Doc Democracy

To me this does not sound like multiple foci but a fragile focus that is readily repaired. Hyper-man’s question is a good one though. What happens if a piece is missing? Would the owner even know? How much time would be wasted putting it together before it was certain piece was missing...

The problem with that is the same as the problem of fire extinguishers, they can give a false sense of security that you might be able to handle a situation when you are well out of your league. In the case of a fire, you dont report it early enough - dont think I want teachers going up against someone armed with even just a semi-automatic pistol wielding nothing but a taser...

My key issue with arming teachers is that it instantly puts more guns inside schools. More guns would surely mean a potentially increased availability of guns to those young people inclined to use them... I think this would make school shootings more likely, not less.

Right now, I am leaning towards a multipower where slots are all bought 0 END but there is an END cost to switching slots. I am thinking that the reserve will also be bought with a limitation of slot only remains active for 1 minute, though not sure what price I would give that - would depend on how often I thought that a player would want the slot to continue for longer than that...five turns is a long combat in my games and that would mean the player deciding not to switch to alternative enchantments in that time...

I instinctively agree with this. The problem is that, on reflection you are buying a HUGE power and then applying a HUGE limitation to get the right cost for the effect you are looking to achieve. That has a problem if the power breaks the Active Point caps applied in many campaigns and, if you allow the exception here, you are opening that process up for any munchkin that wants to play the mega limitation game, fishing for super effectiveness. I think it is wrong to buy a power just to access a minor side effect of the power requiring a major limitation on the power. The point of drain stun is to drain stun, not to leave someone stunned. Doc

I think the way the game is set up (and the way people play the game), most PCs will be able to take hits (or avoid getting hit often enough to worry about it) as noone wants to be taken out of a fight too easily. Also, if you set up with damage dealers and damage soakers, the damage dealers are likely to go straight for the opposiing damage dealers and take them out to allow them to focus on the damage soaker. Kind of like how the cavalry battles on the wings of 16th and 17th century battles would take place while infantry blocks held the centre. Whoever won the cavalry on the wings could then decide the stalemate in the centre. :-) Doc

Motivation is the biggest requirement for any project. Working for other motivation is often provided through others managing you and your work, setting targets, checking quality etc. A lot of that you do not realise is happening until you find yourself in a situation where it does not exist. for personal projects (hobby or commercial), you need to find a way to insert that structure either yourself or leaning on others. You need to be organised and dedicated but most of all to be realistic. If you set yourself unrealistic targets then you will demotivate yourself and everything will grind to an end - all because you were a dufus boss to yourself. :-) I think setting a few small goals over realistic timescales, get some momentum, see some things come to fruition will be the best way. The whole project is too big to see it finished any time soon and that makes it difficult to take the first steps. It is probably worth looking to see if there is a writers group near you. Sharing stuff is great for improving things and for getting motivated to finishing things. People think of writers groups as purely for those producing fiction, I think they would welcome someone doing RPG style material and you would gain a ready made peer group to drive you not only to get the pieces finished but to drive up the quality at the same time. I am trying to think of what I want to do when I retire and putting a lot of thought into how I am going to go about writing work. Thought I might as well share my thoughts.... Doc PS: the trilogy looks fine as a concept. My next step would be a putative contents page for each which might help break the big job down into bite-sized pieces.

Hell, I wasn’t meaning your books wouldn’t happen, was offering you a title if you wanted to use it. You might find having things for the site to be an incentive to get things ready. :-)

You say on the site that you plan to finish a book on street level superheroes (Capes, Masks and Mystery Men was the title I planned to use for the superhero game that I will never write!) What might be valuable on the site is an overview of the decisions you made to customise HERO to get the game you wanted - this might be a decent section in the final book but it would be a useful insight to anyone interested in doing their own version. Doc

Interesting thread this one. I think I like the reversion to the multiples as an easy solution to avoiding mega-results. Personally, I think players need the odd total defeat somewhere in their history, I think it is useful to have a boogie man where running in, fists blazing not only doesn’t work but isn’t even an option.

There is a problem with HERO in that so much of it is extremely detailed, so detailed that we have come to expect that EVERYTHING will be written down somewhere after very careful consideration. That however is not true. There is no Manual of the Universe. Authors do a lot of stuff as they think fit, and they do not always see fit to detail their thinking or to avoid using terms that are quite usefully described elsewhere. My bet is, that in this instance, the author felt that the full concentration penalty was too much for his vision of crossbows. He decided he wanted to reduce that penalty and so he reduced the associated cost break to something he felt was fair as well. What he should have written, in that case was (Limited Power: concentration , 1/2 DCV, +1/4). He has used the fuzzy bit of the rules, limited power, which is essentially a bit of carte blanche for GMs to customise stuff to their idea of what is fair and reasonable. All of the other limitations are essentially examples of what Limited Power might be, what the authors of the rules think are reasonable cost benefit ratios. Doc

I did feel that they never really read the book, there was a pretty tight thriller in there and that did not come out in the series. If Ihad not read and enjoyed the book, I would have been really pleased with it.

I think it is a cool added extra, the practicalities can be subsumed into comic book biophysics. :-) I think therefore that you really are looking at megascale indirect stretching. I don’t think there is a terrible advantage to it, so it should not cost too many points and, if the head cannot see the body, then it would be like the body has lost the ability to see and function. Doc

Well done folks, thanks for the votes, our boy gone and won it... http://bamfsies.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/2017-bamfsies-awards-announced.html

Well. If you duplicate, the basic premise is that each duplicate can do everything the other can. No need to worry about eating breathing etc. The big question is how far you want to go with the whole "the head can still feel the body" thing. Would it take damage if the body took damage (do they share the same pool of STUN and END)? If the answer to those things is no, then the duplicates can be mind linked. That provides a decent connection. Everything else then comes down to how you want to limit each of the duplicates because it is either headless or bodyless. :-)

It really comes down to how difficult it is to replace the item. If the rod is specially designed and it would be difficult to replace then you are definitely in focus territory. If he lost the rod and could simply rip something apart to get a facsimile - like the crankshaft of a car - and it works fine, then you can use the focus system but should downgrade the limitation to reflect the lesser impact of losing the item. Doc

Maybe you could try the board game cafe for roleplayers - https://thegamerslodge.com/

I think the big point here is the (implied) inability of the opponent to react between the two hits. To me that puts everything within a single phase action. I think for my games I would look for an autofire - two hits with a triggered movement (only to where target knocked back to by first hit) The autofire itself is only activated if the character reads the target's chi. The gameplay would be a roll to hit, if successful, a roll to read the chi, if successful the character teleports to where the target is heading (to a maximum of the teleport - so may be risking injury if there is a lot of KB. :-)

You considered her constructing a device that resembles a sling but for the purpose of throwing potions? That would be +STR, only for throwing, OAF. Not sure how much value that would get you but it avoids all of the considerations about slings, whether you can fast draw or reload and the questions about the skill level...

I would have the same concerns but the rules as written (p341 6E1) says

You will of course get a lot of suggestions. My question for you is very mechanical in nature. Do you always want the second attack to hit, if the first one does? Do you always want the first attack, if successful to move the target? Do you care if the target takes damage from the movement (a la knockback). Would the attacker always move, even if the first attack was unsuccessful? The answers to those questions will actually take you to a different mechanical route depending on what you actually want. You also need to think whether what you are actually building is in the spirit of the game you are playing. From the description, you want an attack action to encompass two attacks and some movement. Why would anyone ever use anything else if this was possible?? If this manoeuvre is only available to some, then does that put everyone else at a serious disadvantage in a fight? I am building many straw men here! Give us some more detail and you will likely get more input. Doc

I think for sharing/recording to take place then the clairsentient would need to produce something that devices we know could record. Personally, I would be content with a power that generated images, limited to "only things being seen via clairsentience" and "only onto DVDs". That way, if there was a DVD to hand, the clairsentient would send all of the images he is seeing through his power onto the DVD that other people would be able to watch and see. It is a real advantage to be able to do that and so it is almost definitely worth points... Doc

I think that there has been a bit of fetishisation of skills in recent editions. I tend to have some key defining skills. A professional skill can provide a broad flavour - good enough for supers - with other skills to give access to real specialisations. my games require skill use and knowledge but not enough to be spending much more than 20 points on. It does depend on the games you play though. If you don’t play those games, don’t try to shoehorn it in. If you do play those games, great. As long as players and GMs are on the same page at character creation, nothing is lost... Doc

Now there is a good question. If I buy a power that has a 14- activation roll and requires gestures that multiple people can use simultaneously, do they all need to make the roll and all need to make the gestures? My instinct is to say yes...which makes the movement activation even more of an issue... Doc

will go look in CC, I use 6th edition by default. Will compare...:-)