Digest Archives Vol 1 Issue 104
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Monday, December 21, 1998 10:56 PM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #104
champ-l-digest Monday, December 21 1998 Volume 01 : Number 104
In this issue:
Re: Power set question
Re: Teleporting Others
RE: Magic Lab
Re: Power set question
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: TUV take note!
Re: New Skill: Meditation
RE: HTAs n stuff
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: House Rule: Please Comment
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: House Rule: Please Comment
Re: Magic Lab
Re: Magic Lab
Re: range of success
Re: House Rule: Please Comment
Re: range of success (long)
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: HTAs n stuff
[Fwd: Re: Power set question]
Re: Power set question
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: House Rule: Please Comment
Re: Power set question
Re: House Rule: Please Comment
Re: range of success (long)
Superstar
Re: New Skill: Meditation
Re: Independent Limitation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 98 23:40:18
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Power set question
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:06:21 -0600 (CST), Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, qts wrote:
>
>> How about
>>
>> 32 EC: Major Shadow Powers (40 Base) Always On (-1/4)
>> 32 Desolid 0 End Persistent, Always On
>> 40 2d6 Drain vs Body [20] 0 End + 1/2 Rec 5/5 hrs +1, ARW +2
>> (90 Active) Always On -1/4
>>
>> 15 EC: Minor Shadow Powers
>> 15 Unlife Support: full.
>> 15 10" flight x32 NCM
>
>Does this bug anyone else except me? I mean, two ECs, one for 'Major
>Shadow Powers' and one for 'Minor Shadow Powers'?
Well, the powers are vastly different in cost, so it makes sense to
group them.
> ECs are great as a
>reward for good character concept, but having two of them for the /same/
>character concept is, IMHO, going a little bit too far into the world of
>minmaxing.
It's not that much different from a character having an EC and a MP.
>And oh yeah...isn't 'Always On' a -1/2 limitation normally?
You may be right on that.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:44:49 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Teleporting Others
From: Mike Christodoulou <Cypriot@concentric.net>
>... Not to be confused with "Usable Against Others".
>
>Let's say that a character has the Teleport power. And let's
>say that he also threw in the extra points to be able to teleport
>up to 200 kg. This guy can then take himself and 2 other people
>to some other point as defined by his teleport. (As opposed to
>the UAO advantage, in which the character stays behind and the
>4 other people take the trip.)
>
>How does one define what gets teleported? Can the person
>teleport 200 kg of brick wall, and leave the rest of the wall
>intact? What if he only wants to take 100 kg?
Nope. That would be Tunnelling or a damage power, not Teleportation.
>What if he tries this on a 100 kg person who is carrying 200 kg
>worth of stuff? Does the person vanish while the stuff stays
>behind?
Maybe, maybe not. There are no specifics on this.
>Can he teleport a 100 kg person out of his armor? What
>if the target is grabbing or has been grabbed? Would the grabbee
>(or grabber) also come along with the teleport? Could he separate
>the hostage from the terrorist?
All things that need better definition in Champions.
>How are the boundaries determined? I have similar questions about
>desolidification, by the way.
Right now, they are determined by the GM.
Personally, my solution is that there should be a "Fine Manipulation" for
all powers. Teleporters with Fine Manipulation could Teleport people without
clothes (or clothes without people). A character with Desolid UAO could
reach inside of an Entangle to grab a uniform off an agent to use for
infiltration (did that once; the GM allowed it). Energy Man could melt the
lock of a door out, or weld it shut. The Web Slinger could Entangle just
your hands or feet.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:41:24 -0500
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@mondello.toronto.fmco.com>
Subject: RE: Magic Lab
Hi,
Here's a list of things that I've seen put into magic labs.
*Tables with straps to tie people/things down and do experiments
*An explosion room with really heavy walls and doors. Keep the healing
potions right outside.
*Hardened Force Fields that affects desolid to keep the GM's evil minions
from sneaking in and wrecking your cool mage stuff. These only need to be
small, it's not a bomb shelter.
*Jars to keep all your samples in. You take samples of everything don't you?
*No less than six fake hiding places with one real hiding place behind one
of the fake ones. Keep fake spell books and spare foci in the fake hiding
places.
*Knockout gas traps that are hard to disarm. This shuts down mundane thieves
without wrecking your cool mage stuff like explosions or falling rocks.
Plus, it has the added bonus of leaving a sleepy thief on your floor.
*A few small stone rooms with no windows and restraints on the walls. You
never know.
*Books [obviously] on useful topics like artifacts, secret societies,
classifications of extradimensional creatures, poisons, ancient history,
prophetic writings, geography and the legends of every major religion in
your game world.
*Two summoning circles, one inside the explosion room.
*A heavy front door that can be locked from the inside or the outside. Only
the mage should be able to lock the door from the outside with an enchanted
key or something.
*An antechamber with a really unfair trap or "murder zone".
*A furnace that burns really hot. This is often necessary for creating or
destroying artifacts. It's also good for destroying evidence.
*A comfy chair with good lumbar support.
*Enough dried meats, cofee and trail rations to support the mage for weeks.
*Somewhere to sleep, it's probably the safest place.
*A big bronze model of the cosmos to figure out planetary alignments, phases
of the moon and that kind of thing.
*A secret escape path that's virtually impossible to enter through. Like a
shoot with a fireman's pole and horrible traps that trigger if anyone comes
up the pole or touches the walls.
That's it for now,
BRI
] In my current champaign, one of my PC's is a mage. Recently
] he decided to
] start constructing a magic Lab. unfortunately, he's not to
] certain what he
] wants in it. He knows that he wants magical texts, alchemy
] gear, spell
] components and the occasional item.
]
] Other than that though, he's not too sure what else he would
] need to have go
] into a magic lab.
] So I pose the question. What does everything should go into
] a magic lab???
]
] Visit us at http://www.avalon.net/~brat-inc/ ....
] "In the words of Socrates... I drank what?" ... Real Genius
]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:23:23 -0600 (CST)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: Re: Power set question
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Scott Nolan wrote:
> >Does this bug anyone else except me? I mean, two ECs, one for 'Major
> >Shadow Powers' and one for 'Minor Shadow Powers'?
>
> I think it's a good idea. Two -different- EC's, like "Fire Powers" and
> "Flight
> Powers"
> would be bad, but Major and Minor seem okay to me.
Would you mind explaining your logic?
I'd be leery of /any/ character that had two different ECs, honestly. On
the other hand, if the character conception allowed it, I might let the
player take (for example) 'Telepathy EC' and 'Vampire EC' if, say, he was
a telepath who got turned into a vampire.
If you allowed multiple ECs for the same effect though...eh. I would
think it would lead to players minmaxing the number of ECs that they have
to get the most benefit out of them - "Well, I've got Big Fire Powers EC,
Medium Fire Powers EC, and Small Fire Powers EC, because I've got three
basic AP levels of powers."
I guess also part of my objection is that 'Minor Shadow Powers' and 'Major
Shadow Powers' mean nothing when separated. No character would ever
take 'Minor Shadow Powers' alone as an EC. What is the distinction
between the two? Nothing, they are both 'Shadow Powers', so they should
either go into the same EC, or not go into an EC at all.
J
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:53:31 -0600
From: Todd Hanson <badtodd@home.com>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
Brats Incorporated wrote:
> "it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
> "It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
> "It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
> missed." : Hmmm..
Actually it sounds like he wants a limited form of eidetic memory.
Maybe with some kind of 'extra time, zero (or half) DCV concentrate,
skill roll' combination?
Todd
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 98 23:35:18
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:48:29 -0600 (CST), Brats Incorporated wrote:
>
>Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
>on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
>how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
>"it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
>"It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
>"It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
>missed." : Hmmm..
>
>My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
>that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and post cognitive
>powers. Uhhh, no."
>
>So, was it bad o me to have denied such a request?
> I do have some alternatives though.
> Buy more deduction was my first recommendation. But the PC was
>against this one. Said that it went against the concept of the character.
> Needless to say, I was stumped until a few nights ago, when I
>thought to myself, "hell. best thing for the character would be to allow it
>to have post cognitive powers.
>
>So, should I allow the character to have post cog or not?
This doesn't sound too bad - Retrognition, only to play back events the
character has witnessed (-1/4). Provided the character keeps the power
going long enough, then Perception checks should be allowed ('Hey, I
didn't spot that before!', and if that succeeds, then an appropriate
skill roll can be made.
Or you could just use Eidetic Memory.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:16:52 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: TUV take note!
At 01:52 PM 12/21/98 -0500, Michael Surbrook wrote:
>Here you go Bob, just the thing for TUV!
>
>http://cnn.com/WORLD/africa/9812/11/flame.thrower.car/
Yeah, I'd say it warrants a short paragraph in the Sourcebook.... :-]
- ---
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: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:26:50 -0500
From: Mathieu Roy <matroy@abacom.com>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
Brats Incorporated wrote:
> Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
> on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
> how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
> "it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
> "It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
> "It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
> missed." : Hmmm..
Suggestion: Eidetic Memory that requires a meditation skill roll (or just extra
time and concentration)
Mathieu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:58:51 -0800
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: RE: HTAs n stuff
>> hand doesn't
>> add anything to that? The amount of damage Ogre would do with his hands
>> would pulverize the dagger.
>Just a newbie observation, but the dagger damage would be AP, and the Ogre's
>fists wouldn't be, would it?
no the fists do normal damage, the dagger does killing :) AP is a special
kind of damage (for example a stiletto, very thin, pointed dagger would be
AP but a Killing attack).
- ----------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- -----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:14:28 -0500
From: "Marc" <games@nassau.cv.net>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
Or Edetic memory and a Deduction boost. Treat this as his Meditation skill.
01) He meditates.
02) With Edetic memory he sees the crimescene in his mond (What ever part
he looked at)
03) He now has the time to mentally look around the crime scene and move
the objects around, take a closer look at other parts of the crime scene.
A) This does not allow him to see the crime as it happened
B) Thsi does not let him look at the crime scene at a later time
(Clairvoience / Whatever)
How is that?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
To: champ-l@sysabend.org <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Monday, December 21, 1998 6:10 PM
Subject: New Skill: Meditation
>
>Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
>on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
>how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
>"it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
>"It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
>"It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
>missed." : Hmmm..
>
>My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
>that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and post cognitive
>powers. Uhhh, no."
>
>So, was it bad o me to have denied such a request?
> I do have some alternatives though.
> Buy more deduction was my first recommendation. But the PC was
>against this one. Said that it went against the concept of the character.
> Needless to say, I was stumped until a few nights ago, when I
>thought to myself, "hell. best thing for the character would be to allow
it
>to have post cognitive powers.
>
>So, should I allow the character to have post cog or not?
>
>D-
>Visit us at http://www.avalon.net/~brat-inc/ ....
> "In the words of Socrates... I drank what?" ... Real Genius
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:02:31 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: House Rule: Please Comment
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
>
> While the basic idea isn't a bad one, I think that the application is
>just a tad too cheap, to my mind at least. 60 points gets 12d6 Mind
>Control with normal breakouts, or 11d6 with the second breakout a minute
>later, or 10d6 with the second breakout five minutes later, etc.
> I'd lean toward borrowing a rule from Adjustment Powers, and making the
>Time Chart steps cost a +1/4 Advantage each.
> I could be convinced otherwise, though. :-]
I think you misunderstood the suggestion. The suggestion was that, if I
rolled 45 pts to control someone, and I only needed 40, the target's
recovery gets moved one down the chart.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:23:31 -0600 (CST)
From: Curt Hicks <exucurt@exu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
> From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
>
> Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
> on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
> how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
> "it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
> "It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
What's the game effect ?
> "It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
> missed." : Hmmm..
>
I'd suggest that you have the player expand on this. I assume we're
talking crime scene here. Is all he wants another chance to make perception
rolls at a crime scene ?
> My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
> that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and post cognitive
> powers. Uhhh, no."
>
That's what it sounds like to me too, with the exception of the post-cognitive
part. Ask him why he said no.
> So, was it bad o me to have denied such a request?
> I do have some alternatives though.
> Buy more deduction was my first recommendation. But the PC was
> against this one. Said that it went against the concept of the character.
It may be 'against the character concept' but it might be the best way to
buy the power. Maybe it's just extra time for an increased deduction roll.
> Needless to say, I was stumped until a few nights ago, when I
> thought to myself, "hell. best thing for the character would be to allow it
> to have post cognitive powers.
>
> So, should I allow the character to have post cog or not?
>
I'm not sure he's actually *asked* for post cognition....
Curt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:26:10 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: House Rule: Please Comment
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
<snip>
>
>this rant was brought to you via the BBB page 79, first colum example.
With
>a few modifications.
>
He prefaced this with a disclaimer, stating that it was definitely _NOT_
official, and only a house rule. He didn't want to know the real rule, he
wanted a comment on his house rule.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:15:31 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Magic Lab
At 03:40 PM 12/21/98 -0600, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>In my current champaign, one of my PC's is a mage. Recently he decided to
>start constructing a magic Lab. unfortunately, he's not to certain what he
>wants in it. He knows that he wants magical texts, alchemy gear, spell
>components and the occasional item.
>
>Other than that though, he's not too sure what else he would need to have go
>into a magic lab.
>So I pose the question. What does everything should go into a magic lab???
Actually, to my mind at least, wht he has plus a good Internet
connection pretty much sums it up. ;-]
(Now that I think about it, though, that's only half-joking unless it's
a Fantasy Hero campaign....)
- ---
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: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:19:25 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filksinger@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Magic Lab
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
>In my current champaign, one of my PC's is a mage. Recently he decided to
>start constructing a magic Lab. unfortunately, he's not to certain what he
>wants in it. He knows that he wants magical texts, alchemy gear, spell
>components and the occasional item.
>
>Other than that though, he's not too sure what else he would need to have
go
>into a magic lab.
>So I pose the question. What does everything should go into a magic lab???
A powerful Force Wall, Suppress, Mental Defense, against various effects,
in a fixed location with a (Pentagram). This allows such things as placing
the magical artifact within the wards, so that if it explodes, releases a
demon, or attempts to possess the mage, he is protected.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:45:40 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filksinger@usa.net>
Subject: Re: range of success
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>"EE" == Ell Egyptoid <egyptoid@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>EE> Hogwash. Every player deserves a chance for the dice to
>EE> turn a hopeless situation around.
>
>No player deserves a GM who creates such a scenario in the first place.
There are lots of ways such a situation can occur. Players may ask for a
one-shot "Make it so we can really lose" scenario. You could have designed
the scenario to be fairly straightforward, but player's bad luck or
stupidity caused them to end up in a no-win situation that cannot be readily
fudged, at least without letting them know you cheated in their favor, or
having the NPCs save their bacon when you really didn't want to.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:16:13 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filksinger@usa.net>
Subject: Re: House Rule: Please Comment
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>"SN" == Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> writes:
>
>SN> The "Range of Success" thread got me to thinking about
>SN> the "All-or-Nothing" style of Hero Mental Powers.
>
>Umm... they are not "all or nothing". Or has everyone forgotten the effect
>levels tables?
Depends upon what you mean by "All or Nothing". What is meant is the power
either A) makes you do what is requested, or B), doesn't. If the level of
difficulty of the effect changes, it again becomes A or B.
This is all or nothing, in that you can't have things like "He hesitates,
then continues. However, his movements are slowed, as if he is fighting the
control", or "He screams, 'I can't control myself much longer! Get out,
before I kill you all!" You can kludge them, but the don't exist under the
standard Mind Control as written.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:24:44 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: range of success (long)
From: Curt Hicks <exucurt@exu.ericsson.se>
<snip>
>
>The only official Critical Roll rule I'm aware of is that an 18 always
fails.
There is also an Optional rule from the Hero System Almanac which was
official in 3rd Ed. Specifically, any roll that is half the needed roll,
rounded _down_, does maximum damage. Thus, if I need a 13 or less to hit, a
6 does maximum damage, but a 7 doesn't.
I was going to say that this works poorly for superhero games, but maybe it
works fine. After all, superhero martial artists usually live through their
encounters with massive bricks, but the chance of a critical hit explains
the, "If he connects with _that_, I'm done for!" The martial artist's high
DCV reduces the chance of a critical hit to a semi-reasonable percentage.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:06:28 -0600
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
At 03:48 PM 12/21/98 -0600, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>
> Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set on having
> a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe how the
> skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
> "it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
> "It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
> "It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
> missed." : Hmmm..
>
> My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
> that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and postcognitive
> powers. Uhhh, no."
It seems to me like he wants a skill that will be Complimentary to Deduction
rolls, with the special effect of his deductions being "clarified
perceptions" of what he's already seen -- a kind of self-hypnosis to make
himself a better witness.
>So, was it bad o me to have denied such a request?
IMO, I'd say "yes, at least to have done so out of hand". I'd have pressed
the player to be sure whether or not his idea is really akin to your worries.
- --
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to
do nothing." -- attributed to Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:56:50 -0800
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: HTAs n stuff
>>so with a dagger, he does an average of 11 BOD, which sort of makes sense
>>if you can lift an oil tanker over your head. It seems to be pretty
>>balanced and doesnt make the attacks rediculously powerful, but also keeps
>>it believable, why COULDNT an Ogre do more than a normal man with a dagger??
>
>Just playing Devil's Advocate, but perhaps because when you can punch through
>steel plates with your bare fists, having a tiny point bit of metal in your
>hand doesn't
>add anything to that? The amount of damage Ogre would do with his hands
would
>pulverize the dagger.
>
Due to the system I use for DEF/BOD like 3rd edition champions, is DOES
destroy the dagger, but it also transfers lots more energy into that target
than say, I would. The dagger suffers half the damage it inflicts (and at
Thor's ability that vaporizes the poor thing). But there is footage of a
straw that impaled a TREE that I have seen, its all a matter of physics.
- ----------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- -----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:15:20 -0600
From: Tim Statler <tstatler@igateway.net>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Power set question]
Subject: Re: Power set question
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:11:33 -0600
From: Tim Statler <tstatler@igateway.net>
To: Michael Surbrook <susano@otd.com>
Michael Surbrook wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
>
> > And oh yeah...isn't 'Always On' a -1/2 limitation normally?
>
> Yup.
>
Well point cost is figured for 1/2, my fingers can't read my writing. :)
Tim Statler
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 1998 19:56:26 -0500
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Power set question
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"N" == Nuncheon <jeffj@io.com> writes:
N> Does this bug anyone else except me? I mean, two ECs, one for 'Major
N> Shadow Powers' and one for 'Minor Shadow Powers'?
There is nothing wrong with having several ECs, even multiple ECs with the
same SFX. Sometimes it is the easiest way to manage certain constructs.
What bugs me about this particular set of ECs is technical issues.
One: Life Support does not belong in an EC. Buy it on its own. That
leaves you with Flight, which should go into the main EC, which means
getting rid of the 'Always On' limitation on the EC cost.
Two: That Drain requires Damage Shield. As is it requires an attack roll
to use, which makes Always On meaningless.
Three: As mentioned, Always On is a -1/2, not a -1/4.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info finger gcrypt@ftp.guug.de
iD8DBQE2fu46gl+vIlSVSNkRAkfuAKCJLuNgTsWH6TME1oN5EY0ssBjOxwCgsdGM
FGh5BaXWXS8MXCbzsK7SpLA=
=jlYX
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
GPG Key: same as my PGP 5 (DH) key \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:26:12 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
At 03:48 PM 12/21/98 -0600, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>
>Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
>on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
>how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
>"it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
>"It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
>"It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
>missed." : Hmmm..
>
>My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
>that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and post cognitive
>powers. Uhhh, no."
>
>So, was it bad o me to have denied such a request?
> I do have some alternatives though.
> Buy more deduction was my first recommendation. But the PC was
>against this one. Said that it went against the concept of the character.
> Needless to say, I was stumped until a few nights ago, when I
>thought to myself, "hell. best thing for the character would be to allow it
>to have post cognitive powers.
>
>So, should I allow the character to have post cog or not?
Postcognition would be fine, with appropriate Limitations (Concentrate,
Extra Time, and such).
Additionally, I'd say just go ahead and give him Meditation, letting it
act as a complementary Skill to Deduction, KSes, and similar Skills. It
could also serve as a Required Skill for that Postcognition, as well as
other Powers (such as Mind Scan).
- ---
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: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:51:45 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
At 03:48 PM 12/21/1998 -0600, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>
>Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group who is dead set
>on having a meditation skill. Now I've asked the character to describe
>how the skill works, and this is what he gave me, in my own words of course
>"it's a skill that you use outside of combat." : Fair enough
>"It allows you to focus your mind." : Ok
>"It allows to to go over a scene and catch things that you previously
>missed." : Hmmm..
>
>My reaction to the player was this, "well it sounds like you want a skill
>that is a combination of deduction, enhanced perception and post cognitive
>powers. Uhhh, no."
Based on the player's description of the ability, and assuming it doesn't
do anything in addition to what he described, it sounds a lot like Eidetic
Memory to me. It differs from the existing Talent in that Eidetic Memory
requires that you take the time to memorize something if you want to recall
it later. OTOH, if you do take the time, you can memorize entire phone
books with it.
If you're comfortable adding a new Talent to your campaign, I'd go ahead
and create Meditation, charge the character 10 points, and differentiate it
from Eidetic Memory by allowing the character to recall scenes without
having studied them purposefully ahead of time, but allow correspondingly
less detail to be recalled. The character might be able to remember every
object he saw on a table, and their exact positions; if there were
documents on the table he might be able to recall what each one was
(especially if there were labels or titles identifying them), but he
couldn't remember the contents word for word.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:06:26 -0600
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: House Rule: Please Comment
At 04:09 PM 12/21/98 -0600, Brats Incorporated wrote:
>> If I have a Mind Control power and order a character to do something he
>> is against doing, I have to reach the +20 level or I fail. That's all or
>> nothing.
>
>Yes and no.
Well, to begin with, "yes". No matter how you modify the necessary result,
the fact is that either the Mind Control works COMPLETELY, or it fails to
work at all (at least, under the standard rules). That's the point that
people have been trying to make about "all or nothing" here -- there's no
allowance for partial success.
> If you use mind control and force a character to say, kill his beloved
>teammate that is also his lover, you have a few items that can be taken in
>to account.
> First you have to beat the character's EGO+MD(if any)+20 points.
> To make it more difficult, the character has a CVK at total. For
>this the GM can add on a additional difficulty for the mind control to work.
>Say... +15
> Third. If the character actually has the disad of romantic interest
>with the person that he is to shoot, you ould add on an additional +5.
I saw something similar to this in TUM ... and it didn't look any better
there, either.
There isn't really a need for this kind of micromanagement to be added to
the rules; all such considerations should already be factored in when the GM
determines the initial difficulty for the Mind Control. In other words,
don't say "Oh, gee, this character has a Code v. Killing, that'll require
another 15 points of effect"; rather, say "This character has a code v.
killing, so I can assume out of hand that he's going to be 'violently
opposed' to this action".
- --
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to
do nothing." -- attributed to Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:14:33 -0600
From: Tim Statler <tstatler@igateway.net>
Subject: Re: Power set question
Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Scott Nolan wrote:
>
> > >Does this bug anyone else except me? I mean, two ECs, one for 'Major
> > >Shadow Powers' and one for 'Minor Shadow Powers'?
> >
> > I think it's a good idea. Two -different- EC's, like "Fire Powers" and
> > "Flight
> > Powers"
> > would be bad, but Major and Minor seem okay to me.
>
> Would you mind explaining your logic?
>
> I'd be leery of /any/ character that had two different ECs, honestly. On
> the other hand, if the character conception allowed it, I might let the
> player take (for example) 'Telepathy EC' and 'Vampire EC' if, say, he was
> a telepath who got turned into a vampire.
>
> If you allowed multiple ECs for the same effect though...eh. I would
> think it would lead to players minmaxing the number of ECs that they have
> to get the most benefit out of them - "Well, I've got Big Fire Powers EC,
> Medium Fire Powers EC, and Small Fire Powers EC, because I've got three
> basic AP levels of powers."
>
> I guess also part of my objection is that 'Minor Shadow Powers' and 'Major
> Shadow Powers' mean nothing when separated. No character would ever
> take 'Minor Shadow Powers' alone as an EC. What is the distinction
> between the two? Nothing, they are both 'Shadow Powers', so they should
> either go into the same EC, or not go into an EC at all.
>
> J
I still have to peruse all the msgs better to know how to proceed.
Thanks for all the comments so far. And I also don't like 2 ECs; 2 MPs
or an EC and MP usually work okay (but I look closer).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:48:55 -0800
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Subject: Re: House Rule: Please Comment
From: Brats Incorporated <brat-inc@avalon.net>
<snip>
>>
>>If I have a Mind Control power and order a character to do something he
>>is against doing, I have to reach the +20 level or I fail. That's all or
>>nothing.
>
>Yes and no.
>
<snip>
>
> Mind you now, the situation changes with each person.
>
> I the character is say a villian and has a psych lim where he is
FOR
>killing people, then you might give that haracter a minus to the roll.
>
>It all varies per situation I have found.
>*shrug*
The number required to get the desired effect was not what was being
discussed. The poster was only saying that you either get the effect or not.
You never get partial control, or resisted control where the character does
what you say, but slowly, or control that allows you to give more or less
detailed commands. You either control or you don't. No fuzzy lines.
Filksinger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 11:13:18 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: range of success (long)
>I was going to say that this works poorly for superhero games, but maybe it
>works fine. After all, superhero martial artists usually live through their
>encounters with massive bricks, but the chance of a critical hit explains
>the, "If he connects with _that_, I'm done for!" The martial artist's high
>DCV reduces the chance of a critical hit to a semi-reasonable percentage.
>
Actually, I've found that's too dangerous a rule even for heroic games.
Someone with a good relative CV crits all too often. I've used the 3 is a
crit, 18 is a fumble rule and found the occurance of both being much more
appropriate.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:54:45 -0500 (EST)
From: tdj723@webtv.net (thomas deja)
Subject: Superstar
Okay...I'd like to pick your brains for a while.
I am developing a new character called Superstar. The concept is that
this is a Hong kong action hero who was killed during one of his stunts
ten years ago. Now, hs spirit has found its way back, and is channeling
through his twin brother, who now works in the motion picture industry.
Superstar is a martial artist with a couple of super poewers (i.e. a HA
based on weapons of opportunity, autofire on STR). I want to give him an
EC or MP composed of Jackie-Chan-like super abilities to simulate some
of the wilder things you see in HK martial arts thrillers like CHINESE
GHOST STORY, BRIDE WITH WHITE HAIR, the DRUNKEN MASTER films--with the
special effect of onlookers not being sure if its a trick or not (they
might think the see wires when SS does an impossible leap or something).
Any sugestions for slots?
"Nothing says Christmas like a green Grinch butt."
--THAT 70's SHOW
____________________________________
THE ULTIMATE HULK, containing the new story, "A Quiet, Normal Life," is
available now from Byron Preiss and Berkley
_______________________________
An except from the new story "My Worst Break Up" can now be found at
MAKE UP YOUR OWN DAMN TITLE
www.freeyellow.com/members/tdj
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:00:15 -0500 (EST)
From: tdj723@webtv.net (thomas deja)
Subject: Re: New Skill: Meditation
From: brat-inc@avalon.net (Brats Incorporated)
>Ok. I have this nutty mentallist in the group
> who is dead set on having a meditation skill.
> Now I've asked the character to describe how
> the skill works, and this is what he gave me,
> in my own words of course "it's a skill that you
> use outside of combat." : Fair enough "It
> allows you to focus your mind." : Ok "It allows
> to to go over a scene and catch things that
> you previously missed." : Hmmm..
>My reaction to the player was this, "well it
> sounds like you want a skill that is a
> combination of deduction, enhanced
> perception and post cognitive powers. Uhhh,
> no." So, was it bad o me to have denied such
> a request? I do have some alternatives
> though.
It sounds like maybe this can be simulated with a couple of skill levels
usable only with deduction and perception, with a disad tacked on (only
after meditating/focusing his mind for X turns...with the longer the
meditation, the more skill levels get used). Depending upon the nature
of your game, I don't know if I would give him post cog...is this for a
super-hero game, a pulp game or something else?
"Nothing says Christmas like a green Grinch butt."
--THAT 70's SHOW
____________________________________
THE ULTIMATE HULK, containing the new story, "A Quiet, Normal Life," is
available now from Byron Preiss and Berkley
_______________________________
An except from the new story "My Worst Break Up" can now be found at
MAKE UP YOUR OWN DAMN TITLE
www.freeyellow.com/members/tdj
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 13:49:36 PST
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Independent Limitation
On Thu, 03 Dec 1998 James Jandebeur wrote:
>
>Neither wings nor tattoos are foci, as it requires doing body to the
>characters to remove them. Or is that an old version of the rules?
>
>JAJ
It's in the BBB. Under the description of Flight, they list wings as an
example of Flight bought through a focus. Many winged characters in
various Enemies & other books have this limitation. I can't think of
any off of the top of my head, but I know I've seen it. Their
justification is (I am told) that wings can be interfered with in
combat. IMHO this is silly, but it seems to be a convention that some
people, including the game designers, use. Other people have proposed a
"Foulable" limitation to replace this concept.
Likewise, a tattoo can be written up as a focus, because there are any
number of ways you could remove it (out of combat, anyway). You don't
even need to do Body damage. A good razor could be used to dissect the
skin away without doing any life-threatening damage. It wouldn't look
pretty, and it'd hurt like a sonofabitch, but it would be Stun damage at
most, as it wouldn't neccessarily kill someone even if you did it to
them 10 times. Likewise, a cosmetic Transform could be used to erase
the tattoo, as part of it's special effects. Also, if it was an Obvious
focus, or it's FX were visual in nature, you could define it as
something that wouldn't work if you covered it up. Thus, anyone who
could hit you with an opaque Entangle could effectively remove it from
you. Someone could take a tattoo needle and scratch over it, disrupting
it and forcing you to have it reworked to be effective again. I could
go on...
The point of all this is that things are Foci because you define them
that way. If you define something as a Focus, you have to be able to
think of ways it can be taken away from you. Things are Independent
because they are defined that way. If you want to get the full bonus
for making the power Independent, you have to define a way that the
power can be taken away from you. By my reasoning, that means that the
two Limitations are at least related. By taking an Independent power
and saying, "It isn't a focus", you are in effect saying that the only
way to take the power away is through the use of another power. I admit
I was in error when I said that Independent Powers HAD to be Foci
(that's what I get for skimming over the rules instead of reading them
carefully, just because I think I already know what's in 'em). Still,
I'd be very cautious about anyone who tried to define their powers that
way.
If a player came to me with a character with Independent powers, I'd sit
him down and have an EXTREMELY long talk with him about his character
concept and try to find out if he actually needed his powers to be
Independent or if he was just looking to get a power through a focus at
even more ridiculously reduced cost.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #104
*****************************
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, April 27, 1999 04:23 PM