No need to revive a dead argument.  Lets focus on the fun stuff.

eLock wrote on Oct 29^th, 2009 at 4:02am:


Not trying to nitpick, and I didn't bring my rulebook to work today, but I'm thinking the description of devices is inclusive of some of those powers that are gained by some other method - super soldier formula or whatnot.  If I'm remembering correctly, this would lean toward the counter point of your position.  That innate does equal born with as opposed to acquired later.

I'm willing to admit that I might be eating my foot when I get home tonight and take a look at the rules.

Imaginos wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 6:02pm:


'Submission'?
Do you have anything you could share?

Imaginos wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 6:01pm:
Are you saying, that--theoretically speaking--the Fantastic Four and Hulk rolled their powers on the Devices table instead of Powers. Is that what you're saying?

Imaginos wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 6:50pm:
Just for clarity, then, would that also include someone like Wally West, who was accidentally struck by a Lightning Bolt?

Doctor Foom wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 6:04pm:


Here is the website to the project:
http://mostwantedtwo.iwarp.com/

Here is my character Blister:
http://mostwantedtwo.iwarp.com/blister.htm

Rick wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 7:12pm:


Eric's position on devices is one that's never crossed my mind. It does make sense. I have trouble with it because the category is still called "Devices." But it's a really interesting thought.

Re: 'innate:' I guess I would say that all inborn powers are innate powers, but not all innate powers are inborn, if that makes sense. I always saw the FF as having innate powers, and having gotten their powers from the Powers table rather than the Devices table, fwiw.

How is it that interpretations of these rules can still be interesting after 30 years?! 

Imaginos wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 6:01pm:
If you didn't spot the reference in the revised rules, any chance you were thinking of the Designed/Sponsored table from the original rules? That table would fit Captain America--and it includes abilities that we might describe as skills, powers, and devices.

Rick wrote on Dec 4^th, 2009 at 9:36pm:


I was probably misremembering or getting it confused with another ruleset.

Doctor Foom wrote on Oct 25^th, 2009 at 3:46pm:
Here's the part I don't get. You keep coming back again and again about how Powers is the best table to describe characters born with Heightened Intelligence. Then you bring up that comics have people born with Heightened Intelligence, Telepathy, and Cosmic Awareness at an alarming rate. But Cosmic Awareness isn't even on the Powers table, it's on Magic/Psionics. I can see how others had a hard time following your argument when you altered the table you were talking about mid-stream.

I can't hink of one person in comics or TV who has cosmic awareness the way it works in the game. There are psychics and telepaths, but I don't know of heroes who ask yes/no questions and get results anything like the way it works in the rulebook.

Who are all the characters in comics born with cosmic awareness? I want to read up on them. Thanks.

Starhawk is the "One Who Knows".

So is Mantis, and maybe Layla Miller.

Sorry for the delay. Crazy time of year.

Captain Kurt wrote on Dec 21^st, 2009 at 9:58pm:


I'm not aware of it, even though they are both called "Cosmic Awareness."
I think the reason is simply the differing formats. Comics are visual, so they use visions or pictures to depict these kinds of abilities rather than 'yes or no' dialogue with an all knowing source.
But in the game, the GM is the all knowing source, more or less, so there it will occur with dialogue or questions. Also, I think they put limits on it in V&V to make it playable in a game. In comics, it's a story element or deus ex machina.

Most examples of folks born with the power are alien races or cosmic beings like John's example above or Polar Boy's great Santa thread.

Belated welcome to the boards. 

Captain Kurt wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2009 at 3:34pm:


Where did I say "V&V cosmic awareness?"

I think I see your mistake. You've pulled a line out of context. Folks are born with Cosmic Awareness in comics, as opposed to real life, which is what the quote was referring to.

And Santa will always be a hero to me.
Happy holidays.   

I'm going to have to agree with Captain Kurt on this one, Doctor Foom.  From what you said, character is comics "are born with Cosmic Awareness at an alarming rate".  Unfortunately, none of us here seem to be able to rattle off a list of people with this power (comic book style or V&V type), so it seems to be a pretty rare power (in either medium).

The only character I remember seeing with this ability was a Captain Marvel variant in the Avengers Forever maxiseries.  But - as Doctor Foom said - it's tough to show this power in a comic book, so they end up making references to a character 'consulting the cosmos' or 'being one with the universe' or somesuch.  There's not much way to show what's going on inside a character's head, other than what we see in thought bubbles.

No comic character has cosmic awarness like the V&V rules, thats why  I tweaked them.

From my House Rules:

Cosmic Awareness; Pr=0.  Remains one action.   The character saves Id100.  Each question lowers the intelligence by one.  The harder the question, the GM may lower the I score as they see fit. The player can concentrate harder (EI spend extra power) and increase their I score for purposes of that save on a one per one basis.  If the die roll is less than the I score for the roll, they get the answer. If it misses by up to 50, they get nothing.  If they miss up to 75 they get the wrong answer.  If they miss up to 100, they are overwhelmed with the universe and go into a trance. They save Id20 per hour to awaken.  If they miss over 100, then they are in the trance, but they have gain the attention of some Cosmic Power.  This can be good or bad!


This to me seems to be more in line with Captain Marvel, Mantis, Starhawk mabye Adam Warlock.

Captain Kurt wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2009 at 1:18am:


Yes, I probably wasn't as clear with that as I meant to be.  Of course we can see the exact contents of what is shown, but what I meant was:

Even though we see some of what a character is thinking (via thought bubbles), it doesn't mean we're privvy to everything going on "inside" that character.  In other words, Spider-Man might say "Holy cow, that was close" (when a bullet goes whizzing by his head), but there's no real way to gauge whether he felt exhilerated, scared out of his mind, petrified beyond belief, or hardly worried.  And even if the writer and artist convey to us the proper emotion (via body language, facial expression, and dialog), we still don't really know - let's say on a scale of 1 to 10 - whether that fear is at a "3" or a "9".

So we see some of what they are thinking and feeling, but we rarely get the whole of what's going in their noggins (with some wordy writers like Chris Claremont, we might see 90% of it, though).   

Hopefully that explains what I meant a little better.   

And Merry Christmas to you, too (and to everyone else here!).