Markdoc

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation Yeah. This opens up another issue. Character death is potentially a problem in pretty much every genre except supers. It's like independant writ large, in that you lose all your points := Although I have tried various approaches, I don't have anything that resembles a perfect answer. In a campaign some years back, set in a fantasy-historical Japan, I gave out karma points for good (meaning social class-appropriate) behaviour and deducted them for bad behaviour. I kept the total secret, to reduce chances for gaming the system, but the players knew the system was in use. These points could be cashed in for a reroll, or accumulated and if accumulated, each karma point gave you a 10% bonus on your starting points for your new character meaning - at least in the first few years' play - that a scrupulous character could end up with more points than his old character. I did that deliberately to encourage "contempt for death" in the samurai PCs who were the bulk of the group - an honorable death was very good karma. More usually (since I award XP equally to the whole group but only to the PCs whose players are present at the session, plus very occasional bonus points to individuals for exceptional gaming) I allow new PCs to be bought in at the points value of the lowest PC in the group (at the time death occurred: you can't get an upgrade by killing yourself!) That will always be more than the starting points, but of course will usually be less than everyone else. I do make some rule of thumb exceptions to this: if the PC dies in a particularly glorious or appropriate fashion, for example, they'd get a decent bonus. That helps: the new PC starts out behind everyone else in terms of points, but not drastically so. cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation Really? In this thread, it's only 3:1 no problem: problem, but in past threads, I recall it as significantly more. Even so, none of them indicate this as the recurring problem you hypothesize - instead, it seems to be a one-off where players either weren't clear on the limitation, or hoped the limitation would not come into play. And it's worth noting that that in both cases, the threads rapidly devolved into comments about players who caused problems by relentless min-maxing, regardless of particular limitations (and I suspect, probably regardless of game systems ) So no, the scenario you outline where players would build a character abusing independant, retire it when it lost its power, build a new character abusing independant, retire it when it lost its power, etc .... well, it's an interesting hypothesis, but honestly I've never even heard of it being a problem, far less encountered anyone who's actually experienced it. cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation Interesting in theory, but irrelevant in practice, as that does not seem to be what happens in real life - in my groups, or in others. cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

Re: M44 offhand @ 500 yards As noted, the rules cover the outcome in combat*, and the point about "off-hand" has already been made. Also, I'd note that under 5th DEX 11 gives you an OCV of 4, not 3. So running the numbers, I'd do it like this. Average guy, Dex 8-10: OCV 3. Weapon familiarity, no penalty Range -12 set +1 (I would not give him brace because normally I rule you need something to brace against: the ground would do if you are prone, even your knees if sitting: but he's not doing any of that) Long rifle +1 to ocv and +1 to range mod Range, on a sunny day, no evidence of high winds, nobody shooting back (perfect conditions, +5) That gives us 3+1+2+5-3-12 = -4, or 7 or less to hit We don't now how many takes that video clip took, but if we reckon he can hit 60% of the time (that's what KS did, and he qualifies as a rifleman) then we're looking at 4 levels to bring him to 11- (62% chance) at that range. That means he's hitting 2 shots out of three, so he probably would feel pretty confidant. If he's fitter than average and DEX 11, then 4 levels would give him a 74% chance - he hits with 3 shots out of 4. He'd need 2 more levels to reach 90%, which is pretty over the top, IMO. *My dad - a veteran with literally years of combat experience, who later trained cadets on marksmanship reckoned that you could divide the effective range of most soldiers by three in a combat situation - meaning that if you could shoot 6/10 on a range at 500, you could expect about 0/10 at 500 in combat and about 6/10 at 150 yards. Hero system rules actually model that pretty well, if you add the "good/very good/perfect conditions" bonuses when in training situations. It's the same with skills: the roll you have is for use of the skill in a stress or extraordinary situation. You don't need to make a roll to complete an ordinary task under ordinary conditions. cheers, Mark

Re: More Railgun

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation I'd agree with the others: Cap's shield is clearly not independant: it's a unique focus with some inbuilt power, but most of Cap's points on shield-related stuff (not SHIELD-related stuff ) are actually built with the -1/2 limitation "Shield of opportunity". As noted, he always gets his original shield back if he loses it or gives it away, and in its absence, he uses other shields or even garbage can lids. Independant is really best thought of as "temporary power boost" or "independant power": it's a way of gaining a price break - but that price break is temporary, because at some point, the power is going to go away. A good example, from the last campaign was a character who could make a "ka" - a full physical copy of somebody - from a drop of blood. We put independant on that, because the kas were complete copies, and there was no mental link. They were essentially independant characters and as time passed, they would evolve away from the starting character. So they were not normal followers, because they were not guaranteed to hang around the PC that created them, or even be friendly. Independant worked perfectly for that: a ka of an enemy would still be an enemy, a ka of a PC would react exactly like the PC would ... initially. As time went on, however, they became their own person. Some of the PC Kas hung around with the original PCs, while most drifted away, and some met gruesome ends . The power was based around summon, but summon as written was problematic, because of questions over how many summoned creatures you can have at once and duration of summoning. Independant allowed us to bypass that problem by summoning creatures and then paying the points cost to make them literally independant of the PC in question. I've also had a player make an oath and use independant to get get a temporary boost on powers until the oath was fulfilled - at which point he lost those points. For a creative GM or player, independant offers many useful possibilities. However in games it works best for small powers, where the inevitable loss of the power does not cripple the character. It also works well for "granted powers" a trope of most genres, from fantasy to superheroes, where the hero (or heroes) get temporary power-ups. Of course the GM could just handwave that, but it's not an approach I have ever been fond of, and independant tied it nicely into the rules. cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation Bwahahahaha! Seriously, though, a player like that is going to be a problem anyway - specific limitations aren't the issue. Alas, most GM's know the problem. Cheers, Mark

Re: More Railgun Currently? One, possibly 2, maybe even 3 if you are not fussy about accuracy: since rail guns don't use explosive fuel, that giant fireball coming out behind the projectile you always see with current railguns ... is the internals of the barrel melting and being projected out. So at the moment we have a weapon that weighs as much as a couple of MBTs, packs the punch of light howitzer, and can only be used once. I'm thinking building a turret to put it is is probably a bit of overkill. That's why the actual railgun weapon program was was cancelled and they went back to basic research. The current research program is designed to do two things: Phase I, where they are now, is to get reliable delivery of the power needed. It doesn't matter too much if the gun is trashed after each shot - that goal is not to make a working weapon, but to build reliable power source and delivery systems. It looks like they are getting there: the current gun is much more powerful than anything they have trials before. They have a way to go, though: right now the system has a fraction of the power they need/want Phase II, (which is also going on now, but is considered a much longer-term aim) is to build materials that don't ablate when you run that much juice through them. cheers, Mark

Re: More Railgun You're right: they cancelled the weapons projects. But they replaced them with much smaller budget, research projects designed to work on improving the tech. Which is what this is about: not so much trying to make a working weapon, as work out how to make a working weapon. I must say though, the new railgun looks 100x cooler than the old "block of iron plates on a railcar" version they had before. Cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation I never had a problem, because I made that point up front, when reviewing characters. Players were a bit pissed when powers (and points) were removed, but that passed over by the next session. We have a significant deal of experience in this: in the last game, 5 out of 8 PCs had at least one power with independant, and almost all PCs sacrificed points to build independant items or effects in the course of the game. A significant number of those effects (more than half) went away in the course of the same game (Note: that might sound like a lot, but it was a 5-year game I did however have one player (long ago) who abused the system - even after repeated warnings - and built an elven character with an uber-bow. When the uber-bow met its inevitable fate, the player sulked for a bit, but the lesson was learned - and the new PC was marginally better balanced cheers, Mark

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation As various posters have pointed out IND, is really only designed for powers that can - and some point will - be taken away permanently. There were a few people (like Tasha) who didn't like it, but it was an awesomely useful tool for making mcGuffins in any genre and fits very well with the Fantasy Genre. It's useful for more than just items: in the Campaign, I just finished, I used it for magical gifts/geases - like swearing an oath. You could gain cheap powers that way, but if the geas was broken, or the terms of the oath fulfilled, then the powers went away. In an earlier game, I did the whole "Hid my heart in a duck's egg" thing - a powerful NPC had hidden his lifeforce away in his heart (ie: he bought all his stats down and then rebought them and his powers through an independant focus), which he cut out, embalmed and concealed in a pocket dimension hidden in a trapped room in a forgotten temple full of undead . That made him mondo powerful - but also vulnerable: when his heart was destroyed, (and really, that was inevitable) he ceased to exist. It's not a power for all items. A cop's pistol isn't independant, and nobody "paid points for it". It was made by machines and the cop can always get another one if his is lost/destroyed - though there'll be some paperwork! It is however, a good way of stamping "for limited use only" on certain items that cannot be replaced. It's also not a tool that sees a lot of use. But I use it and players in my games have used it, and powers have been lost, so it clearly works as intended. Taking out of 6th was a mistake, IMO: it's a useful tool which can't easily be replicated another way. But it's not something I worried about, as it can simply be added back in as custom limitation. cheers, Mark

Re: LOTR Genealogy It amuses me that the hobbits get as much or more space as the all the families of all the kings of men, ever I'm guessing this was compiled by a hobbit. cheers, Mark

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? I love that film. I recall sitting down and watching it with my dad when I was at college and we both loved it. Ain't many films I can say that about. cheers, Mark

Re: "Neat" Pictures This is just awesome: colour photos from WW1. http://www.worldwaronecolorphotos.com/ cheers, Mark

Re: A Rogue Like character One possibility: when Rogue drains a target's powers, she usually KO's them. You use STUN suppress for this effect, but when I built a rogue clone, I found it a lot cheaper to simply NND them than try to drain all their powers, plus their Stun. The GM can easily handwave the fact that their powers are mostly nonfunctional when they are KO'd, because they're not going to be using active powers. And I say "mostly non-functional" because in no case can I recall people suffering greatly from Rogue's power drain, unless it was the point of the story (like Wolvie losing his healing power). Jugs loses his invulnerability ... but actually still doesn't get hurt by a punch that'd crumple steel. Storm loses her flight - but somehow isn't hurt by the fall, etc etc. The "loses powers briefly" thing seems to be mostly special effects, not actually modeled in the source material And the 200 active points you used on Drain, gets you a 40d6 NND, which will KO most people pretty good In contrast the 4d6 STUN drain reduces 14 points of STUN per phase - your average brick is going to be able to survive 4-6 phases of drain, even without any power defence, which means they're going to be active while she is trying to drain them. In addition, if she tried to take someone who was too powerful, Rogue would collapse herself. If you build the NND with a side effect (all or nothing, side effect: is affected by own power if opponent remains conscious) it actually models this pretty well, I think. That gives you a potential solution to the "1 minute" problem: your Rogue clone has access to the powers only as long as the target is KO'd (that'd be IMHO a -3/4 limitation). She can cling on longer to put the target under for longer - we've seen that too in the comics .... but doing so triggers another side effect: the possibility that some changes become permanent, also potentially triggering mental changes. I built that as a transform that could also add powers and disadvantages. cheers, Mark

Re: How to found a new Catholic Order Plenty of role-playing fodder there! With regard to the original question, there are - as far as I know - no actual rules for founding an order. Benedict founded a monastery, and his rule was widely copied, giving rise to the Benedictines. The pope made them a formal order in 1883 - about 1300 years after their founding. St Francis had already attracted a following and had drafted a rule before he went to Rome to seek formalisation of his order - and when he relinquished leadersip of it later and founded the tertiaries, he didn't seek papal approval. Ignatius on the other hand, travelled to Rome and got papal blessing for the Jesuits, before really founding the order: it had only been about a dozen guys up until that point. And orders were suppressed - the Jesuits are a good example - when they were perceived to be out of hand or undesirable. So it'd be perfectly in keeping with history for a reforming priest of Asuna to draft a rule to "clean up" the local church. If it gained traction he could either try to spread it back to the mother church, establish an order ... or he could end up branded a heretic. A lot of heresies started with good intentions! Cheers, Mark

Re: Bard villain/mastermind: how?

Re: How to found a new Catholic Order Guilty as charged! You are also guilty of literalism - a crime which will get you in much trouble on the internet! cheers, Mark

Re: Bard villain/mastermind: how? Bard, twanging lute: "Oppress, oppress, oppress, the townsfolk!" cheers, Mark

Re: How to found a new Catholic Order

Re: Realistic Monetary Systems in FH