PDA

View Full Version : Supers! goes to War! (aka Golden Age superhero gaming)



urbwar
02-28-2012, 11:36 PM
Since Simon hinted a new thread should be started regarding Dustland's WW2 themed stuff, I figured I'd start a thread where we can discuss running Supers! in a Golden Age setting. So have at it!

Dustland
02-29-2012, 05:12 PM
Well, I'll kick things off with an optional rule I'm introducing in Supers at War.

Aid Another (includes Covering Fire!):
Two or more characters may work together to succeed at some challenge. Each supporting character must go first, rolling whatever Aptitude or Power is applicable in aiding the action. For every 6 points they roll, the main character gains a Temporary Competency Die that must be used the same round to achieve whatever action they are teaming up on.

ex: Welrod, Ma Deuce, and Gold Rush are trying to get a radio operating so they can call in an air strike on some Nazi tanks! The GM sets a the Target Number at 15 (the radio was blown up during a major fight). Welrod, with Tech 3d, is the main character in the action so he will roll last.

Ma Deuce decides to use her Super Strength 2d to bend, mold, and shape components at Welrod's direction. She rolls a 7, so Welrod will have 1d Temp Comp Die to roll on his turn.

Gold Rush has no applicable powers or trained aptitudes, so he uses his Tech 1d to try to assist in the repairs. He rolls a 1, pretty much just getting in the way so he doesn't add a Temp Comp Die to the action.

Welrod rolls his Tech 3d + 1d Temp Comp Die, scoring a 17! He gets the radio working and calls in the Spitfires to strafe the Panzer column!

I made this rule when I was wondering how Covering Fire could work without getting too complicated. I didn't want to use static bonuses because as a player, if I'm giving up my turn to aid in the glory of another player, I at least want to roll some dice! Also, this allows a particularly good "Aid Another" roll turn into a time to shine in it's own right.

Thoughts?

Dragonfly
02-29-2012, 07:33 PM
So, in the case of cover fire - would each 6 rolled by someone providing cover fire give one competancy dice that the character being aided can use on their resistance roll?

I like it!

Best,

Aldo

Dustland
02-29-2012, 08:42 PM
Exactly sir! I like examples, so here's another one using Aid Another to simulate covering fire:

Ex: The heroes emerge from the treeline only to see a bomb-blasted field and a concrete bunker on the far side bristling with machine guns. The GM tells the players that there are wounded GIs in the field. The players agree that Gold Rush should dash out and grab wounded allies while Welrod and Ma Deuce provide covering fire.

Welrod and Ma Deuce each have Shooting 2d and open fire, scoring a 6 and 9. They each provide a Temp Comp Die to Gold Rush's defense.

Gold Rush darts out and immediately comes under fire from two heavy machine gun crews (10). He uses his Super Speed 4d to dodge the first volley on his own, rolling an 11 so he takes no damage from the bullets whizzing by. He has to use his Reaction 3d to defend against the next volley and chooses to use the 2d TCD on this roll 9since he would loose them at the end of the round anyway).

He rolls a 20, his allies suppressing the enemy fire long enough for him to dart onto the battlefield, grab two soldiers, and dart back to cover without getting hit! (And the crowd goes wild!)

FYI, that's not necessarily how I'm handling heavy weapons (a fixed number), just did it for example's sake. And yes, there'll be lot's of examples because I think they help clarify rules that may be poorly worded.

Dustland
02-29-2012, 11:03 PM
And since I've referenced him a few times, here's Gold Rush!
http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee374/Rusintx/GoldRush2Finished.png

urbwar
02-29-2012, 11:41 PM
very nice!

So the book will include some superheroes/villains in it then? Originally, I thought it was more of a sourcebook on the era, and rules for combat, etc.

I just whipped up a bunch of nazi villains for Dragonfly to playtest for me, plus I'm working on a team of Italian super heroes.

Simon W
03-01-2012, 02:04 AM
I'm liking this!

novaexpress
03-01-2012, 06:41 AM
Very good rule, indeed.
I'll use it.

Dustland
03-01-2012, 08:25 AM
Glad you guys like it so far!

So the book will include some superheroes/villains in it then? Originally, I thought it was more of a sourcebook on the era, and rules for combat, etc.
I've gone back and forth on this. I won't include any heroe types in the book (though the villains could certainly be used as heroes if a player liked the build). If most GMs are like me, pregen villains with a couple of plot points are more useful than a stable of heroes. That being the case I want to include 5-10 villains to plug and play (including a cybernetic, mind bending Hitler and a tyrannical Japanese storm dragon emperor!)

Source material may be a bit light, a few pages max. I'm going to focus on WW2 but will include notes on WW1 and Korean War. For the most part in depth info is easy to come by in the age of Wikipedia so I'll hit the highlights/points of interest.

I'm figuring half or more of the book will be optional rules/tables to help speed up assigning difficulty task ratings/how to use the existing rules to simulate battlefield conditions.

I'll post another excerpt later this week, enjoy!

Dragonfly
03-01-2012, 10:04 PM
I'm liking it too! The supplement sounds INCREDIBLY useful. The examples will be very helpful. I also love Gold Rush! Good show, Dustland!

Oh, and urbwar - thanks for sending the Golden Age villains my way. I've been REALLY busy this week at school, so I haven't really had a chance to reply, but I will this weekend. T'will be fun to play-test them. :-)

Best,

Dragonfly

urbwar
03-02-2012, 05:06 AM
Glad you guys like it so far!
I've gone back and forth on this. I won't include any heroe types in the book (though the villains could certainly be used as heroes if a player liked the build). If most GMs are like me, pregen villains with a couple of plot points are more useful than a stable of heroes. That being the case I want to include 5-10 villains to plug and play (including a cybernetic, mind bending Hitler and a tyrannical Japanese storm dragon emperor!)


I agree that villains are more useful than heroes. I was just curious as many times sourcebooks include NPC hero types you can use for one shots, or as other antagonists for the player characters

---------- Post added at 05:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 AM ----------



Oh, and urbwar - thanks for sending the Golden Age villains my way. I've been REALLY busy this week at school, so I haven't really had a chance to reply, but I will this weekend. T'will be fun to play-test them. :-)

Best,

Dragonfly

Cool. I hope you get a lot of use out of them. Since I hope to publish them, it will be interesting to see how well they work mechanics wise

Dustland
03-04-2012, 09:35 AM
Persistent Damage: This power is used to simulate damaging attacks that last longer than one round. Examples include Acid, Poison, and Fire based attacks. Each level of the power must be bought as though it had a Power Boost, so every 1d in the power costs 2d (ex. Persistent Damage 3d costs 6d).

The initial attack is resolved as normal. If the target takes any damage, then at the start of the attacking character's round the target is automatically attacked again by the power. This continues until the target successfully resists the damage, at which point the effect ends.

While under the effect of the power, the target may act normally during their action OR spend their action resisting the power. If they fail to resist during their action, they do not take additional damage. Other characters may spend their actions either aiding the affected character or, if they have an applicable aptitude or power, they can roll directly against power to end the effect (Water Control power vs Persistent Damage to end a burning effect).

Effects of Persistent Damage don't stack!

Ex) Ma Deuce is attacked by a Nazi henchman armed with a Flammenwerfer (German Flamethrower), a Persistent Damage 2d power with the Device Complication. Ma Deuce is attacked and takes damage from the portable inferno, engulfing her in flames! She ignores the flames and swings a meaty fist at the Nazi, connecting for minimal damage, ending the round.

The next round the Nazi goes first again. Ma Deuce is automatically attacked by the Persistent Damage and fails to resist yet again, taking more damage and keeping the fire going! The Nazi is free to act but can't attack her again with the Flammenwerfer (since she's already on fire), so he pulls a pistol and shoots at the hero. The round hits her but her hardened body shrugs off the attack (go Armor!).

It's Ma Deuce's turn to go. Rather than attack the Nazi again, she decides she needs to put the flames out before he gets in a lucky shot. She rolls to resist the power for the second time this round and succeeds! The flames are out and it's time for a new round!

Dragonfly
03-04-2012, 03:34 PM
Hi Dustland,

I really like this construction quite a bit. I think I like it more than the Lingering suggestion made awhile back (although I like that one too). Again - the examples really make the rules "pop". I would recommend explaining a bit more what you mean by "Effects of Persistent Damage don't stack!" I didn't understand what you meant until I read the example.

I, for one, would love to see Simon weigh in on new powers like this, as it would be confusing to new players if competing rules made it into print in various supplements.

Anyway, VERY nice job!

Best,

Dragonfly

Dustland
03-04-2012, 05:24 PM
Thanks Dragonfly. You're absolutely right about needing to reword/clarify that line. I'll clean it up it the "official" copy. Basically if you're on fire, you're not going to be made MORE on fire by another Persistent Damage attack. However, you could be on fire, then get hit with acid, and with a poisoning attack, and have to deal with each seperately as a Persistent Damage attack. It would be a nasty thing to do to a player or a villian!

Also being affected by Persistent Damage should not make you immune from other attacks of the same type if they come from a different power. If you're on fire from PD, you could still be attacked by the Elemental Control (Fire) power for example. (The villain uses the fire that's ravaging your body and makes it burn hotter!)

I almost don't want to use the power because it is necessary to word it just right :)

Last, I'll be very careful to note that all of these are GM's Options, not "canon" by any means. As a matter of fact, with each entry it will begin with Optional Power: or Optional Aptitude:, etc.

Speaking of Aptitudes, I'll post some options later this week, enjoy!

novaexpress
03-05-2012, 06:24 AM
Nice rule.
Just to clarify, what happens if two Nazis henchmen attack one target with a flamethrower each, and in the same round?

Dustland
03-05-2012, 12:19 PM
The character would only take damage from the first one that hits.

novaexpress
03-06-2012, 08:02 AM
So, technically, it would be useless regarding the rule, that a bunch of henchmen shoots a target with a flamethrower each (or even, with a weapon-device throwing some burning acid)?
Or is it possible that the target still receives some basic damage (non persistent) from each weapon?
Just because of the blow of the fire.

Dustland
03-06-2012, 12:35 PM
Technically Henchmen don't have powers :)

If you wanted to, you certainly could allow the power to do damage to the target repeatedly in the same round (but only have the target under the effect of one Persistant Damage). For me it gets a little too complicated if you start to head down that path. What if the attack is a poison gas attack? Should there be an "impact" damage associated with that too? Just my preference, I wouldn't mess with allowing more than one successful attack.

novaexpress
03-07-2012, 12:12 PM
Technically, you're right about Henchmen having no powers. ;)

In that case, I think I would handle the combat with henchmen/mooks using a flamethrower normally (with a Rating matching the numbers of henchmen/mooks), and I would put another Rating for persistent damage from the flamethrowers. Maybe something like a Rating of 6 to represent the fire burning the character. The target would then have to make an opposed roll of a Resistance vs the persistent damage rating of 6 to decrease it up to 0 (meaning the fire is subdued).

I would do the same with a poison gas attack (but that there are few chances that a poison gas attack makes impact damage - except if the target receives a canister propelled by a launcher, maybe).

And in case of a Super using a power with a persistent damage effect, I would use your rule.

Dustland
03-10-2012, 08:41 AM
I've slowed down a bit on writing because I've been focused on doing some really cool illustrations for Urbwar (thank you sir!). Since his book involves WW2 too, I think it's an evil plot to keep me from working on my project :)

And if anyone else wants to keep me behind schedule, I do all sorts of illustrations, typically $15 for 1/4 to 1/2 page.

Shameless plug over...

Stealing Dragonfly's term, I'll preview one of the benchmarks I'm including in the book, Material Strength. I also have numerous Athleticism-based benchmarks (swimming, climbing, lifting, etc) and am looking around for other areas that could use defining to help overworked GMs run their games. So without further ado, here's a list of Material Strengths!


6 Window Glass, Thick Rope
9 Brick, Thin Aluminum, Wood Door, Shatter Proof Glass (Windshields)
12 Concrete, Thin Iron, Thick Timbers, Blast Proof Glass (Battleship Windows), Thick Ice, Thick Aluminum
15 Reinforced Concrete, Steel, Thick Iron (Anchor Chain)
18 Solid Stone (Granite)
21 Advanced Alloys (Beyond the reach of most WW2 powers)
24 Diamond
30+ Alien or Magical Materials


The numbers represent the difficulty of breeching, breaking, or punching through the material in question. My goal wasn't really to get a 100% acccurate listing of material strengths, there's simply too many factors involved, but simply have a handy reference for a GM to make a quick decision during the game that will allow them to consistantly judge an action.

I've been in games where one character will try to perform an action, say climb a wall, and the GM pulls out a random difficulty number like 6. A few minutes later, a different character tries to perform the same action and the GM, having forgotten what he set the difficulty at before, assigns it a 9. Now everyone's irritated, the player because he/she feels screwed by the arbitrary ruling, and the GM because everyone's questioning his/her call. Hopefully these benchmarks will help!

urbwar
03-10-2012, 12:27 PM
I've slowed down a bit on writing because I've been focused on doing some really cool illustrations for Urbwar (thank you sir!). Since his book involves WW2 too, I think it's an evil plot to keep me from working on my project :)


Oh sure! Make me your scapegoat! :)

Dragonfly
03-10-2012, 02:17 PM
I've slowed down a bit on writing because I've been focused on doing some really cool illustrations for Urbwar (thank you sir!). Since his book involves WW2 too, I think it's an evil plot to keep me from working on my project :)

And if anyone else wants to keep me behind schedule, I do all sorts of illustrations, typically $15 for 1/4 to 1/2 page.

Shameless plug over...

Stealing Dragonfly's term, I'll preview one of the benchmarks I'm including in the book, Material Strength. I also have numerous Athleticism-based benchmarks (swimming, climbing, lifting, etc) and am looking around for other areas that could use defining to help overworked GMs run their games. So without further ado, here's a list of Material Strengths!


The numbers represent the difficulty of breeching, breaking, or punching through the material in question. My goal wasn't really to get a 100% acccurate listing of material strengths, there's simply too many factors involved, but simply have a handy reference for a GM to make a quick decision during the game that will allow them to consistantly judge an action.

I've been in games where one character will try to perform an action, say climb a wall, and the GM pulls out a random difficulty number like 6. A few minutes later, a different character tries to perform the same action and the GM, having forgotten what he set the difficulty at before, assigns it a 9. Now everyone's irritated, the player because he/she feels screwed by the arbitrary ruling, and the GM because everyone's questioning his/her call. Hopefully these benchmarks will help!

VERY cool, Dustland!

This saves me a great deal of trouble, as I was going to develop a set of material strength benchmarks very similar to these.

You may have noticed my earlier attempt, which involves assigning Ratings to objects, rather than Target Numbers (like yours). I was really flip/flopping on which is the best approach. The TN approach is simpler, quicker to resolve, and therefore incredibly appealing.

The Rating approach has the effect of simulating damage being done over time. The Incomprehensible Bulk (Super Strength 10D) punches the vault door (Rating 18) and rolls a total of 37. That's more than twice the rating, so the vault door takes 2 damage, leaving it with a Rating of 16. Next Round, the Bulk rolls a 35, reducing the vault door to a 14 Rating. It would probably take the Bulk 7 rounds to punch through the vault door.

To be honest, I think I like the TN approach better, as I want my Hulk-alike to be able to tear through a vault door as if it were paper, but the Rating option might serve some campaign tones better. (I think of Superman's labored pounding through armored doors in some of the Fleischer cartoons).

Anyway, I'm already standing in a virtual line with my money in hand.

Oh, and urbwar - that goes to anything you produce too. :-)

Best,

Dragonfly

Dustland
03-10-2012, 03:03 PM
I was thinking the same thing, target number vs rating which you reduce over time (like mooks or hazards). I'll probably have a brief description of how to handle it both ways, but like you said, it's more fun for strong guys and super powers to blast through inanimate objects rather than spending numerous rounds bashing away on something. Rolling dice can get tedious if something's not really challenging you (ie fighting back).

I'm planning on it costing under $2 so it won't be too hard to purchase!

honestiago
03-11-2012, 07:17 PM
Dust:

When you guys were playing here, I took a point of damage for Mooks for each point over the TN you rolled. So, if you hit a Mook 4 with a roll of 8 or more, he/it was out). Made things faster, I thought. I also had Mooks "gang up" by adding their ratings together (example: four 3-pt mooks attacking in concert attack at a rating of 12). Smaller Mook numbers increases the value of split/area attacks immensely. In addition, you can always increase Mook attack/defense ratings based on factors such as weaponry, which may affect one, but not the other. Example: 4 Mooks (3 pts each) with body armor/pistols. Attack rating for each Mook is normal (3). Defense rating is then 5. The base points stay the same, so if you exceed the TN, the Mooks take damage and are out at 3 pts. This requires a slightly more complex listing:

4 Guards (3 pts)
Attack: 3
Defense: 5

Or, for simplicity's sake 3/3/5 (hits/attack/defense).

In all honesty, I'm all for Mooks being 3 pts all the way, then adding rolls in. Example: 2 Mooks with flamethrowers=2/2d/2. Mooks then get 4 for their strength rating, plus a 2d roll when they fire flamethrowers (which can make one mook's attack rating 5-14, so you have to be careful when dealing with the weaponry).

This also makes normal baddies much more dangerous in hordes (10 2-pt Mooks attack at 20; which is enough to take out someone who gets a bad defense roll).

Something to chew on, anyway...

Dustland
03-11-2012, 08:35 PM
I'll get to mooks at a later point, but there's some similarities to how you handled them and one of the options I'll present.

novaexpress
03-12-2012, 09:29 AM
I was going to suggest the same method until I saw the Honestiago's post.
I like the way mooks are treated in the rulebook, but it indeed bothered me that huge weaponry/armor wasn't taken into account.
Dustland, I like the way you handled that.
I'm thinking about allowing a Rating of 1 per mook ; +1 to the attacks for the mooks with a weapon virtually more lethal (like submachine gun/machine gun and others automatic weapons) ; and +1 to the defence for the Mooks with bullet-proof armors.
Of course, a mook with a submachine gun and a kevlar vest would have a Rating of 3.
I would authorize as well "ganging up".

Dustland, regarding Henchmen, would you use the same kind of rules you suggested?

Dustland
03-13-2012, 07:46 PM
Dustland, regarding Henchmen, would you use the same kind of rules you suggested?
I'm not really sure what you mean Nova? Do you mean allowing one hit kills of mooks?

But since we're talking about mooks...

Here's two peeks at options for mooks. Considering how common they would be in a traditional war scenario, I felt they could use some fleshing out and need an option to make them less of a grind.

1) Qualities: A group of mooks (or a henchman) may have a single quality, an Aptitude or Power, that sets them apart from your average group of mooks. Normaly they would only have a single Quality! Typically the Quality would only have 1d-3d. For weapons, I prefer to use Qualities to represent crew-served weapons such as heavy machine guns or anti-tank rockets, or special weapons like flamethrowers that aren't represented very well by the mook system.

Ex) The GM wants a group of mooks to be armed with a bazooka (the characters are clearing the way for allied tanks to move through an area). It's a full squad so he assigns them a Mook Rating (8) and gives them the Quality: Special Weapon 3d/1d Armor Piercing (Bazooka).

Tank Hunting Mooks: 8 (Q: Bazooka [SW 3d/1d Ap])

Ex) The characters are tasked with getting a Combat Engineer to a target so he can blow it up. The GM decides he should be a Henchman since he's named and needs to be a bit resiliant. Thinking about it, most of his stats/attributes would probably be 1d so he assigns him a Henchman Rating (3). He needs to be able to do some serious demo work so the GM also gives him the Quality: Technology 3d to reflect his expertise in the destructive arts.

Specialist J. Johnson: Henchman 3 (Q: Technology 3d)

2) Optional Rule for Mook Damage: If you're using lots of mooks in your game, simulating large scale battles for instance, the encounters can get to be a bit of a grind. One option to speed mook battles along is to change how they take damage.

For every point over the mook's rating, they take a point of damage.

Ex) Gold Rush gets the drop on a Squad of Mooks (8). He attacks with his Super Speed 5d, rolling a 15. He beats the mooks by 7 (15-8=7) so they take 7 points! Only 1 mook survives the initial rush and throws his arms down in surrender.

There's two things to consider when implementing this optional rule:
1) Are mook battles turning into a grind? If not, then don't use it!
2) This rule does allow the GM to use higher levels of mooks without turning them into 20 round slug matches. They'll be dangerous for the first round or two, but then they'll go down quickly once they take a few hits.

This is a major modification to the pace of combat, but I think for some GMs/scenarios, this is an excellent way to handle them.

novaexpress
03-14-2012, 05:10 PM
I like the Quality aspect.
Could be a nice compromise. It still allows to use the standard rule to handle mooks (damage decreasing their Rating) and besides adds a flavor (as you said, a special Aptitude, a special weapon, etc.).
And it works as well for groups of henchmen.
I'm gonna give a second thought about that.

honestiago
03-17-2012, 10:19 AM
The Quality aspect is a nice, simple addition. Easy to track. But shouldn't the boost on your example count as part of the 1-3d? (3d plus AP is a 4d power). And could this be expanded to make Henchmen a bit tougher, say 2-3d qualities (6d total)?

Dustland
03-17-2012, 11:14 AM
But shouldn't the boost on your example count as part of the 1-3d?
Yep, technically the Bazooka should be a 4d power. I'll probably reword the text to make it sound less like "qualities shouldn't be more than 3d", it wasn't my intention. For crew-served and man portable weapons of the era, I'll probably have a rough cap of 3d plus boosts so characters don't feel outclassed by the mundane equipment around them. Of course nefarious Nazi tech will be higher :)


And could this be expanded to make Henchmen a bit tougher, say 2-3d qualities
(6d total)?
You could load up as many qualities as you want really. I think in most WW2 scenarios it won't be necessary to have multiple qualities unless the GM just really like making things overly complicated OR it serves to set a henchman apart for the purpose of the story.

Take a UDT Frogman for instance. I'd give him a Henchman Rating (6) since I figure most of his aptitudes and stats would be in the 2d range. I'd add on Tech 3d (for demo work) and Ath 3d (for swimming and diving skills).

honestiago
03-17-2012, 01:44 PM
I'd like to use the Qualities idea in Bad Business, but don't want to steal it from SGTW (Supers Goes to War). I won't script it as such, however, unless SGTW gets out there first (at which point I'll reference the option and SGTW). For now, I am putting in such things as "the operatives have Night Vision technology [treat as Super Senses, 2d]." We did something similar with some robots in Bad Sports, so I don't think this constitutes stealing anything (hopefully).

Dustland
03-17-2012, 02:20 PM
Feel free to use the term Qualities if it suits you Mr E!

Dustland
03-18-2012, 01:30 PM
Finally had the chance to sit down and start writing on Supers! at War today, woo hoo!. I guess I should decide if I want to be an artist or a writer...Organizing my pile of notes is fun and makes me realize this may end up being a decent sized book. I won't let the enormity of the task daunt me! Or I may just edit down things a bit :)

I'll try to post a rough Table of Contents later this week. My plan is to address various optional rules in a manner similar to how Supers! is layed out, so if you want to know where the rules on Aptitudes are, you'll know they precede the chapter on powers, etc.

That being said, Chapter 1 Rolling the Dice is out of place (but finished)! But I figured it is a core concept and should probably go near the beginning of the book. And what's in Ch1? The Wild Die option of course, as well as a Counting Successes option, and notes on how to use the two together (and examples!)

After reading the thread at rpg.net, I think I should include a random character generator somewhere, but the book is beefy enough as it is. Well, back to work!

Dustland
03-20-2012, 12:35 PM
Here's another peek at the Supers! at War, vol 1 content. I'm working through the various Hazards one might encounter during a Supers! war campaign, including gas attacks, aerial and artillary bombardments, and....

Minefields (Hazard Rating 8)
Minefields are hazards that serve two purposes: 1) they discourage people and vehicles from moving through an area, or 2) they slow down enemies when approaching a defended position, forcing them to choose between dealing with the hazard or the enemy lying on the other side.

Minefields are most effective when used in conjunction with Mooks to create a serious dual threat to Supers! Obviously some Supers will have the ability to bypass the Hazard entirely (ie. teleportation). The GM should decide how many rounds it will take a character on foot to travel through the minefield, assuming they don't stop to actively neutralize the threat. Typically it takes 3 rounds to cross a minefield, though larger minefields could take longer.

Minefield Options:
1) Anti-vehicle mines: The Hazard Rating is 3 higher vs targets with Armor.
2) Advanced mines: The Hazard Rating is 3 (or more) higher than a typical minefield.
3) Teleportation mines (advanced tech only): If the character takes damage from the Minefield Hazard, they are teleported back to the start of the minefield! (a particularly nasty trick if the characters are crossing a large minefield and are dealing with large numbers of mooks and/or heavy weapons on the far side).
4) Elemental mines (advanced tech only): Changes the nature of the damage and may have a Lingering Damage effect (fire or acid mines for example)

And many more...!

Useful Powers/Aptitudes: Investigation or Survival for noticing where the mines are, Technology for deactivating the mines, Elemental Control (Earth) to draw the dirt away from the mines, Energy Control (Magnetism) to detect the mines, Plant Powers to literally root out the hazard, various Super Senses (X-Ray Vision for seeing through the ground, Scent for sniffing them out, etc)

Simon W
03-20-2012, 01:31 PM
Looking good, Dusty!

Dragonfly
03-20-2012, 05:11 PM
Beautiful stuff, Dustland!

Upward and onward!

Best,

Dragonfly

Dustland
03-30-2012, 04:29 PM
Absolutely nothing to do with my Supers at War book other than it is a piece I was commissioned to do that has kept me from writing (which I'm always happy to do!). Be afraid of cats with thumbs.

Dragonfly
03-31-2012, 09:02 AM
VERY cool, Dustland! I like it!

Dustland
04-13-2012, 10:07 PM
http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee374/Rusintx/Dustland2.png

---------- Post added at 10:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 PM ----------

Was playing around with the screen name that I use on these forums and was thinking about using something like this as a logo for any products that I work on.

But since this is the Supers at War thread....

I'm going to publish seperate "chapters" at a time to give me smaller bites to work with and help work around my full time job and illustration commissions. I'm looking to have the first $1 pdf done by the end of the month. It will cover Mooks and Henchmen, will have a couple of new power and aptitude options, the wild dice method that I'm always harping about, and some type of adventure thread, or a heaping serving of plot seeds (the only part that isn't written yet).

Hopefully you guys will find that it's well worth your hard earned buck!

Dragonfly
04-16-2012, 01:37 PM
Dustland,

I am still VERY excited about this. Can't wait to pick up your product(s). Keep us posted!

I still have plans for my own Bestiary. Other projects have taken my time, but I hope to get back to it soon.

Best,

Dragonfly

Dustland
05-19-2012, 08:16 PM
Supers! at War is coming along nicely. I have 90% of the writing done so it's time to start working on some illustrations to flesh it out. I did this one, Iron Cross, in a style I normally don't attempt since I prefer more detail and realism, but I like how he looks for the WW2 supplement. Hope you like him too!
3672

novaexpress
05-20-2012, 10:40 AM
Nice!
Reminds me a bit of the BASH's illustrations.
I prefer as well more detail and realism, but this "cartoonsih" style seems more fashionable in indie superheroes RPGs now.