Markdoc

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please Now, guys, play nice. I agree from the posts that it's clear that Sindyr is new to the system and much of what's being discussed here has been discussed at length before (Note to Sindyr - that explains the responses to your first post: you walked into the middle of a discussion that's been going on for years). OTOH, he is throwing up some new ideas, which is never a bad thing. Given that most of the Hero boards would hate the idea of absolutes (or, if you prefer RIFTS/Exalted-like "power levels") being added, with the energy of a thousand exploding suns, the chances of these becoming "official" rules is right up there with Hero moving entirely over to d20 rules. But there are people who might be interested in an internally-consistent set of house rules. Based on what Sindyr has written so far, (and also Chris's comments) I think the key to making something like this workable is to understand the core mechanic at the heart of Hero system: special effects. The idea is to visualise - in as much detail as possible - what you want the power to be, and then build it with the mechanisms available. Part of the problem here seems to be that some posters are treating "invulnerable" like a power. But it's not (at least as things stand, or as it has been defined so far): it's a special effect for defences. Let's take two published "invulnerable" characters to show what I mean: Superman and Miracleman. The former is "invulnerable" (not really: he can be hurt, he's just really hard to hurt) by nature of the fact that he's really tough against certain effects - he can be hurt by magic as easily as a normal human. And he's tough all the way through: it's not like he has a hard shell. If the Atom flew up his nose and started energy blasting the base of his brain it'd have no more effect than if he was doing it from outside. Miracleman, OTOH has a nigh-impenetrable forcefield. It'll bounce all sorts of damage but if you teleport something past the forcefield, he goes squish. Thus Big Blue's invulnerability is best simulated with lots of resistant PD/ED (not vs magic), plus huge CON and STUN totals. Miracleman's is best simulated with a personal forcewall. They are both "invulnerable" (special effect) but have different powers (mechanics) and - important point - react with other powers differently. An indirect attack that would kill Miracleman won't faze Superman. A attack that might Stun Superman, is unlikely to do any STUN at all to Miracleman. Both of them are vulnerable to mental attacks If you throw that difference out the window and just say "Invulnerable subsumes all defences" then you have thrown the core of the entire system out the window. There's literally nothing left of the original game. So..... how do you deal with that? Well as I have suggested there's two ways. What Sindyr has tried so far is to develop a metasystem to underlie the current mechanics. The results have been unbalanced because he's trying to add to the mechanics of the system while really talking about special effects. Invulnerability to all attacks should be very much more expensive than invulnerability to fire which should be more expensive than invulnerability to Negabeams. That's special-effect driven and pricing is always going to problematic. It's going to require a different way of thinking about things. For example, you could price "absolute" as a +1 point adder. Every Superhero will want it, so their attacks will affect each other normally: it just means all heroes are godlike and they ignore the physical world for their absolute ability. You could price it at 100. Odds are the combat oriented types will all want it anyway: that just relegates combat to the absoluters (who can affect each other normally) and means they can ignore the mundane world and non-absolute superheroes, who will do their thing outside combat. If this sounds like handwaving, it is. But that's inevitable - the price depends on what sort of game you want to run. cheers, Mark

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please That's OK: but it's not a simple and direct answer. It's a way of saying "As we understand it, the question cannot be answered" which, when I think of it, is a pretty good reply also to "How do we design a mechanic for absolutes?" cheers, Mark

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please Then maybe I am misunderstanding what you wrote. "Invulnerability" purchased as extra DCV, lots of combat luck or Desolid are three different things mechanically. Only the first would be affected by someone rolling a 3. Only the second would be affected by a really large attack. Only the third would be affected by a power with "affects Desolid". A single power "invulnerability" which treats all of these three as equivalent isn't possible (nor was it what was suggested by the FH "absolute effects" approach) unless you say "Mechanics are irrelevant". If you want a mechanistic approach, "what happens" depends on how the attack power is built and what the defence is. And what I'm saying, is that you are not going to get them, any more than anyone has ever been able to provide a simple, direct answer to the question "Can God make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it?" Not because I think it's a bad idea. Not because I think people shouldn't use absolutes in their game. But because you're specifically asking for a mechanic that can't be mechanically described (at least, by the game as it exists now) The problem is different from creating a power like "Resurrection" or "Wish". In both those cases, we could provide a mechanical solution, though a kludgy one, because those solutions "fit" into the system where nothing else currently sat. There was no contradiction in terms of mechanics with existing "bring back from the dead" or "alter reality" powers because those didn't exist. If you try to introduce a new power modifier "absolute" which simply ignores existing mechanics, you have two potential approaches, both fraught with difficulties. The first is what I thought you were suggesting - that the new power ignore mechanics and operates entirely on special effects. Such an approach can only ever be constructed out of pure handwavium, because by definition you are ignoring the mechanics. How do you create a mechanic which ignores game mechanics? How does god make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it? The second approach is the one Sindyr tried in his first post: to create a second level of mechanics unrelated to the existing mechanics: sort of a meta-mechanic underlying the existing game. I say "unrelated to the existing mechanics" because if you look at what he wrote, the same system could be applied to many games: swap out "50 points" with "one Feat" or "three dots" and you could apply it to D&D or WoD. It attempts to provide a mechanism for special effects - the cost of the absolute in his system depends not on the power it's being applied to, but the description of the power. It's an interesting approach, and might be made workable, although his first attempt is heavily flawed: absolute is actually hard to define for many powers and costs the same for powers with wide - even overwhelming - utility or hardly any utility at all. That leads to a balance/cost issue. A 1d6 EB that "kills anything" costs 55 points, or the same as a regular 11d6 energy blast but is many times more lethal. Heck, if it's limited to 4x a day, costs End, it costs the same as an almost useless 4d6 EB. Every ranged multipower should have one! Oddly, it also costs about a third the price of, but has almost the same effect, as a 20d6 EB that "Kills anything". While that appplication is clearly underpriced, the ability to buy enough range to Teleport anywhere in the Galaxy costs 16 points under the regular rules, but the "absolute" ability to "Teleport Anywhere" costs 52. Still, if the cost of "absolute" scaled better, that's one approach that could work: creating a whole new set of mechanics which over-ride existing mechanics. At that point, though, you are creating quite a different game. The final option is the simplest, but one that only gives provisonal absolutes. And that's to use the rules as is (or modified by the sentence "For games where absolutes are desired a die roll of 3 is not always a success and an 18 is not always a failure".). Treb's suggestion of using Forcewall (2 DEF gives absolute immunity to 1 DC) works fine but is still susceptible to NND, AVLD and attacks greater than the DC you bought imunity to. "Teleport anywhere" can be bought with range, but doesn't let you go through hardened forcewalls, unless you buy AP. Desolid lets you ignore many effects, but inhibits your ability to interact with the real world, etc. But that appears to be exactly what you don't want. Those are the options, as I see it: make it up, make a new game, or live with things as they are. cheers, Mark

Re: Yes, but what about the other guys? I kind of like the luck idea, though you'd need a lot of 6's to change world-shattering events. cheers, Mark

Re: What costing for noncombat movement without penalty?

Re: What costing for noncombat movement without penalty? Think of the multiple moveby specialists. 10 points for +5 OCV with moveby and you can drop that 16d6+ on half your opponents in one phase. cheers, Mark

Re: Yes, but what about the other guys?

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please In post 89, this thread, where you write: Here you explicitly suggest that different mechanics (desolid, combat luck -that is to say PD/ED - or CSLs) should all interact with a different power - an attack with many CSL - as though they were the same. Yet, they are totally different mechanically: the only thing they share in common is the special effect "Can't be hit". If you want powers to be defined by their special effects and the mechanics are irrelevant, how can you truly be seeking a mechanistic approach? The suggestion of using forcewall to simulate invulnerability is an excellent one IMO, and works fine for very tough characters (indeed, I plan on using it, somewhat modified). But that's not an absolute - it's simply buying defences: defences which can be exceeded by larger attacks, or by NND or AVLD. That's a mechanistic approach, but it's also an example of exactly what you've stated you don't want: it's not absolute. cheers, Mark

Re: ...and now he's a werepaladin...

Re: What costing for noncombat movement without penalty?

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please Yeah, I read what you wrote. I also read the sentence where you suggested the absolute "can't hit me" ability whether bought as combat luck, desolidfication or levels in DCV should interact with an "always hits" attack equivalently. That - to me - says pretty clearly that you're not interested in the mechanics, because the mechanics underlying those three approaches are totally different. When you essentially state "The mechanics are not important, the special effect "absolute" is what's important" it seems to me like you are not really interested in mechanics. Isn't that clear? I see your point here, but this just looks like semantics to me. If he buys his fire immunity as desolid, then in the typical session, fire won't hurt him. Rolling a 3 won't have any effect, but attacks built with "affects desolid" will. Would it help if we simply renamed desolid "Invulnerability" and specified that invulnerable characters had to add a +2 advantage to their attacks and renamed "Affects desolid" "Cosmic"? And if we did so, the advantage would be .... what, exactly? This is precisely the sort of near absolute we can easily build now. Fortunately, I'm arguing no such thing. I'm pointing out that you seem to want an mechanic, which by your own description is divorced from the mechanics of the system: an attack whose cost is unrelated to all other atatcks, a defence which supercedes all other defences, an attack that doesn't use the attack rules, etc. You can no more create an integrated mechanic that isn't mechanically defined than you can create a logical solution to the various paradoxes of the absolute that logicians have discussed for the last 3000 years. cheers, Mark

Re: Cursed Item Yep, either would work. cheers, Mark

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

Re: Cursed Item I just build 'em without the focus limitation and the "uncontrollable" limitation. At that point, once the player acquires the power he can't control when it is used and he can't get rid of the "object" by discarding it - since it's not a focus, merely a special effect. The catch is - as I run it - you can't curse someone simply by hiding the object in their gear (for example), since it's not a focus. Since there is no focus to pass around, the character has to actually "accept" the curse in some way (ie: they have to choose to take the power associated with the curse or take some action indicating that they accept it). As for this particular curse, I'd build it thus: Side effect: Mind Control 3d6, Telepathic (+¼), Trigger (Activating the Trigger requires a Zero Phase Action, Trigger requires a Turn or more to reset, Character does not control activation of personal Trigger; +¼), Cumulative (+½), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +½) (37 Active Points) with the trigger being a death in the vicinity. The mind control command (for example could be: "You want to see death up close"). Most people will be able to fight this off with no problem. It won't last very long either unless the person is feeble-minded. However, if exposed to more and more death in a short period of time, the effect of the mindcontrol will become stronger - and longer lasting - at the +30 level, it may even compel the target to kill, if he can't see death up close. At the very least, he'll take to hanging around hospitals and slaughterhouses cheers, Mark

Re: Some ideas on my spell casting system Why not just use a VPP? Initially they will have to spend a goodly chunk of points to get it functioning, but after that, they will be able to expand it as they go and there's no limit on how many spells they can learn. cheers, Mark

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please My emphasis. Ah! Now I understand! But you're on the wrong forum. The game you want is Marvel Superheroes, not Hero, which is a mechanics-driven system. In Hero it makes no sense that "Is never hit" bought as Desolid (less than 40 points, when limited) would have exactly the same cost and effect as +50 CSL (DCV) at 250 points - or that it would change your DCV - or, for that matter that it would somehow interact differently with the 22 point power "1d6 RKA, affects desolid" than just a regular desolidification simply by declaring it "absolute". cheers, Mark

Re: What costing for noncombat movement without penalty? I'd agree. As a GM, I wouldn't permit megamovement combat under virtually any situations (I might in a hard science space game, with my standard proviso that you can do no more additional damage than your own DEF+BOD: beyond that you begin to spread out over your target, obviating further damage) but that's about it. But even if you did permit it, it'd be hard to use. To move-by or movethrough a target, you need to accelerate, which (under the rules) means moving at least 1". With the smallest level of Megamovement, that's at least a kilometre. So you'd have to start at least a km from your target, and then it'd take another km to decelerate. That means you'd need at least a clear straightaway of 2 km to do even the slowest megamoveby... In most situations you wouldn't even be able to see your target. cheers, Mark

Re: What costing for noncombat movement without penalty? Actually, the rules are . So you could buy CSLs or PSLs to offset the penalties and then operate normally at noncombat speed Using mega-scaled movement is specifically ruled out "without GM's permission" but if the GM does give permission, it's still going to be problematic. Since the minimum move is 1" and with megamovement, that's 1 km (or 500") a megamove moveby (in theory possible, since you only have a -2 to hit) would do STR/2 + 100 d6 per inch of movement (the attacker would take STR/2 + 50d6 per inch of movement). There's the further problem with megamovement that your turning radius and your acceleration/deceleration speed are also megascaled, so the odds are good you'll hit some feature of the landscape (and go splat!) if you're attempting combat at those speeds, unless you are fighting high in the air or on a featureless plain. cheers, Mark

Re: Racial Thoughts: Elves

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please Actually I haven't seen anything of the sort. People can say "This is something we don't want to see in the rules" without saying "you should not use it in your game". I take this approach myself. Among the various house rules I use for games are some which I believe improve the game, which I'd like to see added to the core rules ("roll high" in combat, a standard pricing format for all skills, etc) there are other house rules which I obviously want in my game, but which I would never suggest as additions to the core rules (for example, I allow PCs in my current game to purchase some of their own (non focus limited) powers as "independant" to reduce cost.) The latter fulfills a specific goal I wanted in my game - but that does not mean I think it's suited to being added to the core rules.

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please So in essence, you want absolutes that aren't actually absolute? This is the core of this argument, I think. If you allow actual absolutes, then you also allow paradoxes. If - as you have done - you build a system for ranking absolutes, then they are not absolute - at which point it's not celar what the utility is. To take your own example, with the teleporter who wants to teleport anywhere - if someone (anyone) builds a forcewall that cannot be teleported though, then you still have to tell him "no". So it looks like you've gone to a great deal of trouble and introduced potential balance issues for ...... well, for nothing, really. You still don't have absolutes, you still have relative levels of power. You've just expanded the upper end of that power. In the end, if you want absolutes in game, then you have to accept that it's always going to be a GM fiat deal and then live the paradoxes. In your situation, a Teleporter who "can teleport anywhere" simply needs teleport, megascale +5, which gives him the range to go anywhere in the galaxy, or a minimum of 1 km. Stacked in a multipower with personal teleport that lets him go up to 1 km the character can now "teleport anywhere" and it doesn't even cost that much (minimum of 12 points for the long-range power). That's without any kludges about absolute effects and it plays well with all the rules. (of course, like any teleport with that kind of range, it doesn't explain how he's going to find a place to teleport to, but if he can, he can go there) There's a point here: many of the "absolute powers" discussed can be built using the rules as is. Your stated goal, an is unattainable. No such thing can be built (in Hero, or any system) because more than one total absolute can't exist: this paradox has been recognised for thousands of years (or on the Hero board for several years ) cheers, Mark

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

Re: Power advantages to Martial Arts

Re: Power advantages to Martial Arts I'd agree with the last two posters: martial arts as it stands is not designed to play well with the whole powers/advantages/limitations system. As a GM, I would never allow advantages (or limitations, for that matter) to be placed on martial arts maneuvers. It sounds like you should be building these attacks with powers instead. cheers, Mark

Re: Hancock's STR Yeah, what he said. he's not lifting the train, just stopping it. Heh. "just" stopping it. That said, the 90-120 range seems reasonable. cheers, Mark