Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 337
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:17 AM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #337
champ-l-digest Wednesday, May 12 1999 Volume 01 : Number 337
In this issue:
Re: VIPER: What is it?
Re: VIPER: What is it?
Re: VIPER: What is it?
Re: VIPER: What is it?
Re: Farie Fire ver 2.0
Re: Farie Fire ver 2.0
Re: VIPER: What is it?
Re: Amberite Question
Re: Amberite Question
Lady Champions...
Re: Inquest Gamer: Champions is Dead?
Re: My problems... as per your request
Re: Experience (was VIPER: What is it?)
Re: My problems... as per your request
Re: Inquest Gamer: Champions is Dead?
Re: My problems... as per your request
Re: My problems... as per your request
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:09:26 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
here's a few options:
*read the jla series(current) from dc.
Good ideas for high powered supers.
*Put them in a war with a parthenon, not
only a physical battle, but a pr one as well.
*send them on a dimensional jaunt a-la
'champs in 3d', but change every scenario
to a 'fix it', event the really grim ones.
. . .oh, unless you were kidding?
Well, either way, there's plenty of options. .
- -----Original Message-----
From: Mitchel Santorineos <mitchels@megsinet.net>
To: champ-l@sysabend.org <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 3:12 AM
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
>>At 11:28 AM 5/11/99 -0500, Mitchel Santorineos wrote:
>>>>It's got it's own sourcebook. I liked it, but someone is bound to
>>>>mention that Viperia is really gross. She's a Supergirl clone. I
>actually had to toughen her up for an appearence in my game...
>>>
>
>>>Yeah, I had the same problem with Viperia. Most of the characters in my
>campaign could easily beat her one on one.
>>
>>dang you guys have a lot of points in your campaigns... you probably
>>whupped on Genocide's 250 point 'agents' too
>
>
>Yeah, neither, Genocide nor Viper have been a problem for quite awhile.
The
>heroes all fall within 600 and 1000 points. It's hard to believe that just
>9 short years ago these people were just 250 point beginners.
>
>It becomes more and more challenging to find threats great enough to
require
>more than one or two members of the group to show up.
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:15:15 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Nuncheon <jeffj@io.com>
To: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Cc: Champions Mailing List <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 4:22 AM
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
>On Tue, 11 May 1999, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>> I agree, and thats my basic problem with experience. Its fun to expand
and
>> grow your character, but in all honesty, read the comics, in the 70 or so
>> year history of comic books, how much have the characters really grown in
>> power?
>
>Superman grew in power so much from his original appearance that they took
>advantage of resetting the universe to tone him down.
>
>Spider-man might not have gotten any more powerful, but he has picked up a
>lot of new tricks. When he first started out, he didn't have
>Spider-Tracers, for example, and I think his web-shooters/web fluid has
>been redesigned.
>
>Magneto increased in power to ridiculous levels over many years.
>
>Iron Man has redesigned his suit for greater/different power many times.
>
>Personally, I think that experience is better used to broaden a character
>rather than increasing existing powers. A great example is the
>spider-tracers - it's taking something based on the powers/SFX of the
>character ('spider sense') and making a new power out of it.
>
. . .not to mention spidey's mass of contacts, favours,
perks and so on, and a gaget vpp he rarely uses,
but has sometimes, especially reguarding costume variants.
Another option for vpp's is the 'power stunt', where a super starts
thinking really laterally about their pwers and using them in
all sorts of clever ways.
>J
>
>Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
>Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:25:43 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
oh good, another 'fac't. . look, comics characters change constantly.
their powers fluctuate, their social status changes, but they make
progress. You name any six characters and if i know them i'll
tell you how they've progressed, and they have.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
To: champ-l@sysabend.org <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 5:03 AM
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
>>> I agree, and thats my basic problem with experience. Its fun to expand
and
>>> grow your character, but in all honesty, read the comics, in the 70 or
so
>>> year history of comic books, how much have the characters really grown
in
>>> power?
>>
>>Superman grew in power so much from his original appearance that they took
>>advantage of resetting the universe to tone him down.
>
>>Spider-man might not have gotten any more powerful, but he has picked up a
>>lot of new tricks. When he first started out, he didn't have
>>Spider-Tracers, for example, and I think his web-shooters/web fluid has
>>been redesigned.
>>
>>Magneto increased in power to ridiculous levels over many years.
>
>You know as well as I do that these are all exceptions and hardly the rule,
>comic book characters, characters in books, movies etc by the great
>majority do NOT grow in power over the years (the notable exception being
>characters that are children or the story is specifically about their
>training), especially compared to how it works in role playing games. The
>fact is, RPG's do not accurately represent the source material in this.
>
>>Iron Man has redesigned his suit for greater/different power many times.
>
>Dozens, perhaps hundreds of times, but you see the same villains and the
>same level of difficulty for him, dont you? He changes design but really
>doesn't get any more powerful.
>
and you also see threats that were once challenging being hammered
by supers, unless they, too, get a boost.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
>Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:30:21 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Nuncheon <jeffj@io.com>
>Flash - Barry Allen just kept getting faster and faster and faster...
>
and wally west is currently at light speed, and can speed up chemical
reactions
and 'lend speed', resulting for instance in one jla story in which superman
travels very, very, very, very, fast. . . . then again, i haven't read the
flash for a few issues
now.. . .
>Green Lantern - Another excellent example of someone who grew - a lot - in
>raw power.
>
not to mention what the implied ap levels of his powers are. Clearly
he's making progress in what types of thngs he can make.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 13:41:32 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Farie Fire ver 2.0
At 06:26 PM 5/11/1999 GMT, <owner-champ-l@sysabend.org> wrote:
>From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
>Cc: Champions Mailing List <champ-l@sysabend.org>
>Subject: Re: Farie Fire ver 2.0
>
>> >Farie Fire: Images: vs Sight, +4 to PER, Useable against others (+1),
>> >Ranged (+1/2), Only to counteract darkness penalties (-1),
>> >Gestures (-1/2), One Use Lasting One Turn (-1 1/4)
>>
>> When I use Images to make things more perceptible, I don't use UAO; and
>> I don't think Ranged would be needed either (I'm assuming anyway that you
>> included that mainly to go with UAO).
>
>Except UAO is needed to cast it on another target. And yes, I included
>Ragned because of UAO.
Actually, no, you don't need UAO to cast it on another target, because
Images already affects targets other than self as written.
However, you may wish to add a -1 Limitation for "single target" (as
opposed to the default Area Effect).
>> Otherwise, for this particular effect, it looks OK.
>> That said, though, shouldn't there be something to reduce DCV, according
>> to the description you originally sent out?
>
>I guess so... it looks like time to Link <gasp> one power to another!
Yeah... bummer, huh?
- ---
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, 11 May 1999 13:50:23 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Farie Fire ver 2.0
At 03:03 PM 5/11/1999 -0400, Bill Svitavsky wrote:
>
>If you're aiming for an exact translation of the AD&D spell, you might want
>to keep in mind that the "To Hit' number in AD&D is not exactly the same as
>Hero's Attack Roll; Armor Class encompasses PD & ED as well as DCV. So,
>while a DEX/DCV Drain could simulate a bonus to hit, so could a PD & ED
>Drain. This doesn't seem that much more implausible an effect of a wreath
>of flames than the DCV penalty, and it's easier to construct.
This would depend somewhat on how the original spell's description is
written. Does it say it increases others' chance to hit, or degrades the
target's AC? If the latter, I'd make it a PD/ED Drain; otherwise stick
with DCV Drain.
- ---
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, 12 May 1999 10:46:25 +1000
From: "happyelf" <jonesl@cqnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: VIPER: What is it?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
>I cannot deny that they a have grown and changed slightly over time, but
>again, compare that to (in Batman's case) fifty YEARS of experience.
that would make bruce wayne roughtly seventy. while i myself
champion the cause of character time=experience (hence spidey
should be considered a very vetran hero reguardless of age)
there i still a line. bats is like, 35 at the oldest, i think.
>On
>average, in my games, the characters get 20 experience or so a year, and I
>tend to be on the low end. I have a hard time seeing that immense a growth
>in any character written in existence, and so do you, I warrent. The point
>still remains unchallenged, experience does not accurately model nor
>simulate the source material.
>
To that degree, neither does a character sheet. . unless ever characters has
a
'plot device' vpp. Characters make progress. you want
less progress? give less xp.
>>That being my point: XP ought to be used to /broaden/ the characters
>>abilities rather than for more raw power. Instead of spending those 5 xp
>>to get a more powerful Repulsor Ray, Iron Man decides to stash them away
>>to help pay for a new set of 'Space Armor'. (Of course, IM's repulsor
>>rays are a lot more powerful now than they were when he first appeared...)
>
>He uses the space armor once in a blue moon and even in Hero terms that
>costs like... 10 points. If he was getting the xps for his adventures
>(even just 1 or 2 an issue he appears in) he would be somewhere like 500
>points bigger now, and I just dont see that in the character, do you?
>
perks, money, bases, vehicles, followers, ect. and life support
is low cost, that don't prove anything.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
>Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:16:43 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Re: Amberite Question
Curt Hicks wrote:
> > From owner-champ-l@sysabend.org Tue May 11 15:13 CDT 1999
> >
> > Actually, he knew that the sword was back in Amber, but he made it appear,
> > hidden in the tree. You don't see this much later on, although Logrus
> > initiates can reach through Shadow to 'grab' things (as Merlin
> > demonstrates). It could be that most Amberites can only do that to things
> > they have some connection with - after all, Corwin has to physically go
> > through Shadow to get his guns, etc. Possibly the only reason he was able
> > to 'conjure' Greyswandir was that he was connected to it in a metaphysical
> > sense.
> >
> There's a section in the Merlin series where Merlin asks a friend if he
> wants a beer and reaches through Shadow to fetch two beers. Merlin comments
> that he "specified beer" so he knows that it's not poisonous....
>
> Have we had this discussion before ?
>
> Curt
I haven't
Merlins power relates to his duo heritage.. Amber and the Courts of Chaos... he
is using the
logrus to fetch what he wants, Corwin doesnt have that luxury
Amberites can translate equipment as he goes making his equipment match the
universe
he travels through or allow it to stay the same and risk it not working.
Lance
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:19:53 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Re: Amberite Question
Draco Paladin wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 1999, Scott C. Nolan wrote:
>
> > I'm torn between not modelling this at all, any more than I'd model
> > another character's ability to leave footprints or write his name on
> > a blackboard, and calling it an Aid (but to what?)
>
> I'd call it a SFX of being "real". There is no real advantage to a place
> being more "real" so I wouldn't bother trying to model it with a power.
Yes real things are innately more resistant to being affected by Logrus
or Amberite Power, and seem intrinsically better at affecting other real
things
And real places attract real people.
> > The more difficult question (for me) is how to model the Amberite's
> > ability to seek things out in shadow. For instance, without knowing
> > the location in infinite shadow of his sword, Greyswandir, Corwin is
> > able to simply move to its location. Is this a form of summoning?
>
> Summon sounds like a good idea. Corwin didn't move to Greyswandir's
> location, he called it to himself. Although (at least according to ADRPG,
> although the books seem to imply this) it only works for personal items
> (ones that character points have been paid for).
>
> --
> Mother is the name for GOD on the lips and
> hearts of all children. - Eric Draven
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:32:27 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@radiks.net>
Subject: Lady Champions...
It sounds like some ladies do indeed have a series of heroic roles in modern
cinema..
Sandra Bullock in Speed 2 and in the Net, Practical Magic, The Demolition Man
who knows maybe this isnt that gender limited
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 19:08:35 -0700
From: jayphailey@juno.com
Subject: Re: Inquest Gamer: Champions is Dead?
>It's hard to say. I'm not particularly enamored of the genre on the
whole,
>so I'd probably be unlikely to want to. If I did, I might well use
Alternity.
Okay, thank you. Why Alternity?
>Nope. There's no explained rationale for mutants at all.
Ah. Thank you.
> The middle case doesn't seem to have much point to me.
I can tell that about you just from the ay you post... :)
>But there you. That's why I wouldn't use it; if I want to do that kind
of
>work, I'll do it myself all the way (though I'm not shy about snagging
the
>occasional bit to save myself work. For example, even though I don't
use
>Viper per se, Scott Bennie's book on same was such a tour-de-force on
the
>costumed badguy superagency that I stole the vast majority of it with a
>different background, name, and rationale when I was doing one of the
>two I do use. )
Ah Okay. thank you for the insight.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> [ICQ: 37959005]
Read Star Trek- Outwardly Mobile At-
http://www.geocities.com/~tesral/jay/
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 19:03:24 -0700
From: jayphailey@juno.com
Subject: Re: My problems... as per your request
>I don't have any problem with someone suggesting the way to address it
was
>to make CON more worthwile. I just didn't think his response engaged
>with my point as he presented it.
Okay. Granted.
>All too often, I see people respond to a
>criticism of a mechanic by saying, in effect, "Well, I don't think
>that's a problem because in my campaign I do X, Y and Z," when the
latter part
>of the statement is _why_ they don't think that's a problem...but since
X, Y
>and Z aren't part of the published rules, that doesn't have much to do
with
>why it'd be a problem for most people.
I disagree with this. Some presenting their fix for a problem as a house
out here in public is presenting their idea so that other people might
use it. So if the player has a problem with mechanic X, and sees a cool
house rule to fix it, and then the player uses the house rule then his
problem is fixed, isn't it?
If lots and lots of people start using a given house rule or variations
there of then the Game producers may want to take note for future
revisions.
But you're essentially asking the Hero System people to find a generic
fix for something that may not be a pronblem for other people.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> [ICQ: 37959005]
Read Star Trek- Outwardly Mobile At-
http://www.geocities.com/~tesral/jay/
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:56:49 -0700
From: jayphailey@juno.com
Subject: Re: Experience (was VIPER: What is it?)
>>I agree, and thats my basic problem with experience. Its fun to expand
and
>>grow your character, but in all honesty, read the comics, in the 70 or
so
>>year history of comic books, how much have the characters really grown
in
>>power? Its only in recent years that heroes suddenly had a surge in
power
>>level -- and the villains did too, effectively negating their increase
>>(sort of like a video game, yes you are more powerful but so are the
bad
>>guys, and you dont notice a change really). I dont like experience.
>
> When it gets like this, you guys are spending the experience
>wrongly (IMO).
In our Champons game, we had a problem with characters that grew into
dreadnoughts that were impossible to beat or even threaten adequately.
So as a compromise we installed the "Jeramie-Test" named for the player
that first proposed it. The Jeramie test set fairly strick limits on
attacks, CVs, defenses and the effects of most powers.
It was painful rewriting my personal eo-driven dreadnoughts down to the
Jeramie-test but in the end it prolonged the life time of the capaign for
at least two more years. it also forcd me to think through who these
people were and why they were doing the thing that they were doing.
And so my oldest characters with 200 - 300 points of experiences are just
about as combat effective as newer characters, they just have more
different options. (Which leverages their combat effectuivness quite a
bit) If the characters get too powerfulthey fail the jeramie-test.
> Experience can be used to make the characters more powerful, true,
>but it can also be used to broaden what characters can do. I don't just
>mean fancy power tricks and similar variations on the existing theme of
>what the character can do (though there certainly is that); I mean new
Skills
>(especially Knowledge Skills, though I also like to expand my
>characters' Language bases), and Perks (especially Contacts and Favors).
My older charatcers can do a large number of truly unusual things. A
danger of the Jeramie-Test mixed with the obligatory cross dimensional
games.
> Of course, I do understand that there comes a point where this just
>isn't practical any more. As a rule, any construct with 700+ points in
>experience (even when it's represented as an NPC Bonus) is going to be a
>combat monster compared with a beginning character, with high DEX,
>highdefenses, high DCs, multiple attacks, and all that rot.
I have nevr played a character to that level. <Sigh>
> As for characters in comics growing with experience, I find that
>what I describe here is roughly what has happened. Peter Parker was
very
>limited in his scope when Spider-Man was first introduced; over the
years,
>he's gotten a little tougher, but mostly he's gotten more versatile.
More experienced with dealing with the insanity. The Omega Squad
characters are not more powerful than they were at the beginning of the
game, by and large but they don't panic easily, and aren't terribly
imporessed by the flash. So monsters that used to last a whole evening
and affect the characrers deeply now elicit practiced responses and
perhaps a few word of shop talk over coffee...
It's really a matter of attitude.
> That's what I've tended to do with my characters' experience. Sure,
>they've gotten tougher, often pushing the campaign limits when the
campaign
>has lasted long enough. But I've also expanded their scope.
Sounds coool
> Take my longest-played character ever, Captain Glory. He started out
as
>just plain old Frank Lewis, an extraordinary ex-UNTIL agent who still
got
>himself into trouble now and then. After a year with the Portland
>Champions superhero team, he decided to get himself a real costume and
>high-tech weaponry; some saved-up experience became an armored costume,
>electromagnetic gun, and motorcycle. Over the course of the next year
and
>a half, he got a few extra weapons, a sidekick, and an alternate
powered-armor identity (through Multiform), along with the
aforementioned
>expansions in Skills and Perks. All of this happened on 186
>Experience Points by the time the campaign fell apart, and I probably
could >have spent at least as much all over again before he'd become
seriously more
>powerful than a beginning PC.
I have a number of characters hung out in limbo, waiting for something
nmew to happen as well.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> [ICQ: 37959005]
Read Star Trek- Outwardly Mobile At-
http://www.geocities.com/~tesral/jay/
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 18:58:07 -0700
From: jayphailey@juno.com
Subject: Re: My problems... as per your request
>It's not invalid, but it's also outside the scope of the rules as
written.
The only difference I see between altering the rules with house rules,
and asking for an alteration in the rules as written is either making the
game work better for you, or forcing the worl to admit that you're right.
And you're not, necessarily, except for yourself, and the sorts of games
you like to play.
>If someone is going to tell me that X is worth Y, then they need to show
me
>in what way, and in and of itself that's not the case with the rules
>as written.
I tell you that I find CON worth two points as I use it. I think the
people who developed the HSR and play tested it were on to something when
they made CON cost 2 cp per level.
And since we disagree, then we're right back into the question of who's
opinion weighs more. Objective "right" and "wrong" don't apply in this
case. It's a matter of opinion, IMHO.
>>So you're saying that if you count in Figured Stats, then STR costs too
>>little, while if you *don't* count the figured stats, then CON costs
too
>>much?
>
>Generally. STR after all, does a lot of things just by itself. It's a
>movement power, a no-range attack power, and a utility power. And it
gives
>you a bunch of figured stats that almost everyone wants on top of it.
CON,
>on the other hand, as written, prevents you from being stunned, and
>gives you a bunch of figured stats.
And it seems that you're not happy solving this for yourself and letting
the rest of us play the system as is.
>But my point was that your way isn't in the book.
Soooo? My point is that no system is perfect out of the box. We all have
to adjust them in use to suit our particular useages and tastes. And
because each person's tastes will differ, so will their alterations of
the basic system...
> That's why I say if you
>just remove figures stats, it's too expensive. If you remove figured
stats,
>and then deal with a bunch of other things you let CON effect, that's
>another discussion...and one that gets much more complex since it will
>also depend on how often people run into the things your CON rules
effect
>in the typical campaign.
That's true. but if my broader CON effects are somewhatarbitrary then why
isn't taking the figured stats out of the discussion also arbitrary?
>>Again we get to the question of whose opinion weighs more.
>
>That can be said on every rules discussion that has ever been had.
This is true. It means that, IMHO there is no objective "right" and
"wrong" to this discussion *ergo* I am free to decide what works and
doesn't for me and my games and you are free to decided what works and
doesn't work for you and your games.
It also means that if I find you have a solution that works better then
one I have, with your permission, I can norrow it and use and my games
will be better.
it also means that, should we ever find our se;lves gaming together, we
much reach some sort of compromise and middle ground about what we find
acceptable.
But the point I am harping on here is that labeling one part of the game
system "right" or "wrong" is. perhaps too broad a distinction to make.
That's why when I speak of how I use th game system I try to stiock to
"I" statements and speak about house rules and fixes that work in my
experience. I don't feel competent to tell people who have been working
on HSR for umpteen years how to do their jobs.
>And so far it doesn't look like, contrary to what you've said, you _do_
>disagree with my point...you're disagreeing with it from the perspective
of
>someone who's given CON a bunch of extra features.
Actually what I am specifically disagreeingf with is the idea of labeling
your opinions about CON and STR and verything else and objectively
"right" and "wrong" One more time, if I disagree with you, I may not
have thought sn idea through, I may not have considered all the
implications, you may, in fact, have a better idea. That does not make
me "wrong". it does not make you "right" and totally accurate to the
universe at large.
HSR and the things it describes are basically imaginary and unreal. had
to be factul about that srt of stuff.
And that's what I am spinning around and a around over.
As I have said, I find that the CON costing 2 per point work just fine
and I hav no intention of changing it. if ou find it dosn't work for you
then change it.
But don't try and dictate the game system to me, no matter how "right"
you think you are.
> Since how it works in your house
>rules is not what I was talking about, we're effectively having
>different discussions. That's why I blew off your houserules form the
>start...it wasn't the discussion I was trying to have.
Okay. I grok this. I don't think you're getting my point however.
>Which given the Hero System, that shouldn't make it cost more. If two
>things have the same effect in the Hero System, they should cost
>approximately the same. That's the underpinning of the system.
Ah. Then perhaps you're on to something. you may have the math in your
favor. But your polarized way of stating it leaves me a little resistant
to what you have to say. Would you please describe what sort of things
you mean?
>>A mistake *for you*.
>
>No. A mistake. You're disagreement does not make it less of a
>mistake.
Yes, in fact it certainly *does*. HSR has no existence outside the realm
of the imaginary. Since it exists only through the filter of each
person's perceptions, each person's opinion make it entirly right or
wrong in *thier* interpretation.
>There is always someone who likes any rule, no matter how stupid.
"Stupid" is such a subjective quality. Any one can label anything stupid
based on what criteria they choose. it's prsonal judgement. In fact
have just done so in the privacy of my own home recently. No reason in
the world it should effect you in the slightest.
>That does not require me to call it anything but a mistake. It simply
>requires me to explain why I say so, which I've been quite willing to
do.
Sure, but you calling something "stupid" or a "mistake" is no more
binding that my disagreement with your opinions. And the truth is, I my
be disagreeing with your mathematical proofs based on a whole different
set of criteria that you're using to call them proofs.
You can say that X is stupid until you're blue but I am using a different
yardstick to measure it then the answers just won't add up.
>>>He seemed to suggest it was a solution to the STR problem. I was
>>>pointing out it created an entirely different problem.
>>
>>Then what's your solution to the STR problem?
>
>I personally don't think there is one, short of tearing up the roots
>of the system.
Then by all means, do so and invent your own game system. All the game
hackers from the late 1970's and early 1980's do this. It's a given for
the people who learned gaming at that time that with enough though and
proper amount of inspiration, they can design a better system. Given that
most of them were playing Traveller of 1st edition AD&D this idea may not
be without merit.
So why not quit arguing to make the people own at Hero games do things
your way and build the better mouse trap?
> Charging 2 points per point for Strength can work for a Heroic
>game, but my observation on doing the numbers was that it created it's
>own difficulties in the superheroic games. On the whole, I decided the
>least harm was done simply leaving it alone.
Okay. Perhaps a graduated scale? Or perhaps some one down at Hero games
years ago went through the same sets of conceptual and mental gymastics?
And maybe they got to the same point you did, that 1 CP per level was the
best available compromise.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> [ICQ: 37959005]
Read Star Trek- Outwardly Mobile At-
http://www.geocities.com/~tesral/jay/
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Inquest Gamer: Champions is Dead?
>>It's hard to say. I'm not particularly enamored of the genre on the
>whole,
>>so I'd probably be unlikely to want to. If I did, I might well use
>Alternity.
>
>Okay, thank you. Why Alternity?
Because I think the mechanics are likely the soundest for what I'd want to
do, mostly. It's a bit less cinematic in it's bias than Hero, but is a bit
more full featured a system than some others I could use...such as C.P.2020.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: My problems... as per your request
>>All too often, I see people respond to a
>>criticism of a mechanic by saying, in effect, "Well, I don't think
>>that's a problem because in my campaign I do X, Y and Z," when the
>latter part
>>of the statement is _why_ they don't think that's a problem...but since
>X, Y
>>and Z aren't part of the published rules, that doesn't have much to do
>with
>>why it'd be a problem for most people.
>
>I disagree with this. Some presenting their fix for a problem as a house
>out here in public is presenting their idea so that other people might
>use it. So if the player has a problem with mechanic X, and sees a cool
>house rule to fix it, and then the player uses the house rule then his
>problem is fixed, isn't it?
_His_ is. But the problem with the rule hasn't gone away. And the fact
there is a fix for it doesn't mean the rule is fixed, if you understand the
distinction I'm making.
>
>If lots and lots of people start using a given house rule or variations
>there of then the Game producers may want to take note for future
>revisions.
>But you're essentially asking the Hero System people to find a generic
>fix for something that may not be a pronblem for other people.
By that standard no broken rule should be fixed at all, since it 'may not be
a problem for other people'.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: My problems... as per your request
>>It's not invalid, but it's also outside the scope of the rules as
>written.
>
>The only difference I see between altering the rules with house rules,
>and asking for an alteration in the rules as written is either making the
>game work better for you, or forcing the worl to admit that you're right.
The difference is, if the rules get fixed the next person doesn't need to do
a houserule. I tend to expect rules to work. If I'm going to patch them to
death, I might as well do my own.
>
>And you're not, necessarily, except for yourself, and the sorts of games
>you like to play.
Like I said, this argument destroys any intelligable way to discuss whether
rules are well written at all, since it declares the problem out of existance.
>I tell you that I find CON worth two points as I use it. I think the
>people who developed the HSR and play tested it were on to something when
>they made CON cost 2 cp per level.
They also made it give a bunch of figured characteristics. I've never
argued that that Con is too expensive as is; I've argued it's too expensive
if you take the figured characteristics out of it. Please try to keep in
mind what I'm talking about, and not put words in my mouth.
>>Generally. STR after all, does a lot of things just by itself. It's a
>>movement power, a no-range attack power, and a utility power. And it
>gives
>>you a bunch of figured stats that almost everyone wants on top of it.
>CON,
>>on the other hand, as written, prevents you from being stunned, and
>>gives you a bunch of figured stats.
>
>And it seems that you're not happy solving this for yourself and letting
>the rest of us play the system as is.
No, I'm not happy having fixes that address one problem by creating another.
>Soooo? My point is that no system is perfect out of the box. We all have
>to adjust them in use to suit our particular useages and tastes. And
>because each person's tastes will differ, so will their alterations of
>the basic system...
Actually, I disagree with the premise. A game system doesn't have to be
perfect, but when certain fundamentals create certain sorts of problems
repeatedly, those problems should be addressed...at least if they can.
>> That's why I say if you
>>just remove figures stats, it's too expensive. If you remove figured
>stats,
>>and then deal with a bunch of other things you let CON effect, that's
>>another discussion...and one that gets much more complex since it will
>>also depend on how often people run into the things your CON rules
>effect
>>in the typical campaign.
>
>That's true. but if my broader CON effects are somewhatarbitrary then why
>isn't taking the figured stats out of the discussion also arbitrary?
Because that was the _point_ of the discussion. Your houserule wasn't.
It's like saying "Commuting by air is too expensive for the typical middle
class person," and having a rich guy pipe up "It isn't for me, because I
have my own plane". He's broadened the scope of the discussion into
meaninglessness.
>
>>>Again we get to the question of whose opinion weighs more.
>>
>>That can be said on every rules discussion that has ever been had.
>
>This is true. It means that, IMHO there is no objective "right" and
>"wrong" to this discussion *ergo* I am free to decide what works and
>doesn't for me and my games and you are free to decided what works and
>doesn't work for you and your games.
In other words, rules discussions are pointless.
>it also means that, should we ever find our se;lves gaming together, we
>much reach some sort of compromise and middle ground about what we find
>acceptable.
Or not play together. Sometimes there is no useful middle ground. There
are people I encounter on the Net every day that have styles so different
from my own that attempting to play with them would simply be annoying to
both of us.
>
>But the point I am harping on here is that labeling one part of the game
>system "right" or "wrong" is. perhaps too broad a distinction to make.
And there is no other way to discuss costs but by doing that. At that point
you've effectively decided all the costs are completely arbitrary, and there
is not logic to them.
>That's why when I speak of how I use th game system I try to stiock to
>"I" statements and speak about house rules and fixes that work in my
>experience. I don't feel competent to tell people who have been working
>on HSR for umpteen years how to do their jobs.
Since I've been using the system about as long as the designers, I do.
>Actually what I am specifically disagreeingf with is the idea of labeling
>your opinions about CON and STR and verything else and objectively
>"right" and "wrong" One more time, if I disagree with you, I may not
>have thought sn idea through, I may not have considered all the
>implications, you may, in fact, have a better idea. That does not make
>me "wrong". it does not make you "right" and totally accurate to the
>universe at large.
And I think you're essentially making a semantic arguement that turns every
rules argument into a pit of utter subjectivity and therefor useless. So,
yes, I reject that.
>As I have said, I find that the CON costing 2 per point work just fine
>and I hav no intention of changing it. if ou find it dosn't work for you
>then change it.
One. More. Damn. Time.
I have never said CON is too expensive. I've said _if you drop the figured
stats_ it is. If you can't keep track of my point, why even talk to me
about it?
>But don't try and dictate the game system to me, no matter how "right"
>you think you are.
If I think you're wrong, of course I'll tell you so. And argue with you if
you disagree. You're quite welcome to ignore me, of course.
>Okay. I grok this. I don't think you're getting my point however.
I get it. I partially disagree with it, and partly think it's irrelevant.
>>Which given the Hero System, that shouldn't make it cost more. If two
>>things have the same effect in the Hero System, they should cost
>>approximately the same. That's the underpinning of the system.
>
>Ah. Then perhaps you're on to something. you may have the math in your
>favor. But your polarized way of stating it leaves me a little resistant
>to what you have to say. Would you please describe what sort of things
>you mean?
I mentioned it earlier in the thread. When you can buy an extra point of PD
and ED both for the cost of simply making you harder to stun, something is
wrong.
>>No. A mistake. You're disagreement does not make it less of a
>>mistake.
>
>Yes, in fact it certainly *does*. HSR has no existence outside the realm
>of the imaginary. Since it exists only through the filter of each
>person's perceptions, each person's opinion make it entirly right or
>wrong in *thier* interpretation.
And there is nothing that makes their interpetation correct. In a properly
designed game system, there are certain admittedly fuzzy assumptions about
how parts of the system interact. If a portion of the system seems to
violate that, barring a specific intended reason, then it is quite right to
talk about that part of the system being 'wrong'.
>
>>There is always someone who likes any rule, no matter how stupid.
>
>"Stupid" is such a subjective quality. Any one can label anything stupid
>based on what criteria they choose. it's prsonal judgement. In fact
>have just done so in the privacy of my own home recently. No reason in
>the world it should effect you in the slightest.
And no reason I am required to consider someone else's judgement that seems
flawed as correct.
>Sure, but you calling something "stupid" or a "mistake" is no more
>binding that my disagreement with your opinions. And the truth is, I my
>be disagreeing with your mathematical proofs based on a whole different
>set of criteria that you're using to call them proofs.
But at least at that point you have to present your assumptions, and they
can be addressed and compared with not only my assumptions, but with the
apparent ones in the game. There is still objective argument to be had there.
>
>You can say that X is stupid until you're blue but I am using a different
>yardstick to measure it then the answers just won't add up.
It depends if I can show you your yardstick is broken, and why.
>>I personally don't think there is one, short of tearing up the roots
>>of the system.
>
>Then by all means, do so and invent your own game system. All the game
>hackers from the late 1970's and early 1980's do this. It's a given for
>the people who learned gaming at that time that with enough though and
>proper amount of inspiration, they can design a better system. Given that
>most of them were playing Traveller of 1st edition AD&D this idea may not
>be without merit.
It's too much work for the yield. I've tried.
>
>So why not quit arguing to make the people own at Hero games do things
>your way and build the better mouse trap?
See above.
>
>> Charging 2 points per point for Strength can work for a Heroic
>>game, but my observation on doing the numbers was that it created it's
>>own difficulties in the superheroic games. On the whole, I decided the
>>least harm was done simply leaving it alone.
>
>Okay. Perhaps a graduated scale? Or perhaps some one down at Hero games
>years ago went through the same sets of conceptual and mental gymastics?
>And maybe they got to the same point you did, that 1 CP per level was the
>best available compromise.
Actually, part of the problem is that the system really was never designed
for heroic games. The fact it works for them with the latter day
adjustments just shows the all-encompassing nature of the superhero genre.
The kicker is that some of the balancing elements that make strength not an
entirely winning way in the superhero setting (power frameworks for the most
part) don't exist in most heroic settings, so it's attractiveness can easily
be overwhelming.
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #337
*****************************
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 03:57 PM