Vanguard00

Re: Code VS Killing Poll Actually, I think you kind of agreed with him. And I disagree, both with the idea and with the distinction between "humans" and "superhumans". My earlier post explained my reasoning behind why I disagree, but in short I believe it's how the superhero thinks of himself that's important, not how he is perceived by others. He could be hated, feared, ignored, whatever, but if he's doing the right things for the right reasons, he's a superhero. And, almost by extension, those reasons have to align with the moral and ethical codes of those he is trying to protect. You don't hire policemen from other countries because they don't relate to the people they're trying to protect. Along similar lines, if a superhero doesn't relate to the people he's trying to protect then he's going to make mistakes, miscalculations, poor judgment calls, etc. They have to mesh, and the superhero cannot be separate and distinct from the "normal" populace.

Re: Superhero Images Welcome to the boards, Ian, and that's some darn fine work, by the way.

Re: Code VS Killing Poll There's definitely a similarity in my mind, though obviously it's a different context. It's a good example.

Re: Code VS Killing Poll - snip - I read the whole thing, by the way. I just snipped parts for brevity's sake. I disagree with this assessment, and for two reasons. First, I don't believe that morals and ethics are "human centric". It's my opinion that a superhero within the context of most mainstream comics and most Champions games are almost required to attempt to understand and relate to the morals and ethics of those they are trying to protect. Otherwise you get The Authority. Speaking from a superhero's perspective, when they no longer relate to those they are trying to protect, those they are trying to protect no longer relate to them. That separation can cost a person their humility, their compassion, their sincere altruistic motives, and those characteristics can be easily replaced with conceit, arrogance, or megalomania. It's precisely that the norms don't apply to them, yet they still strive to achieve that level of empathy, that contributes to the definition of superhero. Second, I don’t believe that humans and superhumans are two different animals, any more than I believe “African American†and “Caucasian†are two completely different animals. They’re just different, not separate. I don't agree with at least part of what you say above, and in general I disagree with what I think is your point. If a superhero is so out of touch with humanity that they can no longer relate, are they really a superhero? A person who does all the right things for all the wrong reasons isn't a superhero. The connection between human and more-than-human is imperative. Motives are imperative. Intent is imperative. In order for that connection to be valid, and the motives and intent to be sincere, there has to be a level of empathy, of compassion. It seems to me you're saying that this isn't a necessary factor, and while it's possible that an extreme example could be found to support that, I'd have to say that I still believe that empathy is necessary to be a superhero. I think your analogies have gone too far astray. A lion is not heroic for hunting, true. A lion that chooses to hunt and walk away from a kill so that another lion can eat, perhaps one that is sick or injured, could be construed as heroic. But I don't think this line of reasoning is valid because animals don't make moral choices. Understood, but you've twisted the argument slightly. Bear in mind I'm not comfortable with your distinction between "human" and "superhuman", because I don't see them as two different species. However, to address the actual point, it's the superhero who is applying the moral and ethical guide to their actions that make them a superhero. The public's perception is inconsequential at this point. Spiderman is a superhero, yet the majority of the public might see him still as a villain of sorts (thanks to the Daily Bugle). Yet he uses moral and ethical guidelines that any normal person would understand, relate to and likely agree with (at least in the general sense). The X-Men were once counted as outlaws, but they preached (and I mean preached...sheesh! ) that they must not hold themselves above "homo sapiens" because to do so would be to embrace that which they oppose--that they are better than everyone else, which is what Magneto believes. The X-Men don’t believe this, and seek to show the world that despite their abilities and differences, they are essentially the same. Superman, as you pointed out, was raised with common sense and courtesy to believe in humanity, and to believe in what humanity believes in. He doesn't hold himself above others any more than a fireman would hold himself over someone not trained to fight fires. He still feels compassion and empathy for those he protects, and that's why he won't kill. He could kill, and he could probably justify it in many cases, but he doesn't, because the majority of humanity (or at least in our society) believes that the use of lethal force should be a last resort, not a common choice. Heh. Don't do that. It was just gettin' good!

Re: Code VS Killing Poll That's like asking about abortion (which I'm not doing, by the way). Many people don't consider euthanasia to be murder. And if you're following the literal definition of euthanasia then there is already an element of compassion involved (again, if you believe in it. I do, but opinions vary). I'd say that a superhero/PC could indeed believe in euthanasia if that's their belief (or at least that of the player). Another example of a more "out there" approach is in regards to mercy killing. In "Last of the Mohicans" (Daniel Day Lewis version), Hawkeye shoots the British officer rather than let him suffer at the hands of the Indians who have set him on fire. That scene in "Starship Troopers" where the hero kills his sergeant (played by the lovable Michael Ironside) after said sergeant gets bitten in half is another example. Both could still fall into the realm of acceptable behavior for a superhero in many comics/campaigns. Again, though, there's always room for interpretation.

Re: Code VS Killing Poll It’s been 19 hours. I’m 100 posts behind now… You can’t be well aware of my view, because I didn’t tell you what I thought regarding the law. Please don’t assign or attribute beliefs or words to me that I didn’t write. It’s easy, really. Don’t hack on my example, by the way—I’m merely trying to illustrate a point here. Let’s say you have a guy who can kill without remorse. He’s a criminal of the baddest sort, a mercenary, an assassin. In no way, shape or form is he a hero. Now let’s say that said bad@$$ comes across a burning building. A woman is outside screaming because her children are trapped inside. On a whim, the bad@$$ runs into the building and pulls the children out. That’s heroic, but no one would think he was a hero. A “hero†is a person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: (one definition, anyway), while being “heroic†is merely displaying those qualities, the implication being that it relates to a given feat or specific incident. Cap and Superman have both killed when absolutely necessary (in current incarnations, anyway…I’m not going back to “Cap in WWIIâ€). Both felt remorse. I would say that both have a CvK of the highest order. Both are, obviously, superheroes. To live up to the moniker of “superheroâ€, one should never murder. One should kill only when doing so prevents further harm to others. Lethal force is a last resort, but a viable option in certain circumstances. Every effort should be made to remain within the spirit of the law if not the letter, but again, there may be exceptions. One should not place themselves above those s/he seeks to protect, for in doing so one loses the perspective necessary to remain empathic with them. It’s short and not complete, but it gives you an idea of what I’m talking about. Some of my little guidelines leave room for interpretation, as was my intent. It may vary from person to person, culture to culture, but I believe I’ve captured the “gistâ€. Anyone can feel free to disagree, but it’s unlikely you can convince me that any of the above is false in referring to a superhero of any genre.

Re: Code VS Killing Poll

Re: Independant Powers Pretty much how I'd do it. The villain will come back lookin' to reclaim his toy (and have a reasonable chance of succeeding). Someone else could take it away from the hero. Some good guy agency shows up and wants the item for evidence in a trial, or maybe just to study. Some bad guy agency shows up and just plain wants the item. The PC might get to play with it a bit, but I'd have them lose it shortly thereafter.

Re: Code VS Killing Poll As near as I can tell, just about everyone agrees that heroes SHOULDN'T kill (i.e. try and find another way before resorting to lethal force), and most agree that SOME heroes WON'T kill no matter what, and most of you agree that SOME heroes kill way too much (and thus, to some, aren't heroes)... So...what's the debate over again? People's definition of a hero? Almost by definition that's going to vary from person to person. An individual's morality, ethics, perception of the world around them, experiences, etc, are going to shape their feelings over when it might be justified to kill. The same can be said of PCs to a certain extent, but obviously the player's own views will color that greatly. I think the collection of differing view points expressed thus far would make for some interesting RP were these same view points to be expressed in-game.

Re: Stats for the original Champions team I don't know if their stats are posted anywhere online, but if I remember correctly they included the stats of the characters in the backs of the comic books.

Re: Who are the greatest (?) super villains? In no particular order (cuz it depends on the book, the author and the plot for which is ranked #1 at any given time): Joker – The scariest mo-fo out there. “The Killing Joke†cemented my love for this guy. Sabretooth – The baddest mo-fo out there. Every clash with Wolverine is a rollicking good time. It’s even better when the writer gives him half a brain. Darkseid – Gotta have one great “dark lord†always in the background. “The Great Darkness Saga†is forever one of my favorites. Ultron – For being the guy who makes everyone go “Oh, $#!^%†every time he shows up. Bane – Cuz he beat Batman. “Knightfall†rocked. Baron Zemo (#4 I think) – For putting together the greatest line-up of “Masters of Evil†ever. Dr. Doom – The classiest all-around villain out there. Lex Luthor – A used-car salesmen with a genius IQ…the smarmiest, smartest villain around. And he’s President of the USA! [Tie] Ra’s al-Ghul / Magneto – For being truly magnificent villains who don’t think they’re villains. Green Goblin – Cuz he’s just that cool a villain (though I’ll give the ol’ Hobgoblin a “runner up†status) Kingpin – Cuz he just won’t quit. Juggernaut - The greatest of the villain “bricksâ€, and I like him even more now that he’s being given a bit of character. Honorable mention goes to my favorite villains who kinda suck: The Wrecking Crew – I just like seeing these guys in a book, even if they do suck most of the time. It always means some good butt-kicking is just around the corner. Anyone of those guys employed by Justin Hammer: Killer Shrike, Melter, etc. The whole “Sinister Six†from Marvel’s Ultimate universe. They’re just cool. [EDIT] Forgot Deathstroke! And Taskmaster! I just love those "super norm" villains...

Re: Code VS Killing Poll I don’t think I’ve ever played a superhero that will not kill, period, so I’d have to say no to this one. This is not my preference because it doesn’t go along with my own ideology, but I’ve played such characters on rare occasions. Yep, this is where I generally fall. The vast majority of my characters believe that if you can avoid killing, do so, but at some point it might be necessary. That point may vary from character to character, but this is generally where all my PCs fall. In some Dark Champions campaigns, yes, I’ve played such characters. And I have to admit that this is where most of my DC characters probably fall. Not a preference, but I’ve played it. Not that he lasted long…

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

Re: Artemis DC character I think he's asking for help building a character as predominant as Harbinger. Of course, I could be wrong... ...but I really just wanted to post so we could have all three "Vanguard"-named posters in one thread.

Re: The cranky thread Put an offer on a house on Tuesday. My first offer on my first house. I was one of two. They said they'd let me know Wednesday since they were gonna consider both that night. Thursday afternoon rolls around and finally someone lets me know a dark horse third offer came in Wednesday morning for more money, so no go. It's not that I'm cranky, really, but I hated the waiting. THAT made me cranky.

Re: What Fantasy/Sci-Fi book have you just finished? Please rate it...

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER Yeah, it's great escapism, and I'm like you in that I'm a recovering procrastination addict. Or I would be if I ever got around to quitting procrastination... But egads, it's a fun way to kill time at work!

Re: Storn's Art & Characters thread. Again, excellent work, Storn. And props to the creator--I think "Superion" is a pretty cool name.

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER I missed a whole day of posting. One whole day! Do you realize how far behind that puts a guy? Sheesh!

Re: Hospital Floorplans/Maps Needed There's a thread going on about floorplans and such which may have some leads for you: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19442&page=1&pp=15

Re: Partial Body Density It's a matter of effect. For example, if you're increasing the density of someone's hand so they'll do more damage, you're giving an Aid to HA. If you're increasing the density of someone's hand so they'll have a harder time hitting you, that's penalty skill levels. Other examples: increase the density of someone's feet and you're essentially draining SPD (or maybe Running). Increasing the density of someone's extremeties (nothing major, just a bit), might be an END drain since it's now harder for those people to move their arms and legs. The increased density would be a special effect in my mind, not the power used to construct it.

Re: Mystical artifacts All good stuff. Thanks thus far, guys.

Hey, all. I'm hoping y'all can help a little bit. I'm looking for mystical artifacts in the Champions Universe. They don't have to be detailed. In fact, the less said about them the better. Even vague references would be good. If anyone has any ideas I'd appreciate it.

Re: Group Formation Schticks I saw this on a PBEM site years ago, and more recently in JLA: Have the players be the "replacement" characters for an established superteam. Said team disappears under mysterious circumstances and after a short period of time, the public realizes they aren't coming back. One person, maybe a retired member of said superteam, receives "In case of emergency" message that gives a recommendation from each of the established team members. Maybe they saw potential. Maybe they know the PC in question...whatever. The PBEM I saw it on, if I remember correctly, pulled it off fairly well. The JLA one didn't go that badly, either.

Re: A Thread for Random Musings I'm putting this here because it didn't seem appropriate to open a new thread, but it's something I needed to say. This is an impulse post so please bear with me. And please excuse the rambling. I do that when I get a little anxious about things. An open apology to Worldmaker So I was talkin' with a friend of mine this weekend. I was goin' off about this one mutual buddy of ours who pissed me off some time back and never acknowledged it. My friend pointed out that this guy had kinda sorta apologized, but I'd blown it off. My retort was that I didn't think it was fair of him to just say "I'm sorry" without anything to back it up, that I didn't think it fair that he got off that easy. My friend called me a butthead (she's good about stuff like that). She said I was just being stubborn and standing on a principle that didn't really apply this time. This all came about because I still see the other guy on occasion, and we almost always end up hacking on each other. We don't bad mouth each other when the other isn't around, but we always seem to slip into a heated exchange whenever we're together. She, for one, had had enough. So on Saturday, at a party of yet another mutual friend, I went up to the guy and stuck out my hand. I told him that I'd been stubborn and that if he honestly felt he could put the issue behind us, I'd certainly try to do the same. He again apologized (and again it wasn't specific) but it seemed relatively sincere, so I did the same. We might not be as close as we once were but I think we made a good start. You can see where I'm going with this, right? Yeah, it got me to thinkin'. I did the same exact thing with you, Jack. It didn't really matter if you acknowledged the specific issue I was upset about. What mattered is that you at least made some effort toward resolution. It was my stubbornness and refusal to back down from principle that demanded something more specific, more tangible. It wasn't fair to do that to you and I keep hearing my friend's voice calling me a butthead. I guess what I'm trying to say is, though it may be too late, is that I'm sorry I was such a butthead about the whole issue between us. It wasn't important for you to address whatever specific issues I had. It was importat that you apologized, and it should've been enough. I'm sorry that it wasn't. You don't have to reply, or to accept or anything else. I'm honestly not trying to take any high ground here. I guess I needed something similar much closer to home to show me how I'd been acting about it, though, and now that I've had my eyes opened (so to speak), it wouldn't be fair to not say something. Despite my claims to the contrary I'd been holding a grudge, albeit one that I wasn't really aware of. My sense of justice was offended, but that was a burden that shouldn't have been placed on anyone else but me. So, Jack, consider this an open apology. I may have been right to be upset about the events of last year, but I was wrong in how I handled it. We might not ever get to the point we were at once before, but I'd appreciate it if we could at least agree to be civil. I always feel a tad bitter, guilty and maybe angry whenever we clash, especially in public. If nothing else I think we have enough commonality in gaming to put the personal stuff aside. Again, I'll understand if this is too little and too late, but I had to say it while I was thinking of it. If I don't put it out there now I probably never will. I guess I was a little more detached about the whole thing because we've never met, and because with the written medium it's so easy to assign emotions or thoughts that aren't necessarily there. Thus, it was easy to simply not see your side of it. I still don't like the way things went down at GGU last year, but I've been wrong about my approach. I apologize to you, Jack, for my part in carrying this on, and I apologize to the boards for perpetuating it publically.