Steve Long

Yes.

See 6E1 153.

1. Yes, because C isn't in the Darkness to Mental Group. The fact that the Darkness to Mental Group area is between them doesn't matter, since LOS isn't required to use Mind Scan -- after all, a character can Mind Scan for someone on the other side of the planet. 2. If it's Clairsentience (Sight Group), the character can see both B and C. If it's Clairsentience (Mental Group), then he can't perceive either of them with Mental Awareness. He could perceive C with Mind Scan but not B.

See 6E2 14.

There has been no change; the +1/4 minimum remains the rule. This is probably just something that it was too difficult for Dan to program into HD for some reason. Edit: Dan tells me this was something I asked him to do a long time ago for some reason I cannot recall, but I trust Dan's change logs/memory. The rule as stated in the book is still correct, but of course the GM can waive that rule for a particular build (as he might if he accepts the logic of your argument).

There’s no need for an Advantage here — at most you need a GM who’s willing to be a bit flexible in the name of fun. What you have here is: Detect Named Person Detect Named Enemy Detect Whether These Two Stones Are The Same Type Given their breadth and flexibility the first two are at least 5-point Detects, and I can see an argument for 10-point Detects (or maybe a custom in-between cost). The latter would probably be a 3-pointer. And in some cases additional abilities like Discriminatory, Analyze, and Telescopic may be required as well.

Before I can answer your question properly, there’s a more fundamental issue to explore: what is the effect of Clairsentience (Touch Group)? Per 6E1 179, “A character with Clairsentience can use one or more of his Senses (usually the Sight Group) at Range[.]” That parenthetical is important here — I’m sure everyone reading this can think of numerous fictional and real-world powers and gadgets that are most appropriately built with Clairsentience (Sight Group). It takes very little effort to conceive of appropriate uses of Clairsentience (Hearing Group). With some effort I can think of at least one good use for Clairsentience (Smell Group), but I think it’s best for all our sanities not to contemplate Clairsentience (Taste Group). But Clairsentience (Touch Group) is kind of an odd duck, since Touch itself is a bit of a weird mallard. Obviously we can come up with some ideas (or else this question wouldn’t exist), but let’s face it — it’s not exactly a common concept. And there’s already one Power — Stretching — that allows a character to use Touch “at Range.” Clairsentience (Touch Group) in theory has a similar effect, but bypasses intervening barriers and only allows perception, not manipulation. So, when a character uses Clairsentience (Touch Group), he can both actively feel anything at the perception point, and passively feel anything done to/at the perception point that Normal Touch would ordinarily allow him to feel. For example, he could feel an object placed on or at the perception point, could feel the pressure of someone stepping or lying on the perception point, and so on. If there’s any doubt about what the character would experience, the GM should resolve it using common sense, dramatic sense, and game balance sense. So in theory, yes, you could build Someone Touched My Car! with Clairsentience (Touch Group), but the build you posted isn’t entirely correct: —One Sense Only isn’t a valid Limitation since the Touch Group only has one Sense (see 6E2 9). If a character had several Senses assigned to the Touch Group, it would be valid (assuming the GM approved, as usual). —Fixed Perception Point isn’t a comfortable choice either, since the car can move. Replace it with Can Only Perceive If Things/People Touch My Car (-1). (Arguably that Limitation value’s too high, but I don’t feel like going into yet another detailed analysis.) However, all that being said... I think you’re going around your elbow to get at your hand. This is a complex (and now time-wasting) way to build something that you’d do better to build as Detect If Things/People Touch My Car, with a whole bunch of Telescopic. “But Steve!” you protest, anguished. “All that Telescopic would end up costing a huge amount of points that I don’t want to spend for such a trivial little power!” And your concern would be a just one. So you go to your GM and say, “Hey, I know this in theory costs X points, but that’s way too much for a trivial little power, so how about we just say it costs 5 points?” And your GM, being a cool guy, says “Sure.”

I'll use this power -- Change Environment (-5m Running) -- as an example. This means that anyone entering the area suffers a reduction of 5m in their Running speed while affected by the power. So, if the target has the standard Running 12m, if he's hit by this power (or enters an area if affects, if it has the Area Of Effect Advantage), his Running's reduced to 7m.

I'm sorry, but apparently I still don't understand the question. You say you want to: "model a power that attacks 2 (or more) single targets by hitting the hex they are in (ala the Accurate Advantage)" But that's not what Accurate does. Accurate "makes the attack work against DCV 3 without having the potential to affect multiple targets" (6E1 321). By definition it only affects one target. So I can read your question one of two ways: 1. How can I create a power that attacks 2 (or more) single targets by hitting the [area] they are in? The answer to that, of course, is to buy Area Of Effect (1m Radius) (or however big you want the Radius to be), use some other Area Of Effect shape, or perhaps try Autofire. 2. How can I create a power that has the Accurate Advantage but isn't restricted to one target --- it can affect 2 (or more) single targets by hitting the [area] they are in? The answer to that is, "There is no specific way under the HERO System rules to do that; by definition Accurate's restricted to just one target, so you have to get creative." So, on to getting creative. There are some possible workarounds (including, of course, a ruling by the GM, probably involving some increased cost for the power). Consider: 1. Make the attack Autofire, then shoot the same area X times but declare a different target each time. 2. Take a look at the Ignite spell in HSG, which is for lighting candles and other small things (though it could have some combat applications). The construct I used there was to buy Area Of Effect (8m Radius Selective, so the spell only targets objects the wizard wants to hit) and Area Of Effect (1m Radius Accurate, so that each roll within the 8m Radius is against DCV 3 [and by any reasonable person's common sense and dramatic sense simply succeeds automatically]). Technically this requires the GM's permission, since the rules don't specifically say what happens in this situation, but as the GM writing the book I approved it. Hopefully that answers the question. If not, please try again, or PM me if that would be easier.

The text on 6E1 320 states: Typically Accurate is only taken for 1m Radius powers. Therefore a character could, in theory, buy it for a larger than 1m Area — though I doubt many GMs would allow that (I probably wouldn’t). I’m not even sure I understand why a character would want to buy this, since by definition an Accurate attack only affects a single target — no matter how big you make it, it only hits one target. Though since a larger Area makes it harder for the target to Dive For Cover to avoid the attack, some characters might find that beneficial against martial artists and other fast-moving, dodge-y types.

1. I’m going to rephrase this question to make it more broadly applicable: Q: All characters who are Desolidified have to define the special effects of a reasonably common group of attacks that can still hurt him despite his intangibility. If a Desolidified character has Absorption that can Absorb from that reasonably common group of attacks, does the Absorption still work? A: No, unless it’s bought with the Affects Physical World (+2) Advantage. 2A. Restating for general clarity*: Q: Suppose an attacker Grabs a character who has a Damage Shield, and the Damage Shield causes the Grabber to suffer Knockback. What happens? A: See 6E2 67 for rules regarding the interaction of Grab and Knockback. 2B. Restating for general clarity*: Q: Suppose an attacker makes a Multiple Attack against a character. Due to some reason — such as the target having a Damage Shield or a Triggered counterattack — one of the attacks in the sequence causes the attacker to suffer Knockback. Does that prevent him from making any further attacks in the sequence? A: That is up to the GM. Typically the answer is “No,” since combat is a dynamic situation that doesn’t take place in precisely-ordered progressions of action (though for game purposes we have to more or less model it that way). The GM is, however, free to end the Multiple Attack, increase the OCV penalty the attacker suffers for any remaining attacks in the sequence, or impose whatever other restriction he deems likely. For example, if the Multiple Attack consists entire of HTH attacks, and the first one results in the attacker being Knocked Back several meters, I bet most GMs (including me) would rule that the Knockback ends the sequence of attacks. *: Just to be clear (ha, ha), I’m not saying your answers are badly written or that I can’t understand them in this case. I just want to phrase the question and answer in a way that will be easiest for players to understand, and to apply in various situations. Also it makes it easier for me if I ever need to put a FAQ ruling in a book.

No, you're not missing anything, you've just run afoul of a poorly-written example. For the sake of clarity, I’m going to quote the entire example from 6E1 140, with new paragraph breaks for clarity: Winter Dragon has a VPP: Ice Powers with 40 points in the Pool. Thus, Winter Dragon could have one 40 Active Point Power, two 20 Active Point Powers, or four 10 Active Point Powers in his Pool; he could also have, for example, two 40 Active Point Powers, each with a -1 Limitation. If the Medic uses an Aid to boost just Winter Dragon’s Pool (to, say, 60 points, and his Control Cost to 30 points), the number of Active Points Winter Dragon can put in any one Power does not increase — he can still have, at most, 40 Active Points in a Power built with the VPP. However, he can have up to 60 Real Points’ worth of such Powers at once, whereas before being Aided he could only have 40 Real Points’ worth of Powers at any one time. If the Medic Aided both Winter Dragon’s Pool and the Blast he builds with the Pool simultaneously, then the Blast could have as many as 60 Active Points; all other Powers built with the Pool could still only have 40 Active Points. So, here’s what we’re looking at: VPP (Ice Powers), 40 Pool + 40 Control Cost. That means no slot in the VPP can have more than 40 Active Points (as dictated by the Control Cost), and Winter Dragon can’t have more than 40 Real Points total worth of slots in the VPP at any one time (as dictated by the Pool cost) (see 6E1 409). The example discusses Aiding the Pool to 60 (thus increasing the total amount of Real Points’ worth of slots it can have at once) but leaving the Control Cost alone (so each slot’s still restricted to 40 Active Points maximum). I think the problem here is that some of the writing is confusing, and that’s my fault — at a guess, when I changed this from the previous version of the example, I overlooked something (including that number 30). So here’s a better version, written for greater clarity, that I’ll put in the errata: Winter Dragon has a VPP: Ice Powers with 40 Pool, 40 Control Cost. Based on the Control Cost Winter Dragon could have one 40 Active Point Power, two 20 Active Point Powers, or four 10 Active Point Powers in his Pool; he could also have, for example, two 40 Active Point Powers, each with a -1 Limitation. Based on the Pool cost, the total Real Cost of all slots in Winter Dragon’s VPP cannot exceed 40 at a time. That could be a single power with a Real Cost of 40 points, one with Real Cost 30 and another with Real Cost 10, or any other combination of Real Point cost that equals 40 or less. Suppose the Medic uses an Aid to boost Winter Dragon’s Pool (but not his Control Cost) to 60 points. The number of Active Points that Winter Dragon can put in any one Power doesn’t increase — he can still have, at most, 40 Active Points in a Power built with the VPP — because the Medic didn’t Aid the Control Cost. But Winter Dragon can now have up to 60 Real Points’ worth of powers in his VPP at once, whereas before being Aided he could only have 40 Real Points’ worth of Powers at any one time. Suppose instead that the Medic Aided both Winter Dragon’s Pool and the Blast he builds with the Pool simultaneously. In that case the Blast could have as many as 60 Active Points, but all other Powers built with the Pool could still only have 40 Active Points. Hopefully that covers your question. If not, or if I've confused you further, please post a follow-up.

First, welcome to HERO! I hope you enjoy it as much as all the rest of us. Second, take +2 XP out of petty cash to reward yourself for preparing spells in advance to smooth game play. A lot of experienced players still haven’t caught on to that as much as they should. Here are the relevant rules: 1. 6E1 409: “No power in a VPP can have an Active Point cost greater than the Control Cost” (emphasis added).” In this case you built a big ol’ spell and used Limitations to reduce its Real Cost to within the VPP’s Control Cost — but that’s not how they work.* The Active Cost — the cost before you apply Limitations — has to fit within the Control Cost. 2. There’s no way within the rules to have a slot in a Power Framework with an Active Point cost larger than the reserve/Control Cost. However, there are several alternatives: —get your GM’s permission to do so anyway. I doubt many GMs would allow it as a matter of routine, but given the restricted circumstance you describe I bet many of them would be OK with it. I certainly would. —buy additional amounts of power as a separate power outside the VPP that add to that one slot. So in a VPP with a Control Cost of 60 you might have Blast 8d6, Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +½). Then outside the VPP you’d buy Blast +12d6 (adds to VPP Blast), Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +½), costing 90 Active Points. Together you’d have a Blast 20d6, though potentially at a high price. 3. The point of Limiting the slots in Power Frameworks is that it lets you have more slots active at once. Suppose you have a Pool cost of 60 and a Control Cost of 60. If you had -2 worth of Limitations on each power, you could have Blast 12d6, Flight 60m, and Resistant Protection (20 PD/20 ED) all active at once, whereas without any Limitations you could only use one of those powers at a time. *: Lest you think you’re alone in reading things this way, I and my gaming groups back in the Eighties and early Nineties misunderstood the rules ourselves, thinking everything was kosher as long as the Real Cost of a slot fit within the Multipower/VPP. When we finally realized we were doing it wrong I was kinda pissed, because it meant redesigning a lot of characters.

I'm sorry, but I don't answer game design/philosophy questions. Glad to see you back, though!

Per 6E1 161: In short, the old rules about adjusting for relative size were removed for simplicity -- but you could easily re-introduce them if your gaming group likes them. Thus, if someone two levels of Growth tall attacks someone two levels of Shrinking small, he'd suffer a -8 OCV penalty.

That’s up to the GM. The Limitation with which Combat Luck is built is Luck-Based, which the text of the Talent describes in non-exclusive terms. Can the GM envision a way in which the special effect of the Talent would let a character avoid an Area-affecting attack? If so, then the defense provided by the Talent applies; otherwise it doesn’t. In my campaigns, Combat Luck generally applies to reduce Area-affecting damage, but there are situations in which I’ve ruled otherwise, and I can see where some GMs might not allow it at all.

By definition, if the target moves more than 1m before the Haymaker lands, the Haymaker fails (see 6E2 69).

I’m going to restate the question to avoid confusion, and to make sure I’m answering what you’re asking. Q: Suppose a character has Teleportation with Trigger (whenever character uses Dodge, Block, or Dive For Cover). If an enemy attacks him with a Haymakered power, and the character declares that he’ll Block the Haymaker, when does the Trigger activate: in the Segment when the Haymaker’s begun, or the next Segment when it “lands”? A: The Trigger activates in the Segment in which the character declares that he’s Blocking. Typically that means the Segment when the Haymaker begins, but not always.

I see the root of the problem here. It's not that the rules are confusing, it's that I wasn't paying close enough attention and my answer to Rhino's initial question was wrong. I have now changed it. If you're using weapons, it's not a Combined Attack. Just to repeat something I said in another answer, so that everyone is (hopefully) clear: If I've overlooked something in your question, please feel free to follow up (here or via PM) and I'll edit this answer.

That's up to the GM. I believe there are a few examples in Champions Villains if you want to see how I do it, but other GMs may be more or less picky than I am.

There are a couple of things going on here: 1. What you’re describing is a Multiple Attack, not a Combined Attack. Per 6E2 74, Combined Attacks are for “sing two or more powers or similar abilities[.]” That primarily refers to superpowers in Champions campaigns, but it could also apply to spells in some Fantasy campaigns, psionic powers in some Science Fiction campaigns, and so on. Combined Attack specifically says it’s for powers or similar abilities, and not for Combat/Martial Maneuvers — and using a weapon is typically a Strike Combat Maneuver, or some Martial Maneuver. So a character making two weapon-based attacks is using Multiple Attack in its standard form. 2. Now to the meat of the question: how many Attack Rolls are required, and what modifiers apply. A Combined Attack is considered a form of Strike (6E2 74). Therefore it only requires a single Attack Roll regardless of how many powers the character Combines. (And Strike, of course, provides no CV bonuses, damage bonuses, or other benefits.) For modifiers, use the rules for Multiple Attacks on 6E2 76-77 (ignoring anything specific to Multiple Attack, of course, such as -2 OCV penalty, halving of DCV, or attacking multiple targets). The Off Hand penalty does not apply, just like for Multiple Attack (6E2 74, 78). I think that covers your question, but if I overlooked something, please post a follow-up.

See 6E2 181.

The answer to that question is No, because the character has only bought one attack. The character in the original question has two attacks: two different weapons, paid for separately (the fact that he got one using the 5-point doubling rule doesn't change the fact that it's separate and that he paid for it). 6E2 181 specifically states that the two items of equipment are separate and can be used to perform Multiple Attacks "or the like." If the character in question paid for two KAs, Focus-based or not, he could make a Combined Attack or Multiple Attack with them too. That's one reason why, when I build monsters and beasts, I typically pay for the claws and fangs separately, rather than buying just one "Natural Weapons" ability: it lets them pounce and then claw and bite the target.

No. Combined Attack specifically says it’s for powers or similar abilities, and not for Combat/Martial Maneuvers — and using a weapon is typically a Strike Combat Maneuver, or some Martial Maneuver. So a character making two weapon-based attacks is using Multiple Attack in its standard form, and thus derives some benefit from negating OCV penalties.

Since the lesser levels of weight on the STR Table are measured in kilograms, from a logical standpoint I have always assumed that higher measurements are in metric tons. I'll ask the original creators of the game what they intended, just to be sure, and amend this answer after I hear back. That being said, I suspect that many American gamers do what I do: just read it as imperials tons, because I've never had to measure in metric tons and converting things in mid-game is a nuisance. Given that, without going back and looking up a bunch of stuff, I'd guess that the example objects are probably in US tons -- though given the variability in size of most of the objects, I doubt it matters much in most cases.