Labs in Bases...

[radioKAOS]

In order to put a lab in a base, you just purchase the appropriate skill at an appropriate level, right?

My questions are:

Why wouldn't you just purchase skill levels in the appropriate skill? I mean, the lab itself isn't making the skill roll, you need the skill yourself to really know what you're doing, the lab just allows you use of the proper equipment... this says skill levels to me.

Wouldn't the labs use the 'partial coverage' rule? I mean, you can't tell me that you can use the Forensics lab anywhere on the premises...

What about the Focus limitation? Clearly the lab is a focus, no? What about expendable things in said labs?

Multipower for labs? We've seen 'Utility Belts' done this way, why not labs in a base?

Am I just thinking too much about it, and I should just leave it as is?

[Brainstorm]

5ER 468 suggests that buying skills for labs not only designates what the facility was designed for but also enables a 9- Complimentary Skill Roll to reflect the benefits of the facility. I imagine there is a lot of potential for creativity as well here. Simply buying additional levels would improve the number on the complimentary roll, but I believe it would also make sense to buy Usable By Other Skills Levels to reflect a lab of such quality that it actually extends the capabilities of its users. In fact, UBO Skills might not be out of the question in some instances, reflecting a facilitiy designed to enable untrained individuals to perform complex technical feats. Of course, especially fancy labs may have AI or robotic components with Skills of their own. Different GMs are going to be of different minds about these issues, but the official rules do define labs as facilities with their own Skills that may be used to make Complimentary Skill Rolls. Also keep in mind that all this assumes a Base or Vehicle, reflecting the rules on those Perks appropriately. For something like a utility belt science kit or a physician's black bag, I imagine it would make sense to buy a Skill with the Focus Limitation, then let the Skill in the Focus be complimentary to that same Skill as ectually employed by the character.

Regards,
Brainstorm

[Super Squirrel]

In order to put a lab in a base, you just purchase the appropriate skill at an appropriate level, right?

My questions are:

Why wouldn't you just purchase skill levels in the appropriate skill? I mean, the lab itself isn't making the skill roll, you need the skill yourself to really know what you're doing, the lab just allows you use of the proper equipment... this says skill levels to me.

Wouldn't the labs use the 'partial coverage' rule? I mean, you can't tell me that you can use the Forensics lab anywhere on the premises...

What about the Focus limitation? Clearly the lab is a focus, no? What about expendable things in said labs?

Multipower for labs? We've seen 'Utility Belts' done this way, why not labs in a base?

Am I just thinking too much about it, and I should just leave it as is?
There are two seperate entities here.

There are labs that can guide a person through a system and then there are labs designed to enhance an individual's skill with something.

You could cheat and go:

Paramedics 9- OAF Immobile plus+3 Skill Levels with Paramedics, OAF Immobile.

Your normal person will have a 12- with Paramedics. Those already familiar with Paramedics would get a +3 to their skill roll. The cost wouldn't change at all either.

[radioKAOS]

There are two seperate entities here.

There are labs that can guide a person through a system and then there are labs designed to enhance an individual's skill with something.

You could cheat and go:

Paramedics 9- OAF Immobile plus+3 Skill Levels with Paramedics, OAF Immobile.

Your normal person will have a 12- with Paramedics. Those already familiar with Paramedics would get a +3 to their skill roll. The cost wouldn't change at all either.

Yeah, see that's along the lines I was thinking. It makes way more sense to me overall.

[Mike W]

Usable by others skill rolls has potential. But buying partial coverage or focus limitation on the lab is cheesy and munchkiny. I mean, how else does a base have a skill if not in a focus? Considering you're already getting a 5 for 1 return rate, I think we can pass on the focus limit. And partial coverage was never intended for skill uses. It was meant to cover things like armor or a security system that had "holes" in them. Not to tack onto a lab because you don't normally carry it around from room to room. I mean, by that reasoning you could apply partial coverage to just about anything that is attached to the base.

[ghost-angel]

OAF: Immobile is good for simulating Labs - represents that you have to be in a certain area of the base to perform the function.

And Super Squirels idea is an excellent one that I'll be using for all labs on my bases in the future and will now go retcon my current bases.

[Super Squirrel]

Usable by others skill rolls has potential. But buying partial coverage or focus limitation on the lab is cheesy and munchkiny. I mean, how else does a base have a skill if not in a focus? Considering you're already getting a 5 for 1 return rate, I think we can pass on the focus limit. And partial coverage was never intended for skill uses. It was meant to cover things like armor or a security system that had "holes" in them. Not to tack onto a lab because you don't normally carry it around from room to room. I mean, by that reasoning you could apply partial coverage to just about anything that is attached to the base.
I'm curious how you can have a "lab" without actually having equipment.

[Super Squirrel]

OAF: Immobile is good for simulating Labs - represents that you have to be in a certain area of the base to perform the function.

And Super Squirels idea is an excellent one that I'll be using for all labs on my bases in the future and will now go retcon my current bases.
:D Cool. I also like hearing that my ideas are helping people who actually have running campaigns.

[Blue Jogger]

Well, back in Champions II, the idea was that the base assisted you. Back before we had personal computers for a few hundred dollars, this meant one of two things.

1. The base had a roll, which was complimentary to your roll. That meant being in a good physics lab helped you with doing physics, about as much as having that mysterious bonus known as "up to +3 for really good equipment". To get that +3 most of the time, you need a complimentary skill of at least 17 or less, and you probably wanted it to be 21 or less to get it 75% of the time. Which gives you an idea of how great this physics lab had to be to give you that measely +3. Having the best medical facility in the world, didn't help your 8 or less Paramedics by that much. "Hey, here's the book that I needed five hours ago. Chapter Eight, the symptoms and treatment of hypothermia."

OR

2. The base had an AI, in which case, the huge water-cooler supercomputer had the skill and could talked someone through it. Or the robot had the skill.

Nowadays, you could just Google search.

[Brainstorm]

The Focus Limitation is appropriate to instances where skills are in equipment form, but most certainly not applicable to any Base or a Vehicle. Implicit in the pricing of those two creations is the understanding that the Base is an immobile location, and the vehicle a mobile location. If you did not want to build a base but you did want to have access to a lab, then an Immobile Focus Limitation would be the way to go, but again this is strictly in cases where the Skill(s) are being bought straight up rather than through the 1:5 discount rate of Bases and Vehicles. If you're building a Base and you want to have lab(s) in it, reducing the cost of the Base's abilities by the value of a Focus Limitation is simply cheating. On the other hand, if you do not want to bother building a Base, I could see straight up purchase of an Immobile Focus to represent that a character's otherwise normal apartment/house has a room in it outfitted especially for the exercise of those skills, or even simply that the character has unconditional access to such facilities at another fixed location.

Also, I believe that Usable By Other should be required only in Base/Vehicle instances where a built-in Skill is meant to be used outright rather than used to make complimentary rolls. Bases, Vehicles, and Foci are automatically usable by owners, although UBO would still be required if the idea was to have a non-Independent Focus sophisticated enough to walk untrained users other than the owner through a technical process. Also, I personally favor the Complimentary Skill Roll approach for tookits, et al. because I see it as a sort of "how helpful is this gear in this case?" question rather than a "the practitioner is always better for being equipped with this" situation. It reflects the idea that sometimes a given lab/workshop/toolkit will have exactly the right stuff to facilitate the most complicated parts of a given task and sometimes the challenges at hand do not match up well with the hardware at hand. If someone bought Disguise with +3 Levels in a kit and offered no other details, I would assume the kit could be used to make a complimentary roll at 12-. That said, I can certainly see the Skill Level approach as valid, particular in cases where the lab or kit is meant to reflect tools of truly extraordinary quality or it contains some sort of built in help (like a computerized aide or a stack of reference books) that would be consistently useful in pretty much any exercise of the Skill in question. Yet I would expect some sort of character sheet notation to reflect that the something other than the standard approach to lab game mechanics was intended by the design.

Regards,
Brainstorm

[radioKAOS]

Usable by others skill rolls has potential.

Agreed, but then you'd have to include the disads that you don't seem so fond of, no?


But buying partial coverage or focus limitation on the lab is cheesy and munchkiny. I mean, how else does a base have a skill if not in a focus? Considering you're already getting a 5 for 1 return rate, I think we can pass on the focus limit.

Then we should pass on it for everything in a base, no? And that's just not the case of course. I'm looking for something a little more standardized.

Also, let's face it, having a couple good labs is far more expensive than most powers in a base. We're talking 19pts EACH for a 17- roll, that on average will gain us a +3 to one particular skill [as a complimentary skill]. That costs more than the Underwater Base Example [Champions p108] allows you for labs! Seems silly that such a base would only have one lab, or a bunch of labs at really low rolls.


And partial coverage was never intended for skill uses. It was meant to cover things like armor or a security system that had "holes" in them. Not to tack onto a lab because you don't normally carry it around from room to room. I mean, by that reasoning you could apply partial coverage to just about anything that is attached to the base.

And I think you probably should. Maybe the numbers are out of whack for Partial Coverage [meaning that perhaps we get too much of a price break], but it reasons that if something is not available throughout the whole base, then it qualifies for a limitation. Whether that's skills bought as powers, or whatever.

[radioKAOS]

Well, back in Champions II, the idea was that the base assisted you. Back before we had personal computers for a few hundred dollars, this meant one of two things.

1. The base had a roll, which was complimentary to your roll. That meant being in a good physics lab helped you with doing physics, about as much as having that mysterious bonus known as "up to +3 for really good equipment". To get that +3 most of the time, you need a complimentary skill of at least 17 or less, and you probably wanted it to be 21 or less to get it 75% of the time. Which gives you an idea of how great this physics lab had to be to give you that measely +3. Having the best medical facility in the world, didn't help your 8 or less Paramedics by that much. "Hey, here's the book that I needed five hours ago. Chapter Eight, the symptoms and treatment of hypothermia."


This is still the way it is, though I find it's far too expensive to have any really good labs around! You'd think that the system would encourage lab use in bases, and not just boil it down to 'a clubhouse where we have lasers to defend us.'



OR

2. The base had an AI, in which case, the huge water-cooler supercomputer had the skill and could talked someone through it. Or the robot had the skill.

This can be done as well, but you still need the skill bought by the base to say it has that lab for the computer to use.


Nowadays, you could just Google search.

Oh yeah, just ask the Question Man!!!

[radioKAOS]

The Focus Limitation is appropriate to instances where skills are in equipment form, but most certainly not applicable to any Base or a Vehicle. Implicit in the pricing of those two creations is the understanding that the Base is an immobile location, and the vehicle a mobile location. If you did not want to build a base but you did want to have access to a lab, then an Immobile Focus Limitation would be the way to go, but again this is strictly in cases where the Skill(s) are being bought straight up rather than through the 1:5 discount rate of Bases and Vehicles. If you're building a Base and you want to have lab(s) in it, reducing the cost of the Base's abilities by the value of a Focus Limitation is simply cheating. On the other hand, if you do not want to bother building a Base, I could see straight up purchase of an Immobile Focus to represent that a character's otherwise normal apartment/house has a room in it outfitted especially for the exercise of those skills, or even simply that the character has unconditional access to such facilities at another fixed location.

Let's take an Occult library for instance:

3pts KS: Arcane and Occult Lore, OIF Immoble 17-
And you're getting the building it's in for free points...

OR in a base...

19pts KS: Arcane and Occult Lore 17-
plus pay for the base's stats...

19/5 = 4 REAL points.

So it actually costs you more to put it in a base, and you also have to pay for the base's stats...

That doesn't seem very consistent to me. Shouldn't we be encouraging heroes to have bases?


Also, I believe that Usable By Other should be required only in Base/Vehicle instances where a built-in Skill is meant to be used outright rather than used to make complimentary rolls. Bases, Vehicles, and Foci are automatically usable by owners, although UBO would still be required if the idea was to have a non-Independent Focus sophisticated enough to walk untrained users other than the owner through a technical process. Also, I personally favor the Complimentary Skill Roll approach for tookits, et al. because I see it as a sort of "how helpful is this gear in this case?" question rather than a "the practitioner is always better for being equipped with this" situation. It reflects the idea that sometimes a given lab/workshop/toolkit will have exactly the right stuff to facilitate the most complicated parts of a given task and sometimes the challenges at hand do not match up well with the hardware at hand. If someone bought Disguise with +3 Levels in a kit and offered no other details, I would assume the kit could be used to make a complimentary roll at 12-. That said, I can certainly see the Skill Level approach as valid, particular in cases where the lab or kit is meant to reflect tools of truly extraordinary quality or it contains some sort of built in help (like a computerized aide or a stack of reference books) that would be consistently useful in pretty much any exercise of the Skill in question. Yet I would expect some sort of character sheet notation to reflect that the something other than the standard approach to lab game mechanics was intended by the design.

Regards,
Brainstorm

Yeah, I'm torn on that. I do like being able to say "this lab is so good that it will give you a +3 bonus on whatever you do there!" - I mean it's IN THE GAME written that way... pg45 5th Revised. But you can't actually BUY it that way in a base??? That seems more than a little silly, and not at all standardized.

Although, I do like the idea of complimentary skill rolls because not all labs are the same, and not all tasks performed in such labs are the same. The lab may help you out more on a certain task than on others, and it seems overboard to stat that all out [+1 for a certain task, ad nauseum]...

As for the UBO advantage, seems reasonable enough, but I think if that was the case, I'd just have the computer/AI handle the skill instead.

[Mike W]

I'm curious how you can have a "lab" without actually having equipment.

Ok, technically, you do need equipment to have a lab(generally speaking) but buying focus on something that is meant to be inherent to the base(to the point you couldn't take it somewhere else) is pretty munchkiny IMO. I mean, buying OAF on the weapon/security systems is one thing. That stuff is expensive and someone might get the idea of trying to "demount" one and carry it with. But buying a lab with a focus limit, to me, is like buying vehicle movement with a focus limit. The labs are such an inherent part of the base, like phone lines, that you shouldn't get a focus limit on them. The fact that the base's inherent 5/1 break means you're already paying about 1/2 of a real CP for the lab as it is(for a base roll anyway). And since the lab lets you do things that you can't do in the field(sorry you can't perform surgery in the middle of the street, but if you take him back to the base, you can manage it") Or scan/analyze objects to determine properties. Or whatever. And yet, you aren't asked to pay for all of the "powers" that the lab is assumed to have. If you aren't paying for every piece of equipment in the lab then no focus limit.

And what if you put a computer in the base? Do you get to take it as a focus twice. Once for it being a computer and once for its "skills" being only useable at the base(because that's where the hardware for all of its programs is located). Even though the thing is a mainframe that takes up a whole wall and could never realistically be taken anywhere else.

[radioKAOS]

Ok, technically, you do need equipment to have a lab(generally speaking) but buying focus on something that is meant to be inherent to the base(to the point you couldn't take it somewhere else) is pretty munchkiny IMO. I mean, buying OAF on the weapon/security systems is one thing. That stuff is expensive and someone might get the idea of trying to "demount" one and carry it with.

Um, there's usually lots of expensive gear in a lab too. And a lot of it can be taken.



But buying a lab with a focus limit, to me, is like buying vehicle movement with a focus limit. The labs are such an inherent part of the base, like phone lines, that you shouldn't get a focus limit on them. The fact that the base's inherent 5/1 break means you're already paying about 1/2 of a real CP for the lab as it is(for a base roll anyway). And since the lab lets you do things that you can't do in the field(sorry you can't perform surgery in the middle of the street, but if you take him back to the base, you can manage it") Or scan/analyze objects to determine properties. Or whatever. And yet, you aren't asked to pay for all of the "powers" that the lab is assumed to have. If you aren't paying for every piece of equipment in the lab then no focus limit.

See above for price comparison of having said lab in your house vs. in your base.


And what if you put a computer in the base? Do you get to take it as a focus twice. Once for it being a computer and once for its "skills" being only useable at the base(because that's where the hardware for all of its programs is located). Even though the thing is a mainframe that takes up a whole wall and could never realistically be taken anywhere else.

Computers are a whole other issue. They are technically followers.

And with modern tech there's no way the sample computers in the Champions book would take up a whole wall. That doesn't even begin to think about 'super science' that most Super Hero games get into. Hell your mainframe could be the size of a PDA.

[Mike W]

Agreed, but then you'd have to include the disads that you don't seem so fond of, no?

No, you wouldn't. Because the base is already thought of as having certain inherent bonuses and limits. I'm arguing that focus is already inherent. Equivalent to buying say, skills in a person.



Then we should pass on it for everything in a base, no? And that's just not the case of course. I'm looking for something a little more standardized.

No, we shouldn't. Partial coverage was meant for powers. Not skills. Putting ANY limits on skills requires GM permission. And again, the focus idea is already in place. You don't put partial coverage on your lasers just because you don't have enough to cover the whole base. You only put them on your lasers if each one has a "blind spot".

Also, let's face it, having a couple good labs is far more expensive than most powers in a base. We're talking 19pts EACH for a 17- roll, that on average will gain us a +3 to one particular skill [as a complimentary skill]. That costs more than the Underwater Base Example [Champions p108] allows you for labs! Seems silly that such a base would only have one lab, or a bunch of labs at really low rolls.

Except that the sample base you're referring to has a computer - which can use it's own rolls to assist instead of the lab's roll as long as the lab is properly equipped.



And I think you probably should. Maybe the numbers are out of whack for Partial Coverage [meaning that perhaps we get too much of a price break], but it reasons that if something is not available throughout the whole base, then it qualifies for a limitation. Whether that's skills bought as powers, or whatever.

No it doesn't. You don't get limits like "EB must originate from same place" if you're PC can only shoot his EB from his eyes. It's the same idea here. The idea that something is inherent to a location is already factored into the basic cost break.

[Mike W]

Let's take an Occult library for instance:

3pts KS: Arcane and Occult Lore, OIF Immoble 17-
And you're getting the building it's in for free points...

OR in a base...

19pts KS: Arcane and Occult Lore 17-
plus pay for the base's stats...

19/5 = 4 REAL points.

So it actually costs you more to put it in a base, and you also have to pay for the base's stats...

That doesn't seem very consistent to me. Shouldn't we be encouraging heroes to have bases?



.

Except that the first example puts it in your own home, where it is much more vulnerable. The second one puts it in a base, which is presumably much more protected. I mean, sure you can put it into your own home, but you don't have to pay for that regardless of whether or not you put any "labs" there. Remember, you're assumed to be making a decent living($50K or so a year) and have a house and car already. It's a given on your character. But having a base, a place where you can separate your private and public life and protect your identity.

Also, you aren't doing the math right. First, KS is 2/1 not 3/2.(3/1 if you base it on INT) Regardless, putting the skill in a focus means that you don't get bonus for your own stat. If you put it in a Focus, it's based on the Ability Score of the Focus. So the base cost would be the same either way. And since OIF, Immobile is a 1.5 limit, you would get to divide the cost by 2.5 in the first example - which would make it twice as much as putting it in a base and getting to divide it by 5.

[Mike W]

Um, there's usually lots of expensive gear in a lab too. And a lot of it can be taken.



.

But you can't take the whole lab and be able to do everything that the lab could do in the field. You COULD theoretically take all the weapons you could carry. And it's really a side issue anyway.

[radioKAOS]

No, you wouldn't. Because the base is already thought of as having certain inherent bonuses and limits. I'm arguing that focus is already inherent. Equivalent to buying say, skills in a person.

Yes, if you are saying that "focus is already inherent" then we should use that logic across the board, and no powers in a base should get that limitation. I disagee with you completely. I think that nearly everything in a base is a focus of some sort. That's what I meant when I said "Then we should pass on it for everything in a base, no? And that's just not the case of course. I'm looking for something a little more standardized."


No, we shouldn't. Partial coverage was meant for powers. Not skills. Putting ANY limits on skills requires GM permission. And again, the focus idea is already in place. You don't put partial coverage on your lasers just because you don't have enough to cover the whole base. You only put them on your lasers if each one has a "blind spot".

Putting limits on skills is now commonplace. It may have been the exception before, but now it's nearly the rule for gadgeteers and the like. And again, you assume the 'focus is already in place' - I disagree with that.

If we go back to your argument about things being 'inherent' in a base, then sure, you could absolutely use the partial coverage to show that the lasers aren't present in the whole base. Just as you could with Sensors.


Except that the sample base you're referring to has a computer - which can use it's own rolls to assist instead of the lab's roll as long as the lab is properly equipped.

How does that solve the problem? Now you are paying for the lab usage twice, once for the base, and once for the computer....

[radioKAOS]

Except that the first example puts it in your own home, where it is much more vulnerable. The second one puts it in a base, which is presumably much more protected. I mean, sure you can put it into your own home, but you don't have to pay for that regardless of whether or not you put any "labs" there. Remember, you're assumed to be making a decent living($50K or so a year) and have a house and car already. It's a given on your character. But having a base, a place where you can separate your private and public life and protect your identity.

You can BUY the defenses of the base to be higher than your own house, granted.



Also, you aren't doing the math right. First, KS is 2/1 not 3/2.(3/1 if you base it on INT) Regardless, putting the skill in a focus means that you don't get bonus for your own stat. If you put it in a Focus, it's based on the Ability Score of the Focus. So the base cost would be the same either way. And since OIF, Immobile is a 1.5 limit, you would get to divide the cost by 2.5 in the first example - which would make it twice as much as putting it in a base and getting to divide it by 5.

Yes, sorry, bad example, should have used something like Electronics. And yes, It costs 8 to have it in your home, and 4 Real to have it in a base.

[Brainstorm]

Ultimately we are talking about a small difference in real point cost, and I believe there are real advantages to having technical facilities in a Base as opposed to a generic (and therefore not particularly secure) ordinary dwelling. Also, though some GMs may disagree about this, I would hold that Base labs are usable by anyone physically able to enter the facility, whereas Focus-derived labs would require the Usable By Other Advantage to be shared. The thinking here is that a non-Independent Focus is not usable by others unless it is bought with the appropriate Advantage (personal familiarity with the Focus is required to make it work,) but that a Base is innately capable of being shared by residents and their allies. This alone should compensate for the relative expense of Base labs vs. Immobile Focus labs.

As was apparently written write before I started this post, keep in mind one of the most fundamental principles of Power Modifiers -- a Limitation that does not actually limit something is worth zero. Stacking Focus with Base capabilities in no way limits the effectiveness of those capabilities, and as such should not be worth any discount on their purchase. Also, keep in mind that the standard rules as written do not specify a +3 cutoff. If you take the Complimentary Skill Roll approach and you bought a lab with a 17- skill, you'll be getting more +3 results than anything else, but you'll be working with a range of +0 to +7. Couple this with situations where a fresh attempt is allowed every new day or even every new week, and hard work makes it possible to reliably get more than +3 out of a 17- lab.

All that said, here is another thought -- I know I've been sloppy about this particular issue in the past both as a player and as a GM. I might be inclined to be less than rigorously methodical about it even today as I review the Skill Modifiers Table. I would not have a problem granting a character the +1 to +3 "uses good equipment" bonus in addition to the actual bought capabilities of a lab or toolkit. In fact, I would be inclined to toss out a "free" +1 simply for employing a proper toolkit or some engaging in some scrounging from an appropriate source of supplies, a +2 for a combination of having good tools and making the effort to gather supplies from the area or a low end technical facility, and a +3 for something like a high quality fully stocked lab or workshop. This may be a little at odds with the 5ER 468 ruling on labs, yet that ruling is itself odd for the lack of comment about the relationship between Complimentary Skill Rolls for labs and the Skill Modifiers Table's stipulation regarding use of equipment. As I think about it, perhaps I would fold that together with the roleplaying bonus, asking a player to describe the process for the attempt and then awarding an overall bonus based on both the quality of detail in that description and the appropriate use of equipment specified therein.

There is a lot of room for GM judgement in Skill rolls, to the point where I would say that campaigns where highly technical efforts are no more sophisticated than "I want to do X now. What's my number?" will (and probably should) tend to skew toward failure moreso than instances where a player puts some thought into an undertaking of such complexity. For campaigns where the roleplaying really is that light, as a balance matter I could see implementing a House Rule that portable Skill Foci never do worse than a +1 on the Complimentary Roll, Immobile Foci never do worse than a +2, and Base facilities never do worse than a +3. Also, I would still accept a Usable By Others build where any +value could be transferred to a lab's user, though in such cases I would not allow the Complimentary Skill Roll in addition to the direct transfer of Skill Levels. Then again, maybe Usable Simultaneously would justify that approach for a dual use bonus, yet then I would likely find myself implementing a cap on the total bonus applicable to a roll (something like a House Rule that the difference between 9- and a character's intrinsic roll cannot be more than doubled no matter how excellent the material support available to that character happens to be -- so a guy with 12- Weaponsmith and +2 with Intellect Skills [14- total] is going to max out at 19- no matter how tall various lab/equipment bonuses manage to stack.)

Regards,
Brainstorm

[radioKAOS]

Ultimately we are talking about a small difference in real point cost, and I believe there are real advantages to having technical facilities in a Base as opposed to a generic (and therefore not particularly secure) ordinary dwelling. Also, though some GMs may disagree about this, I would hold that Base labs are usable by anyone physically able to enter the facility, whereas Focus-derived labs would require the Usable By Other Advantage to be shared. The thinking here is that a non-Independent Focus is not usable by others unless it is bought with the appropriate Advantage (personal familiarity with the Focus is required to make it work,) but that a Base is innately capable of being shared by residents and their allies. This alone should compensate for the relative expense of Base labs vs. Immobile Focus labs.

As was apparently written write before I started this post, keep in mind one of the most fundamental principles of Power Modifiers -- a Limitation that does not actually limit something is worth zero. Stacking Focus with Base capabilities in no way limits the effectiveness of those capabilities, and as such should not be worth any discount on their purchase. Also, keep in mind that the standard rules as written do not specify a +3 cutoff. If you take the Complimentary Skill Roll approach and you bought a lab with a 17- skill, you'll be getting more +3 results than anything else, but you'll be working with a range of +0 to +7. Couple this with situations where a fresh attempt is allowed every new day or even every new week, and hard work makes it possible to reliably get more than +3 out of a 17- lab.

All that said, here is another thought -- I know I've been sloppy about this particular issue in the past both as a player and as a GM. I might be inclined to be less than rigorously methodical about it even today as I review the Skill Modifiers Table. I would not have a problem granting a character the +1 to +3 "uses good equipment" bonus in addition to the actual bought capabilities of a lab or toolkit. In fact, I would be inclined to toss out a "free" +1 simply for employing a proper toolkit or some engaging in some scrounging from an appropriate source of supplies, a +2 for a combination of having good tools and making the effort to gather supplies from the area or a low end technical facility, and a +3 for something like a high quality fully stocked lab or workshop. This may be a little at odds with the 5ER 468 ruling on labs, yet that ruling is itself odd for the lack of comment about the relationship between Complimentary Skill Rolls for labs and the Skill Modifiers Table's stipulation regarding use of equipment. As I think about it, perhaps I would fold that together with the roleplaying bonus, asking a player to describe the process for the attempt and then awarding an overall bonus based on both the quality of detail in that description and the appropriate use of equipment specified therein.

There is a lot of room for GM judgement in Skill rolls, to the point where I would say that campaigns where highly technical efforts are no more sophisticated than "I want to do X now. What's my number?" will (and probably should) tend to skew toward failure moreso than instances where a player puts some thought into an undertaking of such complexity. For campaigns where the roleplaying really is that light, as a balance matter I could see implementing a House Rule that portable Skill Foci never do worse than a +1 on the Complimentary Roll, Immobile Foci never do worse than a +2, and Base facilities never do worse than a +3. Also, I would still accept a Usable By Others build where any +value could be transferred to a lab's user, though in such cases I would not allow the Complimentary Skill Roll in addition to the direct transfer of Skill Levels. Then again, maybe Usable Simultaneously would justify that approach of a dual use bonus, yet then I would likely find myself implementing a cap on the total bonus applicable to a roll (something like a House Rule that the difference between 9- and a character's intrinsic roll cannot be more than doubled no matter how excellent the material support available to that character happens to be -- so a guy with 12- Weaponsmith and +2 with Intellect Skills [14- total] is going to max out at 19- no matter how tall various lab/equipment bonuses manage to stack.)

Regards,
Brainstorm


Good points.

So now the thought could be...

Just performing said actions in the proper facilities should net you a bonus, as per the rules for skill modifiers. Therefore a lab, even at 9- should grant you between a +1 and a +3, leaning toward the +3. This is in addition to any complimentary skill roll success for the base's skill.

- Wow, yeah, that makes a lot of sense really, and makes labs a whole lot more useful for the cost.

[Mike W]

Yes, if you are saying that "focus is already inherent" then we should use that logic across the board, and no powers in a base should get that limitation. I disagee with you completely. I think that nearly everything in a base is a focus of some sort. That's what I meant when I said "Then we should pass on it for everything in a base, no? And that's just not the case of course. I'm looking for something a little more standardized."



Putting limits on skills is now commonplace. It may have been the exception before, but now it's nearly the rule for gadgeteers and the like. And again, you assume the 'focus is already in place' - I disagree with that.

If we go back to your argument about things being 'inherent' in a base, then sure, you could absolutely use the partial coverage to show that the lasers aren't present in the whole base. Just as you could with Sensors.



How does that solve the problem? Now you are paying for the lab usage twice, once for the base, and once for the computer....

First, your opening comment clarifies something for me. Still, I think we put the Focus limit only on the individual lasers lets say because we think of each laser as a separate item. But the lab(and sensors) we think of as one big item when we build it, not a collection of different little ones. I think this is the biggest difference. You can break the lasers in one room, and they no longer function, but the ones in other rooms do. It's very difficult to "break" the lab. It takes a bit more effort to trash the whole room, unless you're using a bomb that can wipe the whole thing out at once. You might trash individual pieces of equipment, but the "focus" aspect of the lab is so spread out that you can't really break it or take it away. Even if you trash the room, some of the equipment would survive and you could just pick it up and move it somewhere else in the base. So, if you have a focus that cannot really be taken away or destroyed(without taking out the whole base that it is inherent to) is it really enough of a focus to be a limit.

As for partial coverage, because you can still move lab equipment it isn't really partial coverage? Sure, it doesn't cover the whole area AT ONCE, but you could pick up a gadget from the Electronics lab and run to the Communications room and use it there. But partial coverage would imply that you couldn't do that. That all of the useful gadgets are inherent to the room. Partial Coverage is for things that can NEVER cover a given area. Like armor that doesn't have a helmet(and so can't protect the head) or a laser with a limited fire arc(so it may not have a shot at someone in the room).

As for the Computer thing, if the Computer has a skill and a program, then it can do the work for you if it has the equipment. A lab can't do the work for you. If you've already given the computer a major skill roll(which can be complimentary) how much of a skill roll doe the lab really need?

[prestidigitator]

When figuring how we should build something, I think the metarules state pretty plainly that cost should not be the deciding factor. Let's build it simply and correctly. Buy the Skill for the Base, give it Partial Coverage according to how much of the Base the lab occupies, and: A.) provide the Base's roll as Complimentary, and/or B.) provide a Computer that can excercise the Skill on its own.

If you want the lab to provide a +3 to a character's roll, buy the Skill at 17- so it will on average succeed by 6. Then the GM has the option of having you roll each time or just going with the average of +3. It's as easy as that.

I would go so far as to say that if the lab can be used for many Skills, they could be put in a Multipower and/or with multiple Skills plus some Skill Levels. Then everyone who wants to use the lab simultaneously is going to have to negotiate how to split up its benefits.

[Dr. Anomaly]

...whereas Focus-derived labs would require the Usable By Other Advantage to be shared. The thinking here is that a non-Independent Focus is not usable by others unless it is bought with the appropriate Advantage (personal familiarity with the Focus is required to make it work,)...
It's not just "some GMs" which may disagree with you, it's the rules themselves. See 5ER, p. 295, "Applicability". In part:

The last thing a player needs to decide about his character's Focus is its Applicablity -- in other words, can only the character use it or can anyone use it? Either way, the cost is identical, since there are advantages and disadvantages for both.
...
If the character makes his Focus Universal, then other characters can use it without special requirements. (It does not need the Limitation Independent; see page 297.)

[Cancer]

I would imagine that there "ought to be" certain things that cannot be done without an appropriate lab; a practicing scientist will recognize this as the "experimentalist" versus "theoretician" distinction in many disciplines.

I would be very tempted as a GM to say that producing some real, tangible item (or substance, or drug, etc.) REQUIRES some kind of lab, unless the character already has a power that allows them to produce fully-shaped complex material objects from nothing (or from only base raw materials). I would throw creation of computer software into this same bin, though enough characters have internal computer capacity that it might be possible for such a character to create a computer program without using an appropriate external computer system.

It is possible for a stranger to use someone else's lab, but based on real-world experience, there's going to be a huge learning curve getting used to the facility. And the owner is gonna be seriously annoyed (and hampered) on his return that someone else has been f***ing around with his lab in an unauthorized way. This wouldn't extend to anyone "on the same team" who has been part of the lab more or less from inception; any number of people could have use of a lab on that kind of basis.

This seems more like a GM ruling or house rule than anything in the core rules, though.

[Brainstorm]

Here I go thinking that I've made a good impression with a series of thoughtful posts, and I go and overlook a significant aspect of a significant Limitation that was directly relevant to my own comments. Can't we just abolish Focus Applicability so that I can go back to looking smart here? :smoke: On a serious note though, that was a good point. In essence, Base labs are more limited because their applicability is a function of roleplaying and common sense whereas an Immobile Focus lab could reasonably qualify for all the same sorts of uses while allowing on purchase at no additional cost for the owner to determine if the facility was useful for others. Personally, I would have trouble ruling that an Immobile Focus lab should be more restricted than a Base lab in terms of what sorts of tasks could be accomplished there. Yet if I were being especially strict, I could see simply ruling against the application of the Focus Limitation or the Usable by Other Advantage to any Skills save those deployed in a Complimentary Skil Roll context. This would make portable toolkits and Focus labs follow the same mechanic as is the official default for Base lab behavior, though it does seem like it cuts into creativity insofar as a character concept might be best served by an especially high quality Forensics kit or a home library so excellent as to merit a direct boost to specific Knowledge Skills. In the end, the Applicability issue undermines my point about real balance justifying the minor discrepancy between Base lab costs and Focus Skill costs.

Also, it is good someone pointed out that there are roleplaying/common sense concerns about the extent to which portable toolkits can be used to attempt things that would normally be done in labs or workshops. I think my approach to the whole situation would probably factor into difficulty more than modifiers though. Certainly what is or is not possible depends on context, but especially in a comic book or sci-fi campaign, access to a junkyard should at least open up the possibility of some amazing feats of fabrication (however implausible they might seem to a real world engineer.) I think if given an instance where two characters each wanted to fabricate a complex device to resolve a plot point in an ongoing adventure, and one had the benefit of a well-stocked workshop while the other merely had his personal toolkit along with a mix of store bought and salvaged parts, I would handle the situation by making the task less difficult in the first context than in the second. After drawing that distinction, I would then calculate everything else based on character sheet information and modifiers awarded based on each player's description of their character's approach to the endeavor.

I would only be inclined to make a statement like "you can't do that with just your toolkit!" if the timeframe was unreasonable (though that might rule out fabrication in a sophisticated facility as well,) the purchase/salvage of essential components seemed completely implausible, or the work absolutely requires a controlled environment (and again, what work actually requires in the context of a fantastical story may not be at all the like what the same task might be required according to a real world engineer.) Of course, all this assumes plot-driven roleplaying as well -- I have never allowed excellent technical skills to pass as a poor man's VPP in a superheroic campaign, but I do find that building "hurdles" that require technical Skills into an adventure is good for promoting well-rounded character construction and rewarding players who see the Skill system as something much more than window dressing to absorb leftover points after optimizing Characteristics and Powers.

Regards,
Brainstorm

[Dr. Anomaly]

Here I go thinking that I've made a good impression with a series of thoughtful posts, and I go and overlook a significant aspect of a significant Limitation that was directly relevant to my own comments. Can't we just abolish Focus Applicability so that I can go back to looking smart here? :smoke:
I wouldn't worry about it; I've made my share of boneheaded posts because I forgot some part of a given rule...I still shudder, thinking about the way I read Steve the riot act about how Enhanced Senses were handled in 5th Edition (after it had just come out)...and I'd completely skipped a very important little section on the "Simulated Sense Group" rule... :doi:

So everyone overlooks something fairly basic every now and again. Don't let it get you down. :)

[radioKAOS]

When figuring how we should build something, I think the metarules state pretty plainly that cost should not be the deciding factor. Let's build it simply and correctly. Buy the Skill for the Base, give it Partial Coverage according to how much of the Base the lab occupies, and: A.) provide the Base's roll as Complimentary, and/or B.) provide a Computer that can excercise the Skill on its own.

If you want the lab to provide a +3 to a character's roll, buy the Skill at 17- so it will on average succeed by 6. Then the GM has the option of having you roll each time or just going with the average of +3. It's as easy as that.

I would go so far as to say that if the lab can be used for many Skills, they could be put in a Multipower and/or with multiple Skills plus some Skill Levels. Then everyone who wants to use the lab simultaneously is going to have to negotiate how to split up its benefits.

I think it's kind of a broken rule in HERO: in the rules for skill modifiers, it states that good equipment can provide up to a +3 bonus, yet we don't buy it for our labs that way, we buy them as skills.

Truth be told, I really didn't have my mind made up about what I thought was the right way to do it when I started this thread, and it seems like the only real answer I can get is: Do what seems right to you.

Although I do like that in some instances, I think it could be resolved by system rules more fairly [i.e. let's make a rule and follow it across the board, if we decide that 'focus' is inherent in the 1/5 cost break, then no powers should be able to buy focus if bought in a base]...

Ah well, time for sleep and we still really haven't solved anything.

Thanks for everyone who's involved in this discussion.

[ghost-angel]

Although I do like that in some instances, I think it could be resolved by system rules more fairly [i.e. let's make a rule and follow it across the board, if we decide that 'focus' is inherent in the 1/5 cost break, then no powers should be able to buy focus if bought in a base]...
Only thing I have to add at this point ... the Focus limitation is allowable for anything in a Base or Vehicle legally, but as a GM and Player I would only add it to items that can be specifically attacked (weapons, engines, etc...) or that can be damaged individually as opposed to waiting for the overall damage to the base to make it inoperable.

Focus placed on a lab? A bomb in the base may destroy enough of the lab to make it unusable until the damage is repaired.
Focus not placed on a lab? A bomb in the base may break a few beakers but you can still utilize the lab (possibly with a minor modifier) fully.

You get what you pay for. At some point the GM and Players need to take responsibility for the game and leave the book behind. This is one of those instances.

[radioKAOS]

Only thing I have to add at this point ... the Focus limitation is allowable for anything in a Base or Vehicle legally, but as a GM and Player I would only add it to items that can be specifically attacked (weapons, engines, etc...) or that can be damaged individually as opposed to waiting for the overall damage to the base to make it inoperable.

Focus placed on a lab? A bomb in the base may destroy enough of the lab to make it unusable until the damage is repaired.
Focus not placed on a lab? A bomb in the base may break a few beakers but you can still utilize the lab (possibly with a minor modifier) fully.


Sounds like a good rule. Limitation must be a limitation and so on.


You get what you pay for. At some point the GM and Players need to take responsibility for the game and leave the book behind. This is one of those instances.

Yes, I agree.

OTOH, I would like the official rules to better reflect how labs in a base should work.

[TaxiMan]

Hey Brainstorm! Excellent posts, well thought out & articulated. I hope you post tons more, I like the way you think.

But...

Could you please reduce the average paragraph? I tend to speed-read, and a sea of text makes my eyes hurt. Your posts are by no means bad in any way, I just ask as a favor.

[Ura-Maru]

The main part of the issue is there are just no real ‘equipment’ rules for Hero. In superheroic games it’s hand-waved, and in heroic games, they cost money, which doesn’t correspond to points directly.

In other words, there’s no elegant way to buy off the ‘focus’ limitation for skills. :)

This occasionally comes up for other builds as well, for teleporters, metamorphs, gageteers, or super-skill types, and might be very helpful in heroic games, too. Especially ones that use resource pools

Since this is mostly going to deal with GM judgment calls, I’d be inclined to use some kind of perk-like system.

Say:
3 pts: Buys off the ‘focus’ for a single simple skill (Lockpicking)
5 pts: Buys off the ‘focus’ for a related group of simple skills (Lockpicking, Security Systems, Bugging,* and Demolitions*) or a single complex skill (Mechanics)
*Just the fiddly bits, of course, not the actual explosives and bugs!
8 pts: Buys off the ‘focus’ for a group of related complex skills, of (Mechanics, Electronics, and Knowledge: Engineering) or a single very complex skill (Inventor, Weaponsmith, or most Science skills)
10 pts: Buys off the ‘focus’ for a group of very complex skills (Science: Biology, Science: Chemistry, and Weaponsmith: Bio-Weapons)

“Complex,” in this case, means the complexity of the focus required, not the skill itself.

These don’t actually improve the skill, they just let you make checks you otherwise wouldn’t be able to. You can still use Science: Chemistry to realize that the ‘Acid Attack’ the Master Melter is using doesn’t seem to work on ceramics, even without the lab. But you do need it to whip up a spray-on foam that can protect things from it.

Maybe the costs are a bit too high, but the idea should be clear.

This wouldn’t be appropriate for all skills, though. An actual torture chamber, for example would be a flat bonus to Interrogation, and a big shelf of research books would probably be a flat bonus to all Knowledge skills, with Extra Time Required.

---
An alternative: Figure out the maximum penalty for using the skill with improvised tools, and buy that many skill levels, ‘Only to remove penalties for inappropriate tools.’

[Dr. Anomaly]

By the way, in today's Loonatics Unleashed, the hero team had a 'portable lab' that had been constructed as a jet aircraft. ;)

[Blue Jogger]

This is still the way it is, though I find it's far too expensive to have any really good labs around! You'd think that the system would encourage lab use in bases, and not just boil it down to 'a clubhouse where we have lasers to defend us.'

I think the main problem is worrying that the base (the equipment, the arcane books, etc.) becoming more important than the character (the guy with arcane knowledge, or particle physics, or genetic research). A +3 to a skill gives you roughly an additional +25% success (except at the extreme points). This will not help Joe Average decode the Human Genone much faster than Dr. Incredible with his brilliant mind doing it on a piece of paper (instead of a supercomputer). But both of them benefit from a +3 from a lab. And technically Dr. Incredible might suffer minuses if you consider working on paper as poor equipment to decode the Human Genone with (I would, but that's just me).

I suppose you could have a base that just AIDs your INT enough until you are smart enough to figure out the problem without even having a base. Nothing in the rulebook prevents that, and it goes perfectly with comic-book science.

I suppose now that you can offically buy skills on Foci, that labs could be bought as skills on a Immobile Foci. Realize the rules don't allow skill levels on foci except combat skill levels.

For our group, however, we use bases to hide from the really scary villians who'd kill us in our sleep.

[radioKAOS]

I think the main problem is worrying that the base (the equipment, the arcane books, etc.) becoming more important than the character (the guy with arcane knowledge, or particle physics, or genetic research). A +3 to a skill gives you roughly an additional +25% success (except at the extreme points). This will not help Joe Average decode the Human Genone much faster than Dr. Incredible with his brilliant mind doing it on a piece of paper (instead of a supercomputer). But both of them benefit from a +3 from a lab. And technically Dr. Incredible might suffer minuses if you consider working on paper as poor equipment to decode the Human Genone with (I would, but that's just me).

I suppose you could have a base that just AIDs your INT enough until you are smart enough to figure out the problem without even having a base. Nothing in the rulebook prevents that, and it goes perfectly with comic-book science.

I suppose now that you can offically buy skills on Foci, that labs could be bought as skills on a Immobile Foci. Realize the rules don't allow skill levels on foci except combat skill levels.

For our group, however, we use bases to hide from the really scary villians who'd kill us in our sleep.

*shrug*

I am really at a loss to choose what method would be best. I just want something that is a 'universal' rule, and I want Steve to law down the law about it. And I want it to be relatively cheap.

Should it be just skill levels? or just complimentary skills? Should then equipment not give levels at all, but just allow a complimentary roll? If so, the how do we keep costs down for labs in bases?

[TheRavenIs]

There are two seperate entities here.

There are labs that can guide a person through a system and then there are labs designed to enhance an individual's skill with something.

You could cheat and go:

Paramedics 9- OAF Immobile plus+3 Skill Levels with Paramedics, OAF Immobile.

Your normal person will have a 12- with Paramedics. Those already familiar with Paramedics would get a +3 to their skill roll. The cost wouldn't change at all either.

I actually use both idea's. I buy a skill/lab so that it gives the addition to the roll, and I also buy skill levels that are usuable by others, and I usually do the levels as foci.

[Lucius]

Usable by others skill rolls has potential. But buying partial coverage or focus limitation on the lab is cheesy and munchkiny. I mean, how else does a base have a skill if not in a focus? .


The Temple of Healing has a First Aid roll that is complementary to anyone attempting First Aid on the premises. It is neither limited to a particular room nor bound to "foci" (such as tools and supplies) that can be stolen or destroyed.

Of course, the healers ALSO have enough bandages and other supplies on hand to give anyone a boost to their roll if they know where the supplies are kept...maybe that is skill levels, expendable focus?

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary observes that Lucius is being difficult again.....

[ghost-angel]

The Temple of Healing has a First Aid roll that is complementary to anyone attempting First Aid on the premises. It is neither limited to a particular room nor bound to "foci" (such as tools and supplies) that can be stolen or destroyed.

Of course, the healers ALSO have enough bandages and other supplies on hand to give anyone a boost to their roll if they know where the supplies are kept...maybe that is skill levels, expendable focus?

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary observes that Lucius is being difficult again.....
You've got a great example of both in one place...

Divine Aid - +2 to Healing Skills
Infimary - +2 to Healing Skills; OIF, Expendable, Bulky (stays in one room of the temple, and includes the beds, etc...)

[Manic Typist]

I'll confess, I haven't had a chance to do look up the rules on bases on such.

But, just thinking about it, here's my view:

The lab is a sub-part of the base. The lab can be destroyed, while the rest of the base survives. The lab can be seized and held against the heros. This denies the hero access to the powers/abilities granted by the lab.

This is the criterion of a focus.

Thus, I would call it an OAF: Immoible, probably with the additional disadvantage of (-1/2) or (-1/4) saying "Requires 10 points in Science" or somesuch, etc.

Because, unless you are trained in the field of science, most people are only going to hurt themselves attempting to operate a lab unaided.

[ghost-angel]

I'll confess, I haven't had a chance to do look up the rules on bases on such.

But, just thinking about it, here's my view:

The lab is a sub-part of the base. The lab can be destroyed, while the rest of the base survives. The lab can be seized and held against the heros. This denies the hero access to the powers/abilities granted by the lab.

This is the criterion of a focus.

Thus, I would call it an OAF: Immoible, probably with the additional disadvantage of (-1/2) or (-1/4) saying "Requires 10 points in Science" or somesuch, etc.

Because, unless you are trained in the field of science, most people are only going to hurt themselves attempting to operate a lab unaided.
That's why you should use Skill Levels in a specific Skill - can't help you if you don't have the skill.

[Manic Typist]

That's why you should use Skill Levels in a specific Skill - can't help you if you don't have the skill.

Granted, and valid.

But, I still would allow the player to build in the disad. I'm all for allowing him to have something like this for as cheap as he can reasonably build it. I don't see it being dangerously overpowering, so I would lean towards the player's benefit.

[ghost-angel]

eh.. it's already at a 1-5 ratio, why go out of your way to make it even cheaper. sounds munchkiny

[Manic Typist]

1-5 ratio in terms of 1 character point gets them 5 base points yes?

Well, I just don't see it as being DANGEROUS enough to the campaign as to rake the players over the fire over it.

Not to mention, they could still end up spending a good 2-3 points on it anyway, even with the disads I would allow, so, that sounds like a reasonable cost for a rather limited bonus that they gain, as only one PART of their base (surely they have other areas they need to spend the points), AND most likely only a select few of the characters in the group can makeuse of it.