Doc Democracy

I am convinced of the simplicity of sticking to enhancing your own attacks and not trying to make it better for everyone with similar SFX. ? I am also attracted to the flexibility of the environmental effects, a cosmetic transform to change a dry target to a drenched one, then SFX to deliver a bonus dice or two for everyone with ice powers...

That was my first thought. However, if you make someone sensitive to bright light then any attack based on light would have increased effect, not just the one that you happen to possess. I think that the original suggestion of a transform to add a complication to someone is better - you transform the person from someone normal to someone with a vulnerability to something...

A fit with exhaustion that lasts a minute is a small thing out of combat but a game changer in combat. In real life there is also the emotional shock. If this is a one-off NPC/environmental obstacle then it could be interesting but not sure I would allow it for a character. I think you are right, would be inclined to go with some kind of mental paralysis as previously suggested, along with both a short term END drain alongside a REC drain with a delayed recovery. Not cheap but it should be debilitating. you might think a full on drain attack using a SPD drain, perhaps an ongoing gradual SPD drain where then END/REC drains kick in when SPD = 0.

I think the question should be, if there were to be critical hits in your game, what would you want them to do in game terms. sometimes the best thing is not to kill your opponent and, if you roll a critical hit it should benefit you rather than deliver a result (like a killing blow) which might be contrary to what you wanted to achieve. I like a critical hit giving a bonus to your next action. So, you might roll a critical in one action meaning that you get a +5, +8 or +10 (depending on your game) to your next related action. This is the time to try that thing you would never do, like do a head shot, or shoot a gun out of your opponents hand, or any number of things that have large OCV penalties associated with them. Doc

Steve has the right of it though, the first thing you need to do is define the impact of a Grand Mal seizure. Once you have done that you can think about how you achieve that. otherwise you might as well use an all or nothing Transform...

I did fire this off pretty quickly but having looked at it again, I am quite confident in it. If the levels are associated with the use of the focussed power then there is no degradation of the skill levels due to the focus being lost. He is still able to fire that weapon with improved accuracy or to conceal it more easily. Those things still happen, you just cannot use it. I think this is one of the situations where multiple limitations add up to greater value than what is lost in utility to the player...

I don’t think I would allow the focus on the skills at all - that all wraps into the idea of self only. Neither is the skill hurt if the focus is lost as the need to conceal it is also lost. The character would have no need to conceal a focus he is not in possession of and so losing a bonus for that concealment does not limit him. Therefore no limitation. I did not remember either-so I looked at the rulebook :-). In 6th there are no 5 point levels and the rules say that the GM ‘may’ put Restrictions on what kind of levels can be limited. Doc

Absolutely. Batman has a hunted ANDa code versus killing. As such things like the joker crippling Barbara Gordon is both these things riffing and creating greater complications. ? The Joker doing terrible things and escaping to do them again and again is pushing at that code versus killing. The Joker threatening people that Bruce Wayne knows and cares for triggers the Secret ID. Why would Batman care about those people?

If you take the code versus killing you are asking the GM to pitch you situations where it would make some kind of sense to kill someone... Batman is a key example of this, who would not simply kill the Batman if they did not have a code versus killing.... Doc

My understanding, like assault’s, is that a complication complicates your life. Not taking a complication means that it does not complicate your life. so, having a hunted complication but no secret ID complication does not mean you do not have a secret ID but it does mean that, regardless of your identity management there are no related complications. The appearance of the hunting character does not draw in your private life in any way, it never occurs to your hunters to threaten family, friends or colleagues. Doc

I have uploaded them for you.

Am struggling to see what is hackneyed, but that is peripheral to the approach. Looking at the rulebook (6th edition-vol 1-p376) “If a Focus is Inobvious, it's not immediately clear where the power comes from. Examples include disguised or concealed weapons (such as a cane-gun or a blaster hidden inside an ordinary-looking glove)” I think this shows that the rules intend for it to encompass weapons inobvious until they are used as well as rings that provide powers without it being obvious that they are the source of the power. No hand waving necessary. RAW.

Why is it not as simple as purchasing the weapon as an Inobvious Accessible Focus? I know that the point of this is usually identifying the source of a power once it has been used but I would be content to use it as the fact that the focus is inobvious until it has been used.... Doc

I think that every HERO game is pretty individual. I also think everyone’s game is a bit of mishmash of things they like from various editions.... I would say try the uncoupled thing. I did and found going back to figured characteristics for a retro 4th edition game a real drag. ?

yeah, but if you dont have access to 6th? ? I think you have to look at the limitation guidance from the limited power limitation. How often is this likely to affect the character. That is likely to depend on how long you are inclined for that to be. Without looking at anything else my gut is to make anything over 5 minutes +1/4 limitation and anything above an hour a +0 limitation, applied only to persuade the GM to allow the uncontrolled, continuous, 0 END combo. Doc

The problem with charge is that it limits how often you can cast the spell. You could, instead buy it as continuous, uncontrolled and buy it to 0 END then limit it with a time limit. That avoids purchasing huge amounts of END simply to keep the spell going.

I think the initial suggestion from Neil was not really a change in the rules but in the guidance as to how they are applied - I really dont think what was being suggested was all that radical - having a single limitation value that sums up the limitations applied to the power forces the player and the GM to really think about whether all those limitations in gameplay add up to the value suggested arithmetically. It has the added benefit of looking cleaner on the character sheet and possibly encouraging more flavour text on the character sheet... I do think there is a need for more than Disorienting confusion or even Disorienting confusion (6d6 mental entangle) to serve as an aide memoire during play. Doc

Again, never. I guess my experience is partly flawed in that I am the one who designs most of the characters in our games - I have probably written in limitations worth no points without explicitly going through that with the players but in the limited number of characters handed to me by others, I can remember none that have -0 limitations... Doc I need to trawl through some of the official character stuff like Enemies to see how prevalent such a thing is.

Something that might aid with the ENDbattery idea is a susceptibility to going against the deities wishes. Every time you break a tenet of the religion you take a hit to your END reserve. If you are minorly bad all that happens is the temporary reduction in the pool, if you have been majorly bad, this is complicated by the reduced ability to regenerate the pool.... Doc

I have never seen that. I have suggested limitations to players when their descriptions of powers seem to suggest a limitation to help them budget, I have helped players limit their powers. I have never seen a player tell me that his MEGA-bolt can only be fired four times a day but he never uses it more than once or twice in a game, so we should remove the limitation from the costing. ? Doc

And as I look again, I see that I misread the rules intent. My notation should have been: Mental Paralysis 6D6 Entangle. This attack is based on mental combat values. It can be damaged by all mental attacks and provides the entangled character with protection from further mental attacks. It provides no protection against non-mental attacks targeted at the entangled character.(+3) [24 END] I know which one I would prefer on my character sheet. With context of a character and campaign, that text could also be more flavourful.

These were interesting posts next to each other. I do no think that I have house-ruled here. Just as a limitation that is not limiting, an advantage that is providing more advantage should cost more, it is the corollary of the limitation. I went to the rulebook and found mental paralysis and used my notation. RAW would be almost identical with an advantage of +2 1/4 rather than +3. As Hugh pointed out, I could have been clearer in my language. RAW Mental Paralysis 6D6 Entangle, ACV (uses OMCV against DMCV; +1/4), Takes no Damage from Attacks (+3/4), Works against EGO, not STR (+1/4). I think Hugh's critique of my notation could as easily apply to this. Doc

It is almost a berserk, only when leaving a fight. ?