Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 312
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 9:48 AM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #312


champ-l-digest Tuesday, May 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 312



In this issue:

Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Lord Vader's Powers
Power Construct: Bow
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: Projectile HERO (was Archetype Clone Force, Attack!)
Re: Duplication
Re: Duplication
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: Lord Vader's Powers
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: Power Construct: Bow
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: TK Stuff (fwd)
Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
Character updates
Re: TK Stuff (fwd)
Cumulative effect question

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 23:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform

>>>>But at some point it's quite possible to build someone who turns into an
>>>>army of agents...and it's very possible to turn that into a winning
>process.
>>>>Many of the supers who turn into many, many people are also pretty wimpy.
>>>
>>>And you would be if you paid that many points to have lots of duplicates.
>>>My point is in the game at present it simply isnt possible to make a
>>>character like that. You can make 3, 4 characters at most before you reach
>>>a point where you are reduced to utter ineffectiveness in combat. Note how
>>>many agents can be thrown against a PC group and how they fall like wheat.
>>>Numbers do not equal success, especially in Champions.
>>
>>I've also seen three Agents very handily take down a super with some
>>reliability. It's very easy to expend offense at the expense of defense
>>when you know you can afford to have several of them go down. And since we
>>were talking about modifications that increase the number of duplicates,
>>your first point is rather off the point.
>
>In what way? Since the purpose of the rules are to simluate the source
>material accurately at what point did saying "My point is in the game at
>present it simply isnt possible to make a character like that." Since we

Actually, it's to simulate the source accurately and playably. There are
things in most genre that are not playable because they only work if the
writer ignores them most of the time. In the game, this sort of thing has
to be handled mechanically instead.

But it's rather off the point because I was discussing why _not_ to make
buying multiple duplicates cheap. And the simple answer is because it
quickly becomes grossly unbalanced.

>both agree that this is a part of comics in history and presently. Or was
>it "You can make 3, 4 characters at most before you reach a point where you
>are reduced to utter ineffectiveness in combat." That demonstrated that
>the point cost of duplicate is too great that you have a problem with?

No, I have a problem with the idea this is something that should be
addressed too strongly, and I think your fix does just that. I'd rather
have the power be less than useful at the large number level than have it be
too good, if that's the set of options presented.

>
>>>the rules if for characters like Plastic man (you gain no powers, simply
>>>alter form) if you want to have different abilities, Multiform is the
>>>power. You could use Transform for ANY power in existence that does not
>>
>>Nonsense. If you want powers you can just as legitimately...often more
>>legitimately...link a Multipower or a VPP to Shapeshift.
>
>You are going to have to demonstrate how bypassing the structure and rule
>for designing a character that can become different forms is legitimate,
>proper, and does not violate this standard rule for me and the others on
>the list then Wayne. Its fairly self evident that Multiform is the power
>to do this with, at what point do you decide that you won't use the given

Actually, since it's not in any way self evident to me, since it was created
for an entirely different purpose, I disagree with the premise. And I think
you'll find the authors of the game agree. Multiform was created to
represent someone who had a very limited number of forms. it was never
intended for a broad band shapeshifter as I've said before.

>power for this? It is when you look at multiform and realize it will cost
>you 1500 points to build zoo man who can become any animal.... which is
>absurd, when you consider the utility and power of what you get for those
>1500 points. Isn't that a definition of a broken power? Costs more than
>its utility?

Only when you're using it for something it was never intended for.

>>Or because it was never intended for broad band shapeshifters in the first
>>place, which is the case.
>
>That is certainly your argument, but that is only due to the cost, not the
>design of the power. If they made Armor cost 50 points per point of PD or

No, it's due to the fact it was pretty much stated as such by the authors on
occasion. The cost follows the purpose, not the purpose the cost. There's
no need to do a broad band shapeshifter as a multiform, and in fact, some of
the properties of Multiform make it a nuisance to do this way no matter what
the cost.

>ED, that wouldn't negate the intended use, only its implimentation. This
>is the case with Multiform, it costs more than it should for what it is
>designed to do.

That's your opinion because you have an incorrect idea of what it was
designed to do. You're trying to use a wrench as a hammer and are suprised
it does a poor job.

>>it's very easy to build a selection of three or four multiforms that are
>>ideal for certain situations, and move abilities you won't need in those
>
>>situations into other characters. I've got one in my current campaign.
>
>And that character, you feel, outshines the others? Is too powerful? Or
>does that player find that they often are less effective, powerful, and
>frustrated compared to the other characters? Look at the character you end

I think they're just about right, actually.

>up with, it's typically 20-50 points less than any of the rest in the game,
>at minimum. The fact that you can be several is not that significant,

And they can specialize each form to the point where this doesn't matter,
since they simply don't have abilities except in the forms where they'll
need it.

>since you can only be one at a time. And if you would, shave 20-50 points
>off a character you are playing in a game and spend a while considering how
>effective and limited you would be.
>

Since I build a character off of multiform once that I found more than
adequate, I'd say it wasn't ineffective or limited at all.

>>Since in the example situation the character simply dealt with the problem
>>by having minimal defenses and accepting that several of the duplicates
>>would go down in a fight, this was essentially a nonstarter. He had enough
>>defenses they wouldn't die, but no more. And didn't in practice need it,
>>since a given opponent was immensely unlikely to go through even half of
>>them before his duplicates put them down.
>
>Just how often do the opponents consistenly defeat any of the other
>characters? Was this character unreasonably powerful compared to the
>campaign brick? Was he immune to area effect powers? I'm just curious,

Yes. He could easily deal out many times the damage the equivelent energy
projector could, at compareable accuracy.

>what you describe doesnt sound all that awful, nor a definition of how
>duplication works so well. I suspect in practice that he would fold up
>like a cheap card table in any agent fight and in a standard stand up
>supervillain battle would do his part just like everyone else.

In a standard supervillain fight he'd take down a villain a round pretty
reliably, and would have likely done better against agents to boot, since he
could effectively fire at 16 seperate targets in the initial phase of
combat, something no normal character can do.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 02:23:52 -0400
From: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Lord Vader's Powers

At 03:39 AM 5/4/99 +1000, happyelf wrote:
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
>>
>
>An evil jedi is a follower of the dark side.
>That dark side is not nesecarily wasteful or
>less competent just because it's passionatly
>evil- It seems mr spocks' myth of logic
>without emotion rears it's ugly head again. . .
>
>
What I meant by my comment relates to the comment Yoda made (also quoted in
the post) that the Dark Side is anger, agression, and fear, whereas a true
Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense. Vader seems to act from
quiet repose rather than in anger, at least most of the time. But the
choices he makes so calmly are evil. A man might become enraged and slay an
entire small town, or a man might calmly decide to kill an entire small
town. Neither is a good act, but one is an act of anger and agression and
the other is not (or is less so.)

I don't intend to be rearguing my original point: I've had my say. But is
it possable, in others' opinions, for a Jedi to be evil without following
the Dark Side? To coldly and dispassionately kill innocents while using
the Force "only for knowledge and defence"?

============================
Geoff Heald
============================
"do you hear someone laughing megalomaniacally?"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 05:28:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Power Construct: Bow

I'm working on a female archer.

I'd like to construct her bow as a HKA, Ranged, Range Based on STR (part
of a multipower w/ recoverable charges) and give her a bow which is STR
+12, 0 END, OAF Bow, Limitation: STR only used to project arrows.

How much would you charge for the Limitation STR only used to
project arrows?

Also, she has a STR of 13. I want to buy her STR of 13 with the Advantage
1/2 END, but with the Limitation: Only for using bow and arrow.
How much would you charge for the Limitation: Only for using bow
and arrow?

I'm giving her SPD, Only for using Bow and Arrow. She has a SPD of 4. I
want to raise it to a +4.
How much would you charge for the Limitation: Only for using Bow
and Arrow?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 19:50:44 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)

- -----Original Message-----
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
To: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us>
Cc: Hero List <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)


>Thank you Bill... I've pretty much given up on this argument, you and I
seem to
>be agreeing
>entirely something I usually consider a good sign ;) Some people
> seem to want to tow the party line... with regards to INT ,
>
>Yes there are no real world indications that people think faster as they
age or
>even anything in our Comic Book Mythology to impy this either. There is
>indications in the real world that they gain more knowlege but think slower
;)
>and become crystalized less adaptable in their understandings.
>

Nope. Intelect is a type of skilll, and skill is specialised.
Skill in a given area rarely crosses over to another area, BUT
skill in a given area very very rarely or NEVER results in a
limitation or impedement of skills in other areas. This has
more to do with what skills one has. You can argue that an academic
is less skilled in day-to-day matters due to his life experience,
but claiming his academic skills impede his other functions is baseless.

As for adaptation specifically- if a skill does not relate to a given
situation, it
is not activated. A new set of skills will arise, albeit slower
than one being developed by say, a child in the critical period of
development for such skills. Some people have general
cognitive strategies for dealing with new situations, but it's not
known how 'general' such strategies can be and still function well
in an adaptive frame of refrence.

For instance, i have a character in
one of my campaigns that has the ability to take his knowlege of strategic
and tactical matters and apply them to any type of war or battle,
reguardless of how alien and unfamiliar it is. I'd call that a deffinite
super-skill.

What int is is a reasonably valid set of assumptions about
general intelligence, which doesn't exist. Then again,
neither does general coordination, or comliness. It's just
a stat used with validity, based on an assumed curve
of conceptually related skills. If you want reality, have NO stats,
and modify everything from the mean with limited traits.
Demographically speaking, these traits will still group themselves
in clusters which resemble the general stat-categories of games.

If you want einstien, define your setting, and
how intelectuals and genius's function in it. That's also
an interesting topic. Perhaps genius's are your settings
pre-superhuman evlutionary step in a heirachical scheme,
and hence their 'genius' helps them in all sorts of ways.
Or perhaps your setting is a macho world where unless you've
got knowlege of 'the street' and the muscle to back it up,
you're just a stupid siut that gets punched out by the hero
for complaining about property damage. And so on.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:00:44 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Projectile HERO (was Archetype Clone Force, Attack!)

<<
- -----Original Message-----
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Gun HERO- Guns. Lots of them. Revolvers, automatic pistols,
sniper rifles, big freaking machine guns. Everything from a big clip, to
multiple guns (each gun is represented by a "clip"), to a specialized
"multi-gun" (each clip being a different SFX), to crazy gunslinger SFX
(like TK, Autofire, Selective AoE).>>


One option i thought up for gunslingers was a variable advanatage gun-
to represent great skill, or alternative ammo types, especially within a
gaget
vpp where multipowers aren't an option. Such a weapon could use armor
piercing
(aiming at weak point/fmj), area effect (superssive fire/exploding bullet),
autofire(pulling out another of the same weapon from 'somewhere' and firing
with both/rapid-fire setting) or maybe even more clips somehow (representing
more
conventional ammo). You could even say that since 'does no body' is arguably
an advantage or 0-level modifier, you could pursue the 'mercy bullet' option
as well.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:11:01 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Duplication

- -----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser>
>Multiform is even MORE outrageously not represented. Look at who has
>multiform, and count the number of forms they are able to take. The
>purpose and intent of the power is to represent someone able to change
>shape and abilities, but anyone who wants to have that with any range of
>flexibility (for example, animal man! He can be any animal!) has to buy it
>using other power constructs. This violates the basic Hero rule (dont use
>other powers to simulate a power that exists)

bzzt! No such rule, as you suggest it.
there is a 'rule' relating to creating new powers (not new power constructs)
that says something like this, but actually the reverse is true. The BASIC
tenant of
hero is that multipler power mechanics exist that can be equally used to
make
different power-sfx. Hence, the person is not using a power to simulate a
power,
they're using a power to define an sfx, and there is no one true power
for a given sfx, no matter how often somebody says there is- there are
always other otions.
for animal man, shapeshifting and a vpp are obviously just as valid, and a
lot cheaper.
With a 60 pt vpp and a bunch of limitations (like limites category of
powers,
and a variable limitation to represent how animal powers are limited in
various ways)
plus shapeshifting and permisison ofr his gm to get certain special powers
in his
vpp(eagle eyes, gills, ect), animal man is set. The fact that he doesn't use
the multiform power mechanic
is meaningless. Hell, why not make a multiform, once animal man's human
form, and
the other with the vpp and shapeshift powers?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:23:14 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Duplication

- -----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
>>I don't think that's an accurate way to say it. Many concepts are
properly
>>similated by many different power constructs, and there's nothing in the
>>Hero philosophy that says that's wrong. Multiform is not for similating
>
>The standard rule still stands Wayne, if you want a killing attack you buy
>KA, if you want a person to multiform you buy multiform.

If you want an attack that kills, it says to get a ka, because ka's kill.
But it's fine to kill with a no stun eb, or a nastily used UAO power
(assuming yer gm
has some way of for instance, making offensive uao's more expensive or
balanced) or by picking up a normal, pushing your strength to 110, and
throwing them at the
hoover dam. None of these options are a ka, all of them kill. You are mixing
power mechanics with sfx, and frankly, the game relies on not doing that.

>Shapeshifting in
>the rules if for characters like Plastic man (you gain no powers, simply
>alter form) if you want to have different abilities, Multiform is the
>power.

no actually multiform, vpp, variable advantage, duplication,
and summoning all are options. oh, and mind control, followers,
ect, ect, ect. Also, plastic man DOES gain powers,
from str, to stretching, to tk. All of them other power mechanics,
all of them the same sfx.

>You could use Transform for ANY power in existence that does not
>directly affect yourself, but that simply is not the way the rules work,
>even if its cost effective or it works.
>


Using a highly extreme example does not a case make. That's
like trying to get a man convicted of murder by going on about
how much dmage he could do if he is guilty and set free and
happens to stumble across a nuclear warhead.

Transform is an all-purpose power, and you could use it like that,
technically. It would be VERY expensive though, and involve long
discussions with your gm over physics and chemistry.

>Multiform is the power that is used for this effect, and it is rarely used,

It is not _the_ power that is used. It is _a_ power
that is used, one among many.

>because most concepts are simply not possible for the cost. I have never
>seen multiform dominate any campaign nor scenario, its useful but hardly
>too powerful, rather the opposite. YOu end up being able to become several
>weak characters who can barely compete.
>

Because having an army who can fight one at a time is still WAY
more powerful than a single, more powerful character.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 05:20:10 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)

Christopher Taylor wrote:

> >> When did age come into the INT = speed not IQ discussion? LOL
> >
> >Bill brought it in, shame on you for not reading the rest of the quoted
> material
> >The reference was to rule that age increased Max INT (and also Max EGO by
> the by),
>
> Ahh! OK, actually I have never understood that myself, I had kids having
> higher INT max, because they have better reflexes and faster mind and
> keener memory

Well only if the elderly have "Alsheimers" I believe.... no apparent real
decay in
memory or mental clarity unless they are beleagered by specific illness, that
is
far from predominant though not entirely uncommon either

Flexibility and Reflexes do seem to decay... but in some cases also are a
reflection
of an illness associated with aging... "Arthritis".

It might be interesting to make these as specific illnesses rather than bald
faced
projection of age.

> , but you can make the argument that older people tend to be
> more perceptive.

I would agree there except physical senses can also be betrayed by illnesses
associated
with age. And depending on personality growth one can become more
introspective
and "wize" with age... effectively reducing ones perception(or atleast ones
perception
how it is used in HERO.)

> Since all three are in the description and use of INT
> they all have to be considered, not just speed.

Our main argument has been that INT is used more broadly in the system than
is implied by its definition. And that many things should probably be
considered
under the pervue of INT than mental quickness and perception.

> However, all that said I
> really dont think that as you get older your INT should raise. PRE maybe,
> EGO definitely.

You basically just agreed that the aging rules are another instance of INT as
implemented
in the mechanics not matching its definition.

HERO mechanics implies INT does...indeed increase (which matches marvelously
well with having Knowledges tied to the INT which is something IQ does
accidentally
and inspite of itself ) , Though I agree reworking the mechanic so that INT
really is
mSPD would mean INT should decay with time directly porportionate an increase
in EGO.

This would portray fluid thinking becoming crystaline thinking rather well.

The Brashness of Youth.... makes for a form of decisiveness that also might be
reflected in
mSPD and possibly EGO as well so dont be certain EGO increases with age.

Children can be powerfully full of themselves also... but bloated egos and
Powerful Disciplined Wills (aka EGO) are two distinct things right ;)

I can't remember did you propose a rule which made SPD = (INT+DEX)/10 and
increased the cost
of INT to 2, If so you have gone a long way toward forcing the mechanics of
INT into a closer match with the definition.... particularly if you assigned
higher INT to younger folks.

All said and done... having a disadvantage called "Set in ones ways" which
made learning
new skills difficult, would be a more distinct definition and readable
simulation of some characters.

Really old Vampire.
making him highly INT makes sense particularly with , but I want him to be Set
in His Ways, and have difficulty learning new skills [ the fewer skills he has
the bigger a disad this might be ](he might even apropriately be unable to get
past the level of language understanding that leaves him with an accent and
confused by vernacular )

<<<He might also have Anachronistic Skills (such as Elizabethan Social Skills
and Heraldry from the 12 century, and 14th century political accumen) and
other out of date knowledges but that is another story al together limitations
on KS can be fun>>>

I guess I like the verbality in character definitions. So disads like Absent
Minded, Set in Ones Ways or Tests Poorly (sort of a quirk like in GURPS more
than a disad) Tests poorly usually means you end up lacking degrees and
support to gain proper notoriety early in life until you go out and really
prove it otherwise, it is sort of a social disad and I wouldnt think worth too
many points ; -), given HEROS combat oriented point system maybe none, Is it a
poor reputation?.

Camp 1
INT should be understood broadly and real world people should be rated based
on the actual Mechanics presented in the system rather than the simple and
limited definition which doesn't anywhere near match those mechanics (i.e..
change the definition to match the mechanics), The mechanics seem to
incorporate features measured albeit poorly by IQ for instance.

Camp 2
Its fairly simple enough to alter the mechanics to match the definition. A
couple of Included Ideas so far, Incorporating INT into SPD (and increasing
the cost of INT) or even making a separate mSPD, having max INT not Increase
with age(your idea).

Camp 3
says well, I know INT does some things mechanically in the game dont entirely
match what its definition says it does... but
a) We arent really ever modelling real world people anyway we are
modelling comic/fictional
characters and It works in game the way it is.. no matter
what the definition says
b) INT as used does include "some" of the things in its definition
[in sort of back handed ways]
c) Players have to make their characters decisions we dont really
wanting INT taking over stuff
that is really the players job. Broadening the definition
could have this undesireable effect.
d) If everybody just Grok'd the definition completely, they'd
realize it can simulate the most
brilliant minds in modern history with mediocre stats.
Because even INT is combat skewed
by HERO mechanics yes it is, honest it is... don't look at
the man behind the curtain,
the verbal definition is all that counts, really really.

In any event I feel we are nit picking on the system and this is nowhere near
a balance problem,

The problem of Strength being effectively free buy 10 pts and it gives you 11
points worth of figured stats tadah. Fine if you are playing Champions but
Not really balanced for Fantasy Hero or any environ where super strength is
not endemic. Some system balancing may be in order.

But worries over the Definition of INT and Intelligence are more philosophical
than concrete, maybe we have a bunch of philosophers on the list, I wouldnt
doubt it... if anybody reads this verbose message that is. ;)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:32:21 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Lord Vader's Powers

- -----Original Message-----
From: geoff heald <gheald@worldnet.att.net>
>>An evil jedi is a follower of the dark side.
>>That dark side is not nesecarily wasteful or
>>less competent just because it's passionatly
>>evil- It seems mr spocks' myth of logic
>>without emotion rears it's ugly head again. . .
>>
>>
>What I meant by my comment relates to the comment Yoda made (also quoted in
>the post) that the Dark Side is anger, agression, and fear, whereas a true
>Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense. Vader seems to act from
>quiet repose rather than in anger, at least most of the time.

Vaders primary motivation is anger and fear. That is why he does what he
does.
Also, killing somebody might be interpreted as calculating, but so is
brainwshing them or hirig better staff in advance.

>But the
>choices he makes so calmly are evil.

How is choking somebody for insulting your beliefs calm?
I suppose it was an object lesson? Why didn't he just
turn out all the lights or something? Because he's spiteful,
malicious, and unstable. Vader is not calm. He's a
beserker on a leash. That's his menace, that he
is seething with rage, but he maintains his control. . . .
barely.

>A man might become enraged and slay an
>entire small town, or a man might calmly decide to kill an entire small
>town. Neither is a good act, but one is an act of anger and agression and
>the other is not (or is less so.)
>

Both are agressive acts. And your reason for killing a town
has more likely got to do with fear, anger and malice
than a more constructive approach.

>I don't intend to be rearguing my original point: I've had my say. But is
>it possable, in others' opinions, for a Jedi to be evil without following
>the Dark Side? To coldly and dispassionately kill innocents while using
>the Force "only for knowledge and defence"?
>

nope. The force is not only about knowlege and defence.
it's also about being calm and at peace, and
following a life-affirming route.

>============================
>Geoff Heald
>============================
>"do you hear someone laughing megalomaniacally?"
>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:45:26 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)

- -----Original Message-----
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
>Well only if the elderly have "Alsheimers" I believe.... no apparent real
>decay in
>memory or mental clarity unless they are beleagered by specific illness,
that
>is
>far from predominant though not entirely uncommon either
>

There is also a systemic problem with the aged becoming less capable
because their minds are not kept active, or worse yt, pumped full or
drugs.

>
>This would portray fluid thinking becoming crystaline thinking rather well.
>


it's just a pity there's no such thing as 'fluid thinking' or 'crystaline
thinking'.
(in my hho. In psycs' hho, too.)

>Children can be powerfully full of themselves also... but bloated egos and
>Powerful Disciplined Wills (aka EGO) are two distinct things right ;)
>


no. . children have yet the mental faculties to fully understand the
nature of the self and others. These faculties develop over time,
as clearly shown by current developmental and life-span studies.
This is partly why teenagers are so painfull aware of other people
being aware of an percieving them- it's a relativly new process.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 06:17:26 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)

happyelf wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
> To: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us>
> Cc: Hero List <champ-l@sysabend.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 11:52 AM
> Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
>
> >Thank you Bill... I've pretty much given up on this argument, you and I
> seem to
> >be agreeing
> >entirely something I usually consider a good sign ;) Some people
> > seem to want to tow the party line... with regards to INT ,
> >
> >Yes there are no real world indications that people think faster as they
> age or
> >even anything in our Comic Book Mythology to impy this either. There is
> >indications in the real world that they gain more knowlege but think slower
> ;)
> >and become crystalized less adaptable in their understandings.
> >
>

Excuse me but I didnt make up the ideas of fluid and crystalized thinking its
common psychology

> Nope. Intelect is a type of skilll, and skill is specialised.

Skill is not specialized, I can accomplish the same or strikingly similar result
by many routes using different skills, and intellect is so more broad or general
than any other definition what are you talking about?

>
> Skill in a given area rarely crosses over to another area, BUT
> skill in a given area very very rarely or NEVER results in a
> limitation or impedement of skills in other areas

Becoming set in ones ways is a frequently developed personality trait in human
beings over time
and impedes learning to do things in new ways.

Picture this mind set:
It is the old "I can bust down that door in two seconds why in hell would I
spend 8 months learning how to spend ten minutes picking the damn lock"... "I
know there are advantages to the new method (stealth etc)
its just they are so subtle and not right in my face and don't match well with
the definition of who I am which I spent 30 years developing, and is it really
worth spending the 8 months?. And the person may be subconciously doing some of
this not really trying to learn because they don't really want to and give up
frustrated after 2 months even though they think they "want to learn to pick
locks" and they are intelligent and dextrous enough but learning it really does
involve a subtle change in their outlook they deep down dont really want to give
up.

See where this is coming from the existing SKILLS do not directly impede other
skills. Its more like they decrease the percieved cost effectiveness of new
skills because they do indeed overlap for achieving many goals, in this case
getting to the other side of that damned locked door.

You can argue that an academic
is less skilled in day-to-day matters due to his life experience,
but claiming his academic skills impede his other functions is baseless.

Sorry I wasn't arguing this? In this instance we were discussing the affects of
aging and how in HERO the aging rules accelerate your max INT (as in Mental
Quickness and Perception) and this does not correspond to anything noticeable in
real life or the Myth.

Unless INT also represents broad general knowledge which allows cross over and
application of general principles to the new area of learning , which is what
you were arguing I think (DIE in the WOOL definition lovers can't agree with
this) and I think we agree?

Does that explain it better

Lance

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 06:36:37 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: Re: Power Construct: Bow

On Tue, 4 May 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:

> I'd like to construct her bow as a HKA, Ranged, Range Based on STR (part
> of a multipower w/ recoverable charges) and give her a bow which is STR
> +12, 0 END, OAF Bow, Limitation: STR only used to project arrows.
>
> How much would you charge for the Limitation STR only used to
> project arrows?

Hmm. It's definitely greater than -1/2, because it'll include 'doesn't
affect figured stats', but it's also her primary schtick so it'll get used
a lot. I'm going to go for a -1, maybe -1 1/4.

Note that to be strictly realistic, the STR should cost END - the more
powerful the bow is, the harder it is to pull back...

> Also, she has a STR of 13. I want to buy her STR of 13 with the Advantage
> 1/2 END, but with the Limitation: Only for using bow and arrow.
> How much would you charge for the Limitation: Only for using bow
> and arrow?

Yick. Limited Advantages. These get ugly. I'm going to say 'same as
above' though, realizing that it's really not going to make much
difference in the points saved.

> I'm giving her SPD, Only for using Bow and Arrow. She has a SPD of 4. I
> want to raise it to a +4.
> How much would you charge for the Limitation: Only for using Bow
> and Arrow?

So...basically what you're saying is Speed 4 + 4 extra bow attacks per
round? Although you can't move, etc, the limitation isn't as bad as it
might be, and I can easily see it becoming a problem. I'm going to be
stingy and suggest a mere -1/2, since I forsee it being used a /lot/. If
the campaign has less focus on combat, that limitation might be greater.

J

Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 06:45:29 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)

happyelf wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
> >Well only if the elderly have "Alsheimers" I believe.... no apparent real
> >decay in
> >memory or mental clarity unless they are beleagered by specific illness,
> that
> >is
> >far from predominant though not entirely uncommon either
> >
>
> There is also a systemic problem with the aged becoming less capable
> because their minds are not kept active, or worse yt, pumped full or
> drugs.
>

Oh yes that bites big time

>
> >
> >This would portray fluid thinking becoming crystaline thinking rather well.
> >
>
> it's just a pity there's no such thing as 'fluid thinking' or 'crystaline
> thinking'.
> (in my hho. In psycs' hho, too.)
>

Its a valid concept according to the Psychology I read.. ofcourse that was 10
years ago or
more. I answered this with an example of "being set in ones ways: mind set" in
another post

>
> >Children can be powerfully full of themselves also... but bloated egos and
> >Powerful Disciplined Wills (aka EGO) are two distinct things right ;)
> >
>
> no. . children have yet the mental faculties to fully understand the
> nature of the self and others.

OOOPs I was being poorly inspecific in my definitions.. and being an old cooot
I wasnt thinking of children as children.....just young folk

> These faculties develop over time,
> as clearly shown by current developmental and life-span studies.
> This is partly why teenagers are so painfull aware of other people
> being aware of an percieving them- it's a relativly new process.

Arrogance as a responsive behavior often in retalitory reaction to
that excessive awareness of how you are percieved by others,
sometimes the behavior gets reinforced because it works.

Rebellious teens who claim to know everything... (I remember knowing
everything around age 15) seems to represent egotistical behavior
by classic definitions.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 08:21:47 EDT
From: AndMat3@aol.com
Subject: Re: TK Stuff (fwd)

In a message dated 5/3/99 5:27:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ravanos@NJCU.edu
writes:

> I disagree. NND can be used for "BODY-less" attacks, such as
> Flash, Entangle, or Drain.

I am almost certainly positive that this has been changed in the 5th ed. NND
is only suited for certain powers.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 08:33:14 EDT
From: AndMat3@aol.com
Subject: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)

I love duplication and multiform; but I don't really ever buy them. No one I
play with
buys them... though they may come up with ideas... that die during points
factoring. why? b/c these powers are too expensive. how many times has the
duplicating character destroyed or run rampant in a game? the powers are
currently broken because they are too expensive to buy.

and all things being equal... 1 point should equal 1 point.

andy

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 09:29:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: Character updates

In case you missed the final version of Darth, he's at

http://www.otd.com/~susano/darthvader.html

the rust monster version 2.0 is at:

http://www.otd.com/~susano/rustmonster.html

we now return to your regularly scheduled mailing list...

- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html

Elric: "Not long since, I counted myself without comrades. Now, I have
many. For that reason alone I will fight beside them!"
Erekose: "That is, perhaps, the best of reasons."

_Elric: Sailor on the Seas of Fate_, Michael Moorcock

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 08:36:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: Re: TK Stuff (fwd)

On Tue, 4 May 1999 AndMat3@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 5/3/99 5:27:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ravanos@NJCU.edu
> writes:
>
> > I disagree. NND can be used for "BODY-less" attacks, such as
> > Flash, Entangle, or Drain.
>
> I am almost certainly positive that this has been changed in the 5th ed.

Source?

> NND
> is only suited for certain powers.

Which is true in 4th Edition - it's only for attack powers. NND Running,
for example, is meaningless. But NND Flash and Drain are certainly
logical constructs, and I'll be disappointed if they're not officially
allowed in the new addition.

Example: Master Lee the martial artist can deliver a nerve strike that
causes the victim's vision to black out. It's not delivered to the eyes,
so any kind of normal Flash Defense (polarized goggles, for example) isn't
going to help. Master Lee should buy an NND Flash vs Sight, requires a
Physiology roll, no range, with the defense being rigid protection over
the appropriate nerve endings.

J

Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 09:47:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: Cumulative effect question

Okay, I'm working on an idea for a creature that summon storms. The trick
is, the more creatures you have, the more powerful the storm can be.
So... obviously the storm itself is a mixture of Telekinesis and Change
Environment (representing wind and rain), but how would I build the
increased intensity effect?

Do I buy the whole power and then apply a lim that you get so many active
points per creature, or do I but a base amount of power and then add in an
Aid (with a massive top end) that is used to pump up the power?

Suggestions welcome.

- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html

Elric: "Not long since, I counted myself without comrades. Now, I have
many. For that reason alone I will fight beside them!"
Erekose: "That is, perhaps, the best of reasons."

_Elric: Sailor on the Seas of Fate_, Michael Moorcock

------------------------------

End of champ-l-digest V1 #312
*****************************

---

Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 03:54 PM