Physics we usually ignore in the Supers genre
J.J.
Interesting as the debate in Desolid is, I feel we've come to that "uh
huh"-"nuh uh" stage. So I thought I'd toss out some other physics we
tend to ignore in a super hero game.
1-Most characters don't suffer from the "kick" of their energy blasting
powers. You know, the whole equal and opposite reaction thing?
If Cyclops' optic beams cause knockback, he'd also take a pretty nasty,
nasty kickback to his eyesockets and probably blast the back of his head
out.
2-Bending or cutting materials generates HEAT.
So when Superman wraps a lamp post around a bunch of mooks, the post
should heat up incredibly fast and burn the heck out of said mooks.
When Wolverine slashes through a super vault door, the resulting heat
would likely BBQ his arms. In the old days I don't think Adamantium
transferred heat, otherwise he'd just cook himself from the inside out.
And now it's just bone...owie.
3-A human body is simply not designed for independent flight.
Unless you are using TK or something, it'd be extremely difficult for a
man to fly. Any form of propulsion and direction would have to be
anchored to one's center of gravity. Boot jets would simply not work.
Notice that real life "flight packs" are attached to the back and keep
the flyer in a (sometimes slightly tilted) vertical position.
4-A superstrong character wouldn't be able to lift anything big, at all.
Because when a character with immense strength grabs something and tris
to lift it many bad things will happen. First, he's trying to get points
on the object the size of his hands to support all the weight of the
object. Cars would twist and bend under their own weight, etc. Secondly,
the character is forcing the weight of the object AND his own weight to
all be supported by whatever he's standing on in the small, small area
that his feet take up.
Pre-Contact TK Superman would not be able to hold a locomotive over his
head.
5-Clinging works?
In most of man made society...everything is painted or coated with
something. If Spidey were to jump onto my wall right now he'd end up on
the floor with a coating of paint chips on his hands and feet.
6-Energy users rarely suffer from their brilliant displays
That guy with the glowing forcefield isn't blinded by having a light
generating field right in front of his eyes. Or pumping out a stream of
bright energy from their hands or whatever. Sometimes these characters
have a form of Flash Defense... but look at, say, Havoc.
7-People with rock or steel bodies shouldn't be able to move.
If that was really rock or metal, it wouldn't be bending like that
without cracking, breaking, or generating heat. If Colossus ever ran the
50 meter dash, he should be red hot. Think of Absorbing Man turning into
brick...crumble crumble. Same with ice, crystal (even diamond) etc. If
their bodies really turned into these substances they'd lost most (or
all) of their senses, as well.
The most realistic physical alteration character I can think of is Stone
Boy.
These are just some examples off the top of my head. I'm sure there are
plenty more examples of such things (and many of them are probably funny
as can be).
In some cases, many of us use tidbits of reality, but ignore other
aspects. I think it's important to strike a balance - but most important
is that everyone has fun.
David Wolf
J.J. wrote:
> Interesting as the debate in Desolid is, I feel we've come to that "uh
>
> huh"-"nuh uh" stage. So I thought I'd toss out some other physics we
> tend to ignore in a super hero game.
>
Snip
> In some cases, many of us use tidbits of reality, but ignore other
> aspects. I think it's important to strike a balance - but most
> important
> is that everyone has fun.
JJ, this is a great list. I for one try to run semi-realistic
superhero games (just to get dark and gritty). Some of the things I do
to reflect that is charge a 1/4-1/2 advantage for having comic-book
strength. One of my characters who has wind control powers only has
flight by use of a rigid cape, stuff like that. I would like to hear
how some of you other guys explain away the physics without resorting to
powers=magic concepts.
Thanks
Dave Wolf
The Bear
Well, in an alternate game system I looked at the super-strength aspect,
and decided to have some fun. You see, that action/reaction stuff
happens in lifting and throwing situations as well, not just with EB.
A person swinging a car as a baseball bat would find themselves being
swung by the car, because the whold shebang (you+car) would rotate
around it's center of gravity (someplace inside the car).
Strength/lift ratio in this game is linear, not geometric (ie, to double
lift, you must double STR, not just add 5 to it). We added a "Power
Related Skill" called Mega-Lift. A character must have Super-human STR
to learn the skill. In effect, it reduces the weight and mass of the
object being lifted or held. This suspension of the laws of physics
will last until the object is once again at rest. This means that, if a
PC can pick up a 4000 pound luxury car as if it weighed 400 pounds, it
hits and does damage as if it weighed 400 pounds. It also means that
when that famous Kryptonian catches Loas as she falls from a building,
she doesn't shatter like a china-doll in his steel-hard arms, because
she hits as if she weighed 12.5 pounds, instead of 125.
Small note on previous post: Wolverine's claws (adamantium) wouldn't
necessarily get hot cutting metal. Bending metal gets hot from internal
friction, as it resists being bent. It converts the energy used to bend
it into heat. Cutting metal gets hot from friction against the blade
cutting it. An "unbreakable, Armor Piercing" blade wouldn't necessarily
have this problem, since its design is intended to bypass this
resistance. Simply put, Wolverine isn't putting out that much energy,
so it can't be returning to him as heat. The energy has to come from
somewhere, and ol' Wolvie just isn't that strong.
BTW: Cyclops eye-beam does have kick, in some comics. He has used it
to "fly" in one issue, and has used it to cushion his falls many times.
The real problem in trying to consistantly reproduce the comic books in
our games is that the comic books don't follow consistant rules from one
issue to the next.
Stephen Fuelleman
The Bear
thk...@earthlink.net
Elliott Davis
> > In some cases, many of us use tidbits of reality, but ignore other
> JJ, this is a great list. I for one try to run semi-realistic
> superhero games (just to get dark and gritty). Some of the things I do
(emphasis mine)
What exactly does this one-half advantage get the character?!?
What reality penalties does it offset? What is the diff between
Biff w/STR 39 and Bryce w/STR 39 (+1/2 Comic Book Level) ?
Other than you charged Bryce fourteen more points?
Here's another way to ask the physics question: When physics & powers
seem to disagree, do you err on the side of penalizing the player? or
err on the side of giving out the occasional bonus &or break? I'm guessing
that the "comic book strength = advantage" person errs on the side of
rooking the player. Not me. I'm in this to game, not demonstrate for
all to see that I either got a D+ in high-school physics, or to demonstrate
for all to see that I majored in it in college. (Detective skill roll
at +2 to find out which, Desmarais :) I do not mind at all when players
call me on the carpet for forgetting rules (ask the JLA about GENOCIDE's
killing attacks) but I do not tolerate someone trying to bend my reading of a
power description because "mach 3 air friction calls for X to happen"
or whatever physics example you care to name.
Should we charge extra for having "comic book intellect" like Reed Richards?
If not why not?
Should our Energy based RKA's automatically cause Flash?
If not why not?
What if we "realistically" use hit locations with Energy-based RKA's?
(Dang, Hawkeye! AP-Laser right to the Hand, drop that bow forever!)
Should our PC's have the Power Advantage "Impressive" out of Golden Age a lot?
They ought to. In a "realistic" setting any RKA done without
benefit of Foci ought to be impressive as hell.
This is gonna sound preachy but: Why not just stick to the rules?
If a character is Strong, let him lift...
If a character buys Flight, let him fly...
If a hero has Desolid, but no flight, let him fall...
How do I explain away the Physics? I don't. I use the rulebook.
Only _very_ occasionally do I get into an "insoluable special effects bind".
If four-color logic does not prevail we'll be assessed a 10%
Physics Surcharge on all powers not available to the mortal person.
15% if they do it without a Focus. (Kudos to Mr.Rushing on his excellent post)
--
Elliott
Sapphire
It's an interesting list, though I have seen the explainations of the
abilities deal with some issues. For instance... Spider-Man's ability
is to mentally control the flux of inter-atomic attraction between
molecular boundary layers to affect the attraction between surfaces and
can, therefore, wall-crawl through his clothing, and adhere not just to
the pain on the wall, but the wall itself 'through' the paint.
It's also been theorized that 'Strength' forms a telekinetic field
around an object to support it's weight etc.. but... I won't get into
it. ;)
Adam van Eden
J.J. wrote:
>
> Interesting as the debate in Desolid is, I feel we've come to that "uh
> huh"-"nuh uh" stage. So I thought I'd toss out some other physics we
> tend to ignore in a super hero game.
>
> is that everyone has fun.
Had to add a few more differences to your excellent list:
8- in comics, flesh is stretchable without loss of integrity--including
loss of muscular power!
Just where does Mr. Fantastic get all the extra flesh when he stretches,
anyway? And how do paperthin-elongated muscles enable him to lift
criminals? He must have an anti-gravity aura (comic book babble)?
9- in comics, all forces have anti-particles and have concussive
particles
Shadow Lass projects darkness or anti-photons, and Ice Man projects cold
(or anti-thermal quanta?)--he does not transfer heat into himself! And
everyone and their aunt may has access to anti-gravity!
For that matter, why is Dazzler able to create a concussive bolt out of
pure radiant light?
Adam van Eden
Filksinger
On 24 Sep 1997 14:21:39 GMT, The Bear <thk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
<snip>
>This suspension of the laws of physics
>will last until the object is once again at rest. This means that, if a
>PC can pick up a 4000 pound luxury car as if it weighed 400 pounds, it
>hits and does damage as if it weighed 400 pounds. It also means that
>when that famous Kryptonian catches Loas as she falls from a building,
>she doesn't shatter like a china-doll in his steel-hard arms, because
>she hits as if she weighed 12.5 pounds, instead of 125.
That is an interesting idea. That would also _partially_ solve the
problem of balance, but still allow very unbalancing things to pull
the super right on his face.
>Small note on previous post: Wolverine's claws (adamantium) wouldn't
>necessarily get hot cutting metal. Bending metal gets hot from internal
>friction, as it resists being bent. It converts the energy used to bend
>it into heat. Cutting metal gets hot from friction against the blade
>cutting it. An "unbreakable, Armor Piercing" blade wouldn't necessarily
>have this problem, since its design is intended to bypass this
>resistance. Simply put, Wolverine isn't putting out that much energy,
>so it can't be returning to him as heat. The energy has to come from
>somewhere, and ol' Wolvie just isn't that strong.
Actually, most of the heat doesn't come from friction. It comes from
the compression of the material directly in front of the cutting
surface and to the sides as it is forced out of the way. The ease with
which this material is cut is directly proportional to the heat. Thus,
Wolverine _still_ doesn't get hot cutting things.
>BTW: Cyclops eye-beam does have kick, in some comics. He has used it
>to "fly" in one issue, and has used it to cushion his falls many times.
>The real problem in trying to consistantly reproduce the comic books in
>our games is that the comic books don't follow consistant rules from one
>issue to the next.
Amen to that, brother.
Filksinger
"Keeping in mind that the notes we sing are never, ever wrong!"
Filksinger
On Tue, 23 Sep 1997 19:27:15 -0700, "J.J." <jjm...@best.com> wrote:
>
>4-A superstrong character wouldn't be able to lift anything big, at all.
>
>Because when a character with immense strength grabs something and tris
>to lift it many bad things will happen. First, he's trying to get points
>on the object the size of his hands to support all the weight of the
>object. Cars would twist and bend under their own weight, etc. Secondly,
>the character is forcing the weight of the object AND his own weight to
>all be supported by whatever he's standing on in the small, small area
>that his feet take up.
>
>Pre-Contact TK Superman would not be able to hold a locomotive over his
>head.
All your points are good. However, even if the object were unbreakable
and the surface upon which the super stood were unbreakable, much of
the lifting that goes on in comics would _still_ be impossible.
Consider a man sized super lifting a car. Unless he gets _directly_
under the car's center-of-gravity, he just falls over. No matter how
strong the car, the ground, and the super are, the super _cannot_ grab
the front end of a car and lift it.
Ron Charlotte
>J.J. wrote:
>
>> Interesting as the debate in Desolid is, I feel we've come to that "uh
>>
>> huh"-"nuh uh" stage. So I thought I'd toss out some other physics we
>> tend to ignore in a super hero game.
>>
>
>Snip
>
>> In some cases, many of us use tidbits of reality, but ignore other
>> aspects. I think it's important to strike a balance - but most
>> important
>> is that everyone has fun.
>
> JJ, this is a great list. I for one try to run semi-realistic
>superhero games (just to get dark and gritty). Some of the things I do
>to reflect that is charge a 1/4-1/2 advantage for having comic-book
>strength. One of my characters who has wind control powers only has
>flight by use of a rigid cape, stuff like that. I would like to hear
>how some of you other guys explain away the physics without resorting to
>powers=magic concepts.
Well, I don't agree with _all_ of J.J.'s conclusions. The bending and
cutting metal thing, for example. The mass of material is simply
going to be a far better heat-sink than the contact transfer point of
the claws or the dum-dums it's wrapped around.
The gee-whiz part of boot jets isn't so much the jets themselves, as
the gyroscope technology it takes to make them function.
Overall, though, for my own game, I've tended toward the "Wild Cards"
style of power concept: All powers can be defined as a manifestation
of TK or Telepathy for the most part. Even gross physical changes
such as enhanced strength and damage resistance follow under the
notion of subconcious TK manipulation of one's own body structure.
Above a certain strength level, the "contact TK" trick kicks in.
Overall, for my world, the acceptance of the powers of the mind is the
key kludge that has to be swallowed.
--
Ron Charlotte -- Gainesville, FL
Cameron Vk
I'll have to chime in on the ingnore the physics side of the fence. In a
superhero game where people can fly and through bolts of energy out of any
part of their bodies, why bother with realistic physics?
As a gamemaster I feel having fun in the game is more important than
realism. Much like in the movies, its more fun to have the cars blow up
when hit than to see them crumple a bit and just lie there.
Cameron Verkaik
Tri-City Games
came...@aol.com
Filksinger
On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 05:26:42 GMT, ro...@gator.net (Ron Charlotte)
wrote:
>Well, I don't agree with _all_ of J.J.'s conclusions. The bending and
>cutting metal thing, for example. The mass of material is simply
>going to be a far better heat-sink than the contact transfer point of
>the claws or the dum-dums it's wrapped around.
No. In real life, bending metal gets quite hot at the point that
flexes, even when it is something that can be easily bent by a normal
human. Something stronger would get so hot it would burn.
steve_rushing
The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i required
a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
RRationale,
Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
On the other hand, he might try to lasso the flying guy with heat ray vision who
looks to be about the size of your average mild-mannered reporter.
Either way, the guy with the obvious strength is clearly possessing this ability
at all times. Whereas the other guy has the ability to surprise his oppoents by
swinging Cowboy into the next county.
So the decision came down to...
Is strength normally obvious (costing superman extra points for the surprise) or
is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since strenght
costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power, i ruled it was
obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also fit
with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like a
champion weightlifter.
Drew Clifton
Steve Rushing wrote in article <60h2vr$a...@drn.zippo.com>...
> The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i
required
> a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
>
> RRationale,
>
> Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
> No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
>
This is something that I think is already dealt with. This sounds like a
presence issue. Of course the Hulks get even more screwed in your opinion
because he now has to pay for presence(directly or indirectly through
growth), but what about the advantages of obvious strength. What about
assigning the 1/4 inobvious advantage toward body?
Besides, is there any king of quantitative ruling as to exactly how
inobvious you are if you don't buy w/ the advantage? We assume the Hulk
doesn't. What about Spidey? When I last read his tiltes (mid 80's)
Spiderman was a 10 ton kinda guy. He weighs about 180 lbs with a not too
spectacular build( a little toned, but not massive). The Hulk weighs more
(I dont know exacly how much) but it seems to me that he is stronger per lb
than spiderman. Hulk can at least lift 150 tons, surely he doesn't weigh
2700 lbs. So if spiderman ws forced to buy with the advantage, but hulk
wasn't, I'd say Peter Parker got the shaft. After all, I'd say the Hulk's
strength was less obvious than spiderman's. Do you get into different
levels of obvious strength?
> is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since
strenght
> costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power,
It costs endurance, but didn't I read in fourth ed. that str cost 1 end per
5 str, where powers were changed to now use 1 end per 10 pow points - I
don't think a direct Strength to power comparison is as easy to make. I
wouldn't describe strength (even over 20) as a power. Sure it's a nono for
normals, but I think characteristics are still fundementally different than
"powers". I think care should be given when ever advantages or limitations
are applied to them, and I certainly do not think default behaviors of
powers should be assumed for characteristics.
> obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also
fit
> with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like
a
> champion weightlifter.
>
Dealing with supers, I wouldn't bother with this much. With normals a lot
of times I think it is appropriate to buy growth. Remember by default
everyone has a mass of 100kg (nice and round, but more than little above
the above the average human mass). If some body builder weighs 2x more,
(is 2x as massive) as a "normal" unweight lifting dude, I'd be sure go give
the weight lifter a level (or 2, there are some big guys out there) of
growth. This takes care of presence, knockback, strength, body and mass
all at the same time. I might give him/her extra presence too.
J.J.
Steve, Rushing wrote:
> The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i required
> a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
>
> RRationale,
>
> Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
> No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
>
> On the other hand, he might try to lasso the flying guy with heat ray vision who
> looks to be about the size of your average mild-mannered reporter.
>
> Either way, the guy with the obvious strength is clearly possessing this ability
> at all times. Whereas the other guy has the ability to surprise his oppoents by
> swinging Cowboy into the next county.
>
> So the decision came down to...
>
> Is strength normally obvious (costing superman extra points for the surprise) or
> is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since strenght
> costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power, i ruled it was
> obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also fit
> with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like a
> champion weightlifter.
>
Actually, powers should be obvious *in use* so a scrawny child lifting a battleship
is obviously super strong. Not all superstrength is defined as raw muscle power -
such as the current Superboy (and actually, the current Superman) who has "tactile
telekinesis"
Just like someone with flight needn't have wings or some other obvious indicator he
can fly when he has his two feet happily on the floor. And not everyone with energy
blast has glowing hands.
However, in a campaign with a harder science approach I think that's an excellent
way to do things (thinking John Byrne's Next Men for example).
J.J.
John Turner
On 26 Sep 1997 12:38:35 -0700, Steve Rushing wrote:
I don't think strength is obvious by default. Sure it costs END, but
when you start to lift the M1 Abrams over your head, it is gonna be
pretty obvious that you are strong (It isn't invisible). Can you tell
how fast or dexterous they are? Or intelligent?
Okay, here is a subjective question for you:
I have a character who is a bodybuilder (20 STR) in his normal form.
Is that obvious strength (He isn't strong by superpowered standards)?
Okay, how about when he activates his powers (6 levels of Density
Increase w/2 levels of linked Shrinking) an his STR is 60?
We usually compare STR, BODY, and COM ratios to determine how strong
someone looks.
I think that the Characteristics should be put in the Special Powers
list anyway.
>The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i required
>a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
>
>RRationale,
>
>Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
>No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
>
>On the other hand, he might try to lasso the flying guy with heat ray vision who
>looks to be about the size of your average mild-mannered reporter.
>
>Either way, the guy with the obvious strength is clearly possessing this ability
>at all times. Whereas the other guy has the ability to surprise his oppoents by
>swinging Cowboy into the next county.
>
>So the decision came down to...
>
>Is strength normally obvious (costing superman extra points for the surprise) or
>is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since strength
>costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power, i ruled it was
>obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also fit
>with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like a
>champion weightlifter.
>>> JJ, this is a great list. I for one try to run semi-realistic
>>>superhero games (just to get dark and gritty). Some of the things I do
>>>to reflect that is charge a 1/4-1/2 advantage for having comic-book
>>>strength. One of my characters who has wind control powers only has
>>>flight by use of a rigid cape, stuff like that. I would like to hear
>>>how some of you other guys explain away the physics without resorting to
>>>powers=magic concepts.
* John S. Turner (Ave...@flash.net) *
* http://www.flash.net/~avery1/gamehome.htm *
* This post reflects the opinions, beliefs, *
* and humour of myself. Take offense at*
* your own risk. *
Chris Doherty
In article <34287A83...@best.com>, J.J. <jjm...@best.com> wrote:
>Interesting as the debate in Desolid is, I feel we've come to that "uh
>huh"-"nuh uh" stage. So I thought I'd toss out some other physics we
>tend to ignore in a super hero game.
For good reason. Comic books are not reality, nor are they hard SF, nor
are they the collected journals of Sceptics Anonymous. They are pulp
adventure fiction, with all the improbabilities and dramatic license that
implies. Powers work the way they do because that's entertaining. Cyclops'
optic blasts only intermittently obey Conservation of Momentum for the same
reason that a 9mm bullet will knock someone back 6 feet in an action movie,
and for the same reason that Sherlock Holmes never end sup chasing a wild
goose.
--
Chris Doherty cpdo...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Alexander Shearer
came...@aol.com (Cameron Vk) wrote:
> I'll have to chime in on the ingnore the physics side of the fence. In a
> superhero game where people can fly and through bolts of energy out of any
> part of their bodies, why bother with realistic physics?
>
> As a gamemaster I feel having fun in the game is more important than
> realism. Much like in the movies, its more fun to have the cars blow up
> when hit than to see them crumple a bit and just lie there.
Of course, some of us have fun with games that do pay
attention to physics (I know, weird). In my longest running supers
setting, all the powers are derived from psionic (PK, Telepathy, etc)
sources. This "external" power dodges reality (physics,
thermodynamics, etc) but beyond that, reality comes back down like it
should. Thus, if you do pull the "catch Louis at the end of a 30-story
fall" trick, she will pretty much splatter on your arms of steel.
That said, my other supers setting rally didn't go much beyond
cinematic reality (heck - how can any game with hordes of cultist
ninjas attacking one at a time really pretend towards realism?).
Hmmm...it's like that part in Last Action Hero. "Is that taxi
armored?"
Alexander Shearer
night...@earthlink.net
ga...@uclink4.berkeley.edu
steven_rushing
In article <342c874a...@news.flash.net>, ave...@flash.net says...
Can you tell
>how fast or dexterous they are? Or intelligent?
>
>Okay, here is a subjective question for you:
>
>I have a character who is a bodybuilder (20 STR) in his normal form.
>Is that obvious strength (He isn't strong by superpowered standards)?
yes. its obvious. Note here that the strength adds to the characters figured
characteristics giving them greater PD, etc.
Someone looking at champion weightlifter knows he is that strong.
So its obvious.
>
>Okay, how about when he activates his powers (6 levels of Density
>Increase w/2 levels of linked Shrinking) an his STR is 60?
Should that not be 50, 20+30=50?
Lets see, he has bought no new strength except what comes from density. I know
somewhere it is stated that density does not alter appearance. So that inobvious
strength from the density power built in. No points required.
Someone looking at short guy would NOT think he is super strong so its
inobvious. Does not require limit because thats strength gained from power of
density not bought for free.
>We usually compare STR, BODY, and COM ratios to determine how strong
>someone looks.
NOTE: Str bought with "does not affect characteristics" would seem to me to be
inobvious.
steven_rushing
Responses by SWR
In article <01bccad8$74430ff0$1f01000a@dclifton>, "Drew says...
>
>
>
>Steve Rushing wrote in article <60h2vr$a...@drn.zippo.com>...
>> The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i
>required
>> a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
>>
>> RRationale,
>>
>> Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
>> No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
>This is something that I think is already dealt with. This sounds like a
>presence issue. Of course the Hulks get even more screwed in your opinion
>because he now has to pay for presence(directly or indirectly through
>growth),
Huh, Since I did not mention presence at all, perhaps you could fill in for me
my opinion on the subject.
but what about the advantages of obvious strength. What about
>assigning the 1/4 inobvious advantage toward body?
Body is a representation of internal structure, stability, will to live etc.
While there are some cases where its obvious, many times the flaws are
inobvious. Typically villians in combat do not make choices based on their
appraisal of opponents body in my campaign. Do they in yours? If so then perhaps
the lim is appropriate there.
In my campaign, no Viper agent is going to attempt to wrestle the hulk down even
if he had never seen him. he might try to wrestle tights-n-eye-beams.
>Besides, is there any king of quantitative ruling as to exactly how
>inobvious you are if you don't buy w/ the advantage? We assume the Hulk
>doesn't. What about Spidey? When I last read his tiltes (mid 80's)
>Spiderman was a 10 ton kinda guy. He weighs about 180 lbs with a not too
>spectacular build( a little toned, but not massive). The Hulk weighs more
>(I dont know exacly how much) but it seems to me that he is stronger per lb
>than spiderman. Hulk can at least lift 150 tons, surely he doesn't weigh
>2700 lbs. So if spiderman ws forced to buy with the advantage, but hulk
>wasn't, I'd say Peter Parker got the shaft. After all, I'd say the Hulk's
>strength was less obvious than spiderman's. Do you get into different
>levels of obvious strength?
Again, you may have villians basing their decisions of whether the super can
lift a train versus a battleship. maybe you have villians whose EB is defined as
"dropping battleship", i don't know.
The only question in my campaign is does the character's appearance give any
indication that he has superstrength? Does this mean the villian has to be able
to look at him and gian intimate knowledge of his benchpress mark? not at all.
Some may need that level of point mongering definitions, not me.
>> is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since
>strenght
>> costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power,
>It costs endurance, but didn't I read in fourth ed. that str cost 1 end per
>5 str, where powers were changed to now use 1 end per 10 pow points - I
>don't think a direct Strength to power comparison is as easy to make.
Hmm, i simply used the fact that it takes strength and is over "normal" limits.
You seem to believe that its not the fact that it uses end but the end ratio
that makes the determination. Ok, so in your campaign do you assume that powers
with the 2xend cost DONT follow the default rules for powers? i never saw the
ratio as important since 0 end powers (buying the advantage) or half end powers
are visible
I
>wouldn't describe strength (even over 20) as a power. Sure it's a nono for
>normals, but I think characteristics are still fundementally different than
>"powers". I think care should be given when ever advantages or limitations
>are applied to them, and I certainly do not think default behaviors of
>powers should be assumed for characteristics.
Note that were a character to buy strength "does not affect characteristics" at
-1/2 i would certainly not rule that it was obvious.
>> obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also
>fit
>> with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like
>a
>> champion weightlifter.
>>
steve_rushing
Responses by Steve r
In article <342C8DFA...@best.com>, "J.J." says...
>Actually, powers should be obvious *in use* so a scrawny child lifting a
>battleship
>is obviously super strong. Not all superstrength is defined as raw muscle power
>-
>such as the current Superboy (and actually, the current Superman) who has
>"tactile
>telekinesis"
never had anyone try to purchase their superstrength this way. Wonder why?
Lets see.
10 Strength TK is 15 points. +1 Invisible makes for 30 points...
Then we have no range reducing the real cost to 20.
So you end up with "TACTILE TK" costing 2 points for each point of strength and
starting from ) instead of 10 AND costing more end.
If a player wnated that instead of my +1/4 inobvious on strength i would allow
it.
>
>Just like someone with flight needn't have wings or some other obvious indicator
>he
>can fly when he has his two feet happily on the floor. And not everyone with
>energy
>blast has glowing hands.
Seems you are coming down on the side of inobvious by default. As i said that
was the decision. Whether to give disad to the hulk's strength or require
advantage on supes.
steven_rushing
In article <342d1027...@news.earthlink.net>, night...@earthlink.net
says...
>came...@aol.com (Cameron Vk) wrote:
>
>> I'll have to chime in on the ingnore the physics side of the fence. In a
>> superhero game where people can fly and through bolts of energy out of any
>> part of their bodies, why bother with realistic physics?
>>
>> As a gamemaster I feel having fun in the game is more important than
>> realism. Much like in the movies, its more fun to have the cars blow up
>> when hit than to see them crumple a bit and just lie there.
>
> Of course, some of us have fun with games that do pay
>attention to physics (I know, weird).
But, i may be reading into your comment, the original poster did not say he
prefers to drop all physics. I took him to mean that they pay attention to
physcis except when it gets in the way of genre. That sounds EXACTLY what you do
below...
In my longest running supers
>setting, all the powers are derived from psionic (PK, Telepathy, etc)
>sources. This "external" power dodges reality (physics,
>thermodynamics, etc) but beyond that, reality comes back down like it
>should.
So except for superpowers, real world physics kicks in. And in the case of
superpowers, they reset the physics. Sounds like a good definition of a genre
where the laws of physics are used selectively.
Thus, if you do pull the "catch Louis at the end of a 30-story
>fall" trick, she will pretty much splatter on your arms of steel.
But what if your arm of stell is defined as a TK like effect. Could it not stop
her with a more user-friendly decel than hitting an actual real arm of steel? is
this not a possible case of power overriding physics?
My belief is that EVERY camapign uses some real world stuff and some is ignored.
I think thats fine. I jump in when, as the original desolid series showed, gms
or players suddenly get a desire to throw a real world physics law at a power
which contradicts how it has always worked.
Filksinger
On 26 Sep 1997 12:38:35 -0700, Steve Rushing wrote:
>The most.. lets say ... anal i have been with PCs and costs was when i required
>a +1/4 advantage for "inobvious" strength.
>
>RRationale,
>
>Some comic characters are superstrong and look it. Thing, Hulk, etc...
>No, mighty Cowboy is not going to try and lasso the Hulk even on a bet.
But that isn't an effect of his strength. The Hulk has at least a
level of Growth, which is what makes him so big.
>On the other hand, he might try to lasso the flying guy with heat ray vision who
>looks to be about the size of your average mild-mannered reporter.
Unless he's heard of him, or has seen him use his strength _once_.
>Either way, the guy with the obvious strength is clearly possessing this ability
>at all times. Whereas the other guy has the ability to surprise his oppoents by
>swinging Cowboy into the next county.
>
>So the decision came down to...
>
>Is strength normally obvious (costing superman extra points for the surprise) or
>is it normally inobvious (giving hulk a cost break on the power) Since strenght
>costs endurance to use and super-strength is definitely a power, i ruled it was
>obvious by default and charged the mild mannered reporter type. This also fit
>with the idea that you would expect a champion weightlifter to look like a
>champion weightlifter.
Obviousness and inobviousness in super strength is SFX. The guy who is
inobvious is only inobvious if he is a) an unknown to the enemy, and
b) doesn't use his strength in their presence. In the mean time, the
really bulky guy should get "Exhibiting power" against normals just
for standing around.
If you wish to express this with a point break of some kind for the
obvious guy, allow him to take Distinctive Features: Very bulky and
muscular, at whatever level is appropriate for his bulk. That ought to
cover it.
TBolt7
>It's an interesting list, though I have seen the explainations of the
>abilities deal with some issues.
I ended up - blush with real embarrassment - taking my cue from the Wild
Cards books; the first one has some appendices in which it is overtly
stated that the Takisian virus provides the afflicted survivor with access
to psionic power; all super powers are therefore psionicaly based, no
matter how they appear to operate in "real life". Gadgeteers use psi
projected into their gear to gain their powers, mages are really using psi
instead of magic, etc.
I altered it a bit for my campaign universe: I postulated that heroes
could gain their powers from one or more of four basic sources. Physical
or scientific, for any powers and abilities that are eaily explainable by
current scientific theory; psionics, for virtually all other superheroic
powers; magic, for characters overtly based on such; and divine, for those
deities and demigods often found triapsing through the pages of comics. I
even worked out a sort of "unified field theory" about it: where psi was
the interface between physics and magic, and divine power encompassed the
other three and then some. It sidestepped questions about how powers could
"really" work - which was a Good Thing in and of itself - but more
importantly it provided an internally consistent logical framework for
power development.
I liked citing psi as the basic source of powers. For one thing, it left
lots of characters vulnerable to anti-psionic powers...
----------------------------------
Terry Pratchett says:
"...there are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that
cannot easily be duplicated by a normal, kindly family man who just comes
in to work every day and has a job to do... A man who knew that, knew
everything he needed to know about people."
John Turner
On 27 Sep 1997 13:06:51 -0700, Steve Rushing wrote:
>Responses by Steve r
>
>In article <342C8DFA...@best.com>, "J.J." says...
>
>>Actually, powers should be obvious *in use* so a scrawny child lifting a
>>battleship
>>is obviously super strong. Not all superstrength is defined as raw muscle power
>>-
>>such as the current Superboy (and actually, the current Superman) who has
>>"tactile
>>telekinesis"
>
>never had anyone try to purchase their superstrength this way. Wonder why?
>Lets see.
>10 Strength TK is 15 points. +1 Invisible makes for 30 points...
>Then we have no range reducing the real cost to 20.
Isn't there something in the rulebook on buying the most appropriate
power and defining with special effects? STR, even bought as "tactile
TK" should be bought as STR with the TK special effect. It is
automatically at no range and invisible(ie no glowing, etc).
John Turner
On 27 Sep 1997 13:00:09 -0700, Steven Rushing wrote:
>In article <342c874a...@news.flash.net>, ave...@flash.net says...
>>Okay, here is a subjective question for you:
>>I have a character who is a bodybuilder (20 STR) in his normal form.
>>Is that obvious strength (He isn't strong by superpowered standards)?
>yes. its obvious. Note here that the strength adds to the characters figured
>characteristics giving them greater PD, etc.
>Someone looking at champion weightlifter knows he is that strong.
>So its obvious.
Most competitive weightlifters do not look as strong as a body
builder. Body builders have definition, which looks strong, but
rarely are in (compared to a weightlifter of similar weight).
>>
>>Okay, how about when he activates his powers (6 levels of Density
>>Increase w/2 levels of linked Shrinking) an his STR is 60?
>
>Should that not be 50, 20+30=50?
Yeah 50, sorry, lost my mind there for a moment.
>Lets see, he has bought no new strength except what comes from density. I know
>somewhere it is stated that density does not alter appearance. So that inobvious
>strength from the density power built in. No points required.
>
>Someone looking at short guy would NOT think he is super strong so its
>inobvious. Does not require limit because thats strength gained from power of
>density not bought for free.
>
>>We usually compare STR, BODY, and COM ratios to determine how strong
>>someone looks.
>
>NOTE: Str bought with "does not affect characteristics" would seem to me to be
>inobvious.
I don't think that the figured characteristics would make that much
difference. Can you look at someone and tell how well they can take a
punch (PD, REC, STUN)?
steven_rushing
Responses below..
In article <342fb5a1...@news.flash.net>, ave...@flash.net says...
>
>On 27 Sep 1997 13:00:09 -0700, Steven Rushing wrote:
>
>>In article <342c874a...@news.flash.net>, ave...@flash.net says...
>>>Okay, here is a subjective question for you:
>>>I have a character who is a bodybuilder (20 STR) in his normal form.
>>>Is that obvious strength (He isn't strong by superpowered standards)?
>
>>yes. its obvious. Note here that the strength adds to the characters figured
>>characteristics giving them greater PD, etc.
>>Someone looking at champion weightlifter knows he is that strong.
>>So its obvious.
>
>Most competitive weightlifters do not look as strong as a body
>builder. Body builders have definition, which looks strong, but
>rarely are in (compared to a weightlifter of similar weight).
My error. Was actually using the terms interchangeably not thinking such was
relevent to subject. From now on will use "strong looking guy" to avoid
confusion.
>>>Okay, how about when he activates his powers (6 levels of Density
>>>Increase w/2 levels of linked Shrinking) an his STR is 60?
>>
>>Should that not be 50, 20+30=50?
>Yeah 50, sorry, lost my mind there for a moment.
Math. Cant live with it, get arrested for bounced checks without it. :-)
>>Lets see, he has bought no new strength except what comes from density. I know
>>somewhere it is stated that density does not alter appearance. So that inobvious
>>strength from the density power built in. No points required.
>>
>>Someone looking at short guy would NOT think he is super strong so its
>>inobvious. Does not require limit because thats strength gained from power of
>>density not bought for free.
>>
>>>We usually compare STR, BODY, and COM ratios to determine how strong
>>>someone looks.
>>
>>NOTE: Str bought with "does not affect characteristics" would seem to me to be
>>inobvious.
>I don't think that the figured characteristics would make that much
>difference.
It does in that the NFC strength is of super origin because it does not confer
the normal physical carry-ons of natural str (ie the added benefits). Since it
is not conveying those benefits, there is no reason to assume it carries with it
the normal appearance factors. Again, the character cost is probably better of
with my +1/4 obvious than the -1/2 disad anyway.
> Can you look at someone and tell how well they can take a
>punch (PD, REC, STUN)?
No, as i pointed out earlier when someone asked about obvious and inobvious
body. those factors are highly variable witout necessary visible signs. No NPC
normally expects to know a persons PD or rec before throwing their attack (at
least normally in my games) and thus its not a balance issue. Again the issue
with the NVC limit was that taking it meant none of the usual collateral
increases occured for this special strength. it seemed to make sense that it
would follow for my obvious/inobvious thing. i guess i would say its more from
the spirit of the limitation rather than being linked to the points of the
specific figured characteristics.
steven_rushing
In article <342fb496...@news.flash.net>, ave...@flash.net says...
>
>On 27 Sep 1997 13:06:51 -0700, Steve Rushing wrote:
>
>>Responses by Steve r
>>
>>In article <342C8DFA...@best.com>, "J.J." says...
>>
>>>Actually, powers should be obvious *in use* so a scrawny child lifting a
>>>battleship
>>>is obviously super strong. Not all superstrength is defined as raw muscle power
>>>-
>>>such as the current Superboy (and actually, the current Superman) who has
>>>"tactile
>>>telekinesis"
>>
>>never had anyone try to purchase their superstrength this way. Wonder why?
>>Lets see.
>>10 Strength TK is 15 points. +1 Invisible makes for 30 points...
>>Then we have no range reducing the real cost to 20.
>
>Isn't there something in the rulebook on buying the most appropriate
>power and defining with special effects? STR, even bought as "tactile
>TK" should be bought as STR with the TK special effect. It is
>automatically at no range and invisible(ie no glowing, etc).
Thanks john, you seem to support my opinion that super strength is a power,
even if you disagree with the other part.
Buying TK as strength w/ range was specifically mentioned as a no-no. I don't
see defining TK-no-range as STR for cost purposes but keeping all the other
benefits as making any sense or even qualifying under the "suitable power" rule.
Why does the TK increase PD, or stun, or Recovery?Is this really "defining
tactilce TK" properly or just finagling a way to get it cheap? Frankly if a
character wanted to justify superhuman Recovery by saying its because of his TK
ability, i would be skeptical. What about you?
i don't see tactile TK as a special effect of strength. I see it as having
enough differences to make TK the most suitable power. We disagree.
John Turner
I would call that a "does not affect figured stats limitation."
Ron Charlotte
On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 05:35:30 GMT, filks...@usa.net (Filksinger)
wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 05:26:42 GMT, ro...@gator.net (Ron Charlotte)
>wrote:
>
>>Well, I don't agree with _all_ of J.J.'s conclusions. The bending and
>>cutting metal thing, for example. The mass of material is simply
>>going to be a far better heat-sink than the contact transfer point of
>>the claws or the dum-dums it's wrapped around.
>
>No. In real life, bending metal gets quite hot at the point that
>flexes, even when it is something that can be easily bent by a normal
>human. Something stronger would get so hot it would burn.
I actually work with metal a great deal, both hot and cold work. Even
fairly tough and heavy metal like stainless steel coming out of a
shear and brake rig will be painfully hot at the bending points, but
the effect is diffused by the mass of the metal in seconds. In most
cases even heavy cold bent metal is bare-hands safe in under a minute,
and would take repeat flex to the point of fatigue fracture to get hot
enough to burn thru clothing.
Alexander Shearer
Steven rushing wrote:
>
> But, i may be reading into your comment, the original poster did not say he
> prefers to drop all physics. I took him to mean that they pay attention to
> physcis except when it gets in the way of genre. That sounds EXACTLY what you do
> below...
I wasn't really responding to the original poster (I agree
with him, I think). I was responding to the "forget about physics at
all" followup to his post.
>
> In my longest running supers
> >setting, all the powers are derived from psionic (PK, Telepathy, etc)
> >sources. This "external" power dodges reality (physics,
> >thermodynamics, etc) but beyond that, reality comes back down like it
> >should.
>
> So except for superpowers, real world physics kicks in. And in the case of
> superpowers, they reset the physics. Sounds like a good definition of a genre
> where the laws of physics are used selectively.
Pretty much, though I don't see it quite like that. Mainly,
super powers just let a lot of energy come from no where - that's key.
Beyond that, it's details that usually can be worked out within the
real world.
>
> Thus, if you do pull the "catch Louis at the end of a 30-story
> >fall" trick, she will pretty much splatter on your arms of steel.
>
> But what if your arm of stell is defined as a TK like effect. Could it not stop
> her with a more user-friendly decel than hitting an actual real arm of steel? is
> this not a possible case of power overriding physics?
That's possible. It could even happen in the campaign (though
it probably wouldn't). The idea is more that unless the power does
allow that all by itself, I don't have general ultra-cinematic genre
conventions. Again, I was responding to the "forget all about reality"
post, not the initial one.
Alexander Shearer
night...@earthlink.net
ga...@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Filksinger
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 01:25:51 GMT, ro...@gator.net (Ron Charlotte)
wrote:
>
>I actually work with metal a great deal, both hot and cold work. Even
>fairly tough and heavy metal like stainless steel coming out of a
>shear and brake rig will be painfully hot at the bending points, but
>the effect is diffused by the mass of the metal in seconds. In most
>cases even heavy cold bent metal is bare-hands safe in under a minute,
>and would take repeat flex to the point of fatigue fracture to get hot
>enough to burn thru clothing.
So, a steel i-beam, wrapped around someone, would be very hot for a
second, but not enough to burn through clothing, and then cool
rapidly?
Sounds not unreasonable, but that wasn't quite what I meant. It might
not burn through clothing, but it would burn skin, and it would be
painfully hot. It would cool in seconds, but in the meantime it would
be painful, and would cause at least first-degree burns against bare
skin. However, no one in comics ever complains about this.
Garg317
Seems to me you are describing the disadvantage: Distinctive Features!
A person with the distinctive feature: Unsual looks-bodybuilder would appear
strong and stand out. Someone without this disadvantage could appear as a
normal, but actually be able to bench press a locomotive.
Aside from that, since when did strength become obvious, I've arm wrestled many
people who looked stronger than myself, yet i've beaten a lot of them.
steven_rushing
As i stated, it was a decision to go either way. If base strength is inobvious,
then superman is the normal and all hulksters get a disad, either on the
strength cost or an actual disad. Simply classing it as a character disad is
more fuzionesque than champions as the visibility or invisibility of powers is
in kmost cases factored in as a power advantage or disadvantage. (you dont get
disad for visible force field cause thats the standard. if you want invisible
force field you pay for it. Mental attacks are normally invisible, if you want
it visible you get the -1/4 disad NOT a character phys lim.)
As for strength being obvious in the real worl...
I look at Arnold Swarzenegger and Pee Wee Herman and get a pretty clear idea who
i want to crawl to to get them to drag me out of a fire, given the choice.
At no point did i say or use this to allow someone to guess your number, merely
the gross he is strong and he is not where major differences apply.
If strength is not obvious at any level, then there are not necessarily any
assumptions that can be made about strength in the campaign. The characters
should not assume Arnold is stronger than PeeWEE. Thats fails the "can i
explain this to a new player without looking like a fool" test. Sure these could
be given to body stats and the like but STRENGTH in hero is NOT linked to body
at all. If however i explain that Superman has to pay a few more points because
his strength is not obvious, that i can explain very credibly. I cannot explain
that you cannot tell whether Madonna or Stallone can clean and jerk a heavy
weight BY DEFAULT.
i simply felt it better to have more defaults match real world than the other
way around.
This was apparently a more controversial subject than I thought it would be!
Fortunately i am in Fuzion now and this problem goes away with campaign dials
rather easily.
In article <19971009173...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, gar...@aol.com
says...
Drew Clifton
Steven Rushing wrote in article <61j7r1$h...@drn.zippo.com>...
> This was apparently a more controversial subject than I thought it would
be!
I agree with your decision to make inobvious strength an advantage(bought
on strength) as opposed to obvious strength being given as a (flat)
character disadvantage. DC heroes did this kind of thing alot, (characters
were given a flat compensation for any limitation they had their powers)
Here, where we have strength varying from character to character with out
changing the characters's size or presence we get the characters with the
highest(most inobvious and suprising) strengths paying more for their
advantage than someone with just a "little" super strength. The high str
people willl feel that + 1/4 cost more.
> As for strength being obvious in the real worl...
>
> I look at Arnold Swarzenegger and Pee Wee Herman and get a pretty clear
idea who
> i want to crawl to to get them to drag me out of a fire, given the
choice.
>
ok, but remember Champions is not a real world game, and in Champions you
can't be sure pee wee is weaker. After all, he may be a native of Kryton
himself (or have been bitten by a radioactive spider).
I can follow the IStr (Inobvious Strenght) advantage this far
From what you've said so far, I think I understand that under your
advantage's defintion, all "normal" people have obvious strength. We
expect that someone with Pee Wee's physique should have a Strength
somewhere less than 10, and we expect Arnold to have a strength between 15
and 20 (certainly not much more than 20 - What can Arnold lift without
pushing?) From what I've seen in the comics, I'd expect Clark Kent to
have a 14 or 15 Str, and would be surprised when I saw him lift the
Locomotive that he's stronger than example of your IStr. Hulk on the other
hand you offered as an example of OStr.
I start to have problems here:
Does Hulk look THAT much stronger than Arnold though? After all Arnold
did beat Forigno (sp?) out of the Mr. Universe tilte all those years back.
And what If you had a guy whose physique was Identicle to Arnold's but he
was much stronger?( Hyperion) Hyperion certainly looks strong and I
certainly wouldn't mess with him, but Spiderman, or even Jean Claude might
(not knowing Hyperion was Marvels version of Superman).
My point here is, what difference does it make in superhero game
whether or not a a person obviously has a 18 str when nearly every
significant character has at least 40 active points in some attack. In a
superpowered campaign it is the superstrengthed heros/villians you have to
look after(not people who just look really toned) and those people's
strengths are never obvious not even Hulk's. There are lots of supers
(villains mostly) that look as strong or stronger than hulk, but really are
not as strong.
Armadillo, Rhino, Thing and Hulk all look to have the same physique.
Whose is obvious? Throw Storm, Spidey and Batman and all of the boys from
the previous crowd together into a line up and tell Pee Wee he has to fight
one of them. Having no previous knowledge of any of their abilities Pee
Wee'd probably choose Storm (looking the weakest) to contend with (or he
might go with the guy who just looks the slowest, since Pee Wee's just
planning to run anyway )
Again, I'd say the IStr advantage makes sense for "normals", but now
present a Champions character w/ a 50 str and 40 active points in some
defense, with the same line up. In the eyes of this champs character the
Hulk is now one of the more "inobvious" powers. Hulk, Rhino, and Armadillo
all look stronger than human, but not that much. They could easily just
have 25 or 30 strength, and when I have a 50, the difference from batman's
18 str isn't much. In fact, the Hulk, in terms of str, was the biggest
suprise of the buch. After all I have a 50 str, and I'm used to fighting
big thugs with 30 - 60 Str, the Hulks is significantly more than that, but
he doesn't look any stronger.
I singled the hulk out here, but I think you can use this argument
against anyone. This could explained by letting people buy the advantage
for a fraction of their strength as well as the whole. This would simulate
different levels of obviousness (musclular concentration?) but could get
get really messy. I would just pass the whole thing up.
> At no point did i say or use this to allow someone to guess your number,
merely
> the gross he is strong and he is not where major differences apply.
>
I'm not sure what you are saying here.
> If strength is not obvious at any level, then there are not necessarily
any
> assumptions that can be made about strength in the campaign.
You are right. The hero system a system used for description not
explanation. But as long as the GM is there to enforce continuity in the
world (generally bigger people are stronger) this is not a bad thing. Now
I'm confused as to what use the inobvious advantage will serve you ( as a
GM). I thought it was for "balance" (I can see your argument here) but
characters in the game should't be aware of whether or not another
character has inobvious strength or not. Assumptions will be just as
unreliable (only now you'll have a whole bunch of people who'll be burning
more pips on Str, as well as a few others who didn,'t bother to go with the
inonvios stuff and now feel they deserve an advantage during a presence
test over those people who bought for the same str but spent more pips to
do it)
> The characters
> should not assume Arnold is stronger than PeeWEE. Thats fails the "can i
> explain this to a new player without looking like a fool" test.
uh oh, I can here myself talking about Pee wee from outerspace again
Sure these could
> be given to body stats and the like but STRENGTH in hero is NOT linked to
body
> at all..
Just because Hero offers up no formal connection between Str and Body
doesn't mean that as a GM or player you shouldn't acknowledge one. Do
think Arnold and Pee Wee have the same Body? (The Earthling Pee Wee, not
The Kryptonian)
> I cannot explain
> that you cannot tell whether Madonna or Stallone can clean and jerk a
heavy
> weight BY DEFAULT.
>
I think Madonna might actually be able to take Sly after his
"conditioning" for cop city.
> Fortunately i am in Fuzion now and this problem goes away with campaign
dials
> rather easily.
Which ones?
The Septic Avenger
Spartan
Garg317 wrote:
>
> As has been mentioned here before, if a character wants his strength to be
> inobvious, he should just not take the character disadvantage: Distinctive
> features. The disad of looking normal would be cost prohibitive to many
> bricks if used as an advantage on str. The system is there. The system
> works. Why muck with it?
EXCELLENT ANSWER!!! I was going to write more, but you said it exactly
the way it is.
steven_rsuhing
Because i have never ran a rg system "by the books". i always found somethings
they put in for simplicity or simply overlooked.
Any RPG system that said "our system works, dont muck with it" i would run from
very quickly. Then again, C4 is NOT one of those systems. Through the rulebooks
c4 emphasizes GM decision on what he wants to use and how he wants to do things.
One of the oft cited "problems" with champs is that too many games have the
character generation system turn into a "competition" (some friendly some not)
between the GM and the players. In most of the problem cases, the trouble
players end up on the side of "the rulenook says this" (whether that is true or
not) and "dont muck with it".
Just because the book has telepethic powers does NOT mean i have to use them as
is or at all. They dont have stop signs or warning signs at all, but I guarantee
you that every designer at Hero would support this position and go against your
general "it works don't muck with it". Of course, they could all be wrong too,
but then, if they are wrong, why should you trust their system?
Just because the book does not say that you can get a general idea of someones
strength by looking at them, does not mean you cannot or that you should not.
Nowhere does it say that arnold should get a disad for being visibly strong or
that without it he and aunt may are indistinguishable.
Consider that in the system that "works ... dont muck with it" a child (str 5)
can throw a football 48 m ~ 48 yards or half an nfl footbal field. Hey that 8
year old has one heck of a career in the NFL when he gets ready.
Consider that if you use the powers as written a clairsentient precog can look
at the building houseing the bad guys that they are about to hit and simply say
"do we win?". She looks in ahead 5 minutes or maybe two, and looks innocently at
you, the gm, and waits. What are you going to tell her? Remember, dont much with
the system!
Steve
In article <19971011000...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, gar...@aol.com
says...
Garg317
Garg317
I never said you had to run exactly by the book. I just was stating that you
were, in my own humble opinion, unnessesarily complicating something already
covered by the game. House rules are fine and every game can and should have
them, but they generaly should simplify the game not make it more complex. I
find not knowing if the little red haired girl you just met can rip your head
off to be one of the challenges of the game. It isn't obvious she can do it,
but then it wouldn't be obvious she could thow a 6d6 killing attack area of
effect line either until she used such a power. It is only obvious and
visible "in use". Any non-combat effect of her appearance is covered by Pre
and distinctive features and things like reputation.
All that said, play your own game how you want. that's part of the appeal of
champions anyway.
steven_rushing
Responses..
In article <19971011084...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, gar...@aol.com
says...
>
>I never said you had to run exactly by the book. I just was stating that you
> were, in my own humble opinion, unnessesarily complicating something already
> covered by the game. House rules are fine and every game can and should have
> them, but they generaly should simplify the game not make it more complex.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant by "The system is there. The system works.
Dont muck with it." I seem to have misunderstood. I do believe that game systems
sometime err in both directions, oversimplifying some things and over
complicating others. i feel changes should be made where appropriate.
I
> find not knowing if the little red haired girl you just met can rip your head
> off to be one of the challenges of the game.
Thats not an issue here, though some seem to feel it is. i am in no way
diallowing hidden powers. Nor am i even requiring extra cost for strengrh. I am
merely addressing the cost. To get "inobvious" strength one would pay the +1/4
or take the -1/2 disad not-vs-figured and both would result in inobvious
strength.
Using my setup, strength is obvious in most cases but some rare cases will have
characters who bought inobvious strength being a surprise! Isn't that what you
describe above? A deceptively strong figure with a surprise. If we go the other
way, where strength is inobvious, then you have a world where you cannot tell
how strong someone is. In this case, no one would assume little bo peep could
not body slam a buick. No surprises because no basis exists for assumptions.
Aunt May may well pin Arnold to the wall..
It isn't obvious she can do it,
> but then it wouldn't be obvious she could thow a 6d6 killing attack area of
> effect line either until she used such a power. It is only obvious and
> visible "in use".
But isan't strength always in use. Walking standing or moving at all seems
appropriate strength uses. I do thank you though for continuing my anaolgy of
superstrength to powers.
Any non-combat effect of her appearance is covered by Pre
> and distinctive features and things like reputation.
> All that said, play your own game how you want. that's part of the appeal of
> champions anyway.
In a super world, there are normals too. If you go this route, making strength
non-obvious and requiring disad DF for obvious strength, then you either end up
with the extreme case of normals don't show there strength either OR you have
every normal have the obvious strength disad (or at least the well built one)
How can something be consider "distinctive features" if its possessed by that
many people in the campaign area?
Garg317
I have to disagree on the point that strength is always "in use", only the
appearance of strength is obvious, and as many players have found out
appearances can be decieving.
By the way, I have several NORMAL characters who have the disad: distinctive
feature- Huge, bodybuilder physique. this only affects their appearance since
it is not obvious whether they are just powerful normals or supers.
A little paranoia goes a long way in a game, trust no one, keep your force
fields up! Play champions!
Eric Stevenson
Just to throw my own two cents in...
The fact that the cost of making strength inobvious is proportional to
the amount of strength bought indicates that the obviousness of the
strength also increases with the amount of strength bought. Thus, with
practice, characters will be able to estimate just how strong a character
is. "How strong does he look?" "He could probably lift about 100 tons."
There is some support for this form of strength, in the form of growth.
Growth adds strength in a way that is obvious. When a guy is thirty feet
tall, you can get some idea of how strong he is.
On the other hand, there tends to be a lot of variation in comic books as
to how strong someone looks for a given strength level. An alternative to
requiring an advantage on strength would be to apply a flat cost, as with
some powers. 'No fringe' on invisibility, for example, costs the same
amount, no matter how much invisibility is bought. This still makes
obvious strength the default, but removes the link between the amount of
strength bought and the degree of obviousness.
I'd say that the decision on whether or not strength is obvious and the
way that this is simulated depends on what genre is being simulated. In
standard comic books, there are a great many characters who are super
strong, but many of them (and nearly all of the female characters) do not
have obvious strength. In fact, the ones who have obvious strength tend
to have strength as their main ability, and the reason it is obvious is
that they are unusually large. I see this as being simulated with growth
or a distinctive feature. Thus, Rogue, Spider-Man, USAgent, Wonderman,
and She-Hulk all have superhuman strength, but it isn't really obvious.
Sure, some of them look strong, but still human. The Thing, however, has
a level of density increase (he's about 500 pounds) and Distinctive
Features: rockman (concealable, noticed). Hulk has 5 points
of growth and 5 of density increase, making him eight feet tall and a
half ton of hostility, as well as Distinctive Features: huge and green
(not concealable, noticed), and Reputation: rampaging brute
(14-,extreme). Thus no one who has eyes will mistake him for a weakling,
and no one who has seen the news in America in the last ten years will
tangle with him without a *really* good reason.
If you want a more down-to-earth campaign, though, the obvious strength
makes a lot of sense. You can tell if a guy is weaker or stronger than
normal by looking at him, and get a fair idea of how strong he is. Guys
with hidden cybernetic implants, mutant metabolisms, and the like have to
pay extra, since they can sucker weaker foes into close range and trash them.
Which is, of course, the whole point. In a regular superhero campaign, it
doesn't really matter if a guy has strength as his primary power. If
you've got close in attacks, you'll close, if you're a ranged fighter,
you'll try to stand off, regardless of what the other guy can do, since
there are so many other things he might be able to do besides grab or punch
you. In a more normal-type campaign, a guy with high strength may have a
big advantage, what with his ability to grab, throw, disarm, etc enemies
who will probably be in dire straits when he gets his hands on them.
David Johnston
Steven, Rushing wrote:
>
> Responses..
>
> In article <19971011084...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, gar...@aol.com
> says...
> >
> >I never said you had to run exactly by the book. I just was stating that you
> > were, in my own humble opinion, unnessesarily complicating something already
> > covered by the game. House rules are fine and every game can and should have
> > them, but they generaly should simplify the game not make it more complex.
>
> Thanks for clarifying what you meant by "The system is there. The system works.
> Dont muck with it." I seem to have misunderstood. I do believe that game systems
> sometime err in both directions, oversimplifying some things and over
> complicating others. i feel changes should be made where appropriate.
>
> I
> > find not knowing if the little red haired girl you just met can rip your head
> > off to be one of the challenges of the game.
>
> Thats not an issue here, though some seem to feel it is. i am in no way
> diallowing hidden powers. Nor am i even requiring extra cost for strengrh. I am
> merely addressing the cost. To get "inobvious" strength one would pay the +1/4
> or take the -1/2 disad not-vs-figured and both would result in inobvious
> strength.
Too expensive. The vast majority of bricks don't look as strong as
they are. In fact, by definition they can't. Even a body builder
won't look like he can lift an apartment building. Looking like a
6 year-old with a strength of 40 does indeed give a surprise advantage
but no more so than having no focus limitation but wearing something
that looks like an obvious focus. Not every advantage can be
systematised into a point total. For that matter, is the girl any less
surprising if she turns out to be a mentalist, or a zapper with a
4d6 RKA?
> way, where strength is inobvious, then you have a world where you cannot tell
> how strong someone is. In this case, no one would assume little bo
There are limits to the extent that the game mechanics for building
superheros and villians determine the assumptions of the public at
large.
peep could
> not body slam a buick. No surprises because no basis exists for assumptions.
> Aunt May may well pin Arnold to the wall..
>
> It isn't obvious she can do it,
> > but then it wouldn't be obvious she could thow a 6d6 killing attack area of
> > effect line either until she used such a power. It is only obvious and
> > visible "in use".
>
> But isan't strength always in use. Walking standing or moving at al seems
> appropriate strength uses. I do thank you though for continuing my
No. Strength is not always in use. Those effects can be produced
by someone with 0 strength.
anaolgy of
> superstrength to powers.
>
> Any non-combat effect of her appearance is covered by Pre
> > and distinctive features and things like reputation.
> > All that said, play your own game how you want. that's part of the appeal of
> > champions anyway.
>
> In a super world, there are normals too. If you go this route, making strength
> non-obvious and requiring disad DF for obvious strength, then you either end up
> with the extreme case of normals don't show there strength either OR you have
> every normal have the obvious strength disad (or at least the well built one)
Hardly. Because their strength, and the appearance reflecting it,
are not impressive enough to be distinctive.
steve_rushing
Responses...
In article <34415A...@telusplanet.net>, David says...
>> To get "inobvious" strength one would pay the +1/4
>> or take the -1/2 disad not-vs-figured and both would result in inobvious
>> strength.
>
>Too expensive.
Frankly, huh??? Too expensive? One is a disad which would lower the cost of the
strength. The other is a mere +1/4 which considering all the free stats that
strength gives you does not seem too high to me.
> The vast majority of bricks don't look as strong as
>they are. In fact, by definition they can't. Even a body builder
>won't look like he can lift an apartment building.
I like this argument as several other have used it too. Basically it boils down
to "they wont have proportional appearance so no appearance is used". Wel some
guy noted that you cannot gauge relative strength with assurioty in real life
either, so apply these we come back to the inevitable that IN SUCH A CAMPAIGN
non character would have any reason to assume physical appearance has anything
to do with strength on any level. thats absurd. Yeterday when i was flipping
stationg HTS had a power lifting chanpionship. Not one of those competitors
looked like aunt may. I sure would not want to be the GM who told his players
when asked "yes, one of them normals might look like aunt may but she can bench
press 250!" Maybe you would.
> Looking like a
>6 year-old with a strength of 40 does indeed give a surprise advantage
>but no more so than having no focus limitation but wearing something
>that looks like an obvious focus.
Sorry the sourse of the power is obvious and the obvious focus gag would be gone
ASAP. Now if you are implying the girl bulks up when her strength manifests,
thats OK and you might have a point. Of course, you are again comparing one
effect "strength" which directly affects multiple physical characteristics BY
DEFAULT with some other power that does not at all.
> Not every advantage can be
>systematised into a point total. For that matter, is the girl any less
>surprising if she turns out to be a mentalist, or a zapper with a
>4d6 RKA?
If the world were such that mentalists normally had swelled heads or zappers
normally had sparks coming off them sure. If you say that in such a campaign
there is no correltaion between strength and appearance then it fits right in
with the other powers. But you have just "sillied" lots of your normal would
effects.
>
>> way, where strength is inobvious, then you have a world where you cannot tell
>> how strong someone is. In this case, no one would assume little bo
>
>There are limits to the extent that the game mechanics for building
>superheros and villians determine the assumptions of the public at
>large.
Huh? The game mechanics and specifically the character creation process and
interpretations are meant to exemplify the assumptions the characters, players,
and NPCs make in the world. Those probabilities and expectations are what your
Players based their decisions on. Some one without special abilities is not
going to attempt to jump 100 ft from roof to roof. he will look at his sheet and
see say 6m of leaping and go "whoa". he will think reality "could i make that
jump and go "whoa". if he looks at his sheet and goes "I am a gadgeteer with 23
strength but don't show it at all" then he will think the same holds true for
others, or should (if either he or you is concerned about any semblance of
consistency)
> peep could
>> not body slam a buick. No surprises because no basis exists for assumptions.
>> Aunt May may well pin Arnold to the wall..
>>
>> It isn't obvious she can do it,
>> > but then it wouldn't be obvious she could thow a 6d6 killing attack area of
>> > effect line either until she used such a power. It is only obvious and
>> > visible "in use".
>>
>> But isan't strength always in use. Walking standing or moving at al seems
>> appropriate strength uses. I do thank you though for continuing my
>
>No. Strength is not always in use. Those effects can be produced
>by someone with 0 strength.
And I seem to recall an AC with either effects of negative strength.. but that
is negative strength. Since 0 str is defined as lifting 55 lbs are you saying
that when you lift 55 lbs you are not using strength? Could not strength be
considered "in use" since the figured characteristics are in effect? lets put it
succintly..
If i had charges on my strength above 30 (say to a max 60) i would BY THE RULES
get the figured characteristics from that strength. No one would argue, i think,
that you got those characteristics without burning charges whether you actually
lifted something or not. to earn the characteristics you have to "use" a charge.
So is it unreasonable to classify the bestowing of 11 points in figured
characteristics as "in use" for 10 points of strength? Especially since you are
not charged end for this one.
you are indeed correct tho. Strength is not required in game terms for a
character to move or go about his business. Hey, that means in your game a
character drained of all strength could run a marathon with no ill effects as
long as his running was 0End. I think that one fails my "would i feel like a
fool explaining that one to my players" test so i wont let it happen in mine.
Now we culd discuss the lifting capability of 0 str but than we get into that
pesky idea of since you can lift things at 0 str or even below does 0 str
constitue as no str in use?
> anaolgy of
>> superstrength to powers.
>>
>> Any non-combat effect of her appearance is covered by Pre
>> > and distinctive features and things like reputation.
>>> All that said, play your own game how you want. that's part of the appeal of
>> > champions anyway.
>>
>>In a super world, there are normals too. If you go this route, making strength
>>non-obvious and requiring disad DF for obvious strength, then you either end up
>> with the extreme case of normals don't show there strength either OR you have
>> every normal have the obvious strength disad (or at least the well built one)
>Hardly. Because their strength, and the appearance reflecting it,
>are not impressive enough to be distinctive.
Ok, then lets call it a physical disad "strength reflected by appearance".
i was not the one who said it should be a DF anyway.
I did not think though that DF had to be impressive, merely disadvantaging.
May have to consult the rulebook there. thay may well kill the use of DF as
"dead ringer for known criminal figure" disad that led to such wonderful
problems for the character in the campaign. Guess he will have to take something
much more game reasonable like "bodybuilder" if you are right about the
"impressive requirement. (gee wait, have rulebook handy, hey, they don't require
impressive, merely disadvantageous. They even list "peculair walk" as an
example.. I think you got the impressive requirement wrong there. of course
again, you can do whatever you want in your game. You don't have to pass or be
concerned about the "fool" test or consistency or rules as long as your players)
and you are enjoying it)
>> How can something be consider "distinctive features" if its possessed by that
>> many people in the campaign area?
Summing up your points...
Attaching a limitation NVF to strength is too expensive.
Strength is not related to physical appearance (otherwise we have no
disagreement).
Strength has no relation to moving or walking so a guy reduced to 0 strength
could run a marathon.
Strength is not in use even thoug it may be providing 100%+ in figured
characteristics.
Even though strength provides these figured characteristics it should be as
inobvious as a power that does similar damage for similar cost BUT which does
not affect the characteristics at all.
Is that truely indicative of the campaigns you run?
Garg317
keyword Distinctive!
a distictive feature is one that sets you apart from an average crowd. A
person built like Arnold walking down the street would be noticed, even in a
universe with supers. This person may have an 18 STR or an 80 STR, there is
no way of telling till he used super strength. I feel there is no reason to
equate super strength with appearance, the two are matters of character
concept. If the character wants to able to USE str without being seen, that
is invisible power, worth an advantage(the hand is quicker than the eye
grasshopper)
have we beat this thread to death yet?
Tom Carman
Steve Rushing wrote:
>I did not think though that DF had to be impressive, merely disadvantaging.
>May have to consult the rulebook there. thay may well kill the use of DF as
>"dead ringer for known criminal figure" disad that led to such wonderful
>problems for the character in the campaign. Guess he will have to take something
>much more game reasonable like "bodybuilder" if you are right about the
>"impressive requirement. (gee wait, have rulebook handy, hey, they don't require
>impressive, merely disadvantageous. They even list "peculair walk" as an
>example.. I think you got the impressive requirement wrong there. of course
>again, you can do whatever you want in your game. You don't have to pass or be
>concerned about the "fool" test or consistency or rules as long as your players)
>and you are enjoying it)
Having fairly normal strength and a "bodybuilder" DF in a superhero
game is likely to get you killed. People will probably assume your
strength (and defenses) fit your appearance, and hit you with attacks
of an appropriate level.
David Johnston
Steven, Rushing wrote:
>
> As i stated, it was a decision to go either way. If base strength is inobvious,
> then superman is the normal and all hulksters get a disad, either on the
> strength cost or an actual disad. Simply classing it as a character disad is
> more fuzionesque than champions as the visibility or invisibility of powers is
> in kmost cases factored in as a power advantage or disadvantage. (you dont get
> disad for visible force field cause thats the standard. if you want invisible
> force field you pay for it. Mental attacks are normally invisible, if you want
> it visible you get the -1/4 disad NOT a character phys lim.)
Point is, it is not "having" the superpower that makes it obvious,
but using it. A power that changes your looks all the time is
better handled as a looks in Champions (such as glowing eyes,
tentacles, or claws).
> If strength is not obvious at any level, then there are not necessarily any
> assumptions that can be made about strength in the campaign. The characters
steven_rushing
In article <34426f1...@news.zippo.com>, 7177...@compuserve.com says...
>
>Having fairly normal strength and a "bodybuilder" DF in a superhero
>game is likely to get you killed. People will probably assume your
>strength (and defenses) fit your appearance, and hit you with attacks
>of an appropriate level.
>
\
So let me get this straight...
in your campaign, bodybuilders are an endangered species as they get flattened
at will by capes...
or...
Bodybuilders in your campaign do not get the "bodybuilder" DF.
Either way, sounds like an ... interesting campaign. I am glad to see the wide
diversity of campaign styles people enjoy. In mine, Aunt May does not win
powerlifting competitions on HTS. In yours, bodybuilders aare squashed by
Mechanon when leaving the spa.
Tom Carman
Steven Rushing wrote:
>Either way, sounds like an ... interesting campaign. I am glad to see the wide
>diversity of campaign styles people enjoy. In mine, Aunt May does not win
>powerlifting competitions on HTS. In yours, bodybuilders aare squashed by
>Mechanon when leaving the spa.
That's _not_ what I said. I was speaking on general terms about
_characters_ in a superhero game who appear stronger and tougher than
they really are. There has been a case or two of grossly
overestimating an opponent's defenses; rather a problem for those with
"Code against Killing" psychlims.