is far too complicated to be modeled with one 
> >> simple stat. 
> > 
> >Mathlematical, Verbal, Mechanical 
> >just to name a few varieties of intelligence one might start with 
> > 
> 
> The most popular current model of multiple intelligences lists (as I 
> recall) Mathematical, Verbal, Mechanical, Musical, Spatial, Interpersonal, 
> and Intrapersonal. 
 
I beleive Dexterity encorporates aspects of Spatial Intelligence, Clasic IQ tests 
probablly 
only measure the first two and a little of the third ( and do so with questionable 
accuracy) 
 
> 
> I've mentioned on this list before that PRE and EGO are pretty good 
> representations of interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence, respectively. 
> 
 
So that means Musical Intelligence is the only one left in the learch if we expand 
INT 
to include general IQ and Memory 
 
> 
> The Concentration/Attention split Lance suggests for PER is a useful one. 
> As an absent-minded intellectual, I myself have lousy PER rolls, but - I'd 
 
> like to think - a respectable INT 
 
The tendency to concentrate and not pay attention to the world around you 
is almost at odds with the tendency to always notice the world around you that 
alertness represents 
 
Memory (long-term and short-term) is 
 
> still another intelligence characteristic which could be defined separately. 
> 
 
Rolemaster separates memory out.  It seems easy to play someone with a better 
memory 
Gamemaster gets to remind you ;)  Than someone with a lesser memory... but the GM 
could 
still periodically say oh you forgot to pack the salt and pepper for your camping 
trip or whatever 
This should be tied to die rolls of course so your cooking roll is at a penalty... 
etc. 
 
> 
> Considering what a complicated task it is, I think the Hero System does a 
> decent job representing mental qualities through INT, EGO, & PRE. I do 
> think the definition of INT differs quite a bit from its implementation though. 
 
> In practice, I use it to represent more than speed of thought; I'd 
 
> probably give Einstein a 30 INT. 
> 
> - Bill Svitavsky 
 
You did stick inventive genious into the INT stat didnt you. 
 
I think INT emulates long term memory whenever you roll for a Knowledge Skill. 
I believe we are better off claiming statististics simulate more rather than less. 
 
Even if we want the players to use there own intelligence ;) rather than their 
characters 
INT to figure their way out of a problem. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
End of champ-l-digest V1 #299 
***************************** 
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 10:15 AM