Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 417
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 12:11 AM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #417
champ-l-digest Tuesday, June 22 1999 Volume 01 : Number 417
In this issue:
Re: Partial Use of Powers
two weapon combat...
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Heroic-level TK
Susceptability and Disads
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Welcome to the Modern Age (fwd)
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Susceptability and Disads
I remeber the other post...
Re: Susceptability and Disads
Re: Teleportation Revisited
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Question about Concepts
Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Fantasy HERO & Questions about it...
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Question about Concepts
Re: Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Question about Concepts
Re: Partial Use of Powers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:10:54 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 12:08 PM 6/21/1999 PDT, S A Rudy wrote:
>>OK, how about this concept: a character has the ability to turn invisible.
>>Normally, a fringe effect is discernable, but when he wants to, he can
>>eliminate the fringe (by using more END, Concentrating, etc.).
>
>You see, now *this* example is why I think that (SFX
>permitting), it's all right to let people use part of a
>power.
>
>According to the rules, you can take advantages and
>disadvatages on only part of a power. So, you'd take the
>"Concentration" disad only on the Fringe.
More than once, members of this list have suggested constructs that
involved taking a Limitation on the Advantage of a Power, not on the base
Power itself. I wish I could think of an example of that at the moment,
but I can't.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:20:50 -0500
From: Lance Dyas <lancelot@inetnebr.com>
Subject: two weapon combat...
qts wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 20:09:49 -0500, Lance Dyas wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >qts wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 25 May 1999 22:57:45 -0400 (EDT), Jason Sullivan wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > You have to forgive my ignorance when dealing with the Heroic 75
> >> >base + 75 point Disadvantages Fantasy HERO standard campagin. I'm very
> >> >used to using the 100 point base + 150 point Disadvantage Superheroic
> >> >Campagin rules from Champions.
> >> >
> >> > My first question arises:
> >> >
> >> > What to do about "Special Weapon Maneuvers."
> >> >
> >> > For example, in a Champions game, if I wanted a two-weapon knife
> >> >fighter, I would buy a standard HKA with OAF, and then buy Autofire, OAF
> >> >(the other knife), and Limited Power: Uses seperate Levels and attack
> >> >rolls (-1/4) to simulate the ginsu-type chopping action of the two bladed
> >> >attack.
> >> >
> >> >In Fantasy HERO, this is not so... you don't pay points for
> >> >standard weapon attacks.
> >>
> >> >My question is: How do I resolve this?
> >>
> >> The 'two weapon' is SFX. You only get one hit on the opponent.
> >> Otherwise you'd have people fighting with two katana. For the first
> >> strike or two, you'd probably get an OCV bonus for the surprise of the
> >> unusual fighting style - unless your opponent knew beforehand (eg
> >> Reputation).
> >>
> >
> >In the real world the most skilled of Martial Artist Samurai do indeed use
> >two katana. I am sure they do so for some other reason than special effects
> >;)
>
> Well, yes - I have some swords and can wield two simultaneously. But
> that doesn't mean that I can hit twice as often. The second sword is
> often better used for blocking, and for providing an unexpected attack
> - you can switch the other sword to block. Not a lot of good against
> ranged attacks, though.
>
> But, in game terms, you only get one Strike per phase, and, I'd
> suggest, 1/2 Str vs Disarms.
Bad game terms... they are paying extra pts of skill to wield them large ones
simultaneously (seems like it in the real world)
and it seems to me they can go defensive(as you mention) or offensive with that
extra weapon the simplist game
terms might be having a two weapon strike which does extra damage (maybe only one
Damage Class but hey) with an
accuracy cost additionally an opponent blocking the attack of any two weapon
fighter shouldnt necessarily give them the inititiative.
(and I believe you mean In game terms reduce strength by 5 compared to someone
wielding a weapon two handed
but I think you are putting a penalty in where I would give the two handed weapon
wielder a bonus of 5 to his effective str)
Lance
this is really an old
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:27:01 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 05:16 PM 6/21/1999 -0700, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>>If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... I'll rephrase my
>>earlier comment: An option should be considered an Advantage, or not, based
>>on what it does to enhance a Power, not on the basis of pricing scheme (or
>>on what page it appears in the book).
>
>Here is my take on it. Add ons are not advantages, they are additional
>'modules' to the power, like oh +1" of flight adds on to the power and
>increases the utility of the power (I fly FASTER!).
The word 'module' does not appear in the Glossary; nor does 'add-on'. I
accept the use of these terms as accurate general descriptions, but as they
are not reserved [captilized] words with specific meaning, they cannot be
used exclusively. That is, you can't say they are the only words that
*can* correctly be used to describe those options.
>Advantages are clearly labled as such, example:
>
>Page 68: Entangle Stops a Given Sense: Entangles can be purcahsed so that
>(they) are impervious to certain senses...to be impervious to one sense
>group costs +10 points.
>
>Page 68: Entangle Takes No Damage From Attack: This +1/2 ADVANTAGE
>(emphasis mine) represents an entangle that is transparent to attacks...
>
>As you can see if it is an Advantage they say so clearly, if it is an
>add-on, they are just given a straight cost.
This reasoning is circular; you say *all* Advantages are clearly labeled as
such because you don't perceive anything to be an Advantage, regardless of
function, unless it *is* labeled as such. I could use similar reasoning to
"prove" that not all Advantages are clearly labeled as such.
And by the way, thanks for pointing out those examples of Advantages that
aren't in the Power Advantages section. Perhaps at least that minor point
can be conceded by those who had argued "No Fringe" wasn't an Advantage due
to its placement within the book.
>Your definition of Advantage applies to any power that you
>spend points on (buying Force Wall? that +3 ED is an additional cost that
>increases the utility of the PD force wall that you bought originally.
(a) It wasn't "my" definition, it's Hero's. I didn't write their Glossary.
(b) Part of that definition requires the power be modified. Changed.
Altered. Adding +3 ED to a Force Wall doesn't change the Force Wall in any
meaningful way. Hardening it against Teleportation does. That's why
"Hardened" is an Advantage but "+3 ED" is not.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 18:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
>At 12:08 PM 6/21/1999 PDT, S A Rudy wrote:
>>>OK, how about this concept: a character has the ability to turn invisible.
>>>Normally, a fringe effect is discernable, but when he wants to, he can
>>>eliminate the fringe (by using more END, Concentrating, etc.).
>>
>>You see, now *this* example is why I think that (SFX
>>permitting), it's all right to let people use part of a
>>power.
>>
>>According to the rules, you can take advantages and
>>disadvatages on only part of a power. So, you'd take the
>>"Concentration" disad only on the Fringe.
>
>More than once, members of this list have suggested constructs that
>involved taking a Limitation on the Advantage of a Power, not on the base
>Power itself. I wish I could think of an example of that at the moment,
>but I can't.
There are a lot of potential ones, but the one I've used most often was a
character with a natural energy projection power but a focus that allowed
them to use the energy blast to create an Explosion, or focus it down to be
Armor Piercing. I've also seen people who used Activations this way to
represent people who were sitll in the process of learning to use their
powers in odd ways, but didn't always pull off the funky parts yet.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:01:46 -0700
From: jayphailey@juno.com
Subject: Re: Heroic-level TK
>Hmm interesting, probably underpriced but at least it would allow a
>character to buy very low STR TK ... and the upper end would be lower
so
>the "TK costs too much" crowd would be happier (I think its well priced,
TK
>is INCREDIBLY useful).
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
>Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
>Soli Deo Gloria Solus Christus Corum Deo
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
Loooks good to me.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> [ICQ: 37959005]
Read Star Trek- Outwardly Mobile At-
http://www.geocities.com/~tesral/jay/
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:07:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thane Cicero <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Susceptability and Disads
Powers that have Side Effects that can result in Physical and
Psychological Limitations.
Can a Susceptability result in a Psychological or Physical
Limitation? This would prove useful for certain effects...
Example:
Empath is a Mentalist with various empathic SFX based
powers. Unfortunately, she has a hard time dealing with psi-empathic
resonances, or "emotional static" around her. They often over-
whelm Empath, and her target's traits are "duplicated" on to her.
Empath's player decides to take Telepathy with Side
Effects, defined as Empathy (appropiate Limitations: Only to read
emotions), with the Side Effects being Duplication (appropiate
Limitations: Only to duplicate Mental statistics and Psychological
Limitations/Personality of target).
Empath's player also decides to take a Susceptibility to
Strong Emotion (Common, Instant, 3d6), defined as giving her the "Strong
Emotional Traits" she feels around her, even while not actively scanning
minds.
Months later, Empath later decides to buy off these Disadvantages
after a group of VIXEN agents had captured her and held her prisoner
inside a psychiatric ward... with less than favorable consequences.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jun 1999 22:12:31 -0400
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
* "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net> on Mon, 21 Jun 1999
| OK, how about this concept: a character has the ability to turn invisible.
| Normally, a fringe effect is discernable, but when he wants to, he can
| eliminate the fringe (by using more END, Concentrating, etc.). How would
| this be written up in game terms? How would that be usable in a Multipower?
By the book, you have two Multipower slots, one with No Fringe and its
associated limitations, one without. Most GMs that I know will let things
like this slide, though.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE3bvEOgl+vIlSVSNkRAvuDAJ9vAQODoYstlr8pQrwfPL4r2Le9eACgwJGT
jAd5DmZOLaYtQhgzfNjzL9A=
=jtbD
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ Do not use Happy Fun Ball on concrete.
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jun 1999 22:17:09 -0400
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
* Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@fmco.com> on Mon, 21 Jun 1999
| I agree that advantages on powers should be considered active whenever the
| power is active. However, I don't agree that a character must use all the
| active points of a power.
I never said otherwise. Thing is, Invisiblity does not have a variable
active point level like, say, Energy Blast. If I have an 8D6 Armor
Piercing EB, I could opt to use only 4D6 of it, but those 4D6 are still AP
and I have to spend the end for a 6DC attack. Asking to use Invisiblity
without the No Fringe advantage is like me asking to use my 8D6 EB without
the AP advantage which, by the book, is illegal.
As for "beam", it *ONLY* applies to Energy Blast. No other power can have
it, so it is irrelevant to any discussion about Invisibility.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE3bvIlgl+vIlSVSNkRAi+/AKC6lCnx/l4NpnSdH801cslmwlgWaQCghx1N
O7bLabdVW8VjkbFIdXMvlz4=
=/gyv
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ If Happy Fun Ball begins to smoke, get
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ away immediately. Seek shelter and cover
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ head.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:19:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: Welcome to the Modern Age (fwd)
How's this for life imitating art?
- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
A train station is where trains stop. A bus station is where buses stop.
Well, I'm at a workstation.
A NEW BREED OF THINKING COMPUTER?
A team of researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and
a handful of other groups are working to develop hybrid
biocomputers that marry living nerve cells with silicon circuits
to create smarter computers. If they succeed, they could set the
foundation for brain-like computer systems that could find
solutions on their own, with no need for step-by-step programming
instructions. So far, researchers have joined two neurons from
leeches and linked them to a personal computer, which sent
signals to each cell and correctly extracted the answer to a
simple addition problem. The program that links the neurons and
the PC, dubbed "wetware," is based on chaos theory, using the
results to tune the neurons and alter the way they communicate.
Ultimately, brain-like chips will be more creative and may mirror
both the good and bad aspects of human thinking. William L.
Ditto, who heads the project at the Georgia Institute of
Technology, says it will be 10 years or more until biocomputers
are commercially available. (Business Week 06/21/99)
One step at a time, next they'll be able to stimulate thought in humans too.
**DMAN
****************************************************************************
***Welcome to the modern age
"Joe Sheftic is THE Man!!"
****************************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:20:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
> I never said otherwise. Thing is, Invisiblity does not have a variable
> active point level like, say, Energy Blast. If I have an 8D6 Armor
> Piercing EB, I could opt to use only 4D6 of it, but those 4D6 are still AP
> and I have to spend the end for a 6DC attack. Asking to use Invisiblity
> without the No Fringe advantage is like me asking to use my 8D6 EB without
> the AP advantage which, by the book, is illegal.
<snip>
Isn't there a semi-offical house rule bastard supplement book old
edition Advantage that lets you voluntarily turn on or shut off
Advantages?
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jun 1999 22:25:58 -0400
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Susceptability and Disads
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
* Thane Cicero <ravanos@NJCU.edu> on Mon, 21 Jun 1999
| Powers that have Side Effects that can result in Physical and
| Psychological Limitations.
Generally speaking, this is not allowed except with special dispensation
from the GM. The "proper" way to do this is with a Transformation Side
Effect a la Horror Hero.
| Can a Susceptability result in a Psychological or Physical
| Limitation? This would prove useful for certain effects...
Again, generally speaking, this is not allowed, although I see little
reason why the damage from Susceptability could not be converted to a
Transformation (see previous).
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE3bvQ1gl+vIlSVSNkRAlCjAKCa/0M8EBrqtjuwi5vcpl/S+cFu1gCg9S2a
4O6awyTJ4z3+xqWjWvQ6IUY=
=ls1H
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ If Happy Fun Ball begins to smoke, get
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ away immediately. Seek shelter and cover
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ head.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:26:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: I remeber the other post...
In regards to using Spirit Rules for Androids...
You can either approach it from a Spirit in Body approach, like Bob
suggested (buying the Body OIF... or as an Automaton [which works better
IMHO {Trivia: anyone here remeber the possessing villian who was
Desolid/or spirit and possessed a woman who was a mindless human created
as an Automaton?}]),
or, you can have a Multiform, where the Robot costs more than a
secondary form, and the Multiform is triggered with the
destruction/incapatication of the physical body.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:27:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu>
Subject: Re: Susceptability and Disads
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
> * Thane Cicero <ravanos@NJCU.edu> on Mon, 21 Jun 1999
> | Powers that have Side Effects that can result in Physical and
> | Psychological Limitations.
> Generally speaking, this is not allowed except with special dispensation
> from the GM. The "proper" way to do this is with a Transformation Side
> Effect a la Horror Hero.
> | Can a Susceptability result in a Psychological or Physical
> | Limitation? This would prove useful for certain effects...
> Again, generally speaking, this is not allowed, although I see little
> reason why the damage from Susceptability could not be converted to a
> Transformation (see previous).
Any suggestion for the ammount of points acquired/granuality of
the Transformation?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 21:45:44 -0500
From: "J. Alan Easley" <alaneasley@email.com>
Subject: Re: Teleportation Revisited
From: St Julian Perkins Jr <sjp_enterprises@hotmail.com>
> Tp 10" w/ x16 extra mass, Ranged {to negate the touch limitation, BUT must
> roll to 'acquire' all passengers}
>
> Tp 10" w/ x16 extra mass, AE:Radius {to negate the touch and individual
> targeting rolls}; no bonus for no range
>
> Tp 10", Use Vs Others w/ x2 extra mass {the motorcycles}, AE:Radius, No
> Range; The character goes along because he's always in the area effect
>
> Tp 10", Plot Device, Use when GM feels like it. 8-)
>
> Personally, I prefer the third option, but in the interest of fair play
> would like other opinions Thanks again for the input.
Not really sure what kind of opinion you want. They all appear to be valid
constructs except the "Plot Device." I don't personally like Plot Devices
that aren't built, if for no other reason simply to see how expensive an
effect you are really creating. Just make sure you aren't giving option 3 a
limitation for No Range. Which one you pick depends on what the special
effect of the power is supposed to be. If you have any specific concerns
let me know.
Alan
HeroRPG-owner@onelist.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:57:22 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
>>Here is my take on it. Add ons are not advantages, they are additional
>>'modules' to the power, like oh +1" of flight adds on to the power and
>>increases the utility of the power (I fly FASTER!).
>
>The word 'module' does not appear in the Glossary; nor does 'add-on'. I
>accept the use of these terms as accurate general descriptions, but as they
>are not reserved [captilized] words with specific meaning, they cannot be
>used exclusively. That is, you can't say they are the only words that
>*can* correctly be used to describe those options.
Thats why I used the statement "Here is my take on it."
>>Advantages are clearly labled as such, example:
>>
>>Page 68: Entangle Stops a Given Sense: Entangles can be purcahsed so that
>>(they) are impervious to certain senses...to be impervious to one sense
>>group costs +10 points.
>>
>>Page 68: Entangle Takes No Damage From Attack: This +1/2 ADVANTAGE
>>(emphasis mine) represents an entangle that is transparent to attacks...
>>
>>As you can see if it is an Advantage they say so clearly, if it is an
>>add-on, they are just given a straight cost.
>
>This reasoning is circular; you say *all* Advantages are clearly labeled as
>such because you don't perceive anything to be an Advantage, regardless of
>function, unless it *is* labeled as such. I could use similar reasoning to
>"prove" that not all Advantages are clearly labeled as such.
You are going to have to explain that to me, how is it circular to point
out how advantages are labled as such? The example I gave is in the same
section together, an advantage (labled) and an add on (not labled) which
you would prefer to call an advantage. But if it was, don't you think it
would be called such? Why would they lable everything with a +x notation
Advantage (they do, every place in the rules) unless that was what they
were, as opposed to other examples?
>And by the way, thanks for pointing out those examples of Advantages that
>aren't in the Power Advantages section. Perhaps at least that minor point
>can be conceded by those who had argued "No Fringe" wasn't an Advantage due
>to its placement within the book.
Yep, there are advantages placed in the main body of powers.
>>Your definition of Advantage applies to any power that you
>>spend points on (buying Force Wall? that +3 ED is an additional cost that
>>increases the utility of the PD force wall that you bought originally.
>
>(a) It wasn't "my" definition, it's Hero's. I didn't write their Glossary.
Your definition extended what was given to include things without a + added
to it, that is what I meant by 'your definition.'
>(b) Part of that definition requires the power be modified. Changed.
>Altered. Adding +3 ED to a Force Wall doesn't change the Force Wall in any
>meaningful way. Hardening it against Teleportation does. That's why
>"Hardened" is an Advantage but "+3 ED" is not.
What you are assuming is that a power is a single cost (Invisibility,
Desolidification, etc) which taken literally (work with me here this is
called Reductio Ad Absurdum) can be applied to a single defense of a power.
So you can use that assumption to say that when you buy Force Wall at 3
PD, it is a power. As you add ED (+3 in this instance) this has the effect
you accurately quote from the Glossary "...makes the power more useful.
This increases the cost of the Power because it makes it better."
However, if you look more closely, the word "MODIFIER" is used in the
definition of Advantage. Modifier is not defined in the glossary, oddly
enough, but in the Modifier section is this helpful note: "When listed on a
character sheet, Power Advantages are listed with a plus (+). Power
Limitations are listed with a minus (-).
This, combined with the description of each advantage saying it is such
seems to indicate that advantages have a +x construction, and add-ons are
thus not advantages.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Deo Gloria Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:59:21 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
>> I never said otherwise. Thing is, Invisiblity does not have a variable
>> active point level like, say, Energy Blast. If I have an 8D6 Armor
>> Piercing EB, I could opt to use only 4D6 of it, but those 4D6 are still AP
>> and I have to spend the end for a 6DC attack. Asking to use Invisiblity
>> without the No Fringe advantage is like me asking to use my 8D6 EB without
>> the AP advantage which, by the book, is illegal.
><snip>
>
> Isn't there a semi-offical house rule bastard supplement book old
>edition Advantage that lets you voluntarily turn on or shut off
>Advantages?
There was the old Variable Effect advantage (+1/4) that let you do that.
It also lets you do such things as use your force field at different
defense levels etc.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Deo Gloria Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jun 1999 23:22:53 -0400
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
* Jason Sullivan <ravanos@NJCU.edu> on Mon, 21 Jun 1999
| Isn't there a semi-offical house rule bastard supplement book old
| edition Advantage that lets you voluntarily turn on or shut off
| Advantages?
Not that I know of off-hand. There might be some such in one of the
Almanacs, but those are unofficial rules.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE3bwGMgl+vIlSVSNkRAprJAJ42yeC4iIlZZR8/3HbnSRnDxOyKBwCbBUOW
TVhTfFcwPA8nkaIoxUtJ0Nc=
=5Hbx
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ Caution: Happy Fun Ball may suddenly
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ accelerate to dangerous speeds.
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:31:39 -0500
From: Ross Rannells <rossrannells@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
Allan Dunbar wrote:
> At 12:04 21/06/99 EDT, you wrote:
> >
> > I am hoping that at least a few people on this list are familiar with
> >the Wild Card series of books. If so:
> >
> > 1. How would one go about writing up Ti Malice and his "addictive"
> >saliva and its effects on others?
> >
> > 2. How would one write up the Jumper's interesting variant on mind
> >control?
> >
> > Jack Butler
> >
> >
> The Jumpers were covered in the Ultimate Mentalist and let me tell you, they
> are scary. Imagine, a mentalist with the jumper ability. Now imagine your
> team brick. Now imagine the evil possibilities.
>
> Ti Malice *shudder* is one of the characters from WildCards I was actually
> interested in making. I can't remember if his saliva was physically or
> mentally addictive. Regardless, it is better done as a Transformation
> attack (since you are giving someone a disadvantage) cumulative. The
> disadvantage would be along the lines of "Addicted to Ti Malice" - physical
> or psychological depending on whether or not it was a physical or mental
> addiction. And or, you could give a dependence, although drug addictions
> and addictions in general are better handled as psychological or physical
> disadvantages.
>
> Additionally, there is his mind control, to reinforce the addiction.
>
> Ti Malice was just such a swell guy...I loved what Popinjay did to him.
> Just loved it.
Yes but where did Ti Malice go and what is the power that sent him
there. Transdimensional Movement, usable against others, can send
then anywhere the user is familiar with included figments of his owm
imagination?!? That is an ungodly powerful...
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:39:37 -0500 (CDT)
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
Subject: Mental Defense and other questions
Question for people.
I have a PC that is looking to go with a Suppress against Mental Defense.
I was unsure if this is a viable option for Suppress or not.
Thoughts.
Is also looking o go on a variation of Aura Vision.
Is looking to do Mental Vision.
Same gist except sees mental powers.
Visit us at http://www.avalon.net/~brat-inc/ ....
"In the words of Socrates... I drank what?" ... Real Genius
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:57:30 -0500
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: Fantasy HERO & Questions about it...
At 04:50 PM 6/21/99, qts wrote:
> Well, yes - I have some swords and can wield two simultaneously. But
> that doesn't mean that I can hit twice as often. The second sword is
> often better used for blocking, and for providing an unexpected attack
> - you can switch the other sword to block. Not a lot of good against
> ranged attacks, though.
>
> But, in game terms, you only get one Strike per phase, and, I'd
> suggest, 1/2 Str vs Disarms.
- -5 STR. Literal halving of STR stat is too extreme; -5 is the "logical" half.
- --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:57:31 -0500
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 10:17 PM 6/21/99 -0400, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
> I never said otherwise. Thing is, Invisiblity does not have a variable
> active point level like, say, Energy Blast.
Well, this is actually the point of contention, is it not? Things like "No
Fringe" are part of the /base/ cost of the power, after all, and therefore
arguably might be variable.
Another way to look at it: am I required to use ALL of my noncombat
multipliers when I shift to non-combat velocity? Or may I freely select any
velocity between my combat movement and my maximum noncombat velocity?
Noncombat multipliers are "adder options" like No Fringe, after all, too.
- --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:57:33 -0500
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
At 10:31 PM 6/21/99 -0500, Ross Rannells wrote:
> Yes but where did Ti Malice go and what is the power that sent him
> there. Transdimensional Movement, usable against others, can send
> then anywhere the user is familiar with included figments of his owm
> imagination?!? That is an ungodly powerful...
IIRC, the "figment" in question was based on Popinjay's nightmares of seeing
preserved joker-babies at the Jokertown museum. Remember what Ti Malice
*looks* like?
I haven't read any of the later books, so I can't say this with 100%
accuracy, but I always read this that Popinjay unintentionally "popped" Ti
Malice into a jar of formaldehyde -- not literally into his nightmare, but
rather into the *source* of the nightmare.
- --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:57:34 -0500
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: Mental Defense and other questions
At 10:39 PM 6/21/99 -0500, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>I have a PC that is looking to go with a Suppress against Mental Defense.
>I was unsure if this is a viable option for Suppress or not.
It's legal, but I would treat Suppress (and Dispel) as Adjustment Powers,
including the proviso that attacking defensive powers is half-effectiveness.
>Is looking to do Mental Vision.
>Same gist except sees mental powers.
Buy Mental Awareness, and simply define it as "visual" (the same way that
Unusual senses can be linked to existing ones).
- --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:56:02 -0500
From: "J. Alan Easley" <alaneasley@email.com>
Subject: Re: Mental Defense and other questions
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
> Question for people.
> I have a PC that is looking to go with a Suppress against Mental Defense.
> I was unsure if this is a viable option for Suppress or not.
> Thoughts.
As long as you have a valid SFX that would go along with the ability.
> Is also looking o go on a variation of Aura Vision.
> Is looking to do Mental Vision.
> Same gist except sees mental powers.
It may not be a standard rule but it is generally accepted, I believe, to
allow the placement of a sense based on its SFX. If you want your character
to literally see the use of Mental Powers then simply buy Mental Awareness
and put it in the Sight Sense Group. You would probably want to make it
Targeting and Discriminatory but that is just an opinion. You might instead
want to leave either or both to later character growth.
Alan
HeroRPG-owner@onelist.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:35:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
>Another way to look at it: am I required to use ALL of my noncombat
>multipliers when I shift to non-combat velocity? Or may I freely select any
>velocity between my combat movement and my maximum noncombat velocity?
>Noncombat multipliers are "adder options" like No Fringe, after all, too.
Not really parallel, since there are explicit rules for accelleration in the
game, and noncombat multiples do nothing much _but_ define your maximum speed.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
>At 10:31 PM 6/21/99 -0500, Ross Rannells wrote:
>> Yes but where did Ti Malice go and what is the power that sent him
>> there. Transdimensional Movement, usable against others, can send
>> then anywhere the user is familiar with included figments of his owm
>> imagination?!? That is an ungodly powerful...
>
>IIRC, the "figment" in question was based on Popinjay's nightmares of seeing
>preserved joker-babies at the Jokertown museum. Remember what Ti Malice
>*looks* like?
>
>I haven't read any of the later books, so I can't say this with 100%
>accuracy, but I always read this that Popinjay unintentionally "popped" Ti
>Malice into a jar of formaldehyde -- not literally into his nightmare, but
>rather into the *source* of the nightmare.
Personally, I suspect he really did go someplace like that nightmare, since
we find out later with Chalktalk that there _are_ other dimensions in the
Wild Cards universe.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:07:34 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 07:57 PM 6/21/1999 -0700, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>>This reasoning is circular; you say *all* Advantages are clearly labeled as
>>such because you don't perceive anything to be an Advantage, regardless of
>>function, unless it *is* labeled as such. I could use similar reasoning to
>>"prove" that not all Advantages are clearly labeled as such.
>
>You are going to have to explain that to me, how is it circular to point
>out how advantages are labled as such? The example I gave is in the same
>section together, an advantage (labled) and an add on (not labled) which
>you would prefer to call an advantage. But if it was, don't you think it
>would be called such? Why would they lable everything with a +x notation
>Advantage (they do, every place in the rules) unless that was what they
>were, as opposed to other examples?
Circular reasoning: stating that only those items in the format 'plus-times
X' are Advantages, and supporting this argument by contending that all
Advantages are given in this format. The second statement is only true if
the first one is.
I could have argued, based on the Glossary definition, that "No Fringe" is
an Advantage; it is not given in the 'plus-times X' format, therefore it is
true that not all Advantages are given in that format. You may well not
accept the reasoning, but it avoids being circular because the truth or
falsity of the first statement is not dependent on the truth or falsity of
the second (though the second is dependent on the first, as it should be.)
>>>Your definition of Advantage applies to any power that you
>>>spend points on (buying Force Wall? that +3 ED is an additional cost that
>>>increases the utility of the PD force wall that you bought originally.
>>
>>(a) It wasn't "my" definition, it's Hero's. I didn't write their Glossary.
>
>Your definition extended what was given to include things without a + added
>to it, that is what I meant by 'your definition.'
Let's be clear here. First, "things without a + added to it" is incorrect,
since the No Fringe effect, at a flat-rate cost of +10, /does/ have a +
added to it. I think you mean "things that aren't in the 'plus-times X'
format", yes?
Second, I didn't extend the definition that was given, or alter it in any
way. I merely observed that the definition, as written, didn't exclude
modifiers that were written up in a format other than 'plus times X'.
>>(b) Part of that definition requires the power be modified. Changed.
>>Altered. Adding +3 ED to a Force Wall doesn't change the Force Wall in any
>>meaningful way. Hardening it against Teleportation does. That's why
>>"Hardened" is an Advantage but "+3 ED" is not.
>
>What you are assuming is that a power is a single cost (Invisibility,
>Desolidification, etc) which taken literally (work with me here this is
>called Reductio Ad Absurdum) can be applied to a single defense of a power.
Can you rephrase that? I have no idea what you mean by "...a power is a
single cost which taken literally can be applied to a single defense of a
power."
> So you can use that assumption to say that when you buy Force Wall at 3
>PD, it is a power. As you add ED (+3 in this instance) this has the effect
>you accurately quote from the Glossary "...makes the power more useful.
>This increases the cost of the Power because it makes it better."
I'm not clear on how, when and under what circumstances you are "adding ED"
to the Force Wall. The proportion of PD/ED in the Force Wall must be
determined when the Power is bought, you don't "add" ED to a PD Wall. Are
you suggesting an example of someone who has an all-PD Force Wall at
character creation time, and later spends XPTS to add ED coverage to the
Wall? Are you then suggesting that this should be considered an Advantage?
I haven't suggested anything like that.
>However, if you look more closely, the word "MODIFIER" is used in the
>definition of Advantage. Modifier is not defined in the glossary, oddly
>enough, but in the Modifier section is this helpful note: "When listed on a
>character sheet, Power Advantages are listed with a plus (+). Power
>Limitations are listed with a minus (-).
As I mentioned before, the word "modifier" [lowercase, note] used in the
Glossary definition is not exclusively interchangeable with the [reserved,
capitalized] term Power Modifier, so nothing is settled by pointing me to
the Power Modifier section.
However, I will also note that the line you quoted from that section
specifies only a plus (+) for Advantages, it says nothing about a 'plus
times X' format (either under that name or any other); an add-on listed as
'+10 No Fringe Effect' would still be an Advantage under this criterion,
because it has a plus (+) sign.
>This, combined with the description of each advantage saying it is such
>seems to indicate that advantages have a +x construction, and add-ons are
>thus not advantages.
A reasonable point of view, but not, I think, the only one. I still think
you are basing that conclusion on an assumption rather than a solid fact.
I don't make the same assumption, and I've offered arguments against it
based on both common sense and quoted material from the book. If you
decide that an option can only be an Advantage if written up in a 'plus
times X' format, regardless of how that option affects its base Power,
that's up to you. I have yet to see anything in the book that explicitly
says this, just several things in the book that strongly suggest it to you.
Damon
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #417
*****************************
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Friday, July 02, 1999 04:16 PM