Powers Issues -- S-T

[BobGreenwade]

This is why every single Power needs to be renamed to remove SFX connotations.Either that, or (as I would prefer) a strong notice should be given in the introduction to the Powers chapter that one should not give too much weight to the literal meanings of their names -- Energy Blast doesn't have to be Energy damage, Killing Attacks are good for much more than just killing people, Missile Deflection can deflect more than just missiles, and so forth.

But that's a discussion for another thread. :)

[James Gillen]

This is why every single Power needs to be renamed to remove SFX connotations.

The flip side being again, there are a lot of Powers that basically depend on special effect (like Adjustment Powers) that in game mechanics are completely generic. Like in The Ultimate Brick there's a STR Drain based on muscle tearing. If my character has Power Defense based on radiation immunity, he'd be immune to that, even if I don't have a "special effect" that resists a muscle-tearing maneuver.

JG

[AnotherSkip]

Maybe hero Should go one way or another and stop straddling the fence like it has been for years (Decades eeeeven) either SFX driven or Power Driven.

[nexus]

As for the Missile Deflection question

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1579990&postcount=2


I think the text is quite clear that any Ranged attack, except those types specifically exempted by the rules (e.g., Entangles or Area Of Effect attacks), can be Deflected/Reflected.

[Paragon]

Maybe hero Should go one way or another and stop straddling the fence like it has been for years (Decades eeeeven) either SFX driven or Power Driven.

The problem is it can't entirely do that and work properly. Some kinds of effects typically only make sense in context of SFX; most Drains, Dispels and the like are in that category. Others, it muddies the issue while serving no good purpose.

[CTaylor]

OK according to the official ruling I'm wrong about Missile Deflection - yet I'd like to see that changed, or the last step of Missile Deflection should cost a lot more than 5 more points. Rocks... Arrows...Bullets... ANYTHING!

[Netzilla]

I agree with those who feel that Missile Deflection should be mechanics-based rather than SFX-based. I also think that it should simply be renamed Deflection.

Here's how I see it breaking down (no costs):
* HtH (block; this would be Free)
* Ranged
* Mental
* Reflect at attacker
* Reflect at any

Various exotic attacks (NND, AVLD, Flash, Entangle, etc) and Area Effect attacks are eligible for the 'Can Be Deflected' Limitation.

[Paragon]

OK according to the official ruling I'm wrong about Missile Deflection - yet I'd like to see that changed, or the last step of Missile Deflection should cost a lot more than 5 more points. Rocks... Arrows...Bullets... ANYTHING!

I wouldn't be in favor of making it a jot more expensive; anything that ties up a Block action to use effectively (and thus precludes attacking when its in use) shouldn't be all that bloody expensive. You make it much more expensive than it currently is and they might as well abort to Desolid and have done with it.

[ajackson]

I wouldn't be in favor of making it a jot more expensive; anything that ties up a Block action to use effectively (and thus precludes attacking when its in use) shouldn't be all that bloody expensive. You make it much more expensive than it currently is and they might as well abort to Desolid and have done with it.
Well, could change the cost from 5/10/15/20 to 3/5/10/20, or just say it costs 20 points for 'block ranged attack' and let people take limitations if they only want to block a category (or maybe 10 points. Or less.The only reason missile deflection, without reflection, is remotely useful is because it lets you put levels in a multipower, which is ordinarily illegal).

[Paragon]

Well, could change the cost from 5/10/15/20 to 3/5/10/20, or just say it costs 20 points for 'block ranged attack' and let people take limitations if they only want to block a category (or maybe 10 points. Or less.The only reason missile deflection, without reflection, is remotely useful is because it lets you put levels in a multipower, which is ordinarily illegal).

Actually, it can be useful for same reason Dodge sometimes is; you need time to close up with someone and the Deflect cuts your chance of getting hit down seriously while doing it (while increasing the time it takes).

[ajackson]

Actually, it can be useful for same reason Dodge sometimes is; you need time to close up with someone and the Deflect cuts your chance of getting hit down seriously while doing it (while increasing the time it takes).
The thing is, for Missile Deflection to make sense, it has to be better than Dodge, and it isn't. Take those 10 points and buy 3 3-point levels with Dodge and Dive for Cover, and you'll be much better off than using MD.

[BobGreenwade]

I have two other remarks regarding the Missile Deflection discussion.

First, Steve had a nice alternate version of MD/R in TUEP (page 22) that I think should be the standard form. It's based on Active Points instead of Special Effect, with Limitations to restrict the Power by Special effect.

Second, this is the "Powers S-T" thread. Missile Deflection starts with M.

That's all. :)

[nexus]

I have two other remarks regarding the Missile Deflection discussion.

First, Steve had a nice alternate version of MD/R in TUEP (page 22) that I think should be the standard form. It's based on Active Points instead of Special Effect, with Limitations to restrict the Power by Special effect.

Second, this is the "Powers S-T" thread. Missile Deflection starts with M.

That's all. :)

Well the missile deflection conversation was born from a tangent not a deliberate derailing of the thread. Drift happens but you have a point.

[Paragon]

The thing is, for Missile Deflection to make sense, it has to be better than Dodge, and it isn't. Take those 10 points and buy 3 3-point levels with Dodge and Dive for Cover, and you'll be much better off than using MD.

Its not always that tidy, given you can have Missile Deflect (not necessarily its bonus, but the base power) in a small Multipower or EC, and that Missile Deflect works off 2 point levels but the minimum relevant Dodge levels are 3's. The ability to put it in a Multipower and the cheap levels can easily drown the benefit the Dodge levels. It doesn't address the area issue, of course, but often that's a non-issue.

[Balabanto]

Okay. Here are my thoughts on Suppress.

This power is utterly and completely broken. Let's take an average Champions character built on 350 points. Say...Defender, or Ironclad. We'll even be generous and give them 10 points of Power Defense.

I suppress their SPD with a 12d6 Generic Attack. I wait until Phase 1 to do so. The character doesn't go again until the following phase 12, unless I stop paying the end. But WAIT. On Phase 7, I stop paying the END. Now I don't have to pay END anymore, and the next time this guy goes, it's STILL Phase 12. Combat is over, and it's barely even started. (See the crossover chart for phases for how this works.)

Here are my suggestions.

Suppress as it stands is a broken power. It stacks with itself, you can suppress people multiple times and deny the PC or NPC the ability to do anything...at all.

These are the changes that need to be made to it.

1) Suppress needs to cost 10 points per die, or it's too efficient compared to other powers of a similar cost. Would you rather suppress or drain someone's abilities? Suppress, because the other mechanical advantages, like uncontrolled and continuous, tell you that 4d6 of uncontrolled continuous suppress is better than 5d6 of Drain.

2) Suppress can't be allowed to work on Characteristics at all. If you allow characteristics to be suppressed, Combat is Over! Whoever has the suppress WILL defeat one opponent per turn, while his teammates whomp on the helpless victim. This is where the system really falls down, because if I suppress your EGO down to 0, you need to make a 9- EGO roll to act at all, and if I suppress your SPD to 0, you don't act at all, etc.

3) Power Defense needs to count DOUBLE for Suppress on top of this. That's right, DOUBLE. Why? Because no one will ever buy drain relative to suppress when suppress is available. Most characters have NO power defense at all. This slices right through the PC and makes them useless, or right through the villain and makes them useless. This is not very heroic, very dramatic, or very cinematic. Alternatively, Suppress could work versus ED or PD, which would also take the "Broken" sting out of it.

For the record, I really hate suppress. This power causes more mechanical mudslinging than any other power in the game, and it needs to be fixed. The simple expedient of a 4 Def, 2d6 Entangle linked to a 6d6 STR suppress sidelines 75 percent of the characters designed in the game, by virtue of the fact that their strength is 20- and now they can't lift their own weight. The entangle just makes their DCV 0.

[BobGreenwade]

The problem you describe is more a matter of how SPD changes affect things, not with Suppress. Pick something other than SPD to Suppress, and see how it compares to Drain.

[AnotherSkip]

Suppress Defense? or Dex?

[ajackson]

Suppress Stun can one-shot a lot of characters. Actually, suppress (any stat where a 0 stat disables you) can do that.

I think the problem has to do with suppress vs stats, though, not with the cost of suppress per se.

[Balabanto]

Why don't we try this example. If you suppress a guy with an EC, he's powerless. Any one power you suppress and the whole thing goes away. Now, for MOST characters with ECs, this means their resistant defense, and therefore most of their defense, goes away.

BANG. Dead.

And it's far cheaper, pound for pound, than anything else. Furthermore, I can suppress all the powers of a given special effect at once, effectively dropping someone's attack by 3 dice, their defenses by 7 points, and their other powers by 14-15 points for the screamingly low cost of 60 active and 6 end per phase. But how many phases are you really going to need to drop this guy once the suppression kicks in? And, you don't need to link attacks to it. As soon as he's down (And he'll go down super quick), move on to the next guy, and lather, rinse, repeat. You don't need to beat him, you only need to STUN him. Once he's stunned, he's a meat puppet, or, in the grand tradition of champions, a weapon for the nearest enemy character if they're strong enough.

The flaw is in the design of suppress, not in the fact that you can suppress characteristics, because the nature of Power Defense tells us that in order to make drains, transfers, etc, effective, PC's shouldn't be allowed to buy 30 points of it, even in the highest powered games.

The nature of Drain and Transfer tell us that Suppress is broken.

[Paragon]

I didn't think you _could_ Suppress normal attributes; the phrasing seems to indicate it only applies to powers. Am I in error here? Or was that a change between 5th and 5thRev?

[schir1964]

I didn't think you _could_ Suppress normal attributes; the phrasing seems to indicate it only applies to powers. Am I in error here? Or was that a change between 5th and 5thRev?
Per the rules, all adjustment powers (including Suppress) may affect any Characteristics.

Now what you may have heard is that Suppress can not permanently Kill a character (although a Drain can).

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Why don't we try this example. If you suppress a guy with an EC, he's powerless. Any one power you suppress and the whole thing goes away. Now, for MOST characters with ECs, this means their resistant defense, and therefore most of their defense, goes away.
Why are they considered powerless?

Did their STR, DEX, or EGO suddenly drop to zero?

When did having a 10 Stat imply powerless?

Let's add something more to this example. The EC is at zero. The character then takes the UZI they took off one the goons earlier and uses it (as a one time thing for this instance) on the one that just suppressed their EC. Bang. They may be dead, unconscious, or stunned unless they have some extra defense for some reason.

I think the point the poster was making was that dropping STR, DEX, or EGO to Zero with a Suppress can instantly debilitate a character while even a One Trick Pony (every single super power is in a single EC) whose powers are suppressed to zero can still run away, dodge, take complete and full actions (they just can't use their powers).

At least that is what I got from it.

I've thought about treating all Characteristics like Defenses for Adjustment Powers (Adjustment powers work at half effect essentially). Now whether that would unbalance things in the other direction I don't know.

- Christopher Mullins

[Paragon]

Per the rules, all adjustment powers (including Suppress) may affect any Characteristics.

Now what you may have heard is that Suppress can not permanently Kill a character (although a Drain can).

- Christopher Mullins

I'm simply noting that at least in my book (which is 5th pre-revised) that the language is quite different under Drain and Suppress; Drain mentions both Powers and Characteristics, while Suppress _only_ mentions Powers. A quick check of the errata does not show me any note correcting this. Is it different in 5th Revised?

Otherwise, I'd have to assume this distinction is not accidental.

[BobGreenwade]

I'm simply noting that at least in my book (which is 5th pre-revised) that the language is quite different under Drain and Suppress; Drain mentions both Powers and Characteristics, while Suppress _only_ mentions Powers. A quick check of the errata does not show me any note correcting this. Is it different in 5th Revised?

Otherwise, I'd have to assume this distinction is not accidental.In 5ER the first sentence reads: "A character with Suppress can partially or wholly neutralize another character's Characteristics and/or Powers." So yes, apparently this did change.

[schir1964]

In 5ER the first sentence reads: "A character with Suppress can partially or wholly neutralize another character's Characteristics and/or Powers." So yes, apparently this did change.
And the FAQ for 5th Edition also clarifies this for the Unrevised. (I also only have the 5th Edition rules).

The errata is mainly for corrections of the text and so forth (not necessarily rules clarifications).

- Christopher Mullins

[Paragon]

In 5ER the first sentence reads: "A character with Suppress can partially or wholly neutralize another character's Characteristics and/or Powers." So yes, apparently this did change.

Ah. Thus my disconnect. I'll have to keep that in mind when constructing spells for my upcoming campaign.

[Paragon]

And the FAQ for 5th Edition also clarifies this for the Unrevised. (I also only have the 5th Edition rules).

The errata is mainly for corrections of the text and so forth (not necessarily rules clarifications).

- Christopher Mullins

Ah. I'll have to actually finish editing the FAQ into readable form when I have time, then.

[CTaylor]

I'd like to see the Summon notes from Fantasy Hero folded into the main rules, at least to some degree (especially regarding number and duration of tasks) and some more specific rules on summoning inanimate objects such as vehicles and bases.

[Christougher]

Teleport can be blocked by Hardened Defense. The Armor Piercing advantage can overcome this. Why? Armor Piercing halves the defense of a target. The Penetrating advantage means that some part of the attack penetrates. Let's switch AP to Penetrating on Teleport.

[captainNeda]

[QUOTE=Steve Long;1536898]

Q can we modify Telekenesis?

Steve in the interest of granularity if you drop the figured stats, it may be time to take another look at TK. If STR becomes a straight stat I think it may be beneficial to separate components of TK into STR and range. In my opinion many indirect ranged powers should be structured more like Clarsentience which is essentially an indirect form of perception where the range is an adder not an advantage multiplier.

I don't think TK should inherently be indirect. As an example TK defined as tractor beam should be projected from an emmitter, and not be able to start on the other side of a wall. Green Lanterns create TK like effects but frequently do not reach through obstacles to get to the target (though they do reach around objects).

The same idea can be added to the indirect advantage as well. I'll discuss that more under advantages.

[Paragon]

Teleport can be blocked by Hardened Defense. The Armor Piercing advantage can overcome this. Why? Armor Piercing halves the defense of a target. The Penetrating advantage means that some part of the attack penetrates. Let's switch AP to Penetrating on Teleport.

I've always thought those two were bad choices for this anyway; it means strange things stop Teleportation that likely shouldn't. I'd much rather Affects Desolid was used as a substitute here, as at least the things you put an Affects Desolid Defense on in the first place usually look like something that might also stop teleportation.

[ideasmith]

Transformation: Instant Change.

While this handle "Clark Kent in the phone booth" adequately, it doesn't handle "Billy Batson says 'Shazam'" at all. Both need to be covered, and play balance say the Billy Batson form should not be cheaper than the Clark Kent form. Possible the Billy Batson Instant Change (or both) could be some form of shapechange?

[BobGreenwade]

Transformation: Instant Change.

While this handle "Clark Kent in the phone booth" adequately, it doesn't handle "Billy Batson says 'Shazam'" at all. Both need to be covered, and play balance say the Billy Batson form should not be cheaper than the Clark Kent form. Possible the Billy Batson Instant Change (or both) could be some form of shapechange?Actually, the "Shazam!" effect is more of a Multiform.

[Markdoc]

play balance say the Billy Batson form should not be cheaper than the Clark Kent form. Possible the Billy Batson Instant Change (or both) could be some form of shapechange?

Actually, I'm not sure I agree with this: both Captain Marvel and his Miracleman spin-off end up in situations where they are either placed in danger by the fact that they cannot change into their superform, or there are consequences to the fact that they exist in two forms.

If someone blows up the Daily Planet while Clark Kent is there, he's in no personal danger. If Billy Batson is in the same situation, he's facing significant risk.

cheers, Mark

[ideasmith]

Actually, I'm not sure I agree with this: both Captain Marvel and his Miracleman spin-off end up in situations where they are either placed in danger by the fact that they cannot change into their superform, or there are consequences to the fact that they exist in two forms.

If someone blows up the Daily Planet while Clark Kent is there, he's in no personal danger. If Billy Batson is in the same situation, he's facing significant risk.

cheers, Mark

That is handled by Captain Marvel's powers all having 'Only In Hero ID'. An additional bonus on top of that would be excessive.

[Markdoc]

That is handled by Captain Marvel's powers all having 'Only In Hero ID'.

Ah - OK. When you said they should cost the same I assumed you meant that Captain Marvel should not have OHID, since Superman clearly doesn't have that limit.

cheers, Mark

[ideasmith]

Ah - OK. When you said they should cost the same I assumed you meant that Captain Marvel should not have OHID, since Superman clearly doesn't have that limit.

cheers, Mark

I was referring to the cost of changing instantly, not the cost of having additional identities. Sorry for the inclarity.

[captainNeda]

Actually, I'm not sure I agree with this: both Captain Marvel and his Miracleman spin-off end up in situations where they are either placed in danger by the fact that they cannot change into their superform, or there are consequences to the fact that they exist in two forms.

If someone blows up the Daily Planet while Clark Kent is there, he's in no personal danger. If Billy Batson is in the same situation, he's facing significant risk.

cheers, Mark

Good point. People have also stopped Billy from changing simply by gaging him, so it could be instance chagne requires incantations. Also Saying Shazam summons a lightning bold that if prevented from hitting Billy, or he dodges it doesn't cause the change. Watch the clash episode in Justice League. He grabs Superman and holds him above his head calling out Shazam. The lightning bolt came down and struck Supes. By the third time Supes broke free and spun Captain Marvel into the bolt turning him back into Billy alla Accidental change.

Anyway I don't know if I would give Supes instant change or not. Done like in the movie where he spins around in a revolving door and is instantly Superman, or jumps out a window and his clothes magically change on the way to the ground, yes it works, and it's no slower or faster than saying "Shazam".

[BobGreenwade]

Good point. People have also stopped Billy from changing simply by gaging him, so it could be instance chagne requires incantations. Also Saying Shazam summons a lightning bold that if prevented from hitting Billy, or he dodges it doesn't cause the change. Watch the clash episode in Justice League. He grabs Superman and holds him above his head calling out Shazam. The lightning bolt came down and struck Supes. By the third time Supes broke free and spun Captain Marvel into the bolt turning him back into Billy alla Accidental change.

Anyway I don't know if I would give Supes instant change or not. Done like in the movie where he spins around in a revolving door and is instantly Superman, or jumps out a window and his clothes magically change on the way to the ground, yes it works, and it's no slower or faster than saying "Shazam".Superman would have Instant Change, in the form of changing clothes really really fast. This power can be found in one of the USPDs (and probably TUSp) as a Speedster power, built as Transform; I don't have them with me at the moment or I'd give a specific page reference.

Captain Marvel, as I mentioned earlier, would be Multiform -- possibly but not necessarily with the Instant Change adder, but with Incantations.

[James Gillen]

Good point. People have also stopped Billy from changing simply by gaging him, so it could be instance chagne requires incantations. Also Saying Shazam summons a lightning bold that if prevented from hitting Billy, or he dodges it doesn't cause the change. Watch the clash episode in Justice League. He grabs Superman and holds him above his head calling out Shazam. The lightning bolt came down and struck Supes.


He did the same thing in Kingdom Come, which might be where they got the idea.

JG

[CTaylor]

Yeah I thought that was pretty pathetic, the lightning is a special effect, not an energy blast he can avoid. That's very well established in the comics: he cannot dodge the lightning, the Flash tried to save him from it once, not knowing who Billy Batson was.

[BobGreenwade]

He did the same thing in Kingdom Come, which might be where they got the idea.No, Captain Marvel's enemies have stopped Billy Batson from saying "Shazam!" (knowingly or otherwise) by gagging him since at least the DC buy-up in the 70s, and probably clear back to the original run of the character.

[Paragon]

No, Captain Marvel's enemies have stopped Billy Batson from saying "Shazam!" (knowingly or otherwise) by gagging him since at least the DC buy-up in the 70s, and probably clear back to the original run of the character.

They were almost certainly referring to using the lightning as an attack.

[Hugh Neilson]

No, Captain Marvel's enemies have stopped Billy Batson from saying "Shazam!" (knowingly or otherwise) by gagging him since at least the DC buy-up in the 70s, and probably clear back to the original run of the character.

Definitely in the Golden Age. There was an old story where Sivana captures Billy and fits him with a device that drowns out the word Shazam. We kept seeing a word balloon where you could see "Sh" blotted out with a balloon from the device that said "Ozzle Ozzle"

[captainNeda]

Back to Telekinesis. I'd really like to see TK change so that STR and range were bought seperately. The range should be like range on Clairsentience, and each range increment is an adder while TK STR would be bought like normal STR. This would allow characters to have really powerful TK at very short ranges, or very week TK over vast distances. After all Con-El's super STR and invulnerability were defined is TK with almost no range.

[Tonio]

Back to Telekinesis. I'd really like to see TK change so that STR and range were bought seperately. The range should be like range on Clairsentience, and each range increment is an adder while TK STR would be bought like normal STR. This would allow characters to have really powerful TK at very short ranges, or very week TK over vast distances. After all Con-El's super STR and invulnerability were defined is TK with almost no range.

Not that I disagree with range being bought separately for Powers, but the example you gave is not a very good one. Super STR is a high STR value, invulnerability is defenses and/or Damage Reduction, "defined [as] TK with almost no range" is SFX.

Additionally, you can have characters with really powerful TK at very short ranges (buy Limited Range on your strong TK), or very weak TK over vast distances (buy Incresed Maximum Range on your weak TK), with the rules as they are.

[nexus]

I'd like to see some variations on Safe Blind Teleport so allow characters that can teleport into solid matter without harm in different ways, for example by creating a space just large enough for them or effectively fusing it (either would require some form or Tunneling or Desolidification to move and possibly LS to stay there for long) even if just suggestions for how to build such characters.

[captainNeda]

Not that I disagree with range being bought separately for Powers, but the example you gave is not a very good one. Super STR is a high STR value, invulnerability is defenses and/or Damage Reduction, "defined [as] TK with almost no range" is SFX.

Additionally, you can have characters with really powerful TK at very short ranges (buy Limited Range on your strong TK), or very weak TK over vast distances (buy Incresed Maximum Range on your weak TK), with the rules as they are.

True I know it's an SFX issue, and Yes when I build a character like Superboy he had High STR lots of Hardend defenses and Damage reduction. Though it can be done in the current system as you suggested, I feel that is not an accurate reflection of the effectiveness or utility of the power. What I mean by that is 60 STR TK is a 90 pt power. It is little more effective than 60 STR yet costs considerably more as 60 STR provides 12 PD, 12 Rec, 30 Stun and 12" of superleap.

I feel if the figured characteristics are dropped in 6th then it would be simple enough to streamline some power like TK by treating it as STR purchased with some Adders rather than advantages. Performing the mechanics this way I feel is a better reflection of the effectiveness in the active cost.

As for adders I think Range on TK should be an adder as well as the indirect effect of it. I don't think All TK should be inherently indirect, for example a tractor beam (again SFX) shouldn't work through a wall. Again this can be done with the current system by making TK with a limitation, but again I don't feel this accurately reflects the effectiveness in the active cost.

[CTaylor]

I don't think you have pondered the power of telekinesis sufficiently.

[captainNeda]

I don't think you have pondered the power of telekinesis sufficiently.

Reason Being?

[Tonio]

Reason Being?

Well, non-Indirect TK is really Stretching. No-range TK is either STR or Extra-Limbs (or both). TK providing less than STR is a Figured Characteristics problem, not a TK one. Many of the problems you're pointing out aren't really problems with TK, but rather problems with wanting to use TK where another Power would be better.

I believe, though, that if Figured Characteristics go, TK (and probably Stretching, too) can be reformulated as Ranged STR. Or rather, I think so. I haven't given it enough thought to be sure. I'd love the elegant simplicity of it, if it works, though. =)

[BobGreenwade]

Well, non-Indirect TK is really Stretching. No-range TK is either STR or Extra-Limbs (or both). TK providing less than STR is a Figured Characteristics problem, not a TK one. Many of the problems you're pointing out aren't really problems with TK, but rather problems with wanting to use TK where another Power would be better.

I believe, though, that if Figured Characteristics go, TK (and probably Stretching, too) can be reformulated as Ranged STR. Or rather, I think so. I haven't given it enough thought to be sure. I'd love the elegant simplicity of it, if it works, though. =)The thing is, if you define TK as Ranged STR, then it gives all the benefits of regular STR, plus Range -- unless, of course, you Limit it to not do so.

I think it's just simpler to take away the "Punch/Squeeze" and "semi-Indirect" aspects of TK and cost it at 1:1 (rather than the current 3:2).

[captainNeda]

Well, non-Indirect TK is really Stretching. No-range TK is either STR or Extra-Limbs (or both). TK providing less than STR is a Figured Characteristics problem, not a TK one. Many of the problems you're pointing out aren't really problems with TK, but rather problems with wanting to use TK where another Power would be better.

I believe, though, that if Figured Characteristics go, TK (and probably Stretching, too) can be reformulated as Ranged STR. Or rather, I think so. I haven't given it enough thought to be sure. I'd love the elegant simplicity of it, if it works, though. =)

Ok Good I see you you are thinking along the same lines I am when it comes to reformulating. TK has always been one of my favorite and most hated powers. I've always looked at it in relation to Stretching, Energy Blast, Strength and Clairsentience, and the advantages indirect, continous and ranged.

In the past I've been through examples like you suggested and found flaws in all the mechanics. The stretching Idea is reactive in that characters can essentially pull or push and is based on STR. Yes you can put limitations on the stretching and buy STR only to use with TK then it gets' really silly as well.

In considering using Stretching it became apparent that the range of TK done this way was based on how many inches of range was purchased. I considered how we could build TK to reflect this and realized Clairsentience. As for no range TK I'm more concerned with limited range TK and believe reformulating the mechanic to purchase range seperate from strength may be a better way of reflecting the effectiveness of the power.

As for Indirect I see basically 2 forms. Curved path and remote point of origin. Most stretching used to reach around obstacles is a curved path, it couldn't penetrate barriers but goes around them. A remote point of origin is simply that, a remote point of origin of the power that can appear anywhere even on the other side of a barrier. Clairsentience is a good reflection of this through say an OIF Camera. The perception is based on the remote point of origin which happens to be the camera. Then there is indirect which is a combination of the two.

In reformulating TK reformulating Growth, Stretching, Indirect and Clairsentience could all be appropriate. There are obviously relations between them all that I don't have time to go into but I have given this considerable thought.

[Markdoc]

The thing is, if you define TK as Ranged STR, then it gives all the benefits of regular STR, plus Range -- unless, of course, you Limit it to not do so.

Yeah, but that's only a big deal due to the figured/STR cost problem. If "Figureds" go away or STR shifts to 2 points per (both of which look like they are under consideration as a possible solution) then having TK as ranged STR shouldn't be a big deal. You buy STR, you buy ranged: you get what you paid for (if you want indirect, you'd need to buy that too). The only reason ranged STR is specifically off limits now is that STR is so much more cost-effective than EB: if you allowed it to be ranged, there'd be no point in having EB.

cheers, Mark

[CTaylor]

Take a while and think about all you can accomplish with your limited strength and the requirement you have to touch things to do them.

Now put range on that. And indirect. Put no upper limit on the level of strength.

Now you're starting to get an idea how powerful TK is.

[ajackson]

Take a while and think about all you can accomplish with your limited strength and the requirement you have to touch things to do them.

Now put range on that. And indirect. Put no upper limit on the level of strength.

Now you're starting to get an idea how powerful TK is.
I'm a little vague on how this is relevant. If TK is bought as "Str, Ranged, Indirect", well, it sounds like you're paying for all those benefits.

[CTaylor]

Okayy...

Telekinesis in Hero Games is the power by which you exert strength. At range. It is automatically indirect. Is this connecting for you yet?

[ajackson]

Okayy...

Telekinesis in Hero Games is the power by which you exert strength. At range. It is automatically indirect. Is this connecting for you yet?
I understand what you're saying. I'm questioning why this is an argument for TK being anything other than Str, Ranged, Indirect.

[CTaylor]

I'm questioning why this is an argument for TK being anything other than Str, Ranged, Indirect.

It's not. It's an argument against your assertion that telekinesis costs too much.

[ideasmith]

It's not. It's an argument against your assertion that telekinesis costs too much.

I just checked all 22 of ajackson's posts in this thread, without seeing any such assertion. Perhaps you have ajackson confused with someone else?

[AnotherSkip]

Reason Being?

Tk is far more effective than you have proposed.

Magneto's powers in the movies are a good example, and even that is a very modest version of how a truly imaginative gaming person would do things.

I know, I'm playing a hydrokinetic in a V&V PBEM campaign and the poor GM has to reign me in sometimes.

[CTaylor]

As for adders I think Range on TK should be an adder as well as the indirect effect of it. I don't think All TK should be inherently indirect, for example a tractor beam (again SFX) shouldn't work through a wall. Again this can be done with the current system by making TK with a limitation, but again I don't feel this accurately reflects the effectiveness in the active cost.

That's what I was responding to.

[Netzilla]

As for adders I think Range on TK should be an adder as well as the indirect effect of it. I don't think All TK should be inherently indirect, for example a tractor beam (again SFX) shouldn't work through a wall. Again this can be done with the current system by making TK with a limitation, but again I don't feel this accurately reflects the effectiveness in the active cost.That's what I was responding to.

First, that quote came from one of captainNeda's messages, not ajackson's. Second, I don't think captainNeda was arguing that TK, as it stands now, is too cheap. Rather, I believe the argument is that it's too tied to certain SFX due to having a built-in semi-indirect and having range automatically increase as TK Strength increases. His solution would be buying the STR, Range and level-of-Indirect separately for TK.

So, for example, using his idea, one character might buy something like:

Personal Tractor Beam: TK
* STR 30 (x pts)
* Range 10" (y pts)
(Note that this would be a direct power because this version of TK has no levels of indirect by default.)

Another might buy:

Mind Over Matter (TK)
* STR 10 (a pts)
* Range 100" (b pts)
* Indirect, same point of origin (bends around corners) (+1/4)

There's merit to the idea, but really only if we end up divorcing Range from Active Points on all powers (as was discussed elsewhere in the 6E threads).

[captainNeda]

First, that quote came from one of captainNeda's messages, not ajackson's. Second, I don't think captainNeda was arguing that TK, as it stands now, is too cheap. Rather, I believe the argument is that it's too tied to certain SFX due to having a built-in semi-indirect and having range automatically increase as TK Strength increases. His solution would be buying the STR, Range and level-of-Indirect separately for TK.

So, for example, using his idea, one character might buy something like:

Personal Tractor Beam: TK
* STR 30 (x pts)
* Range 10" (y pts)
(Note that this would be a direct power because this version of TK has no levels of indirect by default.)

Another might buy:

Mind Over Matter (TK)
* STR 10 (a pts)
* Range 100" (b pts)
* Indirect, same point of origin (bends around corners) (+1/4)

There's merit to the idea, but really only if we end up divorcing Range from Active Points on all powers (as was discussed elsewhere in the 6E threads).

Thank you NetZilla. Yes I feel TK along with many other Champions powers are tied to certain SFX because of the inherent advantages an limitations associated with them.

In addition to your Merit statement, I feel a "Champions Atoms" system should be developed to better define powers. Years ago it was mentioned on one of the old Forums that powers be broken down into their core elements (which has never been done) which would include divorcing range, damge, duration, endurance cost, Visibiliy and other aspects from each other. I believe this is a good idea for game designers, but I don't think this is a system to be used by players or GM's. If done properly Game designers would be able to use these core elements in developing more balanced powers and effects to use in the game, don't you agree?

Sorry I seem to have gone off topic but it is nice to see a level head in there.

[CTaylor]

Sorry if I got mixed up, Jackson apparently replied to my post directed at Neda as if it was to him, imagine my confusion

[ajackson]

There's merit to the idea, but really only if we end up divorcing Range from Active Points on all powers (as was discussed elsewhere in the 6E threads).
Well, having the basic power be un-advantaged and then taking advantages to get the power you want also works. In general, starting with a simple effect and then adding advantages is less clumsy than starting with a complex effects and using limitations to take away the stuff you don't want.

[Netzilla]

In addition to your Merit statement, I feel a "Champions Atoms" system should be developed to better define powers. Years ago it was mentioned on one of the old Forums that powers be broken down into their core elements (which has never been done) which would include divorcing range, damge, duration, endurance cost, Visibiliy and other aspects from each other. I believe this is a good idea for game designers, but I don't think this is a system to be used by players or GM's. If done properly Game designers would be able to use these core elements in developing more balanced powers and effects to use in the game, don't you agree?

Well, having the basic power be un-advantaged and then taking advantages to get the power you want also works. In general, starting with a simple effect and then adding advantages is less clumsy than starting with a complex effects and using limitations to take away the stuff you don't want.

Hey, I've been a proponent of the idea of breaking the whole system down to a half-dozen (give or take) basic powers and using that to rebuild the existing power list all along. The "meta-powers" can go in the back of the book in the 'Core principles of the Hero System' chapter while the normal powers list stays right where it is. Players and GMs are then completely free to ignore those meta-powers. The advantage, I feel, is that it should lead to more consistent pricing and mechanical structure for the main powers list.

This general idea's been brought up several times during the 6E discussion (mostly over in the General Powers thread; last time I believe it was around here (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1561666#post1561666)). So I really hope Steve Long gives the idea serious consideration.

[Hugh Neilson]

True I know it's an SFX issue, and Yes when I build a character like Superboy he had High STR lots of Hardend defenses and Damage reduction. Though it can be done in the current system as you suggested, I feel that is not an accurate reflection of the effectiveness or utility of the power. What I mean by that is 60 STR TK is a 90 pt power. It is little more effective than 60 STR yet costs considerably more as 60 STR provides 12 PD, 12 Rec, 30 Stun and 12" of superleap.

I feel if the figured characteristics are dropped in 6th then it would be simple enough to streamline some power like TK by treating it as STR purchased with some Adders rather than advantages. Performing the mechanics this way I feel is a better reflection of the effectiveness in the active cost.

As for adders I think Range on TK should be an adder as well as the indirect effect of it. I don't think All TK should be inherently indirect, for example a tractor beam (again SFX) shouldn't work through a wall. Again this can be done with the current system by making TK with a limitation, but again I don't feel this accurately reflects the effectiveness in the active cost.

This implies Ranged and Indirect for KA's, normal attacks, etx. should be an adder, and removal of such benefits should be a "subtractor" rather than a limitation.

The thing is, if you define TK as Ranged STR, then it gives all the benefits of regular STR, plus Range -- unless, of course, you Limit it to not do so.

I think it's just simpler to take away the "Punch/Squeeze" and "semi-Indirect" aspects of TK and cost it at 1:1 (rather than the current 3:2).

I'm a little vague on how this is relevant. If TK is bought as "Str, Ranged, Indirect", well, it sounds like you're paying for all those benefits.

Sure - 10 STR Ranged (+1/2) Indirect (+3/4) = 22.5 points. No Figured (-1/2) drops it down to 15. OH LOOK - Telekinesis! This issue once again comes back to the Figured Dilemma. Let's not restart that here.

As to the Power of TK...

"You cannot harm me for my Wall of Force is impenetrable".

TK is, by default, Indirect. The Wall doesn't stop it.

The vault's too tough to break down? TK lets me pick the lock from the inside.

I want to unlock the car door and get my keys out? TK. I want to turn the wheel of the villain's getaway vehicle? TK. The rest of you need to fight the armored VilainVehicle. I'll just look through the faceplate and use my TK on its 2 DEF scientist operator. Indirect is a very underestimated effect.

It also tends to be a forgotten aspect of TK. A lot of TK effects should be limited as "Not Indirect" (-1/2), which brings the cost down to 1 STR = 1 Point. That's STR with Range and No Figured.

[ajackson]

Sure - 10 STR Ranged (+1/2) Indirect (+3/4) = 22.5 points. No Figured (-1/2) drops it down to 15.
This assumes that figured stats aren't deleted from the game and that Str remains at a cost of 1:1. It's unlikely that both of those things will remain true.

[Hugh Neilson]

This assumes that figured stats aren't deleted from the game and that Str remains at a cost of 1:1. It's unlikely that both of those things will remain true.

TK needs to be refigured to be consistent with whatever the new status quo will be in 6e, but that is the 5e model. In my view, it should be possible to reconcile the cost of 6e TK to STR as well. However, I would like 6e to remove the auto-indirect aspect of TK. If you want it to be Indirect, buy an advantage.

[Paragon]

TK needs to be refigured to be consistent with whatever the new status quo will be in 6e, but that is the 5e model. In my view, it should be possible to reconcile the cost of 6e TK to STR as well. However, I would like 6e to remove the auto-indirect aspect of TK. If you want it to be Indirect, buy an advantage.

That was the way it worked in the old days in fact, but one of the apparent design issues with Hero all along is that they've never really gone for the most atomic case; they've gone for what seemed to be the most common case, and let it Limit or Advantage from there.

[ajackson]

That was the way it worked in the old days in fact, but one of the apparent design issues with Hero all along is that they've never really gone for the most atomic case; they've gone for what seemed to be the most common case, and let it Limit or Advantage from there.
I don't see a lot of evidence for TK as Indirect being the default case; it's pretty rarely done, and not done at all with many special effects, and when it is done, it's rarely done at the level of power seen for direct effects.

[CTaylor]

I think it should cost less if it's not inherently indirect, but I think the justification for naturally being indirect is that the definition of the power is the ability to manipulate things distant from you without a direct connection. Incidentally, I think Telekinesis is only quasi-indirect, I don't think you can use it through a transparent barrier, for instance. Just a guess though.

[Hugh Neilson]

I think it should cost less if it's not inherently indirect, but I think the justification for naturally being indirect is that the definition of the power is the ability to manipulate things distant from you without a direct connection. Incidentally, I think Telekinesis is only quasi-indirect, I don't think you can use it through a transparent barrier, for instance. Just a guess though.

I posed the question on the Rules Board some time ago, and the answer was that Steve couldn't think of anything TK could not do that +3/4 Indirect would permit.

[Paragon]

I don't see a lot of evidence for TK as Indirect being the default case; it's pretty rarely done, and not done at all with many special effects, and when it is done, it's rarely done at the level of power seen for direct effects.

Outside of superheroes--and even sometimes there--I can't say I've ever seen it depicted as _not_ indirect. I've seen numerous examples of it being used through glass, cameras and other things in fiction, and none I can think of where TK proper was ever explicitly stopped by sensory transparent barriers. Can you?

[captainNeda]

Outside of superheroes--and even sometimes there--I can't say I've ever seen it depicted as _not_ indirect. I've seen numerous examples of it being used through glass, cameras and other things in fiction, and none I can think of where TK proper was ever explicitly stopped by sensory transparent barriers. Can you?

Remember TK as a power is STR ranged, not just Telekenisis. That means it could be any STR based special effect such as the Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero. It was something like 20 STR TK only to throw an opponet to the ground OAF bag of marbles, blah blah blah. Setting that up isn't indirect. Most depictions of tractor Beams are not indirect. Heck Storm's ability to create windstorms is frequently purchased as TK, yet in X2 she had to be teleported into the duplicate Cerebro with Night crawler to use it. Granted that could be considered change environment but the wind effect is still TK. Another depictions is the gunslinger (the Spectral kid or some such) who was an undead member of the Assesnos in the 4th editions champions book who shot spectral bullets as a multipower. One of his slots was 20 str TK defined as trick shooting. Unless he bounces a bullet that can't be indirect with that SFX and of course it wouldn't work through glass.

Even TK as Telekinesis is frequently represented inconsistently. Take Star Wars for example. In empire Vader strangled Admiral Azzolle (Spelling I know) who was on the bridge from his command module via telescreen, yet in Phantom Menace why weren't Quigon and Darth Maul clubbing the hell out of each other with it through the forcewall? In the game Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight II and Jedi Outcast TK was mostly Line of sight though sometimes you couldn't use it through a window, other times you could but only to pull a lever, not to slam somebody into the wall or a console or something. Have you seen any of those depictions?

[AnotherSkip]

Outside of superheroes--and even sometimes there--I can't say I've ever seen it depicted as _not_ indirect. I've seen numerous examples of it being used through glass, cameras and other things in fiction, and none I can think of where TK proper was ever explicitly stopped by sensory transparent barriers. Can you?

Part of the problem with this argument is "stopped by sensory transparent barriers or not through cameras" is alot of times no one tests these out, the psionicist does what the single writer usually wants to do then never has to deal with 2,000 screaming players who thought up the 10,000 other things you could do with the power.
In Shadowrun you could not use magic (including TK) through computer, camerars or digital stuff or magic (ie magic clairsentience would not enable magical targeting. I had built a 2" diamiter fiber optic scope that would require no digital opertaions to operate from, in addition I built mirrored periscopes, The Gm liked neither of these "Solutions" even though they were simple applications of technology that got around the rules.

[captainNeda]

This implies Ranged and Indirect for KA's, normal attacks, etx. should be an adder, and removal of such benefits should be a "subtractor" rather than a limitation.


That's not really a bad idea. Consider STR already has continuous on it for Free (via Grab) and adds to HA's and HKA's. Broken down into component parts it could be made to cost the same thing and have similar game effectiveness.


Sure - 10 STR Ranged (+1/2) Indirect (+3/4) = 22.5 points. No Figured (-1/2) drops it down to 15. OH LOOK - Telekinesis! This issue once again comes back to the Figured Dilemma. Let's not restart that here.

As to the Power of TK...

"You cannot harm me for my Wall of Force is impenetrable".

TK is, by default, Indirect. The Wall doesn't stop it.

The vault's too tough to break down? TK lets me pick the lock from the inside.

I want to unlock the car door and get my keys out? TK. I want to turn the wheel of the villain's getaway vehicle? TK. The rest of you need to fight the armored VilainVehicle. I'll just look through the faceplate and use my TK on its 2 DEF scientist operator. Indirect is a very underestimated effect.

It also tends to be a forgotten aspect of TK. A lot of TK effects should be limited as "Not Indirect" (-1/2), which brings the cost down to 1 STR = 1 Point. That's STR with Range and No Figured.

I won't argue with you there, that's a way of resolving it, though I'm not real comfortable with it. Every 5 points of STR grants 6.5 points of other powers for total of 11.5 points. 5 STR adds 1 PD (1 pt), 1 REC (2 pts), 2.5 Stun (2.5 pts) and 1" of superleap (1 pt). I feel I'd be happier if we found a cost effective way of purchasing range and indirect as adders vs advantages.

[captainNeda]

Hey, I've been a proponent of the idea of breaking the whole system down to a half-dozen (give or take) basic powers and using that to rebuild the existing power list all along. The "meta-powers" can go in the back of the book in the 'Core principles of the Hero System' chapter while the normal powers list stays right where it is. Players and GMs are then completely free to ignore those meta-powers. The advantage, I feel, is that it should lead to more consistent pricing and mechanical structure for the main powers list.

This general idea's been brought up several times during the 6E discussion (mostly over in the General Powers thread; last time I believe it was around here (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1561666#post1561666)). So I really hope Steve Long gives the idea serious consideration.

Thanks Netzilla, I appreciate the reference to the page.

[AnotherSkip]

For a really radical suggestion breaking the powers down to 4 (Attack, Defense, movement & senses) though even though I do suggest this it is really really hard to see how it could work at this level.
Stretching AND Tk could be Reflective of Strength with modifiers or just attacks which is where stretching seems to be headed anyways. Shrinking seems to be a defense, Supress is attack a power.

Swimming and Swinging can be described as Flight w/limitations.

[Paragon]

Remember TK as a power is STR ranged, not just Telekenisis. That means it could be any STR based special effect such



Remember my comment about "the commonest usage" however; the commonest usage for TK is, well, TK. As such, like any number of other powers it adjusts from that basis. As I said, Hero has never really been atomic, or any number of powers all the way down to Energy Blast wouldn't be constructed as they are.


Even TK as Telekinesis is frequently represented inconsistently. Take Star Wars for example. In empire Vader strangled Admiral Azzolle (Spelling I know) who was on the bridge from his command module via telescreen, yet in Phantom Menace why weren't Quigon and Darth Maul clubbing the hell out of each other with it through the forcewall? In the game Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight II and Jedi Outcast TK was mostly Line of sight though sometimes you couldn't use it through a window, other times you could but only to pull a lever, not to slam somebody into the wall or a console or something. Have you seen any of those depictions?

Inconsistency is inconsistency. That doesn't change my opinion that the default as depicted in fiction is that TK is not bothered by barriers, just by sensory limitations; I'd have to see examples where it was consistently done the _other_ way to believe otherwise.

[Paragon]

Part of the problem with this argument is "stopped by sensory transparent barriers or not through cameras" is alot of times no one tests these out, the psionicist does what the single writer usually wants to do then never has to deal with 2,000 screaming players who thought up the 10,000 other things you could do with the power.
In Shadowrun you could not use magic (including TK) through computer, camerars or digital stuff or magic (ie magic clairsentience would not enable magical targeting. I had built a 2" diamiter fiber optic scope that would require no digital opertaions to operate from, in addition I built mirrored periscopes, The Gm liked neither of these "Solutions" even though they were simple applications of technology that got around the rules.

That's a particular element of the hostility between magic and technology in Shadowrun though; I'm not sure I consider something that exists largely as a game balance element in another _game_ a particularly good example (in fact, I'm not sure I consider other games a particularly good example of anything for this kind of discussion).

[Hugh Neilson]

Remember TK as a power is STR ranged, not just Telekenisis. That means it could be any STR based special effect such as the Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero. It was something like 20 STR TK only to throw an opponet to the ground OAF bag of marbles, blah blah blah. Setting that up isn't indirect. Most depictions of tractor Beams are not indirect. Heck Storm's ability to create windstorms is frequently purchased as TK, yet in X2 she had to be teleported into the duplicate Cerebro with Night crawler to use it. Granted that could be considered change environment but the wind effect is still TK. Another depictions is the gunslinger (the Spectral kid or some such) who was an undead member of the Assesnos in the 4th editions champions book who shot spectral bullets as a multipower. One of his slots was 20 str TK defined as trick shooting. Unless he bounces a bullet that can't be indirect with that SFX and of course it wouldn't work through glass.

Green Lantern's TK, and that of similar force projectors, also does not seem indirect. Mind you, these are Supers examples.

Even TK as Telekinesis is frequently represented inconsistently. Take Star Wars for example. In empire Vader strangled Admiral Azzolle (Spelling I know) who was on the bridge from his command module via telescreen, yet in Phantom Menace why weren't Quigon and Darth Maul clubbing the hell out of each other with it through the forcewall? In the game Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight II and Jedi Outcast TK was mostly Line of sight though sometimes you couldn't use it through a window, other times you could but only to pull a lever, not to slam somebody into the wall or a console or something. Have you seen any of those depictions?

On the same point, if TK can be used through a barrier in the SW universe, why didn't Obi Wan use his TK to assist Qui-Gon while he was fighting Maul, rather than standing there staring through the window looking horrified?

[Paragon]

Green Lantern's TK, and that of similar force projectors, also does not seem indirect. Mind you, these are Supers examples.




It wasn't a coincidence I used the phrase "outside of supers". :) As you note, the vast majority of supers that use "TK" are actually using force constructs or tractor-pressor effects of some kind. That turns on its head once you get outside of supers, though.

[Hugh Neilson]

Sci Fi tractor beams and Jedi telekinesis aren't Supers and are cited above.

The Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero isn't Supers.

The 20 Str TK defined as trick shooting could just as easily be purchased a Wild West gunslinger, a Superspy or Military gunbunny or a Fantasy archer.

That's without putting a lot of thought into my examples.

[captainNeda]

Sci Fi tractor beams and Jedi telekinesis aren't Supers and are cited above.

The Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero isn't Supers.

The 20 Str TK defined as trick shooting could just as easily be purchased a Wild West gunslinger, a Superspy or Military gunbunny or a Fantasy archer.

That's without putting a lot of thought into my examples.

Ok what do you qualify as super? Iron man? Dr Doom? Iron man's Uni-beam was described several times as a tractor beam. Dr Doom has had similar effects. Red Tornado is a super his wind storm is TK, so is Superman's breath. Just because the power is called TK doesn't mean that it is TK or that it has a limted SFX.

[ajackson]

Outside of superheroes--and even sometimes there--I can't say I've ever seen it depicted as _not_ indirect. I've seen numerous examples of it being used through glass, cameras and other things in fiction, and none I can think of where TK proper was ever explicitly stopped by sensory transparent barriers. Can you?
"TK Proper" isn't a meaningful term; TK is anything that would mechanically behave like strength at range, including a number of things other than psychokinesis. Psychokinesis in literature is usually not affected by cover, but it's also not affected by a lot of other things, including DCV.

[CTaylor]

I posed the question on the Rules Board some time ago, and the answer was that Steve couldn't think of anything TK could not do that +3/4 Indirect would permit.

Thanks I was going to search for that but the search engine on this kind of board is just awful and I was feeling lazy. I would suggest then that for 6th edition it be turned into quasi indirect: you are separated but cannot act through a completely enclosed area with the default, but with an adder or a +1/4 advantage you can. That way you retain the telekinetic feel without making it work through any barrier.

I also suggest a lot of uses of telekinesis people bring up here are not TK at all but rather stretching.

why didn't Obi Wan use his TK to assist Qui-Gon while he was fighting Maul, rather than standing there staring through the window looking horrified?

Because Lucas is a horrible writer.

[Hugh Neilson]

It wasn't a coincidence I used the phrase "outside of supers". :) As you note, the vast majority of supers that use "TK" are actually using force constructs or tractor-pressor effects of some kind. That turns on its head once you get outside of supers, though.

Sci Fi tractor beams and Jedi telekinesis aren't Supers and are cited above.

The Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero isn't Supers.

The 20 Str TK defined as trick shooting could just as easily be purchased a Wild West gunslinger, a Superspy or Military gunbunny or a Fantasy archer.

That's without putting a lot of thought into my examples.

Ok what do you qualify as super? Iron man? Dr Doom? Iron man's Uni-beam was described several times as a tractor beam. Dr Doom has had similar effects. Red Tornado is a super his wind storm is TK, so is Superman's breath. Just because the power is called TK doesn't mean that it is TK or that it has a limted SFX.

My post was directed at Paragon, who has indicated he sees non-indirect TK as being an issue only seen in Supers, so my goal was to provide some non-Super examples. All of your examples are great examples of Supers using non-indirect TK, or less than "+3/4 indirect" TK, and there are lots more out there.

[Paragon]

Sci Fi tractor beams and Jedi telekinesis aren't Supers and are cited above.



And the Jedi powers as noted, are used inconsistently; sometimes they _are_ treated indirect.



The Ninja Marble Trick in ninja hero isn't Supers.



And are poorly done as TK anyway; Change Environment is a far better way to emulate them. The only reason TK was ever used was there was no better tool for the job.


The 20 Str TK defined as trick shooting could just as easily be purchased a Wild West gunslinger, a Superspy or Military gunbunny or a Fantasy archer.

That's without putting a lot of thought into my examples.

I'm not particularly conviced TK is a good model for those, either.

[Paragon]

"TK Proper" isn't a meaningful term; TK is anything that would mechanically behave like strength at range, including a number of things other than psychokinesis. Psychokinesis in literature is usually not affected by cover, but it's also not affected by a lot of other things, including DCV.

And it is already, but as I said, plenty of powers make assumptions about default use, or EBs wouldn't default to doing Body, and Snares wouldn't default to a lot of things they do.

[Paragon]

My post was directed at Paragon, who has indicated he sees non-indirect TK as being an issue only seen in Supers, so my goal was to provide some non-Super examples. All of your examples are great examples of Supers using non-indirect TK, or less than "+3/4 indirect" TK, and there are lots more out there.

No, I'm saying its only commonly seen in supers, especially when you eliminate things that I don't think are best emulated by the TK power in the first place. The commonest things you see outside supers that behave like that are, as far as I can tell, typically psionic or magical object moving, and I have little evidence the vast majority of those care about intervening objects.

[ajackson]

No, I'm saying its only commonly seen in supers, especially when you eliminate things that I don't think are best emulated by the TK power in the first place. The commonest things you see outside supers that behave like that are, as far as I can tell, typically psionic or magical object moving, and I have little evidence the vast majority of those care about intervening objects.
While this is true, it seems to be a feature of 'magical targeting', not a feature of telekinesis, as in fact most pure magical or psionic attacks ignore intervening objects. For these purposes, "pure" means that the magic affects the target directly, rather than generating an effect that in turn affects the target. The Shadowrun example is actually pretty relevant here: in Shadowrun, direct spells ignore barriers and must be resisted rather than dodged, indirect spells are affected by barriers and must be dodged rather than resisted.

This actually appears to be a variant of Based on ECV which works on inanimate objects. Note that BoECV gives exactly the same sort of 'indirect' effect as is being assigned to TK.

[PhilFleischmann]

Opening the can of worms a little farther:

What about 0 STR TK? How do you buy that? It would certainly be useful in many instances to be able to pick up and manipulate objects at a distance that weigh 25 kg or less. As the rules stand, this costs 0 points!

[captainNeda]

My post was directed at Paragon, who has indicated he sees non-indirect TK as being an issue only seen in Supers, so my goal was to provide some non-Super examples. All of your examples are great examples of Supers using non-indirect TK, or less than "+3/4 indirect" TK, and there are lots more out there.


Thanks Hugh, you had me a little confused, I appreciate it.

[CTaylor]

A few dozen pages back I brought up the necessity of giving Telekinesis a minimum cost (and stripping the fine control roll off of active cost - lifting bigger things makes you have better fine control??)

[Hugh Neilson]

And the Jedi powers as noted, are used inconsistently; sometimes they _are_ treated indirect.



And are poorly done as TK anyway; Change Environment is a far better way to emulate them. The only reason TK was ever used was there was no better tool for the job.



I'm not particularly conviced TK is a good model for those, either.

It seems to me that you want TK to be indirect, so any example, including numerous published examples, where it ought not to be is simply something "TK is not a good model for". The fact is, the game as written uses TK for many things that are not, by nature, indirect. I suggest that Indirect be removed as a default. It appears your suggestion is to redefine (or create) powers and builds used for all non-indirect uses of TK. Two viable approaches, but I go with the simpler approach that creates the least change - make TK non-indirect by default and we can buy the advantage for those characters whose TK is indirect by default.

A further thought. Most examples I have seen presented as "true telekinesis" are actually the book build of psychokinesis. As this is based on ECV, it is also based on line of sight so, in theory, should not be stopped by a transparent barrier in any event. I can still see the target, so I can still hit the target. Perhaps Psychokinesis should be its own power, falling under mental powers, and Telekinesis (perhaps renamed, and definitely not indirect by default) should be a physical power.

[AnotherSkip]

I think the biggest difference between using TK Vs Stretchin is are you using your own Strength (or someone elses strength like automations), vs Strength of the power.

And Yes we should compare others games systems, especially the later editions because they have been playtested by alot of other people, taken that feed back and closed some of the more annoying loopholes generally with good reason.

For buying 0 Str TK Id Probably charge 1 point if I wasnt thinking about it, but my thought does say a minimum of 5 points for any "power"(6 in TK's Case), just too darn useful otherwise, and yes you would have to deal with the "penalty" of having more than 25 lbs of capacity to lift stuff with.


i'm also not sold on how you can have TK that isn't explained away as Magic/Psionics or High Tech period. There just isn't anywhere else to go to for SFX as i can see.

the problem with the "little evidence" argument is there is little evidence either way, like I stated earlier. Most authors with good reason Dont fill the first third of their first book with a character testing their powers in all sorts of uncanny situations. Most of which are metawriting reasons. In addition it can been seen as boring for a character to waste an action that produces no result. But when it happens it is genrally because of personal invisible defenses rather than a lucky intervening object.

In addition with magic at least since Most magical barriers ARE transparent (if even visible at all) and can stop the Tk attack then therefore you have two possibilities either transparent defenses no matter how flimsy to real world attacks can stop Magical ones OR magical defenses whether visible or not stop the attacks. Possibly it is both and therefore inseparable from those examples. And generally neither way is decipherable since there is no way to test the hypothosis.

[captainNeda]

i'm also not sold on how you can have TK that isn't explained away as Magic/Psionics or High Tech period. There just isn't anywhere else to go to for SFX as i can see.


Ok are we referring to remote influencing TK (the ability to exert force at range) or psychokenesis here?

TK as a power is the ability to exert force at range and can have numerous SFX and not be Magic, Psionic or Hich Tech. See my examples above, and consider Sue Storm's (the invisible woman's) ability to move objects with her invisible force fields (yes she has invisibility, force walls, flight, EB's and TK as powers to mention a few) or Johny Storm's ability to control fire defined as TK only vs Fire -1 (as defined in several of the books) in addition to Aid, suppress dispell, Energy Blasts, Drains and so on related to his fire control.

For that matter I've also seen write ups that allow Magnetic or electrically powered charecters to take control of machines or metal objects and make them attack targets via TK (like Magneto disarming the police in the X-men movie and turning all there guns on them). Oh and Megneto's power is TK only vs Metal. Electro has something similar with electronic devices (or at least he did).

Cyclops has the ability to push items along the floor using his optic blast with Excellent STR according to TSR's Marvel superheroe's. As described in detail it was TK not KB

The Silver Surfer has several way's he's been writen up. Sometimes I've seen the surf board as a vehicle, but more often as multipower defined as flight, forcewall, EB indirect and TK.

Again Superman has a breath weapon purchased as TK. Yes the effects of his breath can be done as a series of slots in a multipower like energy blasts double knock back, dispel, suppress or some other such stuff, but that couldn't catch Lois Lane and keep her in the air to cushion her fall, or control where to move her as seen in superman II the richard Donner Cut. Red Tornado, Thor, or Storm's ability to create strong winds is also TK.

As a magic example I once saw in the Ultimate Supermage 10 STR TK fine manipulation spell defined as summoning an imp to carry stuff around (again SFX). What would prevent that from being defined as an indestructable robot, spectral force, or the silver age Wonder Woman's magic Lasso (that she can control from a distance without touching it).

Yes I'm certain someone will try and think up another way to define these powers, but that doesn't accurately represent the utility of those powers which can only be handled as STR used at a distance. The term TK means to have remote influence or to exert force at range, the caviot is often as if by psionics, magic or scientifically inexplainable means. For those of you who have limited thinking, get past the last part of the definition and stick to the first the ability to exert Force at range.

[Paragon]

While this is true, it seems to be a feature of 'magical targeting', not a feature of telekinesis, as in fact most pure magical or psionic attacks ignore intervening objects. For these purposes, "pure" means that the magic affects the target directly, rather than generating an effect that in turn affects the target. The Shadowrun example is actually pretty relevant here: in Shadowrun, direct spells ignore barriers and must be resisted rather than dodged, indirect spells are affected by barriers and must be dodged rather than resisted.

This actually appears to be a variant of Based on ECV which works on inanimate objects. Note that BoECV gives exactly the same sort of 'indirect' effect as is being assigned to TK.

Sure. This isn't unique to TK. It just happens that TK is the only really common physical process you see do this in fiction (you have to get down to pyrokinesis before you've probably gotten the next one, and that's nowhere near as common). Most of the others are basically telepathic processes of one sort or another.

Remember the core of my argument here is that Hero is less than atomic in many, perhaps most places. Its always tended to aim at the common place, and let you Advantage and Limit from there. People just don't think of it that way in the case of things like Energy Blast or Snare, but those make just as much assumptions about default effects as TK does.

[Paragon]

It seems to me that you want TK to be indirect, so any example, including numerous published examples, where it ought not to be is simply something "TK is not a good model for". The fact is, the game as written uses TK for many things that are not, by nature, indirect. I suggest that Indirect be removed as a default. It appears your



And it uses Energy Blast for things that don't do Body, and Entangle for transient walls and a lot of other things. As I said, the question isn't "can this power be used for things that don't share its default traits"; that argument only works if every power is built only to its minimum required properties, and virtually no power is. The question clearly has been from day one "What properties does the power need to serve the commonest uses". And my argument is that as soon as you get outside superheroes, the commonest uses TK would be put to _are_ indirect. I argue with your counter examples in part because some of them are poor (the marbles being a particularly bad one, as that was always using a wrench as a hammer because you didn't have hammer, same as a lot of shapeshift builds were years ago) and some of them I don't think are at all common. If that upsets you, it does, but that's what my argument is and that's what my responses are based on.


A further thought. Most examples I have seen presented as "true telekinesis" are actually the book build of psychokinesis. As this is based on ECV, it is also based on line of sight so, in theory, should not be stopped by a transparent barrier in any event. I can still see the target, so I can still hit the target. Perhaps Psychokinesis should be its own power, falling under mental powers, and Telekinesis (perhaps renamed, and definitely not indirect by default) should be a physical power.

This is, on the other hand, a sounder argument to my view, but then, "ECV usable against objects" is, under current construction, very much a kludge in Hero (i'd also argue it inflates the cost of the power way too much, but that's a common problem with that sort of thing).

[ajackson]

This is, on the other hand, a sounder argument to my view, but then, "ECV usable against objects" is, under current construction, very much a kludge in Hero (i'd also argue it inflates the cost of the power way too much, but that's a common problem with that sort of thing).
I'd probably say a power based on ECV is usable against objects if it goes against normal defenses (rather than mental defenses). A +1 advantage for Indirect, No Range Modifier, and a special targeting mechanism that is typically more reliable than OCV vs DCV, is pretty fairly priced anyway.

In any case, I agree with the previous poster: the 'indirect' should be reserved for psychokinesis, implemented as BoECV.

[Paragon]

I'd probably say a power based on ECV is usable against objects if it goes against normal defenses (rather than mental defenses). A +1 advantage for Indirect, No Range Modifier, and a special targeting mechanism that is typically more reliable than OCV vs DCV, is pretty fairly priced anyway.



I'm not at all convinced for the lower powered versions that it is; even many psychic characters aren't going to have that much higher ECV than OCV, and its not like a lot of the inanimate objects used are going to be that hard to hit in the first place. So the problem ends up being you end up paying for a lot of capability that you won't (and in the case of small amounts, in practice often can't) use.



In any case, I agree with the previous poster: the 'indirect' should be reserved for psychokinesis, implemented as BoECV.

At which point I'd have to argue this just says that should be the default form of the power.

[ajackson]

At which point I'd have to argue this just says that should be the default form of the power.
There's far too many other uses of the power. Personally, I think the power should be 'Strength', apply advantages to taste.

[CTaylor]

yeah, but even just strength at range is indirect, or it's stretching. There's nothing between point a (you) and point b (your target) which means you can reach over things and around things, without you being connected. Telekinesis must be indirect to at least some degree.

[Netzilla]

yeah, but even just strength at range is indirect, or it's stretching. There's nothing between point a (you) and point b (your target) which means you can reach over things and around things, without you being connected. Telekinesis must be indirect to at least some degree.

Indirect is not the only difference between Stretching and TK:

Stretching has no Range Modifier
Stretching uses personal STR
Stretching has a Non-Combat Multiplier for its range
Stretching is inherently and explicitly indirect (bends around corners)
Stretched limbs can be attacked
A Stretch grab is a Full Phase action unless the distance to the target is 1/2 max stretch distance or less
After a grab, a character can use Stretching to pull themselves toward the target
Stretching receives a velocity damage bonus

All of the above comes from pages 220-221 of 5ER. All of these would need to be Advantaged/Limited out to represent things like Tractor Beams, wind storms and similar effects. Direct TK would seem to be a better choice.

[ajackson]

yeah, but even just strength at range is indirect, or it's stretching. There's nothing between point a (you) and point b (your target) which means you can reach over things and around things, without you being connected.
Indirect means that it can pass through barriers. Strength at range means that you don't have an extended arm that can be attacked, but by itself still means that barriers get in the way.

[CTaylor]

Not exactly, indirect means there's no line connecting you and your target. An indirect energy blast can come from something right next to you, it just doesn't come from you. Telekinesis is indirect in the sense that it acts remotely from you.

What you're describing is what I mean by "a limited form of indirect;" remote from you but not necessarily able to act through a barrier.

And yes, there are other distinctions from Telekinesis than stretching, I didn't mean to imply there were no others.

[ajackson]

Not exactly, indirect means there's no line connecting you and your target.
Mechanically speaking, indirect means it passes through barriers between you and the target. You seem to be confusing game mechanic and special effect.

[Markdoc]

Mechanically speaking, indirect means it passes through barriers between you and the target. You seem to be confusing game mechanic and special effect.

Not in this case. There are various levels of indirect, and whether they can bypass barriers is a result of which level of indirect you have and the location of the barrier. There is nothing inherent in indirect which allows it to bypass barriers - just that by repositioning the point from which the attack launches, you can usually avoid a barrier.

cheers, Mark

[CTaylor]

Mechanically speaking, indirect means it passes through barriers between you and the target. You seem to be confusing game mechanic and special effect.

No, it does not. Read the rules on indirect again. It simply means that the power originates from a location remote from you. It can be on the other side of a barrier, but specific examples of indirect in the book include lighting that comes from above the target instead of your hands.

Indirect simply means "doesn't come from you."

[Paragon]

There's far too many other uses of the power. Personally, I think the power should be 'Strength', apply advantages to taste.

And I'm back to claiming that's just as true of many powers. Entangle is used for all kinds of things that aren't snare or webs, but its written assuming those are the common uses. TK is written assuming TK-style special effects are the common usage and its modified from that. Beyond that, its just an issue of where you like to place your benchmarks, but neither are atomic (and very few other powers in Hero either; almost all carry baggage, its just a question of how much and if you're okay with it).

[Netzilla]

Mechanically speaking, indirect means it passes through barriers between you and the target. You seem to be confusing game mechanic and special effect.

Not in this case. There are various levels of indirect, and whether they can bypass barriers is a result of which level of indirect you have and the location of the barrier. There is nothing inherent in indirect which allows it to bypass barriers - just that by repositioning the point from which the attack launches, you can usually avoid a barrier.

No, it does not. Read the rules on indirect again. It simply means that the power originates from a location remote from you. It can be on the other side of a barrier, but specific examples of indirect in the book include lighting that comes from above the target instead of your hands.

Indirect simply means "doesn't come from you."

{nitpick}
Actually, I read it as the power does not follow a direct line from the actor to the target. Stretching is listed as having a version of Indirect in both the Stretching entry and under the rules for Indirect and it definitely comes from the actor. Likewise, things like grenades, boomerangs and the such are built with Indirect but still come from the actor; they just follow a non-direct route to the target.
{/nitpick}

[CTaylor]

If you built a robot that hovered by you and had tentacles that reached around things, it would be indirect stretching, because the power originates from a location remote from you.

[Netzilla]

If you built a robot that hovered by you and had tentacles that reached around things, it would be indirect stretching, because the power originates from a location remote from you.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Do you claim that Stretching is not Indirect by default even though the rule entries for both Stretching and Indirect specifically point out that it is?

An attack that comes from a point other than the character himself is one form of Indirect but it is not the only one. The rule entry for Indirect itself gives many example SFX that would come directly from the character yet still qualify as Indirect:

...a character's unmatched skill at bouncing attacks off of objects to strike his targets from behind; a magical bolt whose travel pattern a character can mentally control; and so on.

As discussed on page 98, a power can originate from whatever part of a character's body he desires - an Energy Blast could come from the fingertips, eyes, forehead or other body part. However, once he chooses that point of origin, he cannot alter it. With Indirect (+1/4), he can change the power's point of origin as an Action that takes no time. for example, his Energy Blast could come from his eyes one Phase, his hands another Phase and his chest some other Phase.

If the Indirect power always originates with the character, but can be aimed/fired in any direction, Indirect is a +1/2 Advantage. Examples of this include some types of boomerangs and arrows that a character can cause to arc around and hit the target from various angles.

These last two combined would be type of Indirect that Stretching has.

[ajackson]

In the end, advantages are about mechanical benefits, not special effects. The mechanical benefit of indirect at the +1/2 level is that you can, by setting the origin point, bypass cover. The mechanical benefit of indirect at the +1/4 level is that you can bypass hindrances on your person. The mechanical benefit at the +3/4 level is like the +1/2 level, plus you can hit people from different angles.

[CTaylor]

What I'm pointing out is that you can have stretching and indirect in a single power: it comes from x point rather than me, then stretches to y point. You can use indirect to simulate items that you use as well, but the examples specifically are about making the power appear to or effectively come from a remote point (bouncing off something or curving around to somewhere).

[Paragon]

What I'm pointing out is that you can have stretching and indirect in a single power: it comes from x point rather than me, then stretches to y point. You can use indirect to simulate items that you use as well, but the examples specifically are about making the power appear to or effectively come from a remote point (bouncing off something or curving around to somewhere).

I think part of what confuses issues here is that there's indirect and indirect; the Call Lightning example almost shouldn't be Indirect, because it only swaps one obstruction (that between the attacker and target) for another (that between the target and the sky).

Its pretty obvious Stretching can bypass _some_ obstructions; all one needs is to have a one hex obstruction between you and the target and your Stretching capable of reaching far enough to shoot around it to do that.

Indirect proper, on the other hand, simply bypasses barriers within their target limitations; someone can be in a hermetically sealed bubble and still be nailed with Indirect.

So they aren't really doing the same things, exactly.

[AnotherSkip]

I have a disagreement with Steve over transforms in that changing the description should be cosmetic, content should be minor and value should be Major,

thus changing one word in a description of an ability is only a cosmetic thing, for example
the thin Line between the target instead of hating one thing now loves that thing with the same intensity as his previous condition of dislike. 6d6 Cosmetic transform PSL from hate to love, BoECV +1.

[CTaylor]

someone can be in a hermetically sealed bubble and still be nailed with Indirect.

Again, that isn't necessarily true. A drone that floats by you, a fire that comes up from the floor, both of those are versions of indirect at the cheaper levels. Indirect does not mean "ignores barriers" it means "comes from a remote location" which can mean it ignores barriers, but does not necessarily, and almost always will not at the cheapest level.

[Paragon]

Again, that isn't necessarily true. A drone that floats by you, a fire that comes up from the floor, both of those are versions of indirect at the cheaper levels. Indirect does not mean "ignores barriers" it means "comes from a remote location" which can mean it ignores barriers, but does not necessarily, and almost always will not at the cheapest level.

And my point is that as the Advantage is written, I'd say both of those were flawed versions of the Advantage; the fact its sometimes used that way without flawing it is an implimentation error, but I don't really think is supported by the way its written.

[Netzilla]

Again, that isn't necessarily true. A drone that floats by you, a fire that comes up from the floor, both of those are versions of indirect at the cheaper levels. Indirect does not mean "ignores barriers" it means "comes from a remote location" which can mean it ignores barriers, but does not necessarily, and almost always will not at the cheapest level.
And my point is that as the Advantage is written, I'd say both of those were flawed versions of the Advantage; the fact its sometimes used that way without flawing it is an implimentation error, but I don't really think is supported by the way its written.

Actually, by the rules as given, what CTaylor wrote is mostly correct. The examples I listed in message 363 (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1609582&postcount=363) came directly from the 5ER rulebook and all would be stopped by an enveloping force wall around either the attacker or the target. No limitations/flaws are needed according to the rules as written.


My disagreement with CTaylor is his definition of Indirect as "comes from a remote location", since the rules and examples given show that it is clearly not always the case. All Indirect means is "the attack does not follow a direct line from the attacker to the target". This can be because the attack originates from a location other than the attacker (lightning from the sky, lava from the ground, etc) or that it follow a non-linear path (boomerangs, grenades, Stretching) or some combination of both. This potentially allows the attack to ignore barriers but does not guarantee it. Ignoring barriers depends upon the interaction between the SFX of the Indirect and the SFX of the barrier.

Now, to bring this back on topic for 6E, I've never liked the idea that by hardening your 1-hex Force Wall it somehow both prevents grenades from being thrown over it and prevents sending your EB through a dimensional shunt to come from behind the attacker. I think this ruling should be dropped and possibly replaced with a differently named Advantage (like Reactive or Malleable or some-such).

[Paragon]

Actually, by the rules as given, what CTaylor wrote is mostly correct. The examples I listed in message 363 (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1609582&postcount=363) came directly from the 5ER rulebook and all would be stopped by an enveloping force wall around either the attacker or the target. No limitations/flaws are needed according to the rules as written.



And what I'm arguing is that the examples aren't consistent with the actual rules themselves. As written, the +1/4 Advantage version "always originates from a certain spot." Not a spot that's blocked by something in the way, that spot; in fact, it gives the example of shooting from outside your own Force Wall. Then, of course, it uses two examples (the remote platform and the call lightning) that are more limited than the first.

Essentially, I'm arguing these are not the same case, and the fact that Steve has chosen to treat them so in examples is an implimentation error, created most likely because the Advantage is so small that it'd require a Limited Advantage to modify downward, and almost everyone tends to reflexively avoid those except when absolutely necessary.

[BobGreenwade]

I have a disagreement with Steve over transforms in that changing the description should be cosmetic, content should be minor and value should be Major,

thus changing one word in a description of an ability is only a cosmetic thing, for example
the thin Line between the target instead of hating one thing now loves that thing with the same intensity as his previous condition of dislike. 6d6 Cosmetic transform PSL from hate to love, BoECV +1.I agree here on the basic statement, and I've already said as much in this thread. However, your example under such a rule would be Minor, not Cosmetic; it changes the content of a Psychological Limitation on the character sheet, from "Loves X" to "Hates X."

[PhilFleischmann]

All Indirect means is "the attack does not follow a direct line from the attacker to the target". This can be because the attack originates from a location other than the attacker (lightning from the sky, lava from the ground, etc) or that it follow a non-linear path (boomerangs, grenades, Stretching) or some combination of both. This potentially allows the attack to ignore barriers but does not guarantee it. Ignoring barriers depends upon the interaction between the SFX of the Indirect and the SFX of the barrier.
This is what is known in computer science as an overloaded operator. The single Advantage, Indirect is being used to do to many different things. This is really a topic for the Advantages Issues thread, but it directly (not Indirectly) relates to what has been discussed here. Indirect should perhaps be split up into two (or more) Advantages, to reflect the many possible uses for it:

1) Line from attacker to target is not straight.
2) Line from attacker to target is not continuous.
3) Attack hits target from an unexpected direction.
4) Target takes Knockback in an unexpected direction.
5) Attack bypasses one or more barriers.
6) Attack comes from an unexpected point of origin on the Attacker.

And all of these have different "levels" of utility. #2 for example could be the lightning bolt that always comes from the sky (more or less directly above the target), or the attack fired from a mobile remote weapon which can move around freely.

Granted, there is some overlap between these, but at a base level, Indirect is one Advantage that is being used to do six different things.

Now, to bring this back on topic for 6E, I've never liked the idea that by hardening your 1-hex Force Wall it somehow both prevents grenades from being thrown over it and prevents sending your EB through a dimensional shunt to come from behind the attacker. I think this ruling should be dropped and possibly replaced with a differently named Advantage (like Reactive or Malleable or some-such).
Also a good point (and also should be mentioned on the Advantages Thread). In fact, it seems Hardened is also an overloaded Advantage. It stops Armor Piercing and Penetration (though those two are similar enough that I don't think it's a problem), and Indirect. Whatever kind(s) of "stop Indirect" Advantages are called in 6th, there should probably be more than one of them. And there probably is no need to have an Advantage to stop Indirect types 1, 3, and 6. Type 1 is stopped (or at least defended against)by any completely enclosing barrier. Type 3 is defended by any defense that covers the direction of approach. Type 6 (by itself) has no means to go around or through barriers. Type 4 is defended with KnockBack Resistance, or Clinging, or maybe some "Omnidirectional Bracing" maneuever.

Then all we need is an advantage that stops types 2 and 4 from originating on the other side of barriers. These are similar that they can probably be handled by the same Advantage. Or maybe it can vary depending on the SFX and mechanics of the attack. An Indirect attack defined as a demon popping in right next to the target and biting him, and then disappearing again, might be stopped by a Force Wall bought with Transdimensional.

[ideasmith]

This is what is known in computer science as an overloaded operator.
You are using the term 'overloaded operator' to represent two very different things.
The single Advantage, Indirect is being used to do to many different things....
Indirect can indeed represent any of a variety of special effects. Hero System rules - especially Power Stems and Power Modifiers - are supposed to be that sort of versatile.


Then all we need is an advantage that stops types 2 and 4 from originating on the other side of barriers. These are similar that they can probably be handled by the same Advantage.
They are both similar to 'Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation', which is sortof the defensive form of Transdimensional. If the player choses whether 'fully enclosing', Knockback Resistance (etc.), or whatever 'Cannot Be Escaped With Teleporation' gets renamed (the best I've come up with is Multidimensional) negates a given instance of Indirect, that should handle the problem.

[Klaus Mogensen]

I have a problem with Telekinesis in non-super campaigns.

A common trope in fantasy or pulp fiction is characters with mind-over-matter powers that allow them to move small objects, like bunches of keys, with the power of their minds. However, in Hero, the minimum Telekinesis you can buy (at a cost of just 3 points) is STR 2, which allows lifting about 32 kg. There really is no way to create minor telekinetic effects except by voluntarily scaling down telekinetic STR (and why would you want to do that?).

I see several ways around the problem:

1): A new Talent, Mind Over Matter, available in campaigns that don't allow Powers as such. However, I dislike having Talents that exactly duplicate Powers - especially if you pay more to get less. A cost of, say, 5 points might be justified, though, if the Talent includes fine motor control.

2): Start Telekinesis at STR -25 (0.8 kg), but have a cost of +1 STR per point. A STR 50 Telekinesis would then cost the same as now.

3): Since Steve seems to want to get rid of negative characteristics, redefine STR in the 0-20 range as being able to lift STR squared kg (100 kg at STR 10, 400 kg at STR 20, same as now). Then minimum Telekinesis (STR 2 at 3 points) would allow you to lift 4 kg, a bit more in line with fantasy and pulp fiction - though it would still be fairly cheap to get Telekinesis enough to throw people around, particularly with a few limitations like Concentration or Extra END.

- Klaus

[CTaylor]

Again, correct, Telekinesis needs a minimum cost. However, I strongly disagree with making TK start lower in power because it makes powerful telekinesis insanely expensive. Getting rid of negative characteristics is a serious mistake, but that's for another section.

[Klaus Mogensen]

I strongly disagree with making TK start lower in power because it makes powerful telekinesis insanely expensive.
This is why I reduced the cost to 1:1 rather than 3:2 when starting from STR -25. This actually makes Telekinesis above STR 50 cheaper than now; not what I would call insanely expensive.

Telekinesis in the STR range 2-48 will be more expensive than now, though, particularly at the low end (+24 points for STR 2, +1 point for STR 48). But then, getting any kind of Telekinesis for 3 points seems much too cheap for me.

- Klaus

[CTaylor]

Yeah I think the minimum cost has to be around 10 points or so, there really is a level of utilty with TK that lower strength doesn't reduce. Even with only -25 strength you can drive a car.

[ajackson]

One fix I've generally considered with Strength is to make Str scores of less than 10 linear, so a 0 is actually zero lifting ability.

[PhilFleischmann]

However, in Hero, the minimum Telekinesis you can buy (at a cost of just 3 points) is STR 2, which allows lifting about 32 kg.
I wouldn't have a problem allowing a character to spend 1 point to get 2/3 STR TK, which would allow lifting about 27 kg, if my calculation is correct. The range would be 5" or 10 meters, of course.

1): A new Talent, Mind Over Matter, available in campaigns that don't allow Powers as such. However, I dislike having Talents that exactly duplicate Powers - especially if you pay more to get less. A cost of, say, 5 points might be justified, though, if the Talent includes fine motor control.
That works pretty well. You can use the existing rules to call it -3 (and a third) STR TK (for -5 Points), plus the 10 point Fine Work adder, to get a 5-point TK that allows for lifting about 16 kg. And you can make it even less, to make the numbers come out more even: -4 STR for 4 points, -6 STR for 1 point, or -2 STR for 7 points.

2): Start Telekinesis at STR -25 (0.8 kg), but have a cost of +1 STR per point. A STR 50 Telekinesis would then cost the same as now.
An interesting idea.

3): Since Steve seems to want to get rid of negative characteristics, redefine STR in the 0-20 range as being able to lift STR squared kg (100 kg at STR 10, 400 kg at STR 20, same as now). Then minimum Telekinesis (STR 2 at 3 points) would allow you to lift 4 kg, a bit more in line with fantasy and pulp fiction - though it would still be fairly cheap to get Telekinesis enough to throw people around, particularly with a few limitations like Concentration or Extra END.
This is something I've been playing around with, especially in heroic-level games, perhaps extrending to make all STR (even over 20) geometric instead of exponential.

[CTaylor]

One fix I've generally considered with Strength is to make Str scores of less than 10 linear, so a 0 is actually zero lifting ability.

While that would work, it also makes the game less easy to remember and work with. At present it's all doubling every 5 points so I can work out pretty easily what the stat will do.

[Klaus Mogensen]

Yeah I think the minimum cost has to be around 10 points or so, there really is a level of utilty with TK that lower strength doesn't reduce. Even with only -25 strength you can drive a car.
Ah, but driving a car would require Fine Manipulation at an extra 10 points.

- Klaus

[Klaus Mogensen]

3): Since Steve seems to want to get rid of negative characteristics, redefine STR in the 0-20 range as being able to lift STR squared kg (100 kg at STR 10, 400 kg at STR 20, same as now).
This is something I've been playing around with, especially in heroic-level games, perhaps extrending to make all STR (even over 20) geometric instead of exponential.
Nitpick: Geometric and exponential progressions are the same. I don't know if there's a term for "square progression".
Aside from that, I've been thinking along the same lines. The general rule would be lift = STR squared, with an option for superheroic campaigns of doubling lift with every 5 points above STR 20. Or instead have a Superstrength power that adds to lift, but not to damage.

On a related topic, I would like to see damage defined as the square root of energy rather than the current odd mixture of logarithm of energy and square root of energy.

If lift = STR squared, then it (more or less) follows that HTH damage is proportional to the square root of energy.

With damage ~ square root of energy, damage from velocity will increase linearly with velocity - as it in fact does for Move Through and Move By.

Of course, this may require redefining Growth, Shrinking and Density Increase to be on a non-exponential scale as well.

- Klaus

[Paragon]

Ah, but driving a car would require Fi