Digest Archives Vol 1 Issue 161
From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Sent: Monday, January 25, 1999 9:13 PM
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #161
champ-l-digest Monday, January 25 1999 Volume 01 : Number 161
In this issue:
RE: How much damage should guns do.
Re: Levels and Limitations
RE: How much damage should guns do.
Re: A painful question
Re: Levels and Limitations
RE: A painful question
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: How much damage should guns do.
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: A painful question
Re: A painful question
Re: Multipower Questions
Re: How much damage should guns do.
RE: How much damage should guns do.
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Re: A painful question
Re: How much damage should guns do.
Re: A painful question
Re: A painful question
RE: A painful question
Re: A painful question
Re: Levels and Limitations
Re: [Re: Limitations on Multipowers]
Character:Eowyn
Re: [Re: How much damage should guns do.]
Re: A painful question
[none]
Re: Levels and Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:33:49 PST
From: "Jesse Thomas" <haerandir@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: How much damage should guns do.
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 Brian Wawrow wrote:
>
>Sorry, usually I get half way through an email that contributes nothing
to
>the conversation and stop myself but today I thought I'd just let it
ride.
I'll grant you, it wasn't what you'd call helpful, but it was more
thought-provoking than half of the treatises on the physics of gun
barrels I've read today.
BTW, in case you couldn't tell, I'm of the Egyptoid camp on this
subject.
>I got your muzzle velocity right here.
Oh, is that where it went? Can I have it back? Thanks.
Jesse Thomas
haerandir@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:32:52 -0600 (CST)
From: gilberg@ou.edu
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
>N> 1) If the levels are OAF Blaster rifle, only for use with Blaster Rifle
>N> then they are most certainly more limited than CSLs with only one of
>N> those limitations. Examples follow:
>
>Two-point combat skill levels are purchased for a specific power or
>maneuver, and they may be used *ONLY* with that specific power or maneuver.
>Any limitation that attemps to restrict the use of that CSL to that power
>is redundant, thus worth no bonus.
This is odd, Rat and I agreeing, but yeah.
If you want a level with "blaster rifles," you take a 3 pt level.
If you want a level with a specific blaster rifle, you take a 2 pt level.
-Tim Gilberg
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:01:42 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: RE: How much damage should guns do.
At 03:24 PM 1/25/1999 -0500, Brian Wawrow wrote:
>But, what everybody wants to know is... what kind of penalty do you get on
>your weaponsmith roll to use an Arcane Mana Crystal to juice up an Imperial
>Phasor Pistol?
Unless the IPP was built with the optional AMC Recharge Adaptor, the
penalty is -5, but the usual modifiers for Extra Time apply.
>And, is the Imperial Phasor Pistol a valid focus for your
>CSL's with the aforementioned eye beams?
No, it is not.
Glad I could help.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 10:44:08 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: A painful question
At 09:04 AM 1/25/99 -0600, Curt Hicks wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 99-01-23 22:06:39 EST, sbennie@dowco.com writes:
>>
>> > 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 read through about half of the responses now. Probably the very next
>post will raise the same point but let me ask this anyway:
>
>Does a 'low power game' necessarily equate to a 'low POINT game' ?
No, it doesn't...
>(I'll grant that 'high power' probably has to equate to 'high POINTs".)
...and in this, you're right; it generally would.
It's typical to think of point cost as being equal to campaign power,
but it's not necessarily so. The two are related, to be sure, but the
relationship isn't 1:1 because so many other factors enter into it.
For instance, in the Justifiers game, players get 100 base points and
can get 200 points in Disadvantages. (Before anyone complains at this,
nobody's had to stretch for Disads yet. I've had to offer a few
suggestions for expanding on a weakness or two, but that's about it.) Even
though the characters work with 50 points more than a typical starting
character in Champions, they're a little less powerful than same, mostly
because I also make a lot of demands in the area of versatility, especially
Skills. Thus, a character can be heavy on points but relatively low in
Power.
- ---
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, 25 Jan 1999 07:24:59 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
>> 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.
>
> If the weapon is taken away and used by someone else, the Level(s)
>bought through the Focus would go with it. Otherwise the owning character
>keeps it.
I think Rat's point is as follows:
If the levels only apply to the rifle, if the rifle is taken away he can't
use the levels anyway, as in a game that monitors points for equipment,
chances are he won't have another available. At that point, putting them on
the rifle is more limiting than having them himself in what fashion?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:39:42 -0500
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com>
Subject: RE: A painful question
>] To me, and this may be a matter of taste, gaming is about enjoying a
>] co-operative story. I've always felt that the 'do the wrong thing and
>] you die' type games is one of those holdevers from
>] AD&D/wargaming, just
>] like hack 'n' slashing,; or not caring about
>] characterization, but just
>] about how tough you are.
>]
>] And I will mention (as came up last year when a discussion like this
>] came up) as a GM I _never_ kill any character that plays in my
>] campaigns, unless the player asks for it- in any genre. All the
>] campaigns I've played in within the last 10 years all are
>] GMed that way
>] as well. Maybe it's just that I have high quality players who don't
>] think "Ah, he won't kill us, let's do something stupid!!!' but it has
>] never caused a problem.
Actually, my players would and have said exactly that. I just upped
the lethality by increments until they stopped. No, they aren't high-quality,
but they're my friends and I'm stuck with 'em.
This whole discussion assumes that GMs have fine control over
lethality. This is especially untrue at the low-end of the spectrum.
An hour after he started the character in my fantasy campaign
last night, a character took a 2d6-1 killing shot to the...well...the groin.
Where he had no armor. He suffered 20 Body and 40 Stun. He died
instantly.
Point is, in a dice-based game, lethality is sometimes random.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"In the void is virtue and no evil. Wisdom has existence,
principle has existence, the Way has existence; spirit
is nothingness."
Miyamoto Musashi, A Book of Five Rings
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scott C. Nolan
nolan@erols.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:58:01 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
><<If you put the OAF on the pool, you don't have to buy it again for the
>slots, but the -1 modifier will still apply.>>
>
>So, what you're saying is, that if you put the OAF limitation on the pool,
>you don't buy the limitation again for each slot?
In practice, yes. It's already assumed the whole Multipower is an OAF.
There's been some debate in the past how multipowers _composed_ of entirely
OAFs should normally be priced, since they're harder to take out than a
single OAF would be.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:17:05 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
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.)
In practice, that's what he did. Except for some oddball carbines, rifles
and pistols generally don't fire the same ammo outside of .22 rimfires.
Rifle ammo has immensely more power behind it, which makes for more energy
transfered to the target, all other things being equal. Admittedly, using
muzzle energy is an overly simplistic way to evaluate damage, but as a first
order approximation tool, it's probably the place to start.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 08:00:05 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
>
>On 25-Jan-99 I could have sworn that Christopher Taylor said:
>>
>> Depends how you mean that when you wrote it up. As you have written it,
>> that is legal (if the OAF applies to all powers in the multipower you can
>> take it on the pool, which you meant to be Multipower Pool, not power pool
>> I assume) but if you mean you get the OAF from the pool AND an OAF on the
>> item you cannot do that (i.e. get a -2 total on each slot).
>>
>
>That's fine, but explain this to me:
>
>Why the heck would you buy a multipower *this* way:
>
>30 Munchkin Power, OAF(-1)
>6u Cool Power #1
>6u Cool Power #2
You wouldn't. It should never occur.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:28:14 -0800
From: "James Jandebeur" <james@javaman.to>
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
SSR wrote:
>There used to be something called the 'common' slot limitation. If all of
>your MP slots have different limitations, you could take the smallest total
>bonus and apply it to the reserve. This went away with the fourth edition.
However, it is nicely replaced by Variable Limitation, if allowed: eg. two
slots, one which is 4 charges, the other OAF, are both on a -1 limitation.
This could be considered to be a -1/2 Variable Limitation on the pool cost.
No, nowhere does it explicitely say this is allowed, but it's how I've run
it.
JAJ, GP
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:22:00 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: A painful question
>In a message dated 99-01-24 19:25:10 EST, susano@dedaana.otd.com writes:
>
>> 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.
>
>Milage varies on this. Personally I like this: I have a relatively hard time
>coming up with 150 points of disads, and often the last 50 pts or so are
>'stretchers.' But I have friends who find it easy to come up with the full 150
>pts of disads and more.
It's not just that coming up with them is hard; it's that it encourages
excesses of high-maintainence disads like Hunteds and DNPCs (not high for
the players...high for the GM). As a GM, I _really_ don't need to keep up
with 12 Hunteds and 9 DNPCs for a six character group.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:42:30 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: A painful question
>Here's an exercise. Watch the movie, The Bodyguard, with Kevin Costner.
>If you can stay awake thru the Whitney scenes, just take notes on
>everything that Costner's character, an ex-secret -service man can do.
>
>If you just buy each skill at the basic level, for everything
>he at which demonstrates competency on screen, he's 300 points.
>
>If you assume good stats, and a few more obvious skills and equipment,
>he approaches 400 points. And he's just a "competent normal"
No, he's a movie hero. Movie heroes are always extemely comptentent,
especially in movies with an action component. Not that an ex-Secret
Service guy would necessarily be small points, but you really can't draw too
much conclusions from a movie hero, especially a central movie hero.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:31:42 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>"q" == qts <qts@nildram.co.uk> writes:
>
>q> You're putting the Charges Limitation on the MP itself rather than the
>q> Power, so the MP can only be used 4 times. QED.
>
>You put x2 END cost on the MP. Does it increase the END cost of using the
>MP or does it increase the END cost of using the powers in the MP?
The latter, actually, since there is no difference. The problem with the
charges is that it produces the odd result that the increase in number of
slots actually increases the number of overall charges...and with attack
system multipowers, that _is_ less limiting than it would be for a
standalone power. That's not true of any other Limitation I know of other
than Burnout, and I'd have the same problem with Burnout on individual slots
giving the multipower the full value.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:28:24 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: How much damage should guns do.
>At 07:01 AM 1/25/99 -0600, Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin wrote:
>>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.)
>>
>
>
>That's correct. In fact, there are rifles that can fire pistol ammo
>and pistols that can fire rifle ammo. The damage is done by the ammo
>itself.
I don't know of a pistol that fires a full powered rifle round in existance.
There are ones that fire cut down rifle rounds, but those are not the same
thing and are not as possible. Unless you're talking .22's, and that's a
special case since .22 rimfire ammo is effectively _all_ all pistol ammo.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:31:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Ell Egyptoid <egyptoid@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: How much damage should guns do.
Jesse Thomas <haerandir@hotmail.com> wrote:
> BTW, in case you couldn't tell, I'm of the Egyptoid camp on this
> subject.
Shit. now I have to change my EGYPTOID.CHA file.
Are you about 50 or 75 pt follower?
<< fires up HeroMaker >>
Or should you just be a Contact? ;)
> >I got your muzzle velocity right here.
> Oh, is that where it went? Can I have it back? Thanks.
You guys should've muzzled this part of the thread :)
==
=========================== Elliott aka The Egyptoid ==
=== JLA: Justice League Alabama === Central HQ ===========
=== http://www.sysabend.org/champions/elliott/index.html =
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:57:02 -0800
From: Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net>
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
>> Depends how you mean that when you wrote it up. As you have written it,
>> that is legal (if the OAF applies to all powers in the multipower you can
>> take it on the pool, which you meant to be Multipower Pool, not power pool
>> I assume) but if you mean you get the OAF from the pool AND an OAF on the
>> item you cannot do that (i.e. get a -2 total on each slot).
>
>That's fine, but explain this to me:
>
>Why the heck would you buy a multipower *this* way:
>
>30 Munchkin Power, OAF(-1)
>6u Cool Power #1
>6u Cool Power #2
I cant imagine why, unless you really didnt WANT to take advantage of the
OAF bonus on your powers. If its from a book well, their math is kinda
funny sometimes, and if its from a character, ya know how it goes.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sola Gracia Sola Scriptura Sola Fide
Soli Gloria Deo Solus Christus Corum Deo
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:44:58 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
>This whole limitation thing has me scratching my head, mainly because I don't
>have the rule book in front of me.
>
>Now, my question is this: If you apply a limitation to the Control part of the
>multipower, do you have to buy that same limitation for each slot of the
>multipower?
>
>Here is my example:
>
>20 Muchnkin Power Pool, OAF (-1) [40 AP]
>2u Cool Power #1, OAF(-1) [40 AP]
>2u Cool Power #2, OAF(-1) [40 AP]
>
>It would seem to me that the player is getting to apply the OAF limiation
>*twice* to the powers in the pool. Am I wrong?
Normally, Limitations applied to a pool already apply to all the slots, and
since the cost of the slots is based on the cost of the pool, it's already
handled, so either the above is simply semantics, yes,it'd be double
dipping. The inverse is not necessarily true, however; limitations bought
on slots do not necessarily apply to the pool. When they don't, they aren't
assumed to effect it.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:23:52 -0600
From: Donald Tsang <tsang@sedl.org>
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
Rat said:
>There used to be something called the 'common' slot limitation. If all of
>your MP slots have different limitations, you could take the smallest total
>bonus and apply it to the reserve. This went away with the fourth edition.
I use the following house rule to preserve some of the "common slot lim",
while reducing its abusability by, um, half:
If all of the slots in a Multipower have limitations on the individual
powers, you may take a "Variable Limitations" on the reserve equal to
half the smallest limitation total on any of the slots, rounding down
to the nearest 1/4.
Example:
27 Multipower, 60 pt reserve, OAF (-1), Variable Limitations (-1/4)
(reserve cost = 60 / 2.25; each slot must have at least -1/2 in lims)
2 u 12d6 EB, 2x END (-1/2)
2 u 4d6 RKA, reduced by range (-1/4), limited penetration (-1/4)
2 u 12" Tunneling, 4 charges (-1)
1 u 20" Flight, 4 activations (-1)
Note that the large slots cost 2 instead of 3, since they get the
full limitation total of (OAF plus their individual limitations).
This house overrides the "you only get half the number of charges in a
multipower" rule from Champions ///, which people more interested in
simpler rules should definitely consider.
Donald
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:17:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Ell Egyptoid <egyptoid@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers
>Why the heck would you buy a multipower *this* way:
>
>30 Munchkin Power, OAF(-1)
>6u Cool Power #1
>6u Cool Power #2
>6u Cool Power #3
Dumb question of the Day:
What if I had Psionics, TK, Ego Blast, etc, but could
only implement them while holding the Antares Diamond.
Would it mean:
I have these cool powers, but I can't switch powers sans
jewel, or I don't have the powers without the diamond?
Then some rogue yanks my diamond, but later I discover
I can focus through a GalactiCop issue tricorder...?
How bizarre.
==
=========================== Elliott aka The Egyptoid ==
=== JLA: Justice League Alabama === Central HQ ===========
=== http://www.sysabend.org/champions/elliott/index.html =
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 07:13:15 -0800 (PST)
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
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.
>
>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.
I'll keep this in a superhero context for simplicity.'
As far as I can tell, the virtue of a low powered campaign generally is that
it is easy for almost any oppnent to be credible. Guys with guns, even guys
with clubs are not someone the supers can casually brush off. In addition,
the connection between the characters and the players may be closer as the
character's perceptions of the world tend to be closer to normal humanity.
The flaw is that it can often not feel much like a superhero game; it's easy
for that mythic quality to not be there. In addition, if the power level is
kept low by the use of a small number of points, people can feel point
starved and stint on things in the skill area move because they're a bigger
preportion of their available points.
The virtue of the high powered game is the enhancement of that mythical
feeling that some comics manage admirably on occasion (the current JLA often
has recently, for me) and that operating procedures that have a high buy-in
become possible. The disadvantages (besides the fact that some parts of the
game system, typically those where flat adders are used to determine effect,
start to break down) is that the possible opponents become, in practice,
other supers and compareable entities, and not much else.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:14:41 -0600
From: "Michael (Damon) & Peni Griffin" <griffin@txdirect.net>
Subject: Re: How much damage should guns do.
At 02:14 PM 1/25/1999 EST, Virgil Buttram wrote:
>Which is why a pistol round fired from a rifle will do more damage than
>the same round fired from a pistol - significantly longer barrel. Also,
>rifle rounds tend to have higher length to diameter ratios, thus more
>bullet mass, allowing more powder in the round. This is why a 5.56mm
>rifle round does more damage than a 9mm pistol round, fired from the
>same length of barrel.
Okay, I think I admitted my ignorance -- certainly hinted at it -- when I
joined this thread. I'm willing to be educated here, but as there are
already people complaining about where this thread is going, I'll try to
make my remaining comments and questions brief:
* For me, this is less a matter of overhauling the listed damage ratings of
all the weapons in Hero System (way too much trouble for me) and more a
matter of understanding what went into calculating those ratings in the
first place -- assuming real-world physics played any part in those
calculations.
* I reject the excuse that the damage values given are what they are
because they are intended for "comic book" or "cinematic" damage. The core
rules -- including damage values for common weapons -- need to apply
equally to all genres, not just comic book or cinematic/high adventure
games. If you want to modify the damage ratings, or the way damage is
calculated, within a genre book, fine.
* Several people more knowledgeable than myself have offered specifics on
various weapons and ammo; so far I've heard nothing that disputes my
earlier statement that damage is a function of the ammunition (the
projectile and its charge, since the shooter can opt for "hot loads")
rather than the weapon. Except for one thing:
* I understand how the rifling of the barrel imparts spin to the
projectile. I understand how this improves accuracy at range. I don't
understand how it imparts additional *velocity* to the projectile, which is
the only way I can see that a rifle, firing the same ammunition as a
pistol, could be expected to do more damage.
>For more (and better) explanations of this, see BTRCs 3G3 (Previous
>edition was known as Guns!Guns!Guns!).
I recently got a copy of this, in fact. However, flipping quickly through
the first 25 pages or so, I found nothing to suggest increased barrel
length adds anything but accuracy. If you can point me to a page
reference, great.
Damon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:39:01 -0800
From: "James Jandebeur" <james@javaman.to>
Subject: Re: A painful question
>>Automatically assuming munchkinism because the person doen't
>>like the lethalitaly level is absurd.
>
> But assuming Munch when someone calls playing a low-powered game
>masochistic is.
I agree completely. Assuming Munch when someone calls the low-powered game
you described masochistic is certainly absurd.
Re-read what you wrote, because that's what you said.
The fellow explained what he meant when he called it masochistic: he just
doesn't understand the enjoyment to be had in playing in a low-powered,
half-the-party dies game. He prefers to play in higher powered games, or at
least ones where the party survives and are relatively bright outlook styles
of game.
The Munchkin is someone who builds their characters a certain way, to take
maximum levels of unfair advantage of a system, then weedle and whine if the
GM dares to say no. They want the spotlight at everyone's expense. And so
on: there are many clues of munchkinism. None of which are shown in the post
you are referring to.
You could have made your point in the first place without this statement, or
with this letter (instead of insulting him one more time and trying to
dismiss it with a "But anyway..."). He could have made his point without
being insulting, as well. I must wonder if either of you will be kind enough
to apologize to the other one for the offense rendered. But do so off the
list, please.
JAJ, GP
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:02:15 -0800
From: "James Jandebeur" <james@javaman.to>
Subject: Re: A painful question
BW wrote:
><RANT>
<snipping a most expert rant>
></RANT>
To each their own, as you say (or use words to that effect). I'd put myself
more around the 12-14 range.
"I luff you all. Ho ho ho!"
I've killed characters, but only when it was dramatically correct. The one
time when someone did something so mind-numbingly stupid that he should have
died (he attacked a Death Star equivalent in a fighter without taking
advantage of any weaknesses in his opponent), I left him bobbing about in
hard vacuum for a while after his ship was destroyed. He was then picked up
by the other PC's, but was without his nifty little ship for some time after
that and had to recover from nasty aftereffects of his trip into space.
I'm just too soft for this job... But I'm working on it.
JAJ, GP
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:41:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Ell Egyptoid <egyptoid@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: A painful question
> On the Lethality Scale from 3 to 18, where 3 is The Road Warrior
"Okay mate, we're gonna pull this spear outta yer leg
when I count to Three, Okay?" "One" <<YANK>>
I love that movie.
==
=========================== Elliott aka The Egyptoid ==
=== JLA: Justice League Alabama === Central HQ ===========
=== http://www.sysabend.org/champions/elliott/index.html =
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:43:38 -0600 (CST)
From: gilberg@ou.edu
Subject: Re: A painful question
> ...and in this, you're right; it generally would.
> It's typical to think of point cost as being equal to campaign power,
>but it's not necessarily so. The two are related, to be sure, but the
>relationship isn't 1:1 because so many other factors enter into it.
Exactly. Average skill and characteristic levels. DCs. APs. Etc.
And like I said, _relative_ power is everything. Yes, for Champs,
we have some real-world benchmarks--that allows us to set things up pretty
well. But a CopHero campaign with 200 point starting characters isn't
necessarily High-Powered if your average criminal is at 150, and Swat-team
memebers carry 300.
> For instance, in the Justifiers game, players get 100 base points and
>can get 200 points in Disadvantages. (Before anyone complains at this,
>nobody's had to stretch for Disads yet. I've had to offer a few
>suggestions for expanding on a weakness or two, but that's about it.) Even
>though the characters work with 50 points more than a typical starting
>character in Champions, they're a little less powerful than same, mostly
>because I also make a lot of demands in the area of versatility, especially
>Skills. Thus, a character can be heavy on points but relatively low in
>Power.
Yup, same thing with my 100+175+possible hero bonus campaign. My
character, Derrick Tallcloud, had the highest point level, but he was
concieved as a very broad character with some interesting, if somewhat
limited, powers. Lots of skills--particularly knowledge skills.
-Tim Gilberg
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 99 17:15:53 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
> If the levels only apply to the rifle, if the rifle is taken away he can't
> use the levels anyway, as in a game that monitors points for equipment,
> chances are he won't have another available. At that point, putting them on
> the rifle is more limiting than having them himself in what fashion?
Well, levels that aply only to a specific weapon would be 2 points...
3 if it was some kind of multi-function weapon.
Limited levels would start at 5 points... with the Focus limitation,
they'd be 2.5 each.
The cost is basicly similar. About the only difference between the
2pt levels and the OAF 5pt levels is that the latter would 'go with'
the gun if it's taken away, so if someone shoots you with your own
gun, he'll have a higher OCV if you focus the levels. Aside from
that (or if it's a /Personal/ Focus) the only difference is F/X -
whether it's a skilled character, or an advanced weapon.
Oh, and if the weapon isn't indestructable, then the levels 'function'
could be damaged...
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 99 17:43:24 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: [Re: Limitations on Multipowers]
> There used to be something called the 'common' slot limitation. If all of
> your MP slots have different limitations, you could take the smallest total
> bonus and apply it to the reserve. This went away with the fourth edition.
I suppose you could take the 'Variable Limitation' limitation on your
reserve, and then take a different limitation for each slot... that'd
be close anyway. Of course, they'd have to be limitations apropriate
to VL (not one slot 'Only at Night' and another 'Only durring the
Day' kinda thing).
> Thing to remember is that because it is a multipower, all the slots are
> considered to be a single power, regardless of the Focus limitation. This
> is particularly nasty for Foci since if you steal or destroy one slot you
> have stolen or destroyed all of them.
??
Do you mean that if you take a focus on one slot in an otherwise non-
limited multipower, taking that focus precludes the use of the whole
Framework? Or, that if you take a focus limmitation on the Reserve,
all the slots have to be through the same /focus/ not just the same
level of the limitation?
(Hopefully the latter...)
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 19:15:59 -0500
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com>
Subject: Character:Eowyn
EOWYN, SHIELD-MAIDEN OF ROHAN
13 STR 3
16 DEX 18
15 CON 10
12 BODY 4
16 INT 6
18 EGO 16
15/25 PRE 5
18 COM 4
6 PD 3
5 ED 2
4 SPD 14
9 REC 6
40 END 5
40 STUN 13
Characteristics Cost: 109
7 +10 Presence,Only for Defense
1 WF,Swords
9 3 Levels: Swords,tight group
7 Animal Handler 13-
5 Conversation 15-
1 Disguise 8-
3 High Society 14 -
3 Paramedic 12-
7 Riding 14-
3 Survival 11-
1 Lang: Rohirric,native,literacy
4 Lang: Westron,fluent w/accent,literacy
8 AK: Rohan 17-
4 KS: Eothraim History 13-
5 KS: Rohan Politics 14-
3 KS: Gondorian History and Politics 12-
6 15- Contact: Theoden
6 15- Contact: Eomer
5 Member of Aristocracy
5 Money
Powers Cost: 93
Total Cost: 202
Base Points: 75
10 Watched,"Theoden",more powerful,noncombat influence,mild,
appear 11-
10 Watched,"Grima",as powerful,noncombat influence,harsh,
appear 11-
5 Watched,"Eomer",more powerful,mild,appear 8-
10 Psychological Limitation,"Resents not being allowed to
fight",common,moderate
10 Psychological Limitation,"Love of Aragorn",uncommon,strong
15 Psychological Limitation,"Reckless",common,strong
10 Public ID,"Theoden's Niece"
10 Cultural Limitation Against Warrior Women
47 No Man Bonus
Disadvantages Total: 127
Experience Spent: 0
Total Points: 202
Eowyn is Eomer's sister and Theoden's daughter. She is a trained
shield-maiden, but not allowed to fight in any real conflict, because of
her sex. She was born in Third Age 2995 and was twenty-four at the
time of the War of the Ring.
She was very beautiful and was coveted by the evil Grima, counselor
to Theoden and pawn of Saruman. Both Theoden and Eomer were
protective of Eowyn, which the free-spirited shield-maiden found
smothering. She fell in love with Aragorn when he arrived at Edoras,
and despaired when he left to enter the Paths of the Dead.
Feeling she had only her honor left to live for, Eowyn disguised herself
as a man, called herself "Dernhelm" and joined the army of Rohan as
it rode to war against Sauron's invasion of Gondor. At the Battle of
the Pelennor Fields, she came to the aid of the dying king Theoden,
and stood her ground defending him against the dread Lord of the
Nazgul.
The mighty nazgul was not wary of her, for he feared no mortal man,
having known for a thousand years of the prophecy of Gildor that he
would die at the hand of no man. Eowyn, of course, was not a man.
With the aid of Merry the hobbit, Eowyn slew the lord of the nazgul
and successfully defended her king. But her own despair over
Theoden's death, Aragorn's supposed death, and the contact with
the Morgul-lord caused her to succumb to the Black Breath.
She was cured by Aragorn after the battle, who had arrived with
the captured fleet of Umbar. During her recovery, she fell in love
with the captain of Ithilien, Faramir son of Denethor, who was also
recovering. They were married the following year and took up residence
in Ithilien.
Eowyn was tall, slender, had long golden hair and pale skin, and
was said to be very beautiful. She later became known as the White
Lady of Ithilien.
NOTES:
1) I think Eowyn's high Ego and Presence are justified by her ability
to defy authority, defy convention, and most of all, to defy the Lord of
the Nazgul.
2) I had some difficulty in deciding how to model the cultural prejudice
against warrior-women. I thought to call it a physical limitation, but
decided that feminists would come let the air out of my tires.
3) I also thought of giving her a "Loyal to Theoden" disadvantage similar
to Eomer's, but it really doesn't seem to have been much of a speedbump
for our strong-willed lady. You could certainly argue that facing off against
a nazgul is cause to give her the disadvantage. I wouldn't say you were
wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"In the void is virtue and no evil. Wisdom has existence,
principle has existence, the Way has existence; spirit
is nothingness."
Miyamoto Musashi, A Book of Five Rings
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scott C. Nolan
nolan@erols.com
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 99 18:21:20 MST
From: ANTHONY VARGAS <anthony.vargas@usa.net>
Subject: Re: [Re: How much damage should guns do.]
> MC> and pistols that can fire rifle ammo.
>
> Only very small caliber rifle ammo, such as .22LR and .22 Magnum. Anything
> much more powerful than that is likely to break your wrist.
Then there must have been an epidemic of broken wrists in the 80's
when silhouette shooting was so popular. Those pistols were
chambered for all manner of rifle rounds. IIRC, DI even had stats
for two models of silhouette pistols. Reasonable ones, too, they
did less damage than rifles that used the same ammo.
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:19:47 -0800
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: A painful question
At 10:40 AM 1/25/99 -0800, Filksinger wrote:
>From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu>
>
>
>> A couple of us were
>>"famous figures" from history. (Pontius Pilot and Nostradamus.)
>
>
>Pontius Pilate.
>
>Normally, I wouldn't have said anything, but I am trying desperately to
>dispel the vision of a man in a toga, flying a fighter jet....
"Bogie at three o'clock!"
"You got that right, Shweetheart!" :-]
- ---
Bob's Original Hero Stuff Page! [Circle of HEROS member]
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/original.htm
Merry-Go-Round Webring -- wanna join?
http://www.klock.com/public/users/bob.greenwade/merrhome.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:46:30 +0800
From: "Colin aka Arkham aka the God King" <astroboy@iinet.net.au>
Subject: [none]
Given the discussion recently about alternative speed/initiative systems I
thought I would post my alternative to my webpage. The direct link is
http://www.iinet.net.au/~astroboy/Hero/initiative.htm or you can get to it
from my homepage (link below). Be warned it does away with speed
altogether. If this is likely to offend you don't look :)
While you're there why not check out the other delights on offer.....
Alternative Hero magic system.....
http://www.iinet.net.au/~astroboy/Hero/magic.htm
a bit on the British Region Intelligence Taskforce (BRIT) a super agents
organisation I used many moons ago as part of an agents campaign...
http://www.iinet.net.au/~astroboy/BRIT/index.htm
and background information for my GURPS cyberpunk campaign set in Hong Kong
in 2028...
http://www.iinet.net.au/~astroboy/welcome.htm
********************************************************
Colin Clark
http://www.iinet.net.au/~astroboy
********************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 20:06:26 -0600 (CST)
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com>
Subject: Re: Levels and Limitations
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 gilberg@ou.edu wrote:
> If you want a level with "blaster rifles," you take a 3 pt level.
> If you want a level with a specific blaster rifle, you take a 2 pt level.
And if the level is inherent in the gun rather than a skill (i.e. the
rifle is more accurate) you take a 5-pt level and put OAF and Only for
Blaster Rifles on it.
J
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
------------------------------
End of champ-l-digest V1 #161
*****************************
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