Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 316
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 9:50 PM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #316
champ-l-digest Tuesday, May 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 316
In this issue:
Re: Ignoring armor
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Cumulative effect question
Re: Duplication
power construct
Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
Re: Duplication
Re: Duplication and Multiform
RE: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
Re: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Duplication and Multiform
Re: Combat banter, part 2
Re: Lady Archer Power Construct
Re: Archetypes
Re: Duplication and Multiform
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 13:35:43 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Ignoring armor
At 11:42 AM 5/4/1999 -0400, Michael Surbrook wrote:
>Okay, so this monster I'm designing can hit people and ignore physical
>body armor. Basiaclly, it is not fully part of this plane, and physical
>armors (such as body armor) won't help you. Iwas thinking AVLD (Power DEF)
>that does BODY, but then I was thinking that certain magical defenses
>should stop it, as well as things like personal force screens and the
>like. Anyone have better idea? NND that does BODY? Or some form of
>Indirect instead?
I've tended to allow a +1/4 version of Indirect on hand-to-hand attacks
(including not just HA, but HKA and STR) to allow the attack to bypass
personal armor -- that is, armor that is worn, as opposed to intrinsic
armor, Force Fields, and similar constructs. Any Force Field, Hardened
Armor, or similar thing would still work against it; and to include things
that wouldn't normally protect against an Indirect attack, you can put a
Limitation on the Advantage.
Others on the list have stated that doing this seems abusive, but really
it's not that much worse than getting by bypass Force Walls, standing
walls, vehicular armor, and the like, especially since it's limited to
bypassing Armor (and, optionally, regular PD and ED) that's bought through
a Focus.
- ---
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, 04 May 1999 13:45:50 PDT
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
On Mon, 03 May 1999 Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net> wrote:
>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
>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?
Is it just me, or did anyone else get the impression that the above
paragraph was written in a foreign language that just happens to share
letters and word forms with English? I've read it three times now, and I
still don't know what it's supposed to convey.
>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
>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?
>
No, don't bother explaining it to the list. Most of us are capable of
reading the rules and thinking to ourself, "Wow, this particular power
doesn't fulfil my expectations for my character but this other one does, so
I'll use that one." Apparently Mr. Taylor is not, but he shouldn't take it
upon himself to attribute his own incompetence to the rest of us. I, for
one, am insulted.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:17:33 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>>>That's like asying the intent of followers is to control the earth's
>>>population. There's no maxmimum to the number of followers. I't's
>>posible, but the cost
>>>prohibits it? yes, because it's a very powerful ability.
>>
>>No, the intent of Followers is to give you people who follow and obey you,
>>the maximum number is never given. Just like Multiform.
>
>So you're saying that it's ok to have 1,000,000,000,000 followers, in fact,
>that's it's purpose. After all, there no limit on doing that apart from
the points required.
Correct, that and the campaign concept. You understand things differently?
However I didn't state its purpose was to give you 1 trillion followers, I
said what is quoted above is it's purpose, you can read it again if you
forgot somehow.
>>The point of the power is a simple concept, as you full well know.
>
>Concept is exactly the wrong word. it's a mechanic,
>given an easy handle, that is *deliberatly* divorced from
>preconceptions about it's purpose, so that it can be
>used in a multitide of ways, limited by factors like
>cost, not what peolpe think it's purpose 'obviously' is.
>
>A sfx is a concept, an idea about a power. The mechanics
>are used in conjunction to model that concept. The concept
>is *never* inerent in the mechanic.
So you would say the concept of Telekinesis being a power that allows you
to exert strength is an invalid statement? You are arguing semantics, I'd
rather focus on how Multiform costs too much and requires some changes in
the cost structure.
>>Multiform = change forms to different kinds, thats what it does.
>
>No, what it does is set up a secondary, tertitary, ect, character sheet,
>with a set of powers, skills, ect of it's own, based on
>strictures limiting the overally number of forms based on points available.
What of what you said is different from what I said above, other than the
wording?
>Anyway, what about change froms to identical kinds? There's nothing
>stopping you from doing that, and there are reasons to do it.
That is by definition not a change... Allow me to quote the power's
description from the book (description, you know, that which
defines what a power does, details its use, and explains how it works):
A character with this Special Power can have several different forms, each
with is own personality, Characteristics, and Powers.
Hopefully that is clear.
>>>Not if you grasp the entire POINT of this game. An energy blast is not
>>>nesecarily a blast of energy. Many killing attacks do not sucessfully
>kill.
>>>Teleport is not an alchaholic beverage that doublee as a phone.
>>
>>Thats fascinating but again, his complaint is with using Multiform to
>>simulate a power that it was built to make, yet costs too much, and has no
>>problem using other powers to _simulate_ Multiform.
>
>Nobody's simulating multiform. they're portraying an sfx using their
Are you unclear what I was saying there? When you use shapeshift and power
pool to do the same thing that an existing power: Multiform does, you are
violating the rules. I am not sure how you miss that, unless you simply
enjoy arguing for its own sake, it has been stated over and over on this
list that you do not use other powers to do what an existing power already
does. You don't buy Transform: alive to alive with -D6 STN because STN
drain does this. You dont buy Multiform using other powers, because
multiform already exists, you just have to powergame the rules in order to
build the concept that Multiform is supposed to but costs too much to do
effectively.
>>>yes it is! a vpp/shapeshift is far mroe limted than a distinct character.
>>>multiform c's can have an immense amount of points total.
>>
>>'immense" being limited by the points of a standard character (under the
>>same active cost limits as the power pool/multipower approach), and thus
>>being roughly similar, wouldn't you say?
>
>What you have to realise is that, the vpp option is better, it's cheaper
and allows you to have an unlimted set of forms. The multiform
>option is clearly not designed with that in mind. You can choose either,
but don't expect the points to be shifted to cover the >weaknesses in your
choice.
What you just argued makes my case. Multiform costs too much to do what
you intend to do so you build an alternate construct that ignores
Multiform. When you want a character who can be (for example) able to turn
into any animal that would be a Multiform (read the description of
multiform again if you wish), but when you sit down to build that, you
realize it would cost 25,741 points. Building the same construct using a
munchkin mechanic of shapeshift and power pool results in the same effect
you intended, but for cheaper.
Conclusion: Multiform costs too much.
>('why not have str bought usable by others?'
>'because aid is
>clearly the power they intended for use there!') and so on.
Look again at the mechanics, Aid is a different power than UBO, it does not
have line of sight, it fades over time, is an instant effect, has a random
result. UBO was how Aid was done before they came up with Aid. Now that
there is a written POWER to do such, that is the one you use. Sort of like
how there is a written power to change forms, wouldn't you say?
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:19:27 PDT
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Cumulative effect question
On Tue, 4 May 1999 Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com> wrote:
>
>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?
I'd give all the little critters Change Environment and TK, Useable by
others. Then, they all lend their powers to creature #1 & he does the
raindance.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:19:31 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication
>>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.
>
>I disagree. The proper power for being able to assume a multitude of
>alternate forms is Shapeshift. Multiform isn't intended to make Animal Man,
>it's intended for the Hulk and his ilk. It performs that function very
>well.
It's even worse at that construct, you make joe average and "crappy Hulk,"
the 200 point brick. Hulk is accidental change and HFO perhaps, but not
Multiform, as I see it, and how the points turn out.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:26:29 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: power construct
>Is it just me, or did anyone else get the impression that the above
>paragraph was written in a foreign language that just happens to share
>letters and word forms with English? I've read it three times now, and I
>still don't know what it's supposed to convey.
...
>No, don't bother explaining it to the list. Most of us are capable of
>reading the rules and thinking to ourself, "Wow, this particular power
>doesn't fulfil my expectations for my character but this other one does, so
>I'll use that one." Apparently Mr. Taylor is not, but he shouldn't take it
>upon himself to attribute his own incompetence to the rest of us. I, for
>one, am insulted.
How would you build the above flame in Hero terms?
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:30:46 PDT
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: The Acceptance of Powergaming (was re RE:Darth Vader)
On Tue, 04 May 1999 Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us>
>Perhaps you're opposed to applying Newtonian physics in games as well?
>Piaget certainly isn't cutting edge, but to my knowledge he's still cited
>fairly often as the major figure in developmental psychology. A quick
>search in any library catalog will show how much work is still being done
>in Piagetan theory.
Yes, they still teach Piaget. Or, at least, they still did in 1993, when I
was last a psych major. Admittedly, Piaget's work IS old, and much of it is
dubious, but, unlike many of his contemporaries (*cough*FREUD*cough*), he
apparently engaged in actual research sometimes, and some of his findings
are the foundation of modern developmental psychology. So there.
>The old psych theory game would be cool, though.
Oh, absolutely. I could design a hell of a character around the
Psychological Map. A multiformer, even.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 14:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ben Brown <benbrown@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
On Tue, 4 May 1999, Christopher Taylor wrote:
> >>Multiform = change forms to different kinds, thats what it does.
> >
> >No, what it does is set up a secondary, tertitary, ect, character sheet,
> >with a set of powers, skills, ect of it's own, based on
> >strictures limiting the overally number of forms based on points available.
>
> What of what you said is different from what I said above, other than the
> wording?
>
> That is by definition not a change... Allow me to quote the power's
> description from the book (description, you know, that which
> defines what a power does, details its use, and explains how it works):
>
> A character with this Special Power can have several different forms, each
> with is own personality, Characteristics, and Powers.
>
> Hopefully that is clear.
It's perfectly clear. However, not every shapeshifter has a seperate
personality/skill set for each form. You're right. Multiform is
too expensive to use for having dozens of forms. Multiform wasn't designed
for that. (as far as I can tell.) It really works best for the werewolf/hulk-
type "Involuntary shapeshifters", where the two forms will be remarkably
different in mental, as well as physical stats, and have abilities that
don't really overlap. The more overlap there is (as someone has already
stated), the better some other construct is. The great thing about hero is
that you _can_ do things multiple ways and still simulate related SFX.
Take, for example, running. Running is running, you might say. It's called
running, but that doesn't change the fact that running can be simulated by
limited flight, and that certain running effects are better simulated this
way.
If you can use multiform, and it does what you want to do, use it. On the
other hand, if something else works as well, use it. It's not cheating, it's
just getting something else out of the same rule set. And, if the changes
between the characters are particularly severe, trying to do it with OIHID
or Shapeshift is inefficient.
- -Ben
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: 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.
I agree on Duplication, but not on Mutliform. The first form in the former
is about right; however large number of identical forms should be cheaper
than they are; I just don't think they should be _too_ cheap.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Duplication
>>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.
>
> Absolutely, yes. My soon-to-be-revived duplicating PC, Miss Dozen, was
>able to turn into 12 "selves." After Duplication, I was able to get her
>just enough in Martial Arts and an armored costume that she could barely
>take on a low-level super one-on-one. Essentially, she did become a small
>army of agent-level characters, and did just fine in a group of more
>standard heroes. In fact, she was less useful in combat than as a means of
>communication (her "selves" had a telepathic rapport that was quite handy
>when the team split up).
> As you can guess, while Miss Dozen was already low-powered under 3rd
>Edition, she's completely impractical under 4th -- I don't recall which
>(since I gave up on it in '91), but I either couldn't even buy 11
>Duplicates at 250 points each at all, or if I could they were each less
>effective than a Normal.
Well, you'll note I do agree the current cost is too high for multiple
duplicates...I just think the process has to be watched because it can quite
easily get out of hand if you swing too far the other way. Using the
doubling per five rule would be way excessive, for example. I double for
each increment, so to have 11 duplicates under my system would cost about
45% of the underlaying duplicates; on a 250 point character, this means the
duplicates would be 130 points each, which is about the most I'd want for
someone who was walking out with 12 characters.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>>>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.
>
>OK so you dont find any need to demonstrate your premise, I guess I'll let
>that go. I just would like to understand why you think it is allowable and
Since it was pretty much clear in discussions of the power when it was first
being developed what it was and wasn't for, no, I don't feel a need to dig
three years of back ACs and other pre-Fourth Edition material just to make
you happy.
>not unbalancing for someone to make a 'multiform' character with shapeshift
>and a power pool (for example) and yet it is so to use multipower to do
>this. You don't have a problem with someone making the power by bypassing
>the power in the book intended for this (read the definition again, I'm
>sorry you don't want to agree that is what it is there for, but it quite
>simply WAS the intent of the authors to make a power that allowed you to
>have different forms with different abilities, there isn't any limit on the
But not to have a large number of them. And I know otherwise from the
mouths of the authors, so you can talk about it all you want and that's not
liable to change. The reason it's unbalanced with Multiform is the fact
that Multiform allows you to do things you can't with Mutlipowers and the
like, specifically trading off points in outside abilities and such that are
not needed at the moment. Multiform allows you to play games with your
skills, stats, disadvantages and such in a way that the
Shapeshift/Multipower combination can't. That's why Multiform exists, and
it's also why it operates on much tighter constraints.
>number of forms other than cost, which at this point in the rules is far
>too expensive to allow more than 2 or 3. This does not mean that this was
>their intent from the beginning, rather that the cost prohibits it). You
>just seem to dislike the idea of someone using MULTIFORM to do this, which
>seems oddly inconsistent.
It was their intent whether you care to believe it or not. And I've
explained why above.
>>Only when you're using it for something it was never intended for.
>
>You still have yet to show me in the rules how it was never intended for
>that. Its not possible to do that undermost cost limitations, but nowhere
Because it's not in the rules. Except of course, in the fashion that you're
objecting to; that the designers priced it so that this was not a useful
thing to do with it. I'd think it would be obvious from the design
overhead building Multiforms, no matter how they were priced, that this
wasn't a particularly good way to do it, but apparently not to you.
>can you demonstrate that wasn't the intent. Clearly the intent of the
>power was to allow you to build characters that had several diverse forms,
>one at a time. I cannot conceive how you come up with the idea that this
>was intended to be limited to a small number. The only reason it tends to
Because they deliberately priced it that way, or have said so both in print
and in person perhaps?
>be is that campaigns don't give out 1500 points to build a character with.
>This is a cost issue, not a concept issue for the power. You dont mind
>people building that power bypassing multiform, so it clearly isnt a power
>level issue either.
It would be if you could put skills, general stats, and disadvantages in a
multipower.
>>Yes. He could easily deal out many times the damage the equivelent energy
>>projector could, at compareable accuracy.
>
>Ah he had more damage dice? Or he had multiple attacks (like, say
>autofire... for example?)
Are you particularly slow? There are 12 characters. Each is doing 10D6.
The energy projector is doing 10D6. They both fire at a give target, and
have the same accuracy. Who is going to be doing more damage? Answer: the
12. If you don't understand why this is the case, I don't know how to
explain it to you.
>>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.
>
>Unless they pay the points to be able to do such a thing with, say,
>autofire, or area effect. Are those grossly overpowered? Agents would
>drop his underdefensed self in a hurry, unless you misrepresented his
>defenses.
Agents would have to hit him 16 times to drop him completely. Most supers
could be taken down well before that by most agents. And you can't do what
he could do with any standard set of Advantages, because he could take down
those 16 agents scattered all over the battlefield, intermixed with his
friends, in seperate rooms...if there was a power that essentially allowed
you to hit people anywhere you could see, in large numbers, with no concern
as to people and things like corners, I'd expect it to be pretty damn
pricey. The closest thing to that is a very large Selective Area effect,
and even it won't quite do it. A a large selecitve area effect is quite
expensive in and of itself.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: RE: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
>That's because either you're good roleplayers, or you're bad character
>designers (in the sense of powergaming).
>Try this:
>
>Multiform #1:
>Normal with high INT and PRE and some 100 pts skills (nice, huh?)
>Multiform #2:
>Stealth character with invisibllity, shrinking, desolidification and
>what-have-you.
>Multiform #3:
>Energy projector with lots of foci and uses.
>Multiform #4:
>Close combat specialist with lots of foci.
Yup. And slightly less extreme cases can be justified quite easily with a
bit of work. What's Jaguar but a skills specialist with a combat alternate
form? Specialiation can easily make up for the loss of a few points.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Means Testing Powers (was Duplication)
>I think that any GM worth playing with would have the ability to say "no" to
>something that abusive. If not, then I guess that that GM's going to get
>abused.
Except of course that while that's an extreme example, many perfectly
rational multiform constructs pretty much are 'shapechanging into
specialists'. What's a guy who turns into a werewolf but a most likely
skill based character who trades them in for a combat specialist? Many
others run into much the same idea; taking your dedicated brick form and
turning it into your dedicated energy projector form, for example.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>As far as multiform vs. shapeshift/vpp linked, I take it this way:
[Much snippage of good examples]
>Essentially, if the change is really significant and involves a complete
>change in powers, skills, stats, and possibly even personality, I'd go
>with the multiform. If the change is just the sfx of being able to do
>lots of different stuff, go with the shapeshift/vpp.
>
>Again, look at the results you want, Hero is effect-based, and there's
>almost always more than one way to simulate a power.
Yup. The point I've been trying to convey, that one has to use the tool for
the job, not fixate on one tool and complain it's not doing jobs it wasn't
intended for.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 17:55:12 -0500
From: Mitchel Santorineos <mitchels@megsinet.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>What you just argued makes my case. Multiform costs too much to do what
you intend to do so you build an alternate construct that ignores Multiform.
When you want a character who can be (for example) able to turn into any
animal that would be a Multiform (read the description of multiform again if
you wish), but when you sit down to build that, you realize it would cost
25,741 points. Building the same construct using a munchkin mechanic of
shapeshift and power pool results in the same effect you intended, but for
cheaper.<
I think most players would prefer to buy a shapeshift and a variable power
pool to simulate turning into many different types of animals.
Multiform is best used for someone who can turn into only a few different
types of animals (Werewolf to human), or someone who becomes a completely
different being (hulk). If the memories, skills, disads all change you use
multiform, if not use shapeshift and the power pool. No one would want to
buy 100 multiforms to be able to turn into 100 creatures. Trying to keep
track of the paper trail would be to difficult.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 16:29:44 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>It's perfectly clear. However, not every shapeshifter has a seperate
>personality/skill set for each form. You're right. Multiform is
>too expensive to use for having dozens of forms. Multiform wasn't designed
>for that. (as far as I can tell.) It really works best for the
werewolf/hulk-
>type "Involuntary shapeshifters", where the two forms will be remarkably
>different in mental, as well as physical stats, and have abilities that
>don't really overlap.
I guess I just wonder if that would be true if Multiform was cheaper? If
it cost 1 point per 5 for the most expensive form and +5 points for each
additional form after that would people buy Multiform for dozens of forms
then? I suspect so. In addition, I have stated elsewhere that I think
someone that you describe would be best defined as HFO and accidental
change. The very example in the BBB of Multiform is 'Captain Zoology' who
can turn into various otherwise diverse animal forms (dinosaur, eagle,
elephant).
>Take, for example, running. Running is running, you might say. It's called
>running, but that doesn't change the fact that running can be simulated by
>limited flight, and that certain running effects are better simulated this
>way.
In a sense, but you do have to realize that when you buy flight as running
(for example) you are building something that running does not do, such as
run up walls. Movement in a manner that does not require you to remain
under gravity's pull on a surface is simulated by flight, isnt it? I still
believe that the reason people use other constructs to build
multiple-formed characters is not because Multiform does not do the trick,
but rather because it costs too much to do so.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 17:00:49 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>I think most players would prefer to buy a shapeshift and a variable power
>pool to simulate turning into many different types of animals.
>
>Multiform is best used for someone who can turn into only a few different
>types of animals (Werewolf to human), or someone who becomes a completely
>different being (hulk). If the memories, skills, disads all change you use
>multiform, if not use shapeshift and the power pool. No one would want to
>buy 100 multiforms to be able to turn into 100 creatures. Trying to keep
>track of the paper trail would be to difficult.
Actually what my player did with his animal guy was to use the Bestiary.
He had a Multiform Power Pool (which Im sure makes you all freak out, being
a violation of the Special Powers rule -- but it worked very well, and
simulated what he wanted) and just allotted the points to be a given
animal, the biggest thing he could become was a Lion, if I remember correctly.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>In a sense, but you do have to realize that when you buy flight as running
>(for example) you are building something that running does not do, such as
>run up walls. Movement in a manner that does not require you to remain
>under gravity's pull on a surface is simulated by flight, isnt it? I still
>believe that the reason people use other constructs to build
>multiple-formed characters is not because Multiform does not do the trick,
>but rather because it costs too much to do so.
Even if it was priced differently, the overhead in writing up sheets for all
those Multiforms would be a profound discouragement. No one wants to have
to do up a full character sheet for every possible form a broad band
shapeshifter could assume. Just covering a representative sample of animals
would be amazingly tedious, and if you turn into more exotic entities, you
can't even make do with published write-ups.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 17:17:39 -0700
From: "Ron Abitz" <abitz@richpoor.com>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
- ----------
> From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
> To: champ-l@sysabend.org
> Cc: champ-l@sysabend.org
> Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
> Date: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 4:29 PM
>
> >It's perfectly clear. However, not every shapeshifter has a seperate
> >personality/skill set for each form. You're right. Multiform is
> >too expensive to use for having dozens of forms. Multiform wasn't
designed
> >for that. (as far as I can tell.) It really works best for the
> werewolf/hulk-
> >type "Involuntary shapeshifters", where the two forms will be remarkably
> >different in mental, as well as physical stats, and have abilities that
> >don't really overlap.
>
> I guess I just wonder if that would be true if Multiform was cheaper? If
> it cost 1 point per 5 for the most expensive form and +5 points for each
> additional form after that would people buy Multiform for dozens of forms
> then? I suspect so. In addition, I have stated elsewhere that I think
> someone that you describe would be best defined as HFO and accidental
> change. The very example in the BBB of Multiform is 'Captain Zoology'
who
> can turn into various otherwise diverse animal forms (dinosaur, eagle,
> elephant).
>
> >Take, for example, running. Running is running, you might say. It's
called
> >running, but that doesn't change the fact that running can be simulated
by
> >limited flight, and that certain running effects are better simulated
this
> >way.
>
> In a sense, but you do have to realize that when you buy flight as
running
> (for example) you are building something that running does not do, such
as
> run up walls. Movement in a manner that does not require you to remain
> under gravity's pull on a surface is simulated by flight, isnt it? I
still
> believe that the reason people use other constructs to build
> multiple-formed characters is not because Multiform does not do the
trick,
> but rather because it costs too much to do so.
So you are saying that if I wanted to build a character that could change
into any animal that he wanted I should do so by filling out at least a
hundred different character sheets that multiform would require? That
sounds like the reason to use shapeshift plus VPP/MP not the point cost.
Ron Abitz
abitz@richpoor.com
Death is but a Radiation Accident
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 20:17:53 -0400
From: Mike Christodoulou <Cypriot@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Combat banter, part 2
At 04:22 PM 4/30/99 -0400, David Stallard wrote:
>The response to my first message was overwhelmingly in favor of having
>unrestricted talking during combat. Thus, a PC should be able to spout off
>multiple paragraphs in the time it takes to fire his energy blast or punch
>at the villain.
>
>What about when PCs want to talk to each other? Do you let them banter
>back and forth, discussing strategy and whatnot, while the game is
>essentially frozen in time? If not, how do you handle this?
>
I allow great latitude in delivering a soliloquy. Most of our players
can't really think of so much to say during a a single soliloquy that
you can't picture it in a bunch of little speech bubbles in a single
frame. Let 'em talk. Soliloquy takes no time.
However, I draw the line at conversation. When two players want to
start bantering back and forth, it's time to drop out of combat. The
players in my group are often fond of arguing with the villain. Not
that they have a chance in hell of changing the bad guy's mind, but
it really slows down the play.
====================== =================================================
Mike Christodoulou "Never doubt that a small group of committed
Cypriot@Concentric.Net citizens can change the world. In fact, it is
(770) 662-5605 the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead
====================== =================================================
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 21:07:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Re: Lady Archer Power Construct
On Tue, 4 May 1999, Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
> On Tue, 4 May 1999, Jason Sullivan wrote:
> > New shots are fairly easy, and cheap, to learn... with a maximum of
> > 60 AC and a max ultra-slot cost of 6.
> > 60 point Archery Skill Multipower, 8 Recoverable Charges (0), OAF
> > (-1)
> Awful skimpy on the charges, honestly. If I were an archer, I'd be
> carrying more arrows into combat with me. /Especially/ if you think
> you'll /ever/ use the variable advantage on Slot 4 for 'Autofire'.
I did this on purpose. Ever shot needs to count. After combat,
the charges are recoverable, which is a plus. In addition to this, the
slots need to "level out," as I wouldn't know wether to apply the charges
Advantage to individual alots, the entire Multipower, or what not.
As for Autofire, that wouldn't be one of the choices for the
Advantages- since firing more than one arrow at once or multiple arrows in
rapid sucession really isn't quite what I had in mind as being very
Archer-y.
> 1d6 RKA is pretty skimpy for a supers campaign - it's not going to have a
> lot of effect. You might consider making the variable advantage only a
> +1, which will still let you do plenty of tricks, and going for a bigger
> RKA. Hmm, except you'd only get a 1d6+1 out of it, so it might /not/ be
> worth it.
The slot is there for "flavor." Not very combat effective, but
versitile- and what flare!
I'm probally tagging No KB on slot 3. Slot 4 will get KB. There
in lies, perhaps, the advantage.
Also, things like AP, Penetrating, Additional STUN, Invisible, and
No Range Penalty are the "great equalizers" for that slot... So many
things you can do with it- sure, not alot of damage, but alot of
situations may require a subtler approach.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 21:13:17 -0400
From: "Dave Mattingly" <dave@haymaker.win.net>
Subject: Re: Archetypes
>What power level do you design them at?
>Any body else do this?
I've got several 190-point archetypes at http://www.haymaker.org/haym14.html
and several dozen skill packages at http://www.haymaker.org/haym16.html
Dave Mattingly
http://haymaker.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 18:49:15 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Duplication and Multiform
>>In a sense, but you do have to realize that when you buy flight as running
>>(for example) you are building something that running does not do, such as
>>run up walls. Movement in a manner that does not require you to remain
>>under gravity's pull on a surface is simulated by flight, isnt it? I still
>>believe that the reason people use other constructs to build
>>multiple-formed characters is not because Multiform does not do the trick,
>>but rather because it costs too much to do so.
>
>Even if it was priced differently, the overhead in writing up sheets for all
>those Multiforms would be a profound discouragement. No one wants to have
>to do up a full character sheet for every possible form a broad band
>shapeshifter could assume. Just covering a representative sample of animals
>would be amazingly tedious, and if you turn into more exotic entities, you
>can't even make do with published write-ups.
:) I can't deny that, it would be a whale load of work, although so is
using a power pool to sim powers, you pretty much would need a writeup for
each form (bear has x def, x claws) even if it was limited in nature.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #316
*****************************
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