Digest Archives Vol 1 Issue 158
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Monday, January 25, 1999 8:33 AM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #158
champ-l-digest Monday, January 25 1999 Volume 01 : Number 158
In this issue:
Re: A painful question
Re: A painful question
Re: A painful question
Re: A painful question
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: Levels and Limitations
Re: A painful question
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: [Entangles and Damage Sheild]
Re: A painful question
Re: [Contacts]
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: A painful question
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: [Contacts]
Re: Levels and Limitations
How much damage should guns do.
Re: Levels and Limitations
Re: How much damage should guns do.
Re: How much damage should guns do.
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: How much damage should guns do.
Re: Multipower Questions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 14:11:19 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: A painful question
At 02:28 PM 1/24/1999 -0500, thomas deja wrote:
>The lowest I ever got in a low powered campaign was 1000+65....and the
>characters I got back were highly competenat adventurers (this was a
>Pulp campaign) who were easily the best in their fields....and it was
>one of the best tabletop games I ever participated in.
Hey, it's easy to be the best in your field when you have a 1000 point
base. ;)
Boy, the images this conjures...1065 point pulp characters.
"Doc Savage? the Shadow? Wimps! Mere Incompetent Normals compared to the
PCs in our campaign."
Typos can be so much fun... :)
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 15:56:39 -0500 (EST)
From: tdj723@webtv.net (thomas deja)
Subject: Re: A painful question
- --WebTV-Mail-1966228708-141
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Yes--I noticed after the fact that the 100 point base was typoed into
something that defeated my argument.....
"A trial without witnesses is like the Euro, a monetary system without
the benefits of paper money or coin--what's the fun of that?"
- --Harry Shearer
____________________________________
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 "Too Needy" can now be found at MAKE UP
YOUR OWN DAMN TITLE
www.freeyellow.com/members/tdj
- --WebTV-Mail-1966228708-141
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Received: from mailsorter-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.91) by
postoffice-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 12:52:31
-0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <owner-champ-l@sysabend.org>
Received: from beelzebubba.sysabend.org (beelzebubba.sysabend.org
[208.243.107.6]) by mailsorter-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97)
with ESMTP id MAA00753; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 12:52:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by beelzebubba.sysabend.org (8.9.1/8.9.1)
id PAA01333 for champ-l-list; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 15:13:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from legend.idworld.net (root@legend.idworld.net [209.142.64.2])
by beelzebubba.sysabend.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA01327
for <champ-l@sysabend.org&> Sun, 24 Jan 1999 15:13:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from default.txdirect.net (iits-01-74.sat.idworld.net
[209.142.71.74]) by legend.idworld.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id
OAA04606; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 14:12:52 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990124141119.007513b4@txdirect.net>
X-Sender: griffin@txdirect.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 14:11:19 -0600
To: ErolB1@aol.com
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: A painful question
Cc: champ-l@sysabend.org
In-Reply-To: <3318-36AB746C-1294@mailtod-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <ErolB1@aol.c> message of Sun, 24 Jan 1999 12:12:45 EST>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-champ-l@sysabend.org
Precedence: bulk
At 02:28 PM 1/24/1999 -0500, thomas deja wrote:
>The lowest I ever got in a low powered campaign was 1000+65....and the
>characters I got back were highly competenat adventurers (this was a
>Pulp campaign) who were easily the best in their fields....and it was
>one of the best tabletop games I ever participated in.
Hey, it's easy to be the best in your field when you have a 1000 point
base. ;)
Boy, the images this conjures...1065 point pulp characters.
"Doc Savage? the Shadow? Wimps! Mere Incompetent Normals compared to the
PCs in our campaign."
Typos can be so much fun... :)
Damon
- --WebTV-Mail-1966228708-141--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 16:25:53 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: A painful question
At 03:56 PM 1/24/1999 -0500, thomas deja wrote:
>Yes--I noticed after the fact that the 100 point base was typoed into
>something that defeated my argument.....
Not at all. Your argument remains intact; everyone knew what you meant.
It just struck me as funny.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 15:25:40 -0700
From: Curtis A Gibson <mhoram@relia.net>
Subject: Re: A painful question
Scott Bennie wrote:
>
> Everyone has varying tastes in running a campaign, and we all have
> strong opinions on what makes a campaign enjoyable and encourages the
> feel of the genre, but we rarely get into an objective discussion of the
> specifics.
>
> The question I'm asking is, what are the advantages and disadvantages of
> a low power campaign versus a high power campaign? What does a high
> point campaign do that a low point campaign doesn't, and vice versa?
>
> I've been thinking about writing an article on power levels, and I'd
> appreciate opinions on the question.
>
> Scott Bennie
Here is my take on the whole thing....
I've run and played in (Champs) as low as 75+75 point supers and as high
as 900+ (with experience), and (FH) 50+50 to 100+100 + XP (total points
ending at about 350-400), and (Ninha Hero) 75+75 Herioc MA to 100+150
+XP Wild Heroic (total points being about 400+).
A lot of the commentary remains the same in different genres.
The biggest two differences that I see between the two extreme ends of
the level are:
1) opposistion level
Basically this boils down to what your character is afraid of, and what
he laughs at. In a high point game agents, orcs, and minion MAs are
laughed at, trounced or ignored. Then the PCs can move onto the real
problems of Dr Destroyer, the Dragon king, or the head of the Tong. The
PCs can ingore the lesser evils as not something to personally worry
about, and this kind of encounter can be a fun cakewalk for an evenings
entertainment when the PCs have defeated something big and major
recently. That can't be done in a low point game.
On the other hand low pointers make the characters take everything
seriously, because they can get hurt/killed by agents or minions. This
leads to greater dramatic tension during the course of the adventure
(although not neccisarily greater drama overall). You can run a
'something around the corner could kill you at any minute' type of
adventure that is virtually impossible in a high point campaign.
2) 'real world' benchmarks
Simply put are the heroes average for heroes or the _epic_ legends of
the day? If the characters are to be famous, increadible in their feats,
a high point game is the way to run things. If the PCs are the 'avereage
joe overcoming amazing obsticles' then the low point is the way to go.
Overall I see no real disadvantage or advantage to either one- overall.
The point/power level choice is just a tool to create a campaign
atmosphere; just like the yes/no magic form rules in FH or the campaign
tone sheets in Champs. It's just a matter of salting to taste.
- --
What is called glory, I think, is mostly the relief you feel after
you've fought and lived through battle without getting maimed.
- -Harry Turtledove Krispos Rising
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 99 10:50:13
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 15:14:22 EST, DVBaum@aol.com wrote:
>Multipower #1 is basically just a bunch of gadgets with OAF and 4 charges for
>each slot limitation. My question on that one is: Can I take the OAF(-1) and
>4 charges(-1) limitation on the main multipower cost? I know that I can take
>the OAF limitation, but I'm not sure about the 4 charges limitation.
No. That would mean that the *MP* could only be used four times. This
is sometimes useful - like a wand with assorted functions, but only a
limited number of charges.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 17:04:10 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu>
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
> As GM, I allow Limiations on 2- and 3-point levels as long as at least five
> points worth of levels are packaged together. For example, if a player buys a
> blaster rifle with two 3-point levels, I'll allow a Focus Limitation applied
> to the 6 points.
This would be fine except for the fact that the limitation is not
at all limiting. Those levels are already only with the blaster rifle,
taking a focus lim that says they work only with the blaster rifle is just
free points.
-Tim Gilberg
-"English Majors of the World! Untie!"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:48:35 -0800
From: Jay P Hailey <jayphailey@juno.com>
Subject: Re: A painful question
>Personally, I don't like low-powered campaigns at all. I'll cheerfully
>play heroic games with the characters built on 75+75 pts if the setup is
>approprate, but I won't go lower than that. I can be plenty stupid and
>incompetent and ineffective in real life; I don't need more of this in
>something I do for fun.
Actually I use 100 + 50. 100 base points and 50 points of disads. I
don't want my players taking disads they have no intention of playing.
Also I came to HSR from GURPS and I brought a lot of baggage with me.
>Lower-point characters also tend to be sketchy in terms of details.
>I've noticed that people tend to give mucho points to fictional
characters
>- the recent Middle Earth characters are examples of this. Sam Bell's
>earlier posting of superheroes also exemplify this. Also the example
given
>some time back of the 200 pt package for a "generic real-world cop."
There's a
>lesson in here somewhere, even if I'm not sure what it is...
"When you have a lot of points, you can get everything you want"
>OTOH, very high point totals are harder to play and harder to GM.
This has been my experience. Once in our Omega Squad Game we had a
character conduct a 20+ d6 PRE attack on a tyrannosaur. Scared it to
death. Personally I'd like to see characters take a rampaging T Rex
seriously. But that's just me. The GM then came up with a
*cybernetically enhanced* T Rex. A bionic T Rex fer chrissakes! It lasted
alomst an entire turn against my heavy hitter PC. And it was so weird,
because I built the darned thing for the GM and designed it specifically
to eat that character up!
High power games get to the point where you can trust rthe game world or
the PCs actions to have the effects they should.
>One thing that a high-power campaign does *not* do is "discourage
>roleplaying."
If you have good role players. If you have poor ones then the Higher
powered game degenerates into dueling egos.
>A low power game does allow a GM to dominate the players
>and keep them under strict discipline. It also encourages the
>player-characters to whine and grovel a lot. But it is a mistake to
confuse these things
>with "good roleplaying."
Now, this I take issue with. Can you perhaps give me a few examples?
>The important thing is for the GM to set up benchmarks for the
>gameworld, to have a clear idea of the sort of things he wants the
player-characters
>to do, and *to communicate these things to the players.*
I agree.
>A GM really ought to
>create some sample characters, vet them to ensure that they perform as
>desired, and use the results to set the point levels and guidelines for
the
>campaign[1]. >It's also a good idea for the GM to make those sample
characters
>available to the players as examples of "the sort of characters I want"
and for the
>GM to write up suitable packages for stereotypical professions in the
game
>world. (In a modern-day supers game, these might be such things as a
"Lawyer
>package", an "MD package", a "policeman package", etc.)
This makes a certain amount of sense. Although I can see the sample
characters turing into an excuse for dissention, too.
>Another useful exercise might be to "write yourself up in HERO terms."
>I haven't seen much of this, but "write yourself up in GURPS terms" is a
>common exercise that gives an interesting result: There are a lot of
players
>who write themselves up as under 25 pts - and another lot of players to
>write themselves as 100+ point characters. There are big differences as
to
>how GURPS points map onto the real world, and I expect this to be even
more true
>with HERO.
The guy who's PC scarwed the T. Rex to death is commonly terrorized with
the word (Called loudly) "Nineteen!" He wrote himself up and gave
himself a nineteen DEX. So whenever he trips or stumbles we shout
"NINETTEN!!" at him.
If you're into an eye opening experience have your friends write you up
as a character. On second thought don't. Who needs the grief?
>[1] Unless you're the sort of GM who hates "Pro from Dover"-type players
and
>wants to piss on them, it's important that the sample characters not
represent
>absolute limits. Instead of the NPC Dr. Tachyon being "the fastest man
in the
>campaign", it should be "Dr. Tachyon is in the top rank of speedsters.
He may
>or may not be the fastest, but anyone faster will not be faster by
>very much."
>
>Erol K. Bayburt
>Evil Genius for a Better Tomorrow
That sounds good. I like that.
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!>
Famous Last Words: "Trust me, I know what I'm doing."
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 17:31:54 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
> No. That would mean that the *MP* could only be used four times. This
Says who? The rules never state this, and seem to suggest
otherwise. Back up statements before making them with seeming force of
law.
-Tim Gilberg
-"English Majors of the World! Untie!"
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 99 17:01:18 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: [Entangles and Damage Sheild]
> Rubberboy hits Flameman with his Entangle (SFX Ribberball). Flameman's
> Damage Sheild damages Entangle (on which segments? The one the Entangle
> hits on and Flameman's phases?) Entangle has backlash so Flameman takes
> damage from it if the Entangle does not get destroyed.
>
> Is this Right?
Yep. I wonder about the FX of that backlash, though... (gobs of burning/
melted rubber dropping on Flameman?)
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 18:56:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@dedaana.otd.com>
Subject: Re: A painful question
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Jay P Hailey wrote:
> Actually I use 100 + 50. 100 base points and 50 points of disads. I
> don't want my players taking disads they have no intention of playing.
> Also I came to HSR from GURPS and I brought a lot of baggage with me.
In my games we have debated the 150+100 Super, thus removing part of the
unneeded disad problem. It did work as excesses hunted and the like were
dropped, providing for a tighter concept.
> >Lower-point characters also tend to be sketchy in terms of details.
> >I've noticed that people tend to give mucho points to fictional
> characters
> >- the recent Middle Earth characters are examples of this. Sam Bell's
> >earlier posting of superheroes also exemplify this. Also the example
> given
> >some time back of the 200 pt package for a "generic real-world cop."
When I do an adaption of a fictional character, I try to be reasonable
with regards toi stats and power levels.. I also give the character
everyhting I know the character can do. This does mean that I have
written up a lot of 300 to 400 point adaptions. I have also done adaptions
for as little as 24 points. Many fictional characters are actualyl quite
powerful and will be a *lot* of points. Scott Nolan's LOTR adaptions are
massive in the point department, but he admits to giving them extra
invented items and he hands out a *lot* of skills and followers. I
orginally said '150 to 200 points' per character... You could probably do
them at that power scale as well, depending on how 'complete you adaption
is.
I will also note that I asked it people really wanted to see more of the
Dragonball Z characters, since I knew they were going ot start breaking
900 to 1000 points real fast. The list basically said 'yes' (actually, no
said 'no' and I got a couple of 'yes' votes).
> There's a
> >lesson in here somewhere, even if I'm not sure what it is...
Sure, when you detail every little thing, the points add up fast.
> "When you have a lot of points, you can get everything you want"
Very true.
- --
Michael Surbrook - susano@otd.com - http://www.otd.com/~susano/index.html
Windows 95, n. 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch
to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor,
written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 99 17:05:28 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: [Contacts]
owner-champ-l@sysabend.org wrote:
> While it has yet to come up in a game, I have long thought that Contacts
> should be purchasable as a group, as well as single characters
>
> This would make it much easier to buy such characters as "the stoolie who
>
> knows what's going down, every time", or the priest who knows his
>
> neighborhood so well that nothing happens that he doesn't hear about.
I heartily agree. As far as I'm concerned, the idea of special effects
applies to Perks as well as powers... if you get the same value out
of a 14- Contanct: Old Police Buddies, as you do out of 14- Contact:
Police Captain McNamara, I don't see why you should pay more points for it...
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 1999 20:56:16 -0500
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"TG" == Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> writes:
>> No. That would mean that the *MP* could only be used four times. This
TG> Says who? The rules never state this, and seem to suggest
TG> otherwise. Back up statements before making them with seeming force of
TG> law.
What Tim said. Few limitations placed on a framework affect the framework
itself. Those that do are usually specific to that type of Framework.
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE2q89Agl+vIlSVSNkRAn9BAJ9BZrsgzi3mcv6IfsALcPwNjq+lOwCgxRsQ
T56kAh72rdOWrqxQvy3XiWY=
=W9s1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 19:48:36 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu>
Subject: Re: A painful question
> >Everyone has varying tastes in running a campaign, and we all have
> >strong opinions on what makes a campaign enjoyable and encourages the
> >feel of the genre, but we rarely get into an objective discussion of
> >the specifics.
I'll throw my hat into this ring, though I'm going to start out
with discussing a couple of White Wolf campaigns first. (Mostly as I've
had very little chance to _play_ Champs--I usually have to run it.)
> expression of imaginary power. Super high powered characters never have
> to worry about paying the rent, or fixing the car, or what's for dinner
> tonight. They rise above the mudane stresses of the world and fly away
> from it all.
Yup. I've played in a Vampire campaign where all the characters
were Methuselahs. (If you don't know the term, it's what it
suggests--very old and powerful.) Many of the characters led large
factions of other vampires, ghouls, normals, etc. A couple of us were
"famous figures" from history. (Pontius Pilot and Nostradamus.)
Most mundane things wouldn't have a chance of scaring us, but we
were dealing with 2nd and 3rd gen Vampires--the big names of Vampire
history that don't get directly involved, usually. There was also the
threat of the start of the Armageddon, a bit early, caused by Gabriel.
(Yes, _that_ Gabriel.) Add in influence by Nefertiti, some really
powerful mages, a powerful religious order (The Inquisition) or two
(Followers of Michael), and things got really hectic really fast.
Note how insanely powerful those NPCs are. We rivaled, but were
mostly outpowered. However, it fell to us to try to prevent the various
machinations.
An incredible campaign. My second favorite that I've ever played
in. The one that beat it?
> Lower powered characters enable the PCs to feel a greater sense of
> accomplishement by solving problems.
Yup. Now on to my favorite campaign. Also set in the WoD, but we
were normals--NSA agents assigned to investigating potential Vampire
activity in NYC. We would probably have worked out to highly trained
normals, and we had access to _nice_ equipment, but that really doesn't
mean much when faced by even one moderately powerful Vampire. It really
means nothing when faced with, say, a werewolf.
We were scared shitless the entire game. We knew nothing about
what was going on, and were jerked around a bit like pawns by the various
power players--it turned out our commander, who was a PC, was a Manchurian
Canditate-type. We had a blast uncovering the big plans of Vampire
domination, and were able to put an (at least) temporary stop to them by
blowing up a skyscraper (don't ask). (Well, you can ask, but that's
another story.) We had to be incredibly inventive and creative to get
through this campaign, and 2 of the 4 characters ended up dying.
Like I said, I loved it. This is what being low-powered is about.
Note, however, that power is a relative thing. If FH characters
are based on 100+100, but the average orc is 180 pts, those characters
aren't all that powerful. Relative levels of power are what matter.
Now, for the Champs campaigns I run, I'm pretty open to point. I
try to start characters off at 100+175, as that was standard for the
Champs campaigns around Joliet, IL when I started playing Champs. I
encourage conception, and don't want to see the "players are beginners, so
the characters are beginners"-syndrome. Some characters ended up at lower
point totals--one down at 228. Others ended up higher, 328 was the high.
If the player needed more points, but there were no more disads that
applied, I'd give a "hero bonus." Some players built their own
characters, others I built--it depended on experience, really. As I had
many Champions novices, the majority were my creations or co-creations.
Any questions? Did I have a point here?
-Tim Gilberg
-"English Majors of the World! Untie!"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 20:27:07 -0600
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
Say you have an archer character who carries six different types of arrows:
normal arrows, boxing glove arrows, glue arrows, liferaft arrows, boomerang
arrows, and rocket arrows. He always carries twenty arrows in his quiver,
though the exact number of each type of arrow varies every time he goes out.
He seems to know what he's going to need for each mission, and always seems
to have the right number of arrows for each occasion: if he needs ten rocket
arrows and ten boxing glove arrows, that's how many he has on hand; if he
needs twenty liferaft arrows, that's how many he has.
Now, this would seem to me to be a classic case of putting the charges on
the multipower itself, since he's not restricted to a certain number of
charges per arrow; however, the rules don't permit it. Do I bend the rules
to cover a reasonable character construct? Do I tell the player, "Sorry, the
rules don't allow it, so you can't have it?" Or is there another solution?
- -----Original Message-----
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
To: Champions <champ-l@sysabend.org>
Date: Sunday, January 24, 1999 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
|-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|Hash: SHA1
|
|"TG" == Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> writes:
|
|>> No. That would mean that the *MP* could only be used four times. This
|
|TG> Says who? The rules never state this, and seem to suggest
|TG> otherwise. Back up statements before making them with seeming force of
|TG> law.
|
|What Tim said. Few limitations placed on a framework affect the framework
|itself. Those that do are usually specific to that type of Framework.
|-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux)
|Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
|
|iD8DBQE2q89Agl+vIlSVSNkRAn9BAJ9BZrsgzi3mcv6IfsALcPwNjq+lOwCgxRsQ
|T56kAh72rdOWrqxQvy3XiWY=
|=W9s1
|-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|--
|Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include
an
|Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ unknown glowing substance which fell
to
|PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
|
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 1999 22:57:30 -0500
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"GH" == Guy Hoyle <ghoyle1@airmail.net> writes:
GH> Now, this would seem to me to be a classic case of putting the charges
GH> on the multipower itself, since he's not restricted to a certain number
GH> of charges per arrow; however, the rules don't permit it.
That is why we have GMs to interpret the rules for their campaigns.
In this case, my initial thought is to put Charges on the reserve and
nothing on the individual slots. If the Charges modifier happens to be an
advantage, it increases the cost of the reserve but does not increase its
size (ie, a 30 point reserve with a +1/2 advantage costs 45 points but is
still a 30 point reserve). If a limitation, it does not decrease the cost
of your slots. I'll let you have the 0 END cost on the slots for 'free'.
But the active cost of the reserve is still restricted by campaign
guidelines (gotta draw the line somewhere :).
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE2q+uqgl+vIlSVSNkRAhgiAKDmV3bIrzOuDWBtT297y8jN3FsK6wCg9VUM
gKFQVsni9CbxrKOX7PgsHms=
=2eD1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> \ When not in use, Happy Fun Ball should be
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ returned to its special container and
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ kept under refrigeration.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 23:03:19 -0500 (EST)
From: tdj723@webtv.net (thomas deja)
Subject: Re: [Contacts]
>From: anthony.vargas@usa.net (ANTHONY VARGAS)
>>I heartily agree. As far as I'm concerned, the
>> idea of special effects applies to Perks as
>> well as powers... if you get the same value
>> out of a 14- Contanct: Old Police Buddies,
>> as you do out of 14- Contact: Police Captain
>> McNamara, I don't see why you should pay
>> more points for it...
There are certain types of characters who *need* modified perks as
special effects....a character like, let's say, John Constantine or
Baron Winter, who know people from all walks of life and can access
their knowledges under certain circumtances, might even be justified in
having small (10, 15 point) 'variable contact pools'.....
"A trial without witnesses is like the Euro, a monetary system without
the benefits of paper money or coin--what's the fun of that?"
- --Harry Shearer
____________________________________
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 "Too Needy" can now be found at MAKE UP
YOUR OWN DAMN TITLE
www.freeyellow.com/members/tdj
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 00:56:05 -0600
From: Bryant Berggren <voxel@theramp.net>
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
Note: I'm munging together two messages for a single response on a similar
topic.
At 05:04 PM 1/24/99 -0600, Tim Gilberg wrote:
> This would be fine except for the fact that the limitation is not
> at all limiting. Those levels are already only with the blaster
> rifle, taking a focus lim that says they work only with the blaster
> rifle is just free points.
I don't think this is necessarily true, but it depends on the way a GM
plays. I can buy a 2-pt. "+1 OCV w/IMI Eagle". This means I can use this
level with my own IMI Eagle -- easy. Say I'm in a unit where this is the
standard firearm -- my buddy gets shot, I run out of ammo, I take his. I
still get the +1 ... I think. (As a GM, I would rule so, in much the same
way that two characters with similar powers can "swap" Personal Immunities,
as the book suggests).
I modify my IMI Eagle by tacking on a targeting sight, which I will define
as being OAF (it gets disarmed with the gun). /This/ level does NOT apply to
any other gun but the exact pistol I modified -- ergo, the limitation. If I
have +2 levels through the sight, and a +1 on my own, I'm +3 with my
personal gun and +1 with the general unit's gun.
In other words, the normal level adds to OCV with /a/ "blaster rifle" (or
whatever), the limited one applies to THE "blaster rifle" (or whatever) in
your hands right now.
At 11:57 AM 1/24/99 -0500, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
Rat> A neat idea ... but I think needlessly complex and prone to abuse,
Rat> which is why the restriction to 5-point and higher cost skill levels.
Under the current rules, the integral gunsight described above must be
bought as a 5-point level, though it FUNCTIONS as a 2-pt level. This means a
+2 OCV bought into the focus costs 5 pts -- more than if the character
himself just bought the +2 OCV himself (and as I illustrated above, I
believe the character's levels are marginally more useful). I'm sensitive to
the possibility of a player to abuse the rules -- but IMO, in this case the
rules are abusing the player. :/
At 11:57 AM 1/24/99 -0500, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
E> I've also slightly redefined the different levels of Levels to work out
E> what I see as a kink in the progression and to eliminate the concept of
E> the 'tight group.' IMHO the 'tight group' requires too many judgment
E> calls and is too vulnerable to abuse.
> I see it the other way around, if the GM is properly doing his job. My
> rule of thumb is, if it can go into an Elemental Control, it qualifies
> as a tight group; otherwise not. Simple and consistent.
As a gamer in Erol's circle, I know that he doesn't consider Elemental
Controls "simple and consistent", to the extent that he's banned them in his
home/campaign rules. This may shed a little light on his views in re "tight
group".
- --
"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, 25 Jan 1999 00:35:10 -0800
From: Max Callahan <mcallahan@home.com>
Subject: How much damage should guns do.
Ok, I recognize that this could start some rancorous debate so I'll ask for
civility from the start.
I think that the damage values for firearms, rifles in particular, are
wrong. Case in point a .50 caliber Desert Eagle (a pistol) is rated at
2D6+1 with a +1 stun mult, a 7.62 Nato Rifle round is also rated at 2D6+1
with a +1 stun mult. From a real world perspective this is flat wrong, the
rifle round has an order of magnitude more energy behind it (if you follow
the every doubling of power is an increase of 1 DC than the rifle should be
3D6+1 if the pistol is 2D6+1). Now either the Desert Eagle is doing too
much damage or the 7.62 isn't doing enough, I lean towards the latter. This
is why, a 7D6 normal attack (15 STR + an offensive strike, easily within
the range of a normal human(albeit a trained one) does 5 body to a normal,
a 1.5D6 killing attack also does 5 Body (and that would be a .357 Magnum or
a 10 mm round ) and I think that's about right. The problem is, if I
promote the 7.62 Nato round to a 3D6+1 RKA with +1 stun thats a 15 DC
attack (and thats before considering autofire), and if conventional
hardware is 15 DC's then what does that do the average superheros attacks
("can my punisher clone have a FN-FAL" "no that's 15DC's and this is a 12
DC game"), or their defenses for that matter, and think about what heavy
weapons would be if a battle rifle is 3D6+1, and what about the fact that
barrel length also affects the damage the weapon does, and how do I buy 3
round bursts, and, and what about scarecrows brain.
I think my point here is that rifles just don't do enough damage compared
to pistols, so fixing that would be good, but the consequences of upping
rifle damage are icky, what does everybody else think.
Max Callahan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:12:49 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
>Note: I'm munging together two messages for a single response on a similar
>topic.
>
>At 05:04 PM 1/24/99 -0600, Tim Gilberg wrote:
>> This would be fine except for the fact that the limitation is not
>> at all limiting. Those levels are already only with the blaster
>> rifle, taking a focus lim that says they work only with the blaster
>> rifle is just free points.
>
>I don't think this is necessarily true, but it depends on the way a GM
>plays. I can buy a 2-pt. "+1 OCV w/IMI Eagle". This means I can use this
>level with my own IMI Eagle -- easy. Say I'm in a unit where this is the
>standard firearm -- my buddy gets shot, I run out of ammo, I take his. I
>still get the +1 ... I think. (As a GM, I would rule so, in much the same
>way that two characters with similar powers can "swap" Personal Immunities,
>as the book suggests).
On the other hand, in the more common place where cost accounting on
properties of a Focus are used, it's fairly unlikely you'll spend much time
using a weapon of that type except the one you paid for anyway; if you don't
have that one, you probably don't have one at all.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:17:11 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: How much damage should guns do.
>Ok, I recognize that this could start some rancorous debate so I'll ask for
>civility from the start.
>
>I think that the damage values for firearms, rifles in particular, are
>wrong. Case in point a .50 caliber Desert Eagle (a pistol) is rated at
>2D6+1 with a +1 stun mult, a 7.62 Nato Rifle round is also rated at 2D6+1
>with a +1 stun mult. From a real world perspective this is flat wrong, the
>rifle round has an order of magnitude more energy behind it (if you follow
>the every doubling of power is an increase of 1 DC than the rifle should be
>3D6+1 if the pistol is 2D6+1). Now either the Desert Eagle is doing too
>much damage or the 7.62 isn't doing enough, I lean towards the latter. This
Actually, if you look at the progression of other pistols, it's the former.
There were a lot of generous cinematic assumptions made with the pistols (as
is the case in a lot of games) so they'd not pile up all in one spot.
>I think my point here is that rifles just don't do enough damage compared
>to pistols, so fixing that would be good, but the consequences of upping
>rifle damage are icky, what does everybody else think.
I think you're asking more of a fundamentally cinematic damage system than
it's liable to give you.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 99 12:46:45
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: How much damage should guns do.
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 00:35:10 -0800, Max Callahan wrote:
>I think that the damage values for firearms, rifles in particular, are
>wrong. Case in point a .50 caliber Desert Eagle (a pistol) is rated at
>2D6+1 with a +1 stun mult, a 7.62 Nato Rifle round is also rated at 2D6+1
>with a +1 stun mult. From a real world perspective this is flat wrong
While I'm not familiar with the specific weapons you cite, I disagree.
The advantage of the rifle is that it is far more accurate at range.
Hitting something at 100 yds is very difficult with a pistol; it's
vastly easier witha rifle. Shoot both at point-blank range and you get
similar results
In game terms, pistols should have Reduced Range modifiers, perhaps
even -1/1" and rifles the reverse.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 99 12:50:42
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999 17:31:54 -0600 (Central Standard Time), Tim Gilberg
wrote:
>> No. That would mean that the *MP* could only be used four times. This
>
>Says who? The rules never state this, and seem to suggest
>otherwise. Back up statements before making them with seeming force of
>law.
You're putting the Charges Limitation on the MP itself rather than the
Power, so the MP can only be used 4 times. QED.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:01:06 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: How much damage should guns do.
At 12:46 PM 1/25/1999, qts wrote:
>While I'm not familiar with the specific weapons you cite, I disagree.
>The advantage of the rifle is that it is far more accurate at range.
This has always been my impression as well. I understood that a 9mm bullet
would do the same damage whether fired from a pistol or a rifle, and that
the rifle's only advantage was added range.
So, Max, I think you want to compare the two types of ammunition, not the
two types of weapon. (I'm not sure that has any effect on your question,
though, it may be purely semantic.)
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 99 12:49:30
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999 20:27:07 -0600, Guy Hoyle wrote:
>Say you have an archer character who carries six different types of arrows:
>normal arrows, boxing glove arrows, glue arrows, liferaft arrows, boomerang
>arrows, and rocket arrows. He always carries twenty arrows in his quiver,
>though the exact number of each type of arrow varies every time he goes out.
>He seems to know what he's going to need for each mission, and always seems
>to have the right number of arrows for each occasion: if he needs ten rocket
>arrows and ten boxing glove arrows, that's how many he has on hand; if he
>needs twenty liferaft arrows, that's how many he has.
>
>Now, this would seem to me to be a classic case of putting the charges on
>the multipower itself, since he's not restricted to a certain number of
>charges per arrow; however, the rules don't permit it.
Don't they? Didn't spot anything in the HSR to say that. And if there
is, and you don't like it, change it.
qts
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk.
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #158
*****************************
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 03:14 PM