Barrier Issue

[DocSamson]

My apologies if this has already been covered. I didn't find it on search. We have just converted to 6e and we are experiencing a bit of culture shock at the moment. My current concern is as follows:

Monolith (an Earth/ Stone Telekinetic) has Barrier as his primary defense (and TK as his offense so he can attack through it). Our campaign has a strict 60 AP cap as a house rule so Monolith built his Barrier as [1m long, 4m tall, 1/2m wide, 8 PD/ 8ED, 13 BODY, Opaque, and Mobile = 60 AP]. I look at the power and say "ok, no problem, it should take 3 or 4 12d6 attacks to bring the wall down and get to the creamy filling". The character has relatively low defenses and STUN after the Barrier goes down. He's tough but comparable to our other character who average 25 PD/ ED and 50 STUN.

In our first combat, I get hit with this. On Phase 6 after the character has been hit a few times (due to his low DCV), he points this out to me:
The character who created the Barrier can “heal” the hole by using the Power another time to fill it or erect another Barrier right in front of it. (6e1pg171)
As a zero phase action his Barrier is back to full.

What would you other GMs do in this situation? Common sense tells me it's time for a re-write before the player gets too attached but I wanted to see what you guys thought.

On a side note, a little heads up would have been nice. I think this power should be "!" or even a "stop sign" now because BODY is so cheap and walls can now be healed. I imagine when he englobes a villain it's going to be even worse. Also, while I am whining, we went from needing very few house rules in 5e (a 60 AP cap, no combos like EDM and Transdimensional attacks, ect.) to me having to slash power constructs on every character I looked at (like 120 STUN now fits into a 60 AP cap :nonp:). My hopes is that we are just experiencing sticker shock and that balance has not become more difficult to manage.

Thanks in advance for all replies (Hugh?), comments (Sean?), and flames (Ghost?). :thumbup:

[ghost-angel]

*gets flamethrower* wait.. that's not right...

Under Using Barrier (p170), the first paragraph indicates that placing a Barrier requires an Attack Roll against DCV 3, and taking an Attack Action.

p171 indicates it can be Healed with another use of Barrier.

To me that says it takes an Attack Action to heal the Barrier of any damage, and it is not a 0-Phase Action of merely "activating" the Power.

[IndianaJoe3]

Given that repairing this Barrier is almost certainly defensive, I'd allow the player to Abort to it also. Of course, that still takes a Phase.

[Sean Waters]

You don't 'maintain' a Barrier like you did with a Force Wall - although there is weirdness on that point too - so I'd suggest that 'healing' a force wall is Barrier will take a zero phase action, just like switching the barrier on in the first place. It is up to the GM whether it requires an attack action. There is a strong argument that it does not, for a 'personal barrier', as it is not at range. I'd say your player is interpreting the rules correctly.

Barrier does look potentially very beefy. I'd be very wary about letting this power into a game at all.

Point of order though, I suspect the character needs 'non anchored' too. With the build you've mentioned, he can only manage a 1 Body wall at 7/7 DEF, so you might want to check his maths if there is a 60 AP cap. That is a lot less worrying :)

[Sean Waters]

Barrier 7 PD/7 ED, 1 BODY (up to 1m long, 4m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored, Opaque Sight Group, Mobile (+1/4) (60 Active Points)

[JmOz]

I would definatly call using a barrior an attack action, while I would probably not make him roll to "hit" himself, it would definatly end his action for the phase

[EverKnight]

I agree that it is an attack action to heal a barrier, particularly as one of the heal options is to create another barrier right in front of it.

[Sean Waters]

It is fine to rule that healing a barrier is an attack action, and that may well be an important rule in 6ER, but at present the actual rule is that you can use 'Barrier' to heal 'Barrier', and using barrier, certainly in melee range, doesn't require an attack action and, as a defensive power, can be done as a zero phase action. Certainly creating a new mobile barrier at melee range is a zero phase action. NB The 'mobile' advantage is not well defined: can you control a mobile barrier through another barrier?

Although, as I pointed out, the particular build - including opaque - limited the potency of the barrier, that will not always be the case. Consider this, emphasising Body over protection:

Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 14 BODY (up to 1m long, 4m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored, Mobile (+1/4) (60 Active Points)

If that is 'healable' as a zero phase action, well you're practically indestructible, aren't you?

I'd have preferred not to see the 'healable' rule and, instead, allow the purchase of healing for barriers seperately, either like this:

Healing BODY 2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Ranged (+1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates; +1) (60 Active Points); Limited Power Power loses about two-thirds of its effectiveness (Only to heal own Barriers; -1 1/2) 60 AP 24 RP

OR (better IMO) as a form of per phase healing for the Body element, so, for example, you can buy another element of Barrier, 'regenerating' and for, say, 2 points, the Barrier can recover 1 Body per phase.

Note the creation of new barriers is somewhat self limiting as they have thickness: I don't mind that, particularly.

I already have issues over system consistency with this power - is it instant, or a bit constant, or what?

Now, aside, what are people's views on 'autofire' barriers? Especially with a view to englobing. :sneaky:

[DocSamson]

Thank you all for the great input. It seems the issues are definately on our side.

Ghost, Indiana, Jmoz, Everknight - I totally missed the attack roll. If the renewal of the barrier in melee is an attack action (there seems to be some discussion on the issue), this does make things better imho.

Sean - It seems we better invest in Hero Designer 6 or I suspect this will not be my last math error. We discussed non-anchored but the player said it was more appropriare for his Stone Shield to remain attached to the ground. Also the Opaque, I believe, is Normal Sight only (5 pts.) so that other powers like Infrared Vision will be able to distinquich his warm body from the cooler stone.

Thank you all again for the awesome input.

I am currently thinking about reworking our 60 AP cap house rule (maybe switching back to a "Rule of X") to put us back on "autopilot" for most balance issues. I think we may be too flexible on how Defenses interact with our cap with some of the updates in 6e.

[ghost-angel]

We could ask Steve for clarification on Barrier within Melee Range - but the main fact is that Barrier is not a Personal Defense, and I would argue that even at 1 meter (melee range) it is Always a Ranged Power used At Range (just like Blast used at the same distance is still Ranged).

Of course, if you believe healling a barrier is too restrictive you could bump it down to a 1/2 Phase Action instead.

[Sean Waters]

We could ask Steve for clarification on Barrier within Melee Range - but the main fact is that Barrier is not a Personal Defense, and I would argue that even at 1 meter (melee range) it is Always a Ranged Power used At Range (just like Blast used at the same distance is still Ranged).

Of course, if you believe healling a barrier is too restrictive you could bump it down to a 1/2 Phase Action instead.

Barrier IS a defensive power though, so should take a zero phase action to activate, even if it is not a 'personal' defence...although the text effectively allows for it to be built as a personal defence with mobile and non-anchored.

I'm sure we'll work it out, but I think a strict interpretation of the rules makes Barrier far too useful at present.

[ghost-angel]

I'm not sure what it being a Defense Power has to do with anything. There's nothing unique about Defense Powers that let's them work differently from other Powers.

Activating any Power is a 0-Phase action unless the Power states otherwise; Barrier states otherwise.

Barrier is also one only 2 Defense Powers that is Instant by default (Deflection being the other). And both Instant Defense Powers state they require Attack Actions to use.

[Hugh Neilson]

My apologies if this has already been covered. I didn't find it on search. We have just converted to 6e and we are experiencing a bit of culture shock at the moment. My current concern is as follows:

Monolith (an Earth/ Stone Telekinetic) has Barrier as his primary defense (and TK as his offense so he can attack through it). Our campaign has a strict 60 AP cap as a house rule so Monolith built his Barrier as [1m long, 4m tall, 1/2m wide, 8 PD/ 8ED, 13 BODY, Opaque, and Mobile = 60 AP]. I look at the power and say "ok, no problem, it should take 3 or 4 12d6 attacks to bring the wall down and get to the creamy filling". The character has relatively low defenses and STUN after the Barrier goes down. He's tough but comparable to our other character who average 25 PD/ ED and 50 STUN.

In our first combat, I get hit with this. On Phase 6 after the character has been hit a few times (due to his low DCV), he points this out to me:
The character who created the Barrier can “heal” the hole by using the Power another time to fill it or erect another Barrier right in front of it. (6e1pg171)
As a zero phase action his Barrier is back to full.

What would you other GMs do in this situation? Common sense tells me it's time for a re-write before the player gets too attached but I wanted to see what you guys thought.

On a side note, a little heads up would have been nice. I think this power should be "!" or even a "stop sign" now because BODY is so cheap and walls can now be healed. I imagine when he englobes a villain it's going to be even worse. Also, while I am whining, we went from needing very few house rules in 5e (a 60 AP cap, no combos like EDM and Transdimensional attacks, ect.) to me having to slash power constructs on every character I looked at (like 120 STUN now fits into a 60 AP cap :nonp:). My hopes is that we are just experiencing sticker shock and that balance has not become more difficult to manage.

Thanks in advance for all replies (Hugh?), comments (Sean?), and flames (Ghost?). :thumbup:


*gets flamethrower* wait.. that's not right...

Under Using Barrier (p170), the first paragraph indicates that placing a Barrier requires an Attack Roll against DCV 3, and taking an Attack Action.

p171 indicates it can be Healed with another use of Barrier.

To me that says it takes an Attack Action to heal the Barrier of any damage, and it is not a 0-Phase Action of merely "activating" the Power.


Given that repairing this Barrier is almost certainly defensive, I'd allow the player to Abort to it also. Of course, that still takes a Phase.

I'm in agreement with GA and IndianaJoe. I do, however, see the challenge Sean raises. The wording implies only a barrier targeted at range needs an attack roll. I'd suggest this is either poor phrasing or needs house ruling. Off to the Rule Q Board.

OK, I'm back.

Moving a Mobile Barrier is an attack action (6e1 324) and it needs further advatanges to move faster than 12 meters. Mobile is a ! advantage, by the way. Would an immobile barrier be as big an issue?

Although Mobile indicates a no range power typically moves with the character, Barrier specifically says it does not, so it won't travel along with its creator under any circumstances - he needs to move it with Mobile. In fact, the rules state that a Barrier needs both Mobile and Non-Anchored to move with the character, and even then it is at GM's Option only.


Similarly, a Barrier must be “attached” to the
ground, in that no one can freely move it without
overcoming its BODY and PD in a “push” or
“shove” intended to break it free and move it
(rather than simply breaking it altogether). Once
it’s detached, the ability to move it depends on its
weight (as determined by the GM), the pushing
character’s STR, the surfaces involved, and similar
factors.

and later

[/quote]A character trying to move
another character’s Barrier bubble has to make an
Attack Roll (either against DCV 3 or the DCV of
the character generating it, at the GM’s discretion),
but the character generating the Barrier can
“hit” it automatically (though he must still use an
Attack Action to do so). Barrier bubbles do not
take Knockback from attacks.[/quote]

One final issue I note. An Opaque Barrier used by a character with Indirect attacks and, I assume, targeting senses to see through the Barrier sounds a lot like a Mentalist Sniper. It's book legal, but that doesn't make it balanced.

On a broader note, AP caps are not an official Hero rule. Further, Steve does not like them, and I'm sure he said on at least one occasion that the rules are not, and will not, be designed to support AP cap systems. Use AP caps at your own risk.

Would you let someone buy a 60 AP force field, 60 AP of resistant defense, 60 PD and 60 ED? Not letting them spend 60 on STUN seems no less unreasonable. However, I could see a very high STUN character with a high REC, using this rather than defenses to stay viable in combat, being reasonably balanced.

[DocSamson]

One final issue I note. An Opaque Barrier used by a character with Indirect attacks and, I assume, targeting senses to see through the Barrier sounds a lot like a Mentalist Sniper. It's book legal, but that doesn't make it balanced.

On a broader note, AP caps are not an official Hero rule. Further, Steve does not like them, and I'm sure he said on at least one occasion that the rules are not, and will not, be designed to support AP cap systems. Use AP caps at your own risk.

Would you let someone buy a 60 AP force field, 60 AP of resistant defense, 60 PD and 60 ED? Not letting them spend 60 on STUN seems no less unreasonable. However, I could see a very high STUN character with a high REC, using this rather than defenses to stay viable in combat, being reasonably balanced.
All good points, I thought I had taken everything into account when I caculated how many attacks it would take to get through the Barrier but I was wrong.

As far as AP caps go, we have used them for awhile with good success I think. Even though they are not hard and fast rules, most of the time the system in general does a good job of making 30 pts. of apples as useful as 30 pts. of oranges.

For the sake of discussion on AP caps and not to be argumentative:

While I would agree defenses are high in our campaigns (as compared to the average game), I neglected to mention our AP caps do not allow for stacking of base damage or defenses. For example, we would not allow a character to have 60 STR plus a 12d6 HA. You could have a 60 PD if you wanted, but a Killing attack would likely one-shot you. You would be much more likely to see 30 PD, Resistant, Hardened, Impenetrable on one of our characters, but even then this would likely be our Brick as our average player wouldn't want to spend so many points on one ability. I am very accustomed to building my villains a wide diversity of attack types to keep the players on their toes.

Despite this, I don't think our combats last particularly long as Coordinated Attacks, Multiple Attacks, and Optional Combat Rules (like Placed Shots) are common in our games. I am especially excited to try out the Critical Hit rules from 6e2.

[prestidigitator]

Barriers can certainly be abused, but they have their weaknesses as well. Tunneling, for example. ;)

[prestidigitator]

You could also consider doing things like ruling that the Barrier can only be "healed" once a hole is actually punched through it. Of course, the distinction between "healing" one Barrier and simply having multiple layered shells might get tricky....

[tesuji]

Ok are you also assuming a 1 m long barrier is protecting the character from all sides? I would think he needs 6 m to surround his hex fully?

or ar you assuming he can always move the barrier to intercept attacks no matter how many time in a phase that happens?

if inly one m l is protected it seems very easy to slip round the side and wham.

[ghost-angel]

You only need 4m to surround a Character. I would imagine that'd be more than enough "wall" to surround a person.

[PhilFleischmann]

Ok are you also assuming a 1 m long barrier is protecting the character from all sides? I would think he needs 6 m to surround his hex fully?

or ar you assuming he can always move the barrier to intercept attacks no matter how many time in a phase that happens?

if inly one m l is protected it seems very easy to slip round the side and wham.
Or use an Area Effect attack.


You only need 4m to surround a Character. I would imagine that'd be more than enough "wall" to surround a person.
And of course, that would require four separate Attack Actions, in addition to the Attack Actions "wasted" to "heal" the barriers - which must be done separately, since each is a separate barrier.

And I guess it would be a GM call as to whether the four sides form a solid tower of defense or if there would be cracks between them. There's no need to automatically assume that two 1m Barriers form a smooth continuous 2m Barrier with no gap or seam.

[ghost-angel]

Um... it would be one attack action from a single 4m Barrier.

I suppose if you could get your target to stand still you could use 4 1m Barrier's, but then it doesn't close the top and bottom like Englobing would.

[ghost-angel]

oh, heh - wait.

I managed to go dyslexic when reading the OP. It's 1m Wide by 4m Tall.. I read the other way around :p

Though, I will note it still only requires one attack roll, since the description under Englobing states long or tall.

Anything less and it'd require more than one Attack.

[PhilFleischmann]

Um... it would be one attack action from a single 4m Barrier.

I suppose if you could get your target to stand still you could use 4 1m Barrier's, but then it doesn't close the top and bottom like Englobing would.
But his Barrier is purchased to be only 1 m long. If he wants a 4 m long Barrier, he needs to use his 1m Barrier power four times.

[Chris Goodwin]

You only need 4m to surround a Character. I would imagine that'd be more than enough "wall" to surround a person.

3.14m, actually. ;)

[ghost-angel]

I like pie.

[NestorDRod]

I like pie.

Here you go...

http://www.pvponline.com/2009/09/25/cs%cf%80/

:D

[Sean Waters]

I'm not sure what it being a Defense Power has to do with anything. There's nothing unique about Defense Powers that let's them work differently from other Powers.

Activating any Power is a 0-Phase action unless the Power states otherwise; Barrier states otherwise.

Barrier is also one only 2 Defense Powers that is Instant by default (Deflection being the other). And both Instant Defense Powers state they require Attack Actions to use.

Attack roll to place it accurately at range. It does not take an attack action to use Barrier, or an attack roll if you are not using it at range, or if it does, I can not see that stated anywhere. Barrier does not state 'otherwise' in regard to activation times, or, again, if it does, I can not see it and would be obliged for a reference.

The other defence power is presumably Deflection, but that works on a different basis: you need to use 'Block', which IS an attack action, so there is no real comparison.

[Hyper-Man]

According to Mr. Long, any initial use of Barrier requires an attack action:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75763

[Sean Waters]

Steve has ruled. Might be worth noting for 6ER that it might not be a bad idea to put 'Activation time' in the Power Stat Block. Fer clarity.

Also note that Barriers are a minimum of 1/2m thick: you can not just keep setting up new ones if space is limited AND you could only set up new ones closer to you unless you bought the Barrier power 'indirect': you can not set up a barrier THROUGH a barrier, I assume, as it requires targeting and acts like a real wall. It is unlcear whether you can move a barrier through a barrier: there's a number of things about 'mobile and non-anchored' that's not clear.

[Hugh Neilson]

According to Mr. Long, any initial use of Barrier requires an attack action:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75763

This includes "patching" a barrier, which I interpret to mean shoring up a damaged barrier. Otherwise, it would be noted as an exception.


Steve has ruled. Might be worth noting for 6ER that it might not be a bad idea to put 'Activation time' in the Power Stat Block. Fer clarity.

Also note that Barriers are a minimum of 1/2m thick: you can not just keep setting up new ones if space is limited AND you could only set up new ones closer to you unless you bought the Barrier power 'indirect': you can not set up a barrier THROUGH a barrier, I assume, as it requires targeting and acts like a real wall. It is unlcear whether you can move a barrier through a barrier: there's a number of things about 'mobile and non-anchored' that's not clear.

You couldn't move a barrier through any other physical object, so I fail to see why it would be unclear it can't move through another barrier, which is the same as any other physical object.

[Sean Waters]

............

You couldn't move a barrier through any other physical object, so I fail to see why it would be unclear it can't move through another barrier, which is the same as any other physical object.

You may be right, but it doesn't say that. If I make a barrier that is mobile out in the street, whilst sitting in my living room, then someone closes the window, does that prevent me moving it, even though I can still see it?

If your 'contact' with your barrier is broken in such a way, how can you re-estabilish it? What is the mechanism?

Details, details. I know I'm tiresome, but this is the sort of stuff I'd rather WAS clear so that I do not have to interupt a game to adjudicate on it. It's hardly remote, either: I can see this coming up quite a bit.

[Hugh Neilson]

You may be right, but it doesn't say that. If I make a barrier that is mobile out in the street, whilst sitting in my living room, then someone closes the window, does that prevent me moving it, even though I can still see it?

Assuming the power is not Indirect, I'd say you lose the ability to direct it, just like you can't create it through a solid object.


If your 'contact' with your barrier is broken in such a way, how can you re-estabilish it? What is the mechanism?

Again, I'd approach this with the perspective that moving the barrier is part of the power. Once you can re-establish "direct", you can control the barrier.

The books could be ten times as long and still be unable to cover every possibility.

[phookz]

Assuming the power is not Indirect, I'd say you lose the ability to direct it, just like you can't create it through a solid object.



Again, I'd approach this with the perspective that moving the barrier is part of the power. Once you can re-establish "direct", you can control the barrier.

The books could be ten times as long and still be unable to cover every possibility.

Agreed; the books are long enough already. I sometimes miss the simplicity of 4e. GMs are going to have to make calls on things. I'd hate to see this turn into Starfleet Battles.

[prestidigitator]

Agreed; the books are long enough already. I sometimes miss the simplicity of 4e. GMs are going to have to make calls on things. I'd hate to see this turn into Starfleet Battles.

Agreed.

I mean, we could get really, really silly and start thinking about what kind of physical obstruction is really enough to interrupt non-damaging powers (ones that can't simply blast through). For example, what about a curtain of beads? What about a sheet of tissue paper? Rice paper? A sheet of transparent plastic? Fog? Water?

[Sean Waters]

Assuming the power is not Indirect, I'd say you lose the ability to direct it, just like you can't create it through a solid object.



Again, I'd approach this with the perspective that moving the barrier is part of the power. Once you can re-establish "direct", you can control the barrier.

The books could be ten times as long and still be unable to cover every possibility.


Fairy nuff, but I very much disagree with the last bit: I promise you the 'Barrier' definition could be a lot shorter and cover a lot more eventualities. Tha could apply elsewhere too. Consistent application of rules and principles means you can avoid repetition and you don't need to cover every specific.

[prestidigitator]

Fairy nuff, but I very much disagree with the last bit: I promise you the 'Barrier' definition could be a lot shorter and cover a lot more eventualities. Tha could apply elsewhere too. Consistent application of rules and principles means you can avoid repetition and you don't need to cover every specific.

I can agree with that. The Barrier description is certainly a bit long winded and confusing. It could probably benefit with a bit of simplification.

[DocSamson]

According to Mr. Long, any initial use of Barrier requires an attack action:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75763
This makes sense to me. Being able to heal the Barrier is very powerful, being able to do it every phase whilst attacking makes it unfun.

Tangent Question: Before the player even asks, does Counteracts Indirect keep a character from attacking enemies through his own barrier with Indirect attacks? If not, shouldn't it?

[Hugh Neilson]

From the Barrier power, p 6e1 173, Counteracts Indirectblocks Indirect attacks made by characters on one side of the Barrier against characters
on the other side. I can read this as "it only works from one side", but that makes less sense to me than "it prevents indirect attacks from passing through the barrier". Off to the Rules Q's.

EDIT: "it prevents indirect attacks from passing through the barrier". IOW, both ways are affected. Steve's extra-quick this morning!

[Sean Waters]

You could make it transparent in one direction and avoid the need for 'indirect' at all, or make your attacks doubly indirect or, possibly, buy personal immunity to allow your indirect attacks through. :)

In other words it can be done, but it is likely to cost more. Which is fine.

[DocSamson]

From the Barrier power, p 6e1 173, Counteracts Indirectblocks Indirect attacks made by characters on one side of the Barrier against characters
on the other side. I can read this as "it only works from one side", but that makes less sense to me than "it prevents indirect attacks from passing through the barrier". Off to the Rules Q's.

EDIT: "it prevents indirect attacks from passing through the barrier". IOW, both ways are affected. Steve's extra-quick this morning!
Thanks again.:thumbup:

[Sean Waters]

Question: what does this do?

Barrier, 17 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored, Mobile (+1/4), Constant (+1/2) (59 Active Points)

Does the constant mean that it auto-repairs so long as you maintain it?

[dmjalund]

Question: what does this do?

Barrier, 17 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored, Mobile (+1/4), Constant (+1/2) (59 Active Points)

Does the constant mean that it auto-repairs so long as you maintain it?
if this is allowed, it would only repair itself at the beginning of your next phase , allowing people who have held their actions a clear shot before it gets healed up

[DocSamson]

Question: what does this do?

Barrier, 17 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored, Mobile (+1/4), Constant (+1/2) (59 Active Points)

Does the constant mean that it auto-repairs so long as you maintain it?
This causes me to tear up character sheets...especially because I'm jealous I didn't think of it. :p

It would appear to provide auto-healing and actually this would be fun for a major villain where the group has to cordinate their attacks on the Barrier each phase until it goes down so heroes with phases before the Barrier goes back up can take shots.

[PhilFleischmann]

Assuming the power is not Indirect, I'd say you lose the ability to direct it, just like you can't create it through a solid object.

Again, I'd approach this with the perspective that moving the barrier is part of the power. Once you can re-establish "direct", you can control the barrier.
Am I correct in concluding from some of the things said in this discussion*, that a Mobile Barrier can be controlled/moved at will, at range? So I can make a "Tenser's Floating Disk" and get really cheap Telekinesis?

*Not having actually read 6E yet.

[Sean Waters]

Am I correct in concluding from some of the things said in this discussion*, that a Mobile Barrier can be controlled/moved at will, at range? So I can make a "Tenser's Floating Disk" and get really cheap Telekinesis?

*Not having actually read 6E yet.

You can not use Barrier to exert force, so whilst it would be a GM call, I'd suspect not, at least technically - however it is such a good idea it would be wrong to disallow it :)

[ghost-angel]

Tenser's Floating Disc that can be broken by force: Barrier

Tenser's Floating Disc that cannot be broken by force Telekinesis.

Remember - objects that are placed on a Barrier designed to carry something exert their weight in STR Damage every Segment. Don't build it with enough DEF and it will crack under weight alone.

The book cautions against using Barrier as a cheap TK, as well.

[NestorDRod]

This causes me to tear up character sheets...especially because I'm jealous I didn't think of it. :p

It would appear to provide auto-healing and actually this would be fun for a major villain where the group has to cordinate their attacks on the Barrier each phase until it goes down so heroes with phases before the Barrier goes back up can take shots.

Ugh. :idjit:

Sorry, that sounded to me like the sort of thing a GM would use to just to p!$$ off the PCs.

And I have a low tolerance for that sort of game.

[prestidigitator]

Tenser's Floating Disc that can be broken by force: Barrier

Tenser's Floating Disc that cannot be broken by force Telekinesis.

Remember - objects that are placed on a Barrier designed to carry something exert their weight in STR Damage every Segment. Don't build it with enough DEF and it will crack under weight alone.

The book cautions against using Barrier as a cheap TK, as well.

I think I'd still stick with TK (and probably Physical Manifestation) for a Tenser's Floating Disc that can be broken by force. I'm not terribly comfortable with the mobility of a Barrier allowing enough force to move a significant weight as well as keeping it aloft. Worst case I might require some limited TK to be Linked in with the Barrier.

[ghost-angel]

Probably a good call, all things considered.

[DocSamson]

Ugh. :idjit:

Sorry, that sounded to me like the sort of thing a GM would use to just to p!$$ off the PCs.

And I have a low tolerance for that sort of game.
To each his own. My players prefer challenges that require thinking and teamwork rather than rolling piles of dice. I think they would find it interesting to have to determine the source and limits of the villain's defense before they could claim victory, instead of just steamrolling him.

One of the advantages to playing with the same people for a long time is trust. Just as I trust the player whom this thread is based on to tweak his power so it does not disrupt our game, my hopes are that my players trust me not to do things "just to p!$$ off the PCs".

[Jagged]

I would be naturally suspicious of someone with that power (http://www.titanstower.com/assets/animated/merchandise/teentiansgocovers/teentitansgo11.jpg) :(

Can I hear a Booya?

[DocSamson]

I would be naturally suspicious of someone with that power (http://www.titanstower.com/assets/animated/merchandise/teentiansgocovers/teentitansgo11.jpg) :(

Can I hear a Booya?
:thumbup:

[PhilFleischmann]

You can not use Barrier to exert force, so whilst it would be a GM call, I'd suspect not, at least technically - however it is such a good idea it would be wrong to disallow it :)
If Barriers can't exert force, how can they be barriers? I would have thought Steve would want to learn at least the very basics of physics before writing 6E.

If a small child is leaning against my Barrier, I can't move it? Does air resistance stop it also? Can I create a big flat barrier and wave it like a fan?

Right now, you are exerting force on the chair you're sitting on. And the chair is exerting an equal force back to keep you off the floor. Assuming the chair is study enough, it can keep exerting this force indefinitely. However, if you exert a big enough force on the chair, you can break it.

Barriers must be able to exert force, otherwise they might as well be wet tissue paper.

[PhilFleischmann]

Tenser's Floating Disc that can be broken by force: Barrier

Tenser's Floating Disc that cannot be broken by force Telekinesis.

Remember - objects that are placed on a Barrier designed to carry something exert their weight in STR Damage every Segment. Don't build it with enough DEF and it will crack under weight alone.
Shouldn't be a problem. 2 DEF is enough to hold 100 kg. 6 DEF holds 1600 kg. But even that seems like too much damage for a steady weight to do. There's a big difference between a steady pressure and a sudden impact. You can drop a 1 kg rock on soda can and crush it, but if you're careful, a soda can will support your entire body weight (well, depending on how big you are, I guess). Likewise, a truck bed might be capaple of holding a ton of cargo without being damaged, but it can be destroyed if that ton of cargo is dropped on the truck bed from a sufficient hieght.

As a rough house rule, I'd say that a stationary weight on a barrier only does half its wieght in STR damage (equivalent to its "Casual STR").


The book cautions against using Barrier as a cheap TK, as well.
Fair enough. I have a problem with it as well. It seems a bit too much to get a free "TK, Only Affects My Barriers" for the price of Mobile. How much is Mobile anyway? Is it an Adder or an Advantage?

For Tenser's Floating Disc, it's probably better to just by TK with Physical Manifestation.

[prestidigitator]

Well, a dropped/moving weight could probably add damage due to the equivalent of an uncontrolled Move Through. That means you wouldn't have to decrease the amount of crushing damage done by the object's base weight.

As for a barrier not being able to exert force, I think we all basically understand the difference. While a barrier can resist being moved with just about whatever force is necessary (unless it is enough to break or dislodge the barrier), it cannot be moved freely in such a way as to force significant objects or characters to move as well (though personally I'll probably allow a character to use a barrier that it centered on and moves with himself to use it to perform a Shove/Move By/Move Through with his normal Strength, like you could with a Vehicle). From a physical perspective it may not make complete sense, but from the perspective of game system balance I bet we can all appreciate the difference pretty readily (this coming from a physicist). And I think there are enough ways to include such an active force when we really want one (e.g. Telekinesis).

[Sean Waters]

If Barriers can't exert force, how can they be barriers? I would have thought Steve would want to learn at least the very basics of physics before writing 6E.

If a small child is leaning against my Barrier, I can't move it? Does air resistance stop it also? Can I create a big flat barrier and wave it like a fan?

Right now, you are exerting force on the chair you're sitting on. And the chair is exerting an equal force back to keep you off the floor. Assuming the chair is study enough, it can keep exerting this force indefinitely. However, if you exert a big enough force on the chair, you can break it.

Barriers must be able to exert force, otherwise they might as well be wet tissue paper.


Barriers are supposed to be anchored, so they act like a wall or surface. They get their non-movingness from the surface they are anchored to (which begs the question: is there much point in creating a 20/20 Barrier on sand?).

The non-anchored adder allows you to create a barrier then pick it up and move it around.

The mobile advantage allows you to move a barrier - but not use it to exert force - which is all about game balance, not physics. It was always the same with Force Wall.

I think it could have been done differently, certainly, but the basic shape of the power is not really a problem - just the details.

[EverKnight]

The main problem I feel Barrier has is to do with englobing. According to the rules a barrier can be used to englobe if either the length or the height are 4m. This means that a barrier with a minimum surface area of 4 sq. metres will surround someone including top and bottom. There are further rules if the barrier forms a sphere.

Now, if I remembered and applied the formulas correctly, and ignoring the thickness of the barrier for simplicity, I calculate that 4 sq. metres will form a sphere with a diameter a little over 1m or a 2m tall cylinder that is a little over 0.5m wide. This seems to me to be a very small space in which to surround someone, especially if you are trying to englobe an opponent.

If we take what I feel would be a more realistic minimum of a sphere with a 2m diameter then we end up with a surface area just over 12 sq. metres. I am tempted therefore to rule that barriers can only englobe when the length multiplied by the height is 12 or more. Incidentally the 2m tall cylinder is now 1.4m wide.

How much difference this would make I don't know as it need only cost 2 points more on the size of the barrier but at least I would believe that the barrier could comfortably surround someone.

[PhilFleischmann]

Well, a dropped/moving weight could probably add damage due to the equivalent of an uncontrolled Move Through. That means you wouldn't have to decrease the amount of crushing damage done by the object's base weight.
Well, you don't *have* to do anything, but it just strikes me as completely unrealistic and implausible that a stationary 100 kg object is doing 2d6 damage to whatever it's resting on every segment.


As for a barrier not being able to exert force, I think we all basically understand the difference. While a barrier can resist being moved with just about whatever force is necessary (unless it is enough to break or dislodge the barrier), it cannot be moved freely in such a way as to force significant objects or characters to move as well (though personally I'll probably allow a character to use a barrier that it centered on and moves with himself to use it to perform a Shove/Move By/Move Through with his normal Strength, like you could with a Vehicle).
So I can pick up a large flat object of opportunity and push things and people around with it, but if it's a large flat object created with the Barrier power, then I can't?

If BarrierMan creates an unanchored barrier, and Strongman pushes it with his 60 STR from one side, he can do so. But if Joe Milquetoast is standing on the other side with his 5 STR, Strongman can't move the barrier, because it can't exert force. WTF?

I don't think I'm asking for too much here. I recognize that certain laws of physics can and must be broken for the sake of the game, but this isn't relativity effects near the speed of light, this is just basic force moving an object. It not only doesn't make sense from a physics perspective, it doesn't make sense from a rules perspective.


The mobile advantage allows you to move a barrier - but not use it to exert force - which is all about game balance, not physics. It was always the same with Force Wall.
And it didn't make any sense with Force Wall either. I was hoping the nonsense would have been eliminated (or at least reduced) in 6E.


I think it could have been done differently, certainly, but the basic shape of the power is not really a problem - just the details.
Yes, but the details matter. The details actually come up in the game. It's not rocket science. It's object-pushing-object. Cavemen understood it.

-----

OK, to me, the problem seems to come from the Mobile Advantage, and what it means. IMO, the solution is to let an Unanchored Barrier act like any other unanchored object of opportunity - you can exert force with it. but of course that force is exerted by the character who is actually moving the barrier. In my example above, it's Strongman's 60 STR that is exerting the force. Joe Milquetoast is swept away like a cow by a train. Of course, if Joe has just finished drinking a Potion of Ridiculous Strength, Strongman may have a contest on his hands.

For the Mobile Advantage, something needs to be defined as to how the barrier moves and what STR it can posess for the purpose of pushing things as it moves. It seems that as the rules are currently written, Mobile means the user has essentially TK that only moves the barrier. *That's* the problem. Mobile should be defined as "It moves with Me (or with the "target" I've englobed/protected)". That way, the STR of the movement is the STR of the character moving the barrier.

With 6E, the Barrier Power essentially added the option of buying BODY for a Force Wall. Perhaps we should allow buying STR for it as well.

Whatever we, as individual players/GMs decide, it just has to be defined how the barrier moves and how it deals with other objects in its path when it moves, when the Mobile advantage is purchased.

[ghost-angel]

Objects exert their full weight on another object given the application of direct downward force (gravity) being constant. However you model that is up to you, honestly, but an object that exerts for weight on a second object than the second object can hold will eventually just break it. Possibly not quickly, but eventually.

without getting into surface area distribution of mass and all that... the entire process of modeling weight, damage, defenses and body of objects is utterly abstract and the one in the book is as good a guideline as any, IMO. I find the whole idea of "unrealistic" and "realistic" measured in terms of Strength Damage to be utterly rediculous.

[Sean Waters]

Well, you don't *have* to do anything, but it just strikes me as completely unrealistic and implausible that a stationary 100 kg object is doing 2d6 damage to whatever it's resting on every segment.

That is actually pretty reasonable, but I'd rule that crushing damage is always standard effect (for Body, at least) and can be resisted/neutralised with STR. That means objects will either be able to hold the weight or not (if Mass Damage does not exceed PD) and most living things are not going to take damage from having weight on them they could lift anyway.



So I can pick up a large flat object of opportunity and push things and people around with it, but if it's a large flat object created with the Barrier power, then I can't?

If BarrierMan creates an unanchored barrier, and Strongman pushes it with his 60 STR from one side, he can do so. But if Joe Milquetoast is standing on the other side with his 5 STR, Strongman can't move the barrier, because it can't exert force. WTF?

IMO a barrier is a real object so if it is not anchored, or a bit is broken off, you can use it to exert force just like you could with any other object.

What you can not do is move it about without touching it and use that to exert force: the power itself doesn't come with a push.

You can not use Barrier to create some sort of skintight exosuit - well you can, perhaps, but you would never be able to change the shape fast enought o make it useful, and as a wall, it is anchored to SOMETHING. I'd have preferred to not see 'mobile' as an adder and instead make people buy limited TK to move their barriers around.

........................................



And it didn't make any sense with Force Wall either. I was hoping the nonsense would have been eliminated (or at least reduced) in 6E.

If it did not make sense then you were probably using th ewrong power to model the effect you were after.



Yes, but the details matter. The details actually come up in the game. It's not rocket science. It's object-pushing-object. Cavemen understood it.

I agree, but then we are not operating in a world with actual physics as the base ruleset. You can always HausRhul that you can not take the 'mobile' advantage and have to use TK (or brute STR) to move your barriers around.


-----

OK, to me, the problem seems to come from the Mobile Advantage, and what it means. IMO, the solution is to let an Unanchored Barrier act like any other unanchored object of opportunity - you can exert force with it. but of course that force is exerted by the character who is actually moving the barrier. In my example above, it's Strongman's 60 STR that is exerting the force. Joe Milquetoast is swept away like a cow by a train. Of course, if Joe has just finished drinking a Potion of Ridiculous Strength, Strongman may have a contest on his hands.

For the Mobile Advantage, something needs to be defined as to how the barrier moves and what STR it can posess for the purpose of pushing things as it moves. It seems that as the rules are currently written, Mobile means the user has essentially TK that only moves the barrier. *That's* the problem. Mobile should be defined as "It moves with Me (or with the "target" I've englobed/protected)". That way, the STR of the movement is the STR of the character moving the barrier.

With 6E, the Barrier Power essentially added the option of buying BODY for a Force Wall. Perhaps we should allow buying STR for it as well.

Whatever we, as individual players/GMs decide, it just has to be defined how the barrier moves and how it deals with other objects in its path when it moves, when the Mobile advantage is purchased.


Actually there's quite a bit of difference between FW and Barrier: not just added Body goodness. Personally I do not like the way the power is instant, but 'mobile' (that damn advantage again) allows you to maintain control over it...that is an attribute of a constant power.

If I'd been scratch building Barrier, I'd have done it as an Artefact Creation power, including rules for mass and MUCH more complex shapes, better definition of how anchoring works: you could build a wall or a sword or a lockpick, or create an anvil over the villain's head. Missed opportunity.

[PhilFleischmann]

That is actually pretty reasonable, but I'd rule that crushing damage is always standard effect (for Body, at least) and can be resisted/neutralised with STR.
Yeah. Standard Effect helps aleviate the problem somewhat, and it certainly makes more sense. How would a stationary object do varying amounts of damage each segment? But it still seems too high.


IMO a barrier is a real object so if it is not anchored, or a bit is broken off, you can use it to exert force just like you could with any other object.

What you can not do is move it about without touching it and use that to exert force: the power itself doesn't come with a push.
Agreed.


You can not use Barrier to create some sort of skintight exosuit - well you can, perhaps, but you would never be able to change the shape fast enought o make it useful, and as a wall, it is anchored to SOMETHING. I'd have preferred to not see 'mobile' as an adder and instead make people buy limited TK to move their barriers around.
Also agreed.


If it did not make sense then you were probably using the wrong power to model the effect you were after.
How would you know what power I was using or what I was trying to model? I didn't specify anything. The official rule was that Force Walls can't support any weight. So all you have to do to take one down is lean against it. That makes no sense regardless of what you're trying to model. (Unless you're trying to model wet tissue paper, but that's pretty darned expensive for tissue paper!)


I agree, but then we are not operating in a world with actual physics as the base ruleset.
I think we are. Any RPG with a good degree of crunch has a good "sim" element. What's all the crunch for if we're not trying to make a world with some modicum of verisimilitude?


Actually there's quite a bit of difference between FW and Barrier: not just added Body goodness.
Yes, of course. I didn't mean to imply that that was the *only* difference.

I think my house rule will be that Mobile must be defined as moving in a fixed way, such as with a particular target, in which case it exerts force based on the STR of the target. And I'd probably let that "fixed way" be chosen as the power is used. Another "fixed way" would be to simply move in a straight line at a steady rate. And if you want to be able to move it around at will, you need to buy limited TK - and I'd allow the mass of the barrier to be ignored - you get the full STR of the TK to apply force.

[prestidigitator]

OK, to me, the problem seems to come from the Mobile Advantage, and what it means. IMO, the solution is to let an Unanchored Barrier act like any other unanchored object of opportunity - you can exert force with it. but of course that force is exerted by the character who is actually moving the barrier. In my example above, it's Strongman's 60 STR that is exerting the force. Joe Milquetoast is swept away like a cow by a train. Of course, if Joe has just finished drinking a Potion of Ridiculous Strength, Strongman may have a contest on his hands.

Oh. Okay. I think I agree with you then. I'll probably let someone pick up the Barrier and use his own Str to push someone around with it, essentially in hand-to-hand (hence my mention of the Shove/Move By/Move Through maneuvers above). But if they're just taking advantage of the Mobile Adder to float the Barrier around, it won't exert enough force by itself (without the character's own Str to back it up) to push around any significant objects/characters. I think we need to be a little careful not to let a Barrier become a cheap form of Area of Effect on the character's Str, so as always I'll be watching to make sure it isn't abused that way.

[prestidigitator]

The main problem I feel Barrier has is to do with englobing. According to the rules a barrier can be used to englobe if either the length or the height are 4m. This means that a barrier with a minimum surface area of 4 sq. metres will surround someone including top and bottom. There are further rules if the barrier forms a sphere.

Now, if I remembered and applied the formulas correctly, and ignoring the thickness of the barrier for simplicity, I calculate that 4 sq. metres will form a sphere with a diameter a little over 1m or a 2m tall cylinder that is a little over 0.5m wide. This seems to me to be a very small space in which to surround someone, especially if you are trying to englobe an opponent.

If we take what I feel would be a more realistic minimum of a sphere with a 2m diameter then we end up with a surface area just over 12 sq. metres. I am tempted therefore to rule that barriers can only englobe when the length multiplied by the height is 12 or more. Incidentally the 2m tall cylinder is now 1.4m wide.

How much difference this would make I don't know as it need only cost 2 points more on the size of the barrier but at least I would believe that the barrier could comfortably surround someone.

Well, the surface area of a sphere is... [EDIT: As pointed out below, this idiot had too little sleep, or something. NVM. Confusing falsehood redacted. :idjit: ]. I would personally require different sizes for smaller or larger targets though. That 4m^2 Barrier isn't going to work on a giant, and is overkill for an ant (though perhaps the minimum size requirement isn't as big a deal for small targets).

[phookz]

Well, the surface area of a sphere is (4/3)(pi)r^2. A 1m radius (2m diameter) sphere has a surface area of about 4.2m^2, so I think it is reasonable to englobe a normal (2m tall, 0.5m long and wide) target in a 4m^2 Barrier. I would personally require different sizes for smaller or larger targets though. That 4m^2 Barrier isn't going to work on a giant, and is overkill for an ant (though perhaps the minimum size requirement isn't as big a deal for small targets).

I believe that's the equation for the volume of a sphere. The surface area of a sphere is 4*pi*r^2, or pi*d^2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere). So your 1m radius sphere has a surface area of 12.56m. The mentioned 4m^2 area would only cover a sphere with a radius of about .56m. You could probably englobe someone in that, but it would be a tight fit, might be easier to use a woodchipper first.

[prestidigitator]

I believe that's the equation for the volume of a sphere. The surface area of a sphere is 4*pi*r^2, or pi*d^2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere). So your 1m radius sphere has a surface area of 12.56m. The mentioned 4m^2 area would only cover a sphere with a radius of about .56m. You could probably englobe someone in that, but it would be a tight fit, might be easier to use a woodchipper first.

HA! Right you are. Boy, was that a goof. LOL. I guess I needed a little more sleep. (In fact, the volume of a sphere is also proportional to the cube of the radius, so I was doubly screwed up there.) Sorry about that. Hmm. So yeah, I guess I'd have to agree with you. And in any case the area of the Barier should have to go up with the square of the linear size of the creature (assuming size is increased in all dimensions equally as usual). So doubling the height of the target should require that the area of the Barrier go up by four.

[Sean Waters]

Rather than mucking about with curved surfaces, and given you need SOME wiggle room, why not determine minimum englobement dimensions with cuboids?

Normal human has to be at least 4m to go around (4 sides of a square - never mind you are only 1/2 m thick - wiggle room) and 2m high (we'll assume top and bottom close off from the excess width bits).

Target is 20m tall and 10m wide? You need 40mx20m barrier.

Not as accurate, much MUCH easier.

[ghost-angel]

Since Englobing doesn't need to be a sphere.... kicking out a 4m x 1m square around a target generally works.

[prestidigitator]

Well, a sphere has the largest surface area per unit volume so really you're only going to need more area for other shapes, though I guess it depends on how we decide on the fundamental length.

In any case, for a cubic shell I'd still want to see at least 2m on a side, which would be 6*2m*2m=24m^2. If you really insisted on a rectangular prism 1m along each horizontal side and 2m tall (come on; people are assumed to be 2m tall by default in the system!), it'd be 4*1m*2m+2*1m*1m=10m^2. Both of those are at least twice the area of the minimum size stated by the book.

I think I'm going to go with taking the target's maximum length characteristic (that way it'll work for unusual shapes, vehicles, etc.) and require at least as much area as a sphere with that diameter would have. So calling the length L, the approximate minimum area would be 3*L^2. For optional complexity I might require that the thickness of the Barrier be added to L for purposes of calculating that minimum area.

[ghost-angel]

I think the problem just lies in the fact that one side can be 1m.

I would just change it, either width or height has to be 4m and either width or height has to be 2m.

The issue arises when you realize that FW in 5E was 1" Tall by default, and Barrier is 1m tall by default - half the height it previously was.

1m to a side (4m total, call it long) + 2m to the other side (call it tall) should be enough to englobe a person in a rectangle, a tight rectangle, but still enough.

[Sean Waters]

Well, a sphere has the largest surface area per unit volume so really you're only going to need more area for other shapes, though I guess it depends on how we decide on the fundamental length.

In any case, for a cubic shell I'd still want to see at least 2m on a side, which would be 6*2m*2m=24m^2. If you really insisted on a rectangular prism 1m along each horizontal side and 2m tall (come on; people are assumed to be 2m tall by default in the system!), it'd be 4*1m*2m+2*1m*1m=10m^2. Both of those are at least twice the area of the minimum size stated by the book.

I think I'm going to go with taking the target's maximum length characteristic (that way it'll work for unusual shapes, vehicles, etc.) and require at least as much area as a sphere with that diameter would have. So calling the length L, the approximate minimum area would be 3*L^2. For optional complexity I might require that the thickness of the Barrier be added to L for purposes of calculating that minimum area.


Smallest area for unit volume, surely.

You need more sleep :D

[phookz]

I think the problem just lies in the fact that one side can be 1m.

I would just change it, either width or height has to be 4m and either width or height has to be 2m.

The issue arises when you realize that FW in 5E was 1" Tall by default, and Barrier is 1m tall by default - half the height it previously was.

1m to a side (4m total, call it long) + 2m to the other side (call it tall) should be enough to englobe a person in a rectangle, a tight rectangle, but still enough.

I'd agree with that. It would be a tight fit, but nobody said it had to be comfortable. If you assume a person is 2m tall and needs about .5m for width and height, you would need a total of 4.5 square meters to cover them, but that's a squared off rectangle, and people aren't squared off - there's probably 20% that could be saved there by cutting corners and whatnot.

But still, using a woodchipper first might be perfect for a Dark Champions (really Dark) game :sneaky:

[Sean Waters]

Presumably, as Barrier applies no force, you can avoid being englobed by a 'minimum size' Barrier by sticking your arms out?

[phookz]

Woodchipper won't care what your arms are doing ;)

[Sean Waters]

Woodchipper won't care what your arms are doing ;)

Barrier chips no wood.

EDIT: I have no idea what I meant by that, so if any of you feel the same, and were in any way concerned you were missing something clever, you weren't :)

[prestidigitator]

Smallest area for unit volume, surely.

You need more sleep :D

Gah! This isn't my lucky thread.