Digest Archives Vol 1 Issue 179

From: owner-champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 1999 3:00 PM 
To: champ-l-digest@sysabend.org 
Subject: champ-l-digest V1 #179 
 
 
champ-l-digest        Tuesday, February 2 1999        Volume 01 : Number 179 
 
 
 
In this issue: 
 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
    Re: Unity in Nerd Culture 
    Re: A painful question 
    Re: Multipower Questions 
    Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
    Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Multipower Questions 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Other SRPGs as source material 
    Re: Multipower Questions 
    Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Other SRPGs as source material? 
    Re: Multipower Questions (fwd) 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Martial artist power 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    (no subject) 
    Re: Martial artist power 
    RE: Unity in Nerd Culture 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Martial artist power 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
    Re: Character: Gandalf The Grey 
    Re: The Necrotron 
    Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
    Re: Dress for DF (Character: Gandalf The Grey) 
    Re: <FHList> The Necrotron 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Date: 01 Feb 1999 23:48:30 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"ML" == Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com> writes: 
 
ML> I would say you're wrong on this one Rat. 
ML> You lose 1d6 per hex you fill.  An EB that is spread one die is exactly 
ML> like an AoE: Hex; selective.  He'd have to roll to hit each focus. 
 
In other words, a +3/4 Advantage in exchange for 1d6 off of a 12d6 attack. 
41 Active Points worth of unlimited advantage for 5 points. 
 
Somehow, I do not think that is what the guys at Hero Games intended. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2toOdgl+vIlSVSNkRAi7NAJ4j4TbiWC7ksP1qJ1wNESwSZs1ARwCeKL5z 
Hx92glEPbYVivRPdXlnOzuU= 
=uh7z 
- -----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: 01 Feb 1999 23:51:43 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"WS" == Wayne Shaw <shaw@caprica.com> writes: 
 
WS> And remember, I don't think the slots would have that 13 Body; since 
WS> they're only slots, they probably run to needing somewhere from 2-3 
WS> Body damage per slot. 
 
A Focused 60 Active Point power has 12 DEF and 1 Body.  If each slot is 60 
AP and each slot has Focus but the reserve does not, then each individual 
slot is 12 DEF, 1 Body.  Even 30 Active Point slots would be 6 DEF, 1 Body. 
A slot that can be destroyed by 3 Body of attack is at most 20 Active 
Points. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2toRegl+vIlSVSNkRAppRAJ9fB5OGl1I6i1+qs9OMImRNLnwc0ACgjCaU 
fOjX1hM44EQElvfg78SVy2Q= 
=L2ZE 
- -----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: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:01:13 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
 
> 
>> >But the tac nukes we were using (Basically a suitcase nuke) was a 100d6 
>> >EB; 0 range; explosive; one charge, never recovers. And that got the job 
>> >done fine. 
>>  
>>  
>> Over simple and a hair bit too big for a tacnuke, but if it worked for you... 
> 
>	You think?  With that -1DC per inch explosion thing, this isn't 
>all that great. 
 
That just means some extended area should be applied.  But tacnukes, other 
than the radiation, are really just big thermal explosions...and that damage 
is out of preportion to the game's progression on explosive tonnage. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 00:22:46 -0500 
From: Scott Nolan <nolan@erols.com> 
Subject: Re: Unity in Nerd Culture 
 
>No, that part of my tirade was in reaction to the attitude I've gotten from 
>some CCGamers who seem to feel that if you aren't playing with waxed cards 
>and Pente stones, whatever you're playing is passe. 
 
I've gotten this reaction, too.  Despite the fact that I was the dinosaur and 
they the furry, successful mammals, I had to laugh uproariously.  It was 
like having your Ferrari dissed by kids on tricycles.  
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
"When the stars threw down their spears, 
and water'd heaven with their tears, 
Did he smile his work to see? 
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?" 
        William Blake, The Tyger 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Scott C. Nolan 
nolan@erols.com   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:57:39 -0800 
From: Jay P Hailey <jayphailey@juno.com> 
Subject: Re: A painful question 
 
>That's part of the problem; I don't want the Hunteds defining the  
>campaign to that extreme.  In addition, if they're just going to be the 
theme  
>of the game, why should anyone get extra points for them? 
 
They should be worth points because in the extremely unlikely event that 
they can get their way, the hunterds will kill or capture the Character. 
 
We're talking at cross purposes here.  Your style of GMing is your own, 
and if it works for you and your players, then I have nothing whatsoever 
to say about. You go ahead and have all the fun you can have. 
 
And if 12 different hunteds doiesn't work for you, then, well, you're the 
GM of your campaign and that's the way it goes. 
 
I may operate on slightly different principles, but that doesn''t make 
your style of GMing "wrong" nor does your style make mine "wrong".  There 
is no point in arguing about it. 
 
It sounds to me like you begin your campaigns with a much more definite 
idea of the theme and aim of it.   
 
Myself, I tend to "wing it" more. Each approach will have it's advantages 
and disadvantages... 
 
 
Jay P. Hailey <Meow!> 
 
"If that's God, I'm quitting." - Crow 
 
___________________________________________________________________ 
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: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 00:01:41 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions 
 
> charges land, on the multipower as a whole or on the slots is the default 
> assumption.  Either one excludes some concepts, neither one is spelled 
> out...but only one of them is imbalanced. 
 
	We just disagree which one. 
 
> >64 Charges is a +1/2 Advantage.  Infinite Charges in the form of Zero 
> >Endurance Cost is a +1/2 Advantage. 
>  
> Just means the higher numbers of charges aren't particularly worth while, 
> outside of autofire (where I think you have to hit the +1 level before it 
> doesn't make much sense) but it's at least not imbalanced.   
 
	Er, not imbalanced?  But you just said that it was. 
 
> See above.  It works.  It's kind of goofy, but it does no harm to take the 
> high number of charges.  Not the same thing as assuming that the charges has 
> to be rewritten to accomodate multipowers.  All that needs to be done is to 
 
	No harm?  So wait, if something is unbalanced, it isn't causing 
any harm?  The assumption that there is no harm when a particular purchase 
is unbalanced as to be underuseful but that there is when you get too much 
for a purchase is really not healthy.  It basically directly sets up the 
GM vs Player dichotomy of the GM making sure the players cannot get a 
break, but not willing to make sure they're not getting screwed. 
 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 00:18:48 -0600 (Central Standard Time) 
From: Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> 
Subject: Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
 
> >	You think?  With that -1DC per inch explosion thing, this isn't 
> >all that great. 
>  
> That just means some extended area should be applied.  But tacnukes, other 
> than the radiation, are really just big thermal explosions...and that damage 
> is out of preportion to the game's progression on explosive tonnage. 
 
	Well, the game is out of whack on the progression of explosive 
tonnage, and a few other things, but that's an argument I'd like to avoid 
for now. 
 
					-Tim Gilberg 
			-"English Majors of the World!  Untie!" 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:47:49 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
 
> 
>> >	You think?  With that -1DC per inch explosion thing, this isn't 
>> >all that great. 
>>  
>> That just means some extended area should be applied.  But tacnukes, other 
>> than the radiation, are really just big thermal explosions...and that damage 
>> is out of preportion to the game's progression on explosive tonnage. 
> 
>	Well, the game is out of whack on the progression of explosive 
>tonnage, and a few other things, but that's an argument I'd like to avoid 
>for now. 
 
Then we don't have any common ground to discuss it on, since I don't have a 
problem with that progression at all. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:32:46 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
>Hash: SHA1 
> 
>"ML" == Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com> writes: 
> 
>ML> I would say you're wrong on this one Rat. 
>ML> You lose 1d6 per hex you fill.  An EB that is spread one die is exactly 
>ML> like an AoE: Hex; selective.  He'd have to roll to hit each focus. 
> 
>In other words, a +3/4 Advantage in exchange for 1d6 off of a 12d6 attack. 
>41 Active Points worth of unlimited advantage for 5 points. 
> 
>Somehow, I do not think that is what the guys at Hero Games intended. 
 
Since the spreading rules came well before One Hex Area or Selective Target, 
it wouldn't suprise me that in effect, they intended just that.  After all, 
Continuing Charges apply Uncontrolled at no real cost at all. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:30:43 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions 
 
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
>Hash: SHA1 
> 
>"WS" == Wayne Shaw <shaw@caprica.com> writes: 
> 
>WS> See above.  It works.  It's kind of goofy, but it does no harm to take 
>WS> the high number of charges. 
> 
>Charges has gone from '[working] on every other part of the system' to 
>'kind of goofy'.  None of the other limitations or advantages are 'kind of 
>goofy', just Charges.  That should be a clue that there is something 
>inherently not quite right with Charges. 
 
Actually, many Advantages at least are 'kind of goofy'.  Radius almost never 
pays for itself if any kind of Active Point cap is being used, unless you 
combine it with NND; Invisible Power Effects is frequently the same, 
especially above one sense;  The fact that high end Charges (which are an 
Advantage at that point) don't either doesn't suprise me.   
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:35:43 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
>Hash: SHA1 
> 
>"WS" == Wayne Shaw <shaw@caprica.com> writes: 
> 
>WS> And remember, I don't think the slots would have that 13 Body; since 
>WS> they're only slots, they probably run to needing somewhere from 2-3 
>WS> Body damage per slot. 
> 
>A Focused 60 Active Point power has 12 DEF and 1 Body.  If each slot is 60 
>AP and each slot has Focus but the reserve does not, then each individual 
>slot is 12 DEF, 1 Body.  Even 30 Active Point slots would be 6 DEF, 1 Body. 
>A slot that can be destroyed by 3 Body of attack is at most 20 Active 
>Points. 
 
Ah, but the slots aren't powers.  And as such, I don't think if bought as 
Foci in and of themself that they'd use the full power's points, but just 
their portion of it...which is to say about 10 to 20 percent of it.  Slots 
have active point costs too, or they couldn't be Limited at all.  if you 
have a 60 point multpower with a full value ultra slot, that slot has a 6 
active point cost.  Rather brittle individually at that point. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 01:34:31 -0600 
From: Todd Hanson <badtodd@home.com> 
Subject: Re: Other SRPGs as source material 
 
Bob Greenwade wrote: 
 
> At 07:45 PM 2/1/99 -0500, chrisopher spoor wrote: 
> >V&V has been redone on the net under the name L&L. can't find the 
> >address tonight 
> 
>    That's probably because it's not L&L.  It's called Living Legends, and I 
> believe that the rules are actually going to be put out through the 
> traditional commercial channels (though with a very active Web presence). 
> --- 
 
And they've done a pretty decent line of superhero miniatures for the new 
version (which are pretty rare these days). 
 
You can check out the miniatures at: 
 
http://www.lance-and-laser.com/legends/ 
 
 
 
Todd 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:44:53 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions 
 
> 
>> charges land, on the multipower as a whole or on the slots is the default 
>> assumption.  Either one excludes some concepts, neither one is spelled 
>> out...but only one of them is imbalanced. 
> 
>	We just disagree which one. 
> 
 
I'd like to see how applying it to the multipower is imbalanced.  You get as 
much out of that as out of applying it to any other power. 
 
>> >64 Charges is a +1/2 Advantage.  Infinite Charges in the form of Zero 
>> >Endurance Cost is a +1/2 Advantage. 
>>  
>> Just means the higher numbers of charges aren't particularly worth while, 
>> outside of autofire (where I think you have to hit the +1 level before it 
>> doesn't make much sense) but it's at least not imbalanced.   
> 
>	Er, not imbalanced?  But you just said that it was. 
 
Different discussion  I was refering to the issue of buying 0 END compared 
to buying 64 Charges.  The latter isn't imbalanced, it's just kind of silly.   
 
 
> 
>> See above.  It works.  It's kind of goofy, but it does no harm to take the 
>> high number of charges.  Not the same thing as assuming that the charges has 
>> to be rewritten to accomodate multipowers.  All that needs to be done is to 
> 
>	No harm?  So wait, if something is unbalanced, it isn't causing 
>any harm?  The assumption that there is no harm when a particular purchase 
>is unbalanced as to be underuseful but that there is when you get too much 
>for a purchase is really not healthy.  It basically directly sets up the 
>GM vs Player dichotomy of the GM making sure the players cannot get a 
>break, but not willing to make sure they're not getting screwed. 
 
I usually feel people can take care of themself when it comes to not buying 
constructs that will screw them.  The opposiite is not true.  So yes, if a 
construct isn't worth buying, it's a problem, but to my view not the problem 
it is if it's _too_ worth buying.  The former won't cause much campaign 
harm, though it can cause some annoyance.  The latter can be incredibly 
disruptive on the other hand.  And I don't think assuming the multipower 
charge limitation only applies to total pool charges is imbalanced at all; 
it forbids some concepts, but so does the other, and it _is_ imbalanced. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:29:46 -0800 
From: Rick Holding <rholding@ActOnline.com.au> 
Subject: Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
 
Anthony Jackson wrote: 
 
> > I'd also like to know if anyone has had a nuclear bomb situation in their 
> > games, if the bomb went off, and what happened. 
>  
> Hm...I've had a couple go off, at varying power levels.  In the normal power 
> level game, we ran away.  In the 25-30 die game, the nuclear self-destruct in 
> the giant monster knocked almost everyone out and came very close to killing 
> some martial-artist types ;) 
 
	Came close.  Was the target for a nuclear missile with nowhere to go.  
I thought I was toast for sure.  Until, that is, I remembered a little 
used power and used shrinking at range and reduced the size of the 
missile so that the warhead was below critical mass when it went bang. 
 
	Hell of a mess afterwards, however. 
- --  
Rick Holding 
 
If only "common sense" was just a bit more common... 
   or if you prefer...  You call this logic ? 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:52:38 -0800 
From: Rick Holding <rholding@ActOnline.com.au> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
Mark Lemming wrote: 
>  
> Stainless Steel Rat wrote: 
> > 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
> > Hash: SHA1 
> > 
> > "WS" == Wayne Shaw <shaw@caprica.com> writes: 
> > 
> > WS> Not really, Rat; since an Energy Blast can be spread across a hex for a 
> > WS> whole loss of one die, 
> > 
> > Not quite.  An EB can be spread to hit multiple targets, one die per hex in 
> > a straight line, but it does not fill the Hex the way AoE: Hex does.  It is 
> > still considered to be a single target attack, and an attack roll must be 
> > made for each target.  In the end, it works more like Autofire than AoE. 
> > 
> > Given that, if you want to blast 7 Focuses (the BBB's pluralization, go 
> > fig) with a single EB, I would require that you spend 6 dice for the 
> > additional targets.  Go ahead and roll 13 Body on 6D6 worth of EB; now do 
> > it 7 times. :) 
>  
> I would say you're wrong on this one Rat. 
> You lose 1d6 per hex you fill.  An EB that is spread one die is exactly 
> like an AoE: Hex; selective.  He'd have to roll to hit each focus. 
 
	Don't forget the -2 for targeting foci.  The only advantage you get 
with this form of attack is you don't seem to get any negative modifiers 
like you get for sweep for attacking multiple targets. 
 
- --  
Rick Holding 
 
If only "common sense" was just a bit more common... 
   or if you prefer...  You call this logic ? 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 03:09:20 -0800 
From: Darrin Kelley <backflash@mindspring.com> 
Subject: Re: Other SRPGs as source material? 
 
David Stallard wrote: 
 
> For anyone who is familiar with the other superhero RPGs out there, can you 
> comment on their value as source material in the following areas: 
> 
> * Ideas for powers 
 
    Villains & Vigilantes, Heroes Unlimited, the Marvel Advanced Set, and the 
new Marvel SAGA game have given me alot of good ideas for powers. 
 
> * Ideas for character disadvantages (always tough for my group to get 150 
> points of disads without coming up with some contrived stuff that distorts 
> the original character concept..."I'll take a 2nd Hunted and a 3rd DNPC, 
> just because otherwise I'll never make it to 150") 
 
    Superbabes and GURPS have given me great ideas for Disadvantages. Weirdness 
Magnet being one of the ones that stand out the most. 
 
> * GM advice (adventure ideas, handling problems and certain 
> player/character types, etc). 
 
    Adventures? Well Superworld, and especially V&V have been great sources of 
new adventures. 
 
    As for advice? I have never seen a better source of GM info than Aaron 
Allston's Strike Force. Yes, I know it is still a classic Hero product. But it 
deserves mention. 
 
> The two games that have had me wondering are GURPS Supers and Heroes 
> Unlimited 2nd Edition.  I don't care how good or bad the rules system is (I 
> understand that Palladium (HU2E) really sucks), I'm just looking for 
> sources for some fresh ideas.  I own the 1st editions of both Marvel Super 
> Heroes and DC Heroes...DC Heroes had some interesting ideas for the first 
> two bullets above, but I found Marvel to be pretty much worthless as source 
> material for Champions.  Ironic, since I read a lot of Marvel comics but 
> don't like DC comics very much at all. 
 
    I disagree on the new edition of Heroes Unlimited. It has evolved 
considerably over the years and has actually developed into a game that finally 
approaches acceptability for a superhero game. However, there is not enough 
support for the game at this time to make it worth as source material. Villains 
Unlimited is probably the one supplement worth looking at for NPCs and ideas. 
 
    GURPS: Supers has some good material and some bad. It is a mixed bag. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 06:33:04 -0600 (CST) 
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com> 
Subject: Re: Multipower Questions (fwd) 
 
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Jesse Thomas wrote: 
 
> On Sat, 30 Jan 1999 Christopher Taylor <ctaylor@viser.net> wrote: 
>  
> > On a game theme: How WOULD you buy duct tape?  seriously? 
>  
> I dunno.  Has anyone done a Star Wars Hero conversion?  After all, Duct  
> Tape is like the Force, so I suppose the costs would be similar.   
 
VPP.  Definitely VPP.  OAF, Only for duct tape powers.  Oh, and an END 
reserve to measure how much tape you have (more powerful powers use more 
tape), with limitation 'only recharges in hardware store'. 
 
J 
 
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent.              Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com 
Qui annus est?                                   http://www.io.com/~jeffj 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 06:30:09 -0600 (CST) 
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
On 1 Feb 1999, Stainless Steel Rat wrote: 
 
> "ML" == Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com> writes: 
>  
> ML> I would say you're wrong on this one Rat. 
> ML> You lose 1d6 per hex you fill.  An EB that is spread one die is exactly 
> ML> like an AoE: Hex; selective.  He'd have to roll to hit each focus. 
>  
> In other words, a +3/4 Advantage in exchange for 1d6 off of a 12d6 attack. 
> 41 Active Points worth of unlimited advantage for 5 points. 
>  
> Somehow, I do not think that is what the guys at Hero Games intended. 
 
Actually, I'd guess 'nonselective' - if you're spreading an EB to fill a 
hex, you are not going to be able to target specifically.  So it's a +1/4, 
which is a lot less of a problem.  (OK, it should still be 2-3 dice off, 
so maybe equating 'spreading' with AE: Hex is not right.) 
 
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent.              Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com 
Qui annus est?                                   http://www.io.com/~jeffj 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 06:18:25 -0600 (CST) 
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com> 
Subject: Re: Martial artist power 
 
On 1 Feb 1999, Stainless Steel Rat wrote: 
 
> "TG" == Tim Gilberg <gilberg@ou.edu> writes: 
>  
> TG> If a GM disallows a perfectly reasonable concept because he or she just 
> TG> doesn't like that sort of thing, then as a player I really wouldn't 
> TG> want to play in that GM's campaign. 
>  
> It should be obvious by now that it is not the effect that I disagree with 
> but the implementation.  Desolidification does not make one hard to hit; it 
> makes one insubstantial. 
 
And being insubstantial makes you impossible to hit without something 
special about the attack, but it also makes it impossible for you to 
attack without spomething special about /your/ attack. 
 
So...nobody can hit you, and you can hit nobody.  (If he starts buying 
'Affects Real World' powers I'd probably disallow the original power.) 
 
Honestly, using Desolidification in this way makes just as much sense as 
using Entangle to create walls, at least to me.  Desolid's primary 
function is to make you insubstantial, Entangle's primary function is to 
entangle people.  Both the 'Ultimate Dodge' and the 'Create Wall' powers 
limit their respective base powers and only deal with what is essentially 
a minor effect of said powers...so why is one acceptable and the other is 
not? 
  
From the 'abuse standpoint', it again doesn't seem too bad to me, since 
the weakness for the Desolid is 'area effect/explosion' attacks.  When we 
used it in a game, in fact, it wasn't abusive because of this fact, and 
because of the fact that the character had to /stop/ using it to actually 
take part in the fight.  When the character with this power was dueling a 
villain with no AE attacks one-on-one, it took the villain getting hit a 
couple of times before he realized that the SFX of the power 'stopped' 
happening when the character was attacking...and he started holding 
actions to strike when the character had already committed to his attack. 
 
Have you ever allowed such a construct in the game, and had abuses made of 
it, or is your objection to the power purely theoretical? 
 
J 
 
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent.              Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com 
Qui annus est?                                   http://www.io.com/~jeffj 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 04:57:37 -0800 (PST) 
From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
>	Don't forget the -2 for targeting foci.  The only advantage you get 
>with this form of attack is you don't seem to get any negative modifiers 
>like you get for sweep for attacking multiple targets. 
 
Sure, but that's true when aiming at any focus.  The issue was whether it 
was harder to blow multiple OAF slots off than one big OIF.  To my take on 
it, not much, if at all. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 07:54:58 -0600 
From: joshua windeknecht <joshuaw@igateway.net> 
Subject: (no subject) 
 
unsubscribe 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 09:59:53 EST 
From: Leah L Watts <llwatts@juno.com> 
Subject: Re: Martial artist power 
 
>	And as Rat is sofond of saying, this would be a good campaign to 
>not play in.  It is not an unreasonable concept 
 
But does it fit the game being played?  In a realistic martial arts 
campaign, the GM would be justified in not allowing mystic abilities.  In 
a martial arts a la Big Trouble in Little China campaign, mystic 
abilities like a super-Dodge would be appropriate. 
 
If I had a player who gave me a character sheet that violated the 
established ground rules for the campaign, I would have no trouble 
telling that player to start over.  (In fact, I've done that -- I had 
someone try to tell me that because the Danger International book had a 
section on SF, his Doctor Who clone was perfectly in genre for my 
realistic spy game.) 
 
Leah 
 
___________________________________________________________________ 
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: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 09:45:26 -0500  
From: Brian Wawrow <bwawrow@mondello.toronto.fmco.com> 
Subject: RE: Unity in Nerd Culture 
 
I'm hearing a lot about what pricks Magic players are. Don't we all sound 
like old men sitting on the porch bitching about 'kids these days'. I 
neither game nor play Magic with teenagers. I don't have a problem with 
teenagers and their big pants per se but I don't happen to be one. Likewise, 
I neither game nor play cards with a$$holes. 
 
In terms of Magic as an intro to gaming, I have found that for someone who's 
never really thought about how to approach 'being' a mage, it's a decent 
intro to the genre. Once you put the idea of dragons and trolls into 
somebody's head, the math comes easier. I've brought a number of people into 
Hero, usually via Magic. I've also brought people into Magic that didn't 
make it to Hero. No problem, they weren't worthy. 
 
Obviously, Magic is simplistic and commercial in comparison to Hero. This is 
part of it's beauty. I can play Magic with *any* number of people with 
*zero* prep time. To me, Magic is the equivalent of microwave pizza pops. 
You'd starve to death on them but they're quick and tasty. 
 
In terms of the marketplace, well what can I say? Do you want to live in a 
free market economy or not? The lowest common denominator has always been a 
sound marketing decision. This is the cornerstone of the American dream, to 
come up with some piece of crap that people will line up for. 
 
psssstt... this is why democracy is a flawed system of government, because 
most people are morons - pass it on... 
 
 
BRI 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: 02 Feb 1999 10:23:23 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"N" == Nuncheon  <jeffj@io.com> writes: 
 
N> Actually, I'd guess 'nonselective' - if you're spreading an EB to fill a 
N> hex, you are not going to be able to target specifically. 
 
After re-reading the description, Spreading is definitely Selective AoE: 
Hex they way it is described, as a separate attack roll is required for 
each separate target within the Hex. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2txhqgl+vIlSVSNkRAkE/AJ9ge02zGYTiFgWW4q1f/esJRi6ThgCePEaZ 
I27jTUZcfsdFTX2u0F5dGj8= 
=H3xg 
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
 
- --  
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>    \ Warning: pregnant women, the elderly, and 
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ children under 10 should avoid prolonged 
PGP Key: at a key server near you!  \ exposure to Happy Fun Ball. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: 02 Feb 1999 10:40:42 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Martial artist power 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"N" == Nuncheon  <jeffj@io.com> writes: 
 
N> Honestly, using Desolidification in this way makes just as much sense as 
N> using Entangle to create walls, at least to me.  Desolid's primary 
N> function is to make you insubstantial, Entangle's primary function is to 
N> entangle people. 
 
Entangle has a two-fold purpose described in its first sentence: 
 
	A character with this Standard Power can restrain an opponent *OR* 
	[emphasis mine] create a barrier. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2txx6gl+vIlSVSNkRAnVOAKD4Mo0Xl5u428OpF2u+jStpG3Vc2QCeIHZ/ 
/VgjwRiIjXSuCK3jKTDPmOQ= 
=ZlQ0 
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
 
- --  
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>    \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types 
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ of skin. 
PGP Key: at a key server near you!  \  
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: 02 Feb 1999 10:35:50 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"WS" == Wayne Shaw <shaw@caprica.com> writes: 
 
WS> Ah, but the slots aren't powers. 
 
The Multipower slot cost is not Active Points, it is the Real Points of the  
powers in the slot dividied by 5 or 10, depending on whether the slot is a 
multi or ultra slot. 
 
If the reserve does not have Focus but each slot does, then each slot is a 
separate Focus, the DEF of which is figured based on the largest power in 
that Focus.  As all of the powers within a single Framework slot (EC or MP) 
are considered to be a single power, DEF is calculated based on the total 
Active Points within the slot.  Yes, that means that a 60-point slot with 6 
10-point powers has a DEF of 12; it also means that all 6 powers must be 
used together proportionally. 
 
If the reserve has Focus, then the DEF is based on the size of the largest 
power in all of the slots -- which for a 60 point reserve I would figure to 
be a 60 point power. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2txtWgl+vIlSVSNkRAv95AJ4wOqa1dGkjTbw4okx1TGxpLepB7ACfZI7d 
WYDqZ2+zWHtIv7wm0mJrxdo= 
=iBRE 
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
 
- --  
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>    \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types 
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ of skin. 
PGP Key: at a key server near you!  \  
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 11:56:53 -0600 (CST) 
From: "Dr. Nuncheon" <jeffj@io.com> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
On 2 Feb 1999, Stainless Steel Rat wrote: 
 
> "N" == Nuncheon  <jeffj@io.com> writes: 
>  
> N> Actually, I'd guess 'nonselective' - if you're spreading an EB to fill a 
> N> hex, you are not going to be able to target specifically. 
>  
> After re-reading the description, Spreading is definitely Selective AoE: 
> Hex they way it is described, as a separate attack roll is required for 
> each separate target within the Hex. 
 
Er. 
 
Normal AE: One roll to hit target hex. 
 
Nonselective AE: Roll separate to-hits vs everything in the area whether 
  you want to hit it or not. 
 
Selective AE: Roll separate to-hits vs. only the things you want to 
  hit in the affected area. 
 
Can you really Spread and only roll against the things you /want/ to hit 
in that hex?  That seems a bit odd to me. 
 
J 
 
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent.              Jeff Johnston - jeffj@io.com 
Qui annus est?                                   http://www.io.com/~jeffj 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 09:42:57 -0800 
From: Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
Wayne Shaw wrote: 
>  
> >       Don't forget the -2 for targeting foci.  The only advantage you get 
> >with this form of attack is you don't seem to get any negative modifiers 
> >like you get for sweep for attacking multiple targets. 
>  
> Sure, but that's true when aiming at any focus.  The issue was whether it 
> was harder to blow multiple OAF slots off than one big OIF.  To my take on 
> it, not much, if at all. 
 
Of course you can only target Accessible foci.  Foci that provide defense 
always get hit however.  Donald brought up the point that you have to 
specifically target foci as well.  Does this mean foci don't get damaged by 
incidental damage like Area effects?  I'm not sure. 
 
Another thing I re-read in the rules: 
Spreading EB is an optional rule. (Well, everything is really.) 
I leaning toward it being like a non-selective AOE:Hex(s). 
 
The other part that is wierd is a Multipower is counted as one power when 
breaking foci. 
 
It's not completly correct, but I'd probably let the OIF on the reserve and 
the slots have OAF on them. 
 
I don't really like the breaking foci rules that much, but that has more to do 
with a past experience.  The player brought this in one game: 
1d6 RKA, Area effect, selective, penetrating 
One game was enough. 
 
- -Mark Lemming 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: 02 Feb 1999 13:30:12 -0500 
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> 
Subject: Re: Limitations on Multipowers 
 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
Hash: SHA1 
 
"N" == Nuncheon  <jeffj@io.com> writes: 
 
N> Can you really Spread and only roll against the things you /want/ to hit 
N> in that hex?  That seems a bit odd to me. 
 
That appears to be the case, based on the description and the example. 
 
Yes, it is a *very* potent maneuver, which is why probably it has been 
relegated to being an optional maneuver in the fourth edition, and 
definitely why I would change it to be -1d6 per target rather than -1d6 per  
Hex. 
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux) 
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org 
 
iD8DBQE2t0Q0gl+vIlSVSNkRAl7cAKDSkbCWJtQqrH7y40noDI8cp8frDgCdGqzf 
jeg5FrtPuLnH6UEwjQA56wA= 
=d3CN 
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
 
- --  
Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>    \ Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. 
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \  
PGP Key: at a key server near you!  \  
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 99 12:01:29  
 
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk> 
Subject: Re: Character: Gandalf The Grey 
 
On Mon, 01 Feb 1999 15:33:16 PST, Jesse Thomas wrote: 
 
>> 
>>On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 04:50:34 +1000, happyelf wrote: 
>> 
>>>so i take it you'd never hand out 'distinctive features' for anything  
>>>other than an individual? no elves, orcs, or hobbits? 
>> 
>>If hobbits et al are sufficiently rare. Generally, they aren't. Now, a 
>>hobbit with a peg-leg would qualify. 
>> 
>Except in the land of the Wee Peg-Legged Folk. 
 
Smart alec! :} 
 
qts 
 
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 99 17:00:34  
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk> 
Subject: Re: The Necrotron 
 
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:49:25 -0500, Brian Wawrow wrote: 
 
>Those of you on the Champs list may remember me asking about zombie hordes a 
>few months ago. The zombies worked out okay but my players draw the zombies 
>into a tactical situation that allowed them to fight in a doorway, thus the 
>situation was less of an overwhelming zombie mob than a queue of HTK [hard 
>to kill] fodder that weren't much of a threat to the front-door guys. 
 
How about having them so unintelligent that they bash through the 
walls? 
 
Of course, you could have this as a deliberate setup - the players 
should have a chance of detecting that the walls are weak. 
qts 
 
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 99 12:37:23  
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk> 
Subject: Re: LS and their effects on attack damage 
 
On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:29:46 -0800, Rick Holding wrote: 
 
>Anthony Jackson wrote: 
> 
>> > I'd also like to know if anyone has had a nuclear bomb situation in their 
>> > games, if the bomb went off, and what happened. 
>>  
>> Hm...I've had a couple go off, at varying power levels.  In the normal power 
>> level game, we ran away.  In the 25-30 die game, the nuclear self-destruct in 
>> the giant monster knocked almost everyone out and came very close to killing 
>> some martial-artist types ;) 
> 
>Came close.  Was the target for a nuclear missile with nowhere to go.  
>I thought I was toast for sure.  Until, that is, I remembered a little 
>used power and used shrinking at range and reduced the size of the 
>missile so that the warhead was below critical mass when it went bang. 
 
You used *Shrinking* on a nuke?! You do realise that that's effectively 
what happens in reality, though explosive charges are used? (Read Tom 
Clancy's Sum of All Fears for an entertaining description of this). 
 
GM: So you wanna save your behind by Shrinking the nuke? 
PC: Yep! 
GM: OK, it's now become a critical mass. BOOM! 
 
qts 
 
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 99 12:25:41  
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk> 
Subject: Re: Dress for DF (Character: Gandalf The Grey) 
 
On Mon, 01 Feb 1999 14:41:47 PST, Jesse Thomas wrote: 
 
>So, lemme get this straight.  Some of you think he should have DF, some  
>favor Public ID, others have suggested Reputation.  I suppose it would  
>be impossible to give him all 3, but I can't think why.  Enlighten me. 
 
Of the three, I'd go for Reputation, but, to generalise the case, it is 
very easy for a character to have all three. 
 
Consider Prince Crispus - as son of King Alric he's known throughout 
the Kingdom, his head appears on some coinage, and well-known in courts 
beyond (Public ID); thanks to an assassination attempt he has a scar 
from eye to chin (DF); and he has a Reputation for being honourable. 
 
Back to Gandalf: I disagree with DF because I don't think being an old 
greybeard qualifies. I originally went for PID, but then was informed 
that he wasn't automatically recognised when not disguised, so scratch 
that. On further reflection, he was also able to travel about quite 
freely, whereas if he had PID, he'd likely have been hounded by 
Sauron's minions. That leaves Reputation (of being a powerful wizard), 
which is eminently suitable. They can't pick him out in a crowd, but 
still know of him. 
qts 
 
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 99 11:59:51  
From: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk> 
Subject: Re: <FHList> The Necrotron 
 
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:49:25 -0500, Brian Wawrow wrote: 
 
>Hi, 
> 
>Those of you on the Champs list may remember me asking about zombie hordes a 
>few months ago. The zombies worked out okay but my players draw the zombies 
>into a tactical situation that allowed them to fight in a doorway, thus the 
>situation was less of an overwhelming zombie mob than a queue of HTK [hard 
>to kill] fodder that weren't much of a threat to the front-door guys. 
> 
>I have another topic to ask the list's opinion on. The dungeon boss in this 
>adventure is called the Necrotron, a great machine run by necromantic 
>magics. The Necrotron's main attack is an NND EB with some clever homing 
>features who's SFX is the good ol' flaming skull. 
> 
>At any rate, in order to approach the Necrotron, the players have to wade 
>through this waist deep pit filled with animated body parts. So, the 
>mechanics of this pit should reflect a stew of arms, legs, partial torsos, 
>rotting intestines and so on whose only purpose is to grab a living thing 
>and pull into the soup and drown it. Obviously, I want this to be scary but 
>not lethal. Mostly this exists to freak out the players and slow them down 
>enough so the Necrotron can get some shots off. 
 
Yuk! Hehehe! 
 
How about an AOE TK, Non-Selective? Or a low-powered AOE NS Entangle? 
 
Some thoughts, though: how much magic do the PCs wield? Gliding, Force 
Wall, Flight, Entangle could all make the trap easy to bypass. How 
about adding body parts to the walls like in Aliens? 
 
A Cumulative Dispel or Transform would make for a good scene with the 
priest chanting away at the Dispel / Transform while the warriors 
heroicly defend him. 
 
 
qts 
 
Home: qts@nildram.co.uk. 
 
------------------------------ 
 
End of champ-l-digest V1 #179 
***************************** 


Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 09:27 AM