Digest Archive vol 1 Issue 418
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 9:58 AM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #418
champ-l-digest Tuesday, June 22 1999 Volume 01 : Number 418
In this issue:
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Question about Concepts
Re: Question about Concepts
Re: Question about Concepts
Wild Cards (was Re: Question about Concepts)
Re: Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Question about Concepts
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Top 5 things
Re: I remeber the other post...
Re: Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Mental Defense and other questions
Re: Partial Use of Powers
Re: Susceptability and Disads
Re: Top 5 things
supplements
Re: Welcome to the Modern Age (fwd)
Re: Partial Use of Powers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:25:08 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 07:59 PM 6/21/1999 -0700, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>> 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.
Where was this? I checked Champions 1st thru 3rd Editions, and several of
the old genre sourcebooks. Closest thing I found was Variable Result
(+1/4) in 1st Edition Fantasy Hero, which does not allow you to manipulate
your Advantages in any way.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:34:03 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 10:57 PM 6/21/1999 -0500, Bryant Berggren wrote:
>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.
FWIW, I would not consider NCMs to be Advantages because they don't change
the Power in any meaningful way. This is similar to adding dice of damage;
more, but in no way different.
A Power with an Advantage is a distinct, separate Power. So an option
isn't an Advantage unless it creates that distinction.
That being the case, you can freely select any velocity between your combat
movement and your maximum noncombat velocity.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chuk Goodin <cgoodin@sfu.ca>
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Ross Rannells wrote:
> > 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...
Ackroyd _is_ ungodly powerful. He sent Finn to the planet Takis, which
must be at least several light years away. And he can pop at least the
mass of a big truck. Some of those Wild Cards are just super nasty in
RPG terms.
chuk
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chuk Goodin <cgoodin@sfu.ca>
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Bryant Berggren wrote:
> 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.
I don't think that's the case. Ti Malice doesn't appear in any of the
later books, although I guess if he was in formaldehyde, he'd be dead.
But you would think there would have been at least a mention of it.
Interesting idea, too.
chuk
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:18:58 -0700
From: Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com>
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
At 10:04 PM 6/21/99 -0700, Chuk Goodin wrote:
>Ackroyd _is_ ungodly powerful. He sent Finn to the planet Takis, which
>must be at least several light years away. And he can pop at least the
>mass of a big truck. Some of those Wild Cards are just super nasty in
>RPG terms.
>
OTOH, any thug with a .22 can kill him if he gets the drop on him.
Resistant defenses are rare in WC, unless they're the primary effect of the
virus.
To simulate WC, I'd enforce Normal Characteristic Maxima, which could be
bought off, but only out of a pool of 'Wild card points' used for buying
powers. PCs should begin as 50pt Normals, with an additional 75-150 points
of 'powers', which should be tightly linked/focused. I would also use all
the optional rules, such as bleeding and hit location, to make combat with
killing attacks fatal, as it often is in the WC universe. Most heroes, even
the powerful ones, can't bounce bullets or survive 100 foot drops. (Even
Golden Boy thought he would die when he crashed through that hotel lobby in
Atlanta...or did someone actually catch him? I forget...)
Ackroys is a wonderful example of the gesture&concentration limitation.
Even so, Champions might be too inherently cinematic to simulate character
who, despite having great powers, are very mortal. The rules allow people
to soak up too much damage, even if they are 'normals'. (Several Murphys
have caught this) This is not a criticism -- it's just how the game is.
One idea for 5th ed (prolly too late) or an almanac is some sort of
'lethality dial', which would adjust how everyone takes damage. (For
example, suppose even normal attacks had a minimum of 2 per die -- that is,
every one counted as a 2, instead. And rule that non-resistant defenses are
halved vs. BODY, even from normal attack. (Thus, PD 6 would stop 6 stun,
but only 3 body)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chuk Goodin <cgoodin@sfu.ca>
Subject: Wild Cards (was Re: Question about Concepts)
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Lizard wrote:
> At 10:04 PM 6/21/99 -0700, Chuk Goodin wrote:
> >Ackroyd _is_ ungodly powerful. He sent Finn to the planet Takis, which
> >must be at least several light years away. And he can pop at least the
> >mass of a big truck. Some of those Wild Cards are just super nasty in
> >RPG terms.
> >
> OTOH, any thug with a .22 can kill him if he gets the drop on him.
> Resistant defenses are rare in WC, unless they're the primary effect of the
> virus.
Yeah, that's true.
>
> To simulate WC, I'd enforce Normal Characteristic Maxima, which could be
> bought off, but only out of a pool of 'Wild card points' used for buying
> powers. PCs should begin as 50pt Normals, with an additional 75-150 points
> of 'powers', which should be tightly linked/focused. I would also use all
> the optional rules, such as bleeding and hit location, to make combat with
> killing attacks fatal, as it often is in the WC universe. Most heroes, even
> the powerful ones, can't bounce bullets or survive 100 foot drops. (Even
> Golden Boy thought he would die when he crashed through that hotel lobby in
> Atlanta...or did someone actually catch him? I forget...)
He was "caught" by Hiram's gravity power.
>
> Ackroys is a wonderful example of the gesture&concentration limitation.
Gesture maybe, but I don't think I'd give him concentration. He just has
to point, and he's been shown using it in hectic combat situations
without getting in trouble (i.e. low DCV) because of it.
>
> Even so, Champions might be too inherently cinematic to simulate character
> who, despite having great powers, are very mortal. The rules allow people
> to soak up too much damage, even if they are 'normals'. (Several Murphys
> have caught this) This is not a criticism -- it's just how the game is.
Yeah, I'd probably use GURPS, which, after all, already has a couple of
Wild Cards supplements. If only it had a decent powers construction
set of rules...
>
> One idea for 5th ed (prolly too late) or an almanac is some sort of
> 'lethality dial', which would adjust how everyone takes damage. (For
> example, suppose even normal attacks had a minimum of 2 per die -- that is,
> every one counted as a 2, instead. And rule that non-resistant defenses are
> halved vs. BODY, even from normal attack. (Thus, PD 6 would stop 6 stun,
> but only 3 body)
Hmmm...Fuzion Wild Cards, anyone?
chuk
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:06:12 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: 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.
No problem, very effective in conjunction with a Mental attack, just two
things to remember:
1. Mental Defense is a defense and thus the Suppress is halved.
2. Suppress is an attack power and thus cannot be used at the same time as
any OTHER attack unless bought uncontrolled.
>Is also looking o go on a variation of Aura Vision.
>Is looking to do Mental Vision.
>Same gist except sees mental powers.
Mental Awareness does that
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Deo Gloria Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:32:05 -0700
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
>>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?
I'm sure you are able to extrapolate that from the context of my entire post.
>>>(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."
single cost = buying a single defense; thus if you chose to buy FW at 3 PD
that would be buying it at a single cost, one effect from the power.
Adding to this single effect is by your concept and definition a modifier,
even if that includes adding ED. At what point is adding more to the power
just the power (PD+ED) and at what point does it become a modifier
(Invisibility with no fringe or added senses it is invisible to; Tunnelling
+ 5 DEF)?
>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.
You did by default, when you said that adding straight points in a power
writeup is an advantage. See above for more detail on this.
>>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.
Actually it is shown from the quote that I gave that your position is
incorrect.
>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.
That's an interesting statement but do you really believe that this is
true? Lets apply that logic to the rest of the rules. Every time the
symbol + is used, it means advantage. Let's look at some quotes:
"One Combat Skill Level can be used as +1 OCV with any attack that the
Combat Skill Level applies to." (pg 22)
"A Character can have 2x as many Followers for +5 points" (pg 43)
"...that is, the character gets a Contact that will help on an 8 or less
for 1 point, an 11 or less for 2 points, and +1 to the contact roll for
each +1 point thereafter" (pg 43)
"He purchases +14" Running for 28 Character Points, giving him a total of
20" running..." (pg 55)
(this one really makes your position difficult) "this radius can be doubled
for +5 points...To be able to vary the effects of Change Environment is a
+1 Power Advantage." (pg 59)
There are many incidences in the Powers section that have add ons and
advantages in the same section. Why do the ones written up +x always say
advantage and the ones with simply points added not every time? It seems
to me that your position is akin to the fellows who wrote up the rules for
Magic: the Gathering and basically ruined the game for any casual or fun
based player, by over lawyering the system. The intent and system is clear
to the great majority, yet some few require rules to be written up in some
odd, IRS code fashion to prevent the slightest chance of any opening for
misunderstanding.
>>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.
It actually does say it, but you have to be able to think about it a little
bit. They don't state it in agonizing step by step clarity because the
system has been in place for almost 20 years and nobody has ever brought it
up before.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Deo Gloria Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Question about Concepts
>Even so, Champions might be too inherently cinematic to simulate character
>who, despite having great powers, are very mortal. The rules allow people
>to soak up too much damage, even if they are 'normals'. (Several Murphys
>have caught this) This is not a criticism -- it's just how the game is.
I suspect it is, which is not suprising since it's based on a campaign that
was run in Superworld, which, while it had it's own cinematic properties,
was still a bit more realistic once you get away from people with defenses
and/or the Extra Hit Points power.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 02:46:19 -0500
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 11:32 PM 6/21/1999 -0700, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>single cost = buying a single defense; thus if you chose to buy FW at 3 PD
>that would be buying it at a single cost, one effect from the power.
>Adding to this single effect is by your concept and definition a modifier,
>even if that includes adding ED. At what point is adding more to the power
>just the power (PD+ED) and at what point does it become a modifier
>(Invisibility with no fringe or added senses it is invisible to; Tunnelling
>+ 5 DEF)?
Sigh. When you create a Force Wall Power, you specify a PD/ED ratio at the
time of creation. 3 PD/0 ED, 3 PD/3 ED, whatever. No "addition" involved.
It's all one Power. You can choose any PD/ED ratio you want, and it's
"just the Power", no Advantage involved, because Force Wall by default will
work vs. either PD or ED or both. No add-on option is needed to change the
way the Force Wall works, because the base Power works against PD, ED or
both just as you choose.
Invisibility, by default, is not 100% effective at distances of <1". In
order to make it 100% effective at that range, you must modify the Power.
An option that modifies the Power in a way that makes it "better", and
raises the cost as a result, is by Hero System definition an Advantage.
Tunneling allows a character to move through the ground by creating a
tunnel; this does not change meaningfully if the character buys +1 DEF for
3 points. The character can still tunnel through the ground, and that's
all he can do. The ability to fill in the tunnel behind the character
could be considered an Advantage, because it creates a distinction from the
base Power: it allows the character to do something the base Power does not.
>
>>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.
>
>You did by default, when you said that adding straight points in a power
>writeup is an advantage. See above for more detail on this.
I think I have explained my position in considerable detail, and cannot
help it if you are not paying attention, or choose to infer things I have
not implied, much less stated outright. At no time have I said that
"adding straight points in a power writeup is an Advantage." That
statement is far too broad and clearly inaccurate.
I /have/ said that a flat-cost modifier, which may appear in the power
writeup rather than the Power Modifiers section, is an Advantage IF (a) it
meets the criteria in the Glossary definition: it modifies the power, makes
it better, and increases the cost; and (b) it cannot be excluded on the
basis of what's in that definition.
The Glossary does not dictate a pricing scheme or format, does not specify
a location in the book where all Advantages must be exclusively found, does
not specify that the word "Advantage" must be present within the writeup of
every such modifier in order to qualify it as such; does not include any
term such as "add-on" or "module" which might be used to distinguish such
things from Power-specific Advantages.
This means you can't say something isn't an Advantage on the basis of its
pricing scheme; you can't say something isn't an Advantage because it's in
the power writeup rather than the Power Modfifiers section; you can't say
it isn't an Advantage just because the word "Advantage" isn't in the
description.
You *can* call these options add-ons or modules if you wish, but you can't
call them Add-Ons or Modules, because Hero doesn't recognize either as a
reserved term for describing something distinct from an Advantage; this
means an add-on or module *can* be an Advantage.
>
>>>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.
>
>Actually it is shown from the quote that I gave that your position is
>incorrect.
No, it is not. One thing does not logically follow another simply because
you feel it should. Your quote only said that an Advantage would be marked
by a (+); the No Fringe option is so marked. The quote, by itself, does
nothing whatsoever to invalidate my position. And since you added nothing
in support of the quote...
>>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.
>
>That's an interesting statement but do you really believe that this is
>true? Lets apply that logic to the rest of the rules.
It's not appropriate to apply that logic to every random occurance of a (+)
on every page of the book, nor have I ever suggested it should be. I only
pointed out that you could not logically exclude No Fringe on the basis of
the requirement that it have a (+), because it *does* have one.
>Every time the symbol + is used, it means advantage.
No. No. No. As you pointed out, the book says Advantages are marked with
(+). Now, does this mean that *only* Advantages are marked with (+)? No,
it does not. So I could not argue that *every* occurance of a (+)
indicated an Advantage, nor have I done so -- "by default" or in any other
manner.
You *can* state that the presence of a (+) in "+10 No Fringe" does not, in
and of itself, make No Fringe an Advantage. And that's true; that plus
sign isn't what makes No Fringe an Advantage. But you tried to say that No
Fringe *couldn't* be an Advantage because it lacked a (+)...and it doesn't.
>Let's look at some quotes:
[irrelevant quotes snipped]
>(this one really makes your position difficult) "this radius can be doubled
>for +5 points...To be able to vary the effects of Change Environment is a
>+1 Power Advantage." (pg 59)
I don't see how. No doubt it's really obvious to you.
>
>There are many incidences in the Powers section that have add ons and
>advantages in the same section. Why do the ones written up +x always say
>advantage and the ones with simply points added not every time? It seems
>to me that your position is akin to the fellows who wrote up the rules for
>Magic: the Gathering and basically ruined the game for any casual or fun
>based player, by over lawyering the system. The intent and system is clear
>to the great majority, yet some few require rules to be written up in some
>odd, IRS code fashion to prevent the slightest chance of any opening for
>misunderstanding.
Now you are simply being abusive. I won't apologize to you for not playing
the game exactly the way you do, nor will I acknowledge that your personal
preferences represent the One True Path to Hero Enlightenment.
I remind you that this thread started because there was a difference of
opinion as to how Invisibility would work under certain circumstances.
Evidently your "great majority" are not of one mind regarding the intent
and the system.
>It actually does say it, but you have to be able to think about it a little
>bit. They don't state it in agonizing step by step clarity because the
>system has been in place for almost 20 years and nobody has ever brought it
>up before.
Hogwash. In 18 years of play, *everything* has come up before. Most
things never get fully resolved, precisely because the great majority can't
agree with each other on what's correct. I refer you to the Great Linked
Debate; 'nuff said.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 08:39:19 -0400
From: Bill Svitavsky <nbymail11@mln.lib.ma.us>
Subject: Re: Top 5 things
At 09:59 AM 6/21/99 -0700, James Jandebeur wrote:
>> > 3) Decouple Movement and Speed, at least as an optional rule. This can
>> > be trivially done by buying movement powers on a per turn basis, say 1
>> > pt buys 5"/turn for most powers, 10"/turn for Gliding, etc. Each phase,
>> > a character may move a maximum of Movement/SPD, rounded up, but may move
>> > no more than Movement in one turn. Pushing is required to exceed either
>> > limit.
>>
>> I don't see how this is supposed to work/or fix anything.
>
>Two that I can think of:
>
>1. It means your reflexes don't mean you move faster or slower, that's based
>solely on how much Movement you bought.
>2. All movement works, or can be made to work, approximately the same way:
>falling velocity will be the same as ramming speed will be the same as
>knockback damage. If it does then certain abilities become easier to do.
>
This would also avoid the problem of having a lower SPD character with a
higher per phase movement catching up with a higher SPD character with a
lower per phase move, even if the higher SPD character is moving at a
higher rate per turn. For example, Character A has SPD 3 and 30" Flight;
this character moves at 90" per turn. Character B has SPD 5 and 25" Flight,
thus moving 125" per turn. If combat begins on Segment 12 and B attempts to
flee from A, he'll be overtaken, despite the fact that B started moving
first and is moving at a theoretically higher rate.
Bill Svitavsky
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:07:17 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: I remeber the other post...
At 10:26 PM 6/21/1999 -0400, Jason Sullivan wrote:
>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.
For the record, my suggestion was not Spirit in a Body OIF; this was the
suggestions from HSA1. My suggestion was to build the androids from an
extension of the Vehicle rules.
And the spirit possessing a mindless woman was not a villain, at least
if I'm thinking of the same character you are: Albion, of the New Knights
of the Round Table, from Kingdom of Champions.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:14:31 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Mental Defense and other questions
At 11:06 PM 6/21/1999 -0700, Christopher Taylor wrote:
>>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.
>
>No problem, very effective in conjunction with a Mental attack, just two
>things to remember:
>1. Mental Defense is a defense and thus the Suppress is halved.
>2. Suppress is an attack power and thus cannot be used at the same time as
>any OTHER attack unless bought uncontrolled.
Suppress being a Constant Power, it only needs an Attack Roll when it's
initially applied, so other attacks can be used in subsequent phases.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:49:37 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Mental Defense and other questions
At 10:39 PM 6/21/1999 -0500, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>
>
>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.
Sure, why not? As others point out, though, remember that effectiveness
is halved because Mental Defense is, well, a defense. :-]
>Is also looking o go on a variation of Aura Vision.
Just use Detect Aura. This is suggested in HSA1, and I agree.
>Is looking to do Mental Vision.
>Same gist except sees mental powers.
If Mental Awareness doesn't cover it, use Detect Mental Powers.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:49:58 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
At 08:27 PM 6/21/1999 -0500, Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin wrote:
>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 Power Advantages, applied using the formula at the top of
HSR page 90. What Christopher is referring to here is what the Hero Guys
are now calling "Adders" (after the similar items from Fuzion).
Whether the "must-use" rule applies to Adders or not, I don't know. The
HSR isn't clear on that point one way or the other.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:32:25 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Susceptability and Disads
At 10:07 PM 6/21/1999 -0400, Thane Cicero wrote:
>
> 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...
Well, why not? The rules don't specifically state so, but I do think
that one could apply the same guidelines from Side Effects to achieve the
desired effect.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:41:29 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Top 5 things
At 08:39 AM 6/22/1999 -0400, Bill Svitavsky wrote:
>
>This would also avoid the problem of having a lower SPD character with a
>higher per phase movement catching up with a higher SPD character with a
>lower per phase move, even if the higher SPD character is moving at a
>higher rate per turn. For example, Character A has SPD 3 and 30" Flight;
>this character moves at 90" per turn. Character B has SPD 5 and 25" Flight,
>thus moving 125" per turn. If combat begins on Segment 12 and B attempts to
>flee from A, he'll be overtaken, despite the fact that B started moving
>first and is moving at a theoretically higher rate.
Actually, this only happens if A has a higher DEX than B. A fix I've
seen for this problem, an option which I put into my manuscript for TUV, is
to always allow a character being chased to move before the character doing
the chasing.
On the other hand, in your example if combat starts on segment 1 then A
will overtake B even with the above option; only per-Turn movement would
fix this.
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 09:48:58 -0400
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@fmco.com>
Subject: supplements
Hey,
So who's on the list that works for Hero? Steve? Bruce?
Listen carefully. It's very important to me to support Hero games, who have
always gone with quality over flashy commercial crap like some other
companies. But there's a problem. I've been waiting a long long time to buy
Broken Kingdoms, or whatever that new FH campaign book is called. Like a
stupidly long time.
Who's taking care of your page? Handcuff them to their development machine
and get the online store working fast! Forget about the whiny demands of
those concerned only with cosmetics and design. Who cares that the top frame
is way too fat. Don't forget what your web page is for. It's for me to give
you my Visa number and you to ship me a book!
Why? Why don't you want my money?
If I took this long to get a simple little web page like that working, I'd
be looking for a new job. Sorry to be blunt, but this is getting stupid and
you guys are looking like clowns. It's time to start taking care of
business.
I wouldn't normally care but I have some money and I want to buy a couple of
your books, see?
Anybody want to sell me a used copy of either Broken Kingdoms or TUM? I'd
actually prefer a used pdf of them. I'd get them from Hero but I can't.
BRI
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:47:05 -0700
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to the Modern Age (fwd)
At 10:19 PM 6/21/1999 -0400, Michael Surbrook wrote:
>How's this for life imitating art?
Depending on how far back the "art" goes, I think this is the other way
around; if you're referring to the computers on ST:Voyager, the idea behind
the bio-gel thingies that the computer uses was based on this research.
>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)
I'll worry about it when a bio-computer develops mental illness. ;-]
>One step at a time, next they'll be able to stimulate thought in humans too.
Now, that would *really* be advanced technology!
- ---
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
Interested in sarrusophones? Join the Sarrusophone Mailing List!
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/sarrus.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 08:57:38 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: Re: Partial Use of Powers
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin wrote:
> Tunneling allows a character to move through the ground by creating a
> tunnel; this does not change meaningfully if the character buys +1 DEF for
> 3 points. The character can still tunnel through the ground, and that's
> all he can do. The ability to fill in the tunnel behind the character
> could be considered an Advantage, because it creates a distinction from the
> base Power: it allows the character to do something the base Power does not.
But it is clearly *NOT* an advantage.
Advantages MUST be used at all times - everyone agrees on this.
The character who pays the +10 points MAY fill in the tunnel if he so
wishes - that's clear from the Tunnelling writeup.
Also, the other big difference between Advantages by the HERO definition
and any other added cost, which I have not seen you deal with:
Added costs like No Fringe and Fills in Tunnel add to the BASE COST.
Power Advantages add to the ACTIVE COST.
J
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #418
*****************************
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