Jump to content

Thoughts on combining Frameworks


Recommended Posts

The first general rule of Power Frameworks is "No combination of Power Frameworks":

 

A Power Framework can never be bought through another Power Framework. For example, a character cannot create a Multipower with his Variable Power Pool, or have a VPP as a slot in a Multipower.

 

 

I have been thinking about how one could put a Multipower into a VPP without breaking the balance. And this is what I though up so far:

First, you have to define the Abstract Multipower. This is a implementation neutral "template". It is a multipower with slots as usual, but it has no special effect assigned. Also it cannot have any Power modifiers that affect the Pool Cost as a whole*. Limitations on specific slots must be made as generic as possible.

The Abstracts Multipower total cost (pool + slots) is used as the base cost for the Slot in the VPP.

 

Example Abstract Multipower :

60 Pool Multipower "Assault Rifle"

6  Single Shoot: 10 DC attack, +2 OCV; 60 AP

4  Burst: 12 DC attack, Tripple Cost (-1/2); 60 AP, 40 Real

6  Autofire: 8 DC base attack, Autofire 5 (+1/2) for 12 DC total attack; 60 AP

Total: 76

 

Single Shoot:

Represents high precision Single Shoot attacks, hence the OCV bonus

Burst:

The "3 Shoot Burst" mode used in many assault rilfes, designed for optimal stoppig power. Noticeable is the Tripple Cost Limitation. As we do not know if the implemented framework will run of endurance or charges (that is a implementation detail), we cannot use "Multiple Charges" or "Extra Endurance". So we just use something a bit more generic instead.

Autofire:

Base DC is the amount of DC before the advantage. 8D6 Blast or 2.5d6 of RKA respectively.

 

Now some implementations of this power in a VPP:

Energy Assault Rfile: "Abstract Assault Rifle", 76 Base; 76 Active Points, Focus (-1), 39 Real

The energy version of the assault rifle draws power from Endurance (either personal or a Endurance Reserve that is bought seperately). Hence burst will cost triple endurance cost. It is built on a Obvious, Accesible Focus

 

Bullet Assault Rifle: "Abstract Assault Rifle", 76 Base, 32 Charges (+1), 152 AP, Focus (-1), 76 Real

A "realistic" version of the rifle. It has limited amunition. More suiteable for heroic games then superheroic, due to high AP cost.

 

Magic Wand of Variable Assault: "Abstract Assault Rifle", 76 Base, Focus (-1/2), 51 Real

This is a magic wand that returns to the users hand (Inaccessible Focus), but can still be destroyed. It works of personal endurance (the Magic the user has to feed it). Special effect is Magic. It does not look like a Rifle at all, but otherwise functions identical to the Energy Assault Rfile

 

Firepowers of Variable Assault: "Abstract Assault Rifle", 76 Base, 76 AP, 76 Real

Who says it has to have a focus at all? "Abstract Assault Rifle" is just a power like every other. In this case it has the Fire Special effect and is just a natural power without any limtiations.

 

 

*The most important rule. If the limitation affects the Pool, it would affect the base cost of the implementation. It would allow people to cram a 12 DC Attack into a VPP with 30 AP limit. Hence it is the one thing that cannot be allowed for the sake of game balance.

 

 

Anyone having any thoughts on this idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What problem is this solution addressing?

 

From similar thread from last year.

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/83788-vpp-discusion/page-3?hl=framework&do=findComment&comment=2194644

 

 

 

Re: VPP discusion

Perhaps... Perhaps not....

Anyway, here is an example of what I think the rule was designed to prevent (for good reason).

45 Swiss Army Powers: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 30 base + 30 control cost
0 1) See Below*: Custom Power (30 Active Points) Real Cost: 30
 

20 Below: Multipower, 30-point reserve, (30 Active Points); all slots OIF (-1/2)
2f 1) He's A Flasher: Sight Group Flash 4d6, Area Of Effect (32m Radius Explosion; +1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 4 clips of 8 Charges (-0) - END=[8]
2f 2) He's A Swinger!: Swinging 40m, x8 Noncombat (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]
2f 3) He's A Blaster: Blast 6d6 (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]
2f 4) He's A Hitter!: Hand-To-Hand Attack +4d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/4) - END=0
2f 5) He's A Roper!: Entangle 2d6, 4 PD/4 ED (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]

The total real cost of the "Below" Multipower is 30 points and without the quoted rule in place it could theoretically be taken as 'whole cloth' as a slot within the "Swiss Army VPP" above it (which does NOT have either of the Cosmic Advantages: No Skill Roll & 0 Phase to Change). Since "Below" is a single "Slot" within the VPP neither of those Advantages would be required to switch between the 5 Multipower slots because a "Multipower" does not need them.

Preventing that bit of munchkinery is the only valid reason I see for the rule. Does anyone else have a different example that justifies the RAW?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I foresee game breaking consequences with no real game improvement.

I would like to know the results of your pay testing if you try it. But the VPP has always been a power framework on its own that scares many game masters because it is so subject to abuse, to grant it even more utility without additional cost our consequence would have even more game masters banning them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't see the need for this. And I agree with Hyper-Man's question.

 

Back in 1E, when there were no Power Frameworks (they were just "powers"), you could put ECs in MPs and vice-versa. Horrible min-maxing ensued, if the GM didn't control it.

The idea of putting MP as slots into VPP's has ocassionally popped up over the time. And this seemed like a way to allow it, while also preserving balance.

Putting all three side by side in a VPP is porhibitively expensive from the Real Points of view.

Same is true for buying "No time to change" and "No Skill Roll" for the VPP, even if you afterwards limit it to only specific powers.

If you know of a fault I my design, show it to me. I am happy to fix it.

 

Forbidding any limitation that affects the pool cost of the Multipower, means the core avenue for abuse is sealed. If you try to put a bunch of 60 AP Powers in a MP and then put that MP into your VPP you will pay a huge ammount of Points for it (much more then just buying that MP in the first place). This example Abstract multipower already approached 80 AP, already beyond the usual 60 AP limit.

You need at least a 120 Character Points of VPP to just get the basic version (without any advantages) on your character sheet.

 

Even if you heavily limit the Implemented power, all you archieve is dropping the Real Cost of the power. The bigger deal has always been the AP.

 

 

A Multipower is just a VPP with a limited number of slots.

 

Better question is " How would you allow a Multipower within a Multipower? Or a VPP within a VPP or Multipower? 

 

All iterations are equally balanced/unbalanced.

And I always thought the VPP is a mulipower where the control cost simulates having bought unlimited Slots and a "Full Phase & Skill Roll to change" Limitation on top.

 

Absolute balance can never exist. To many variables vs too much igenuity.

But I am confident that this way of combining a Multipower and a VPP are as close to balanced as can be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Same is true for buying "No time to change" and "No Skill Roll" for the VPP, even if you afterwards limit it to only specific powers.

.

 

 

 

So, basically you want these elements for free for the attack portion of your VPP.  

 

If that maintains balance in your usage, go for it. I would consider it broken in mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting a framework in single slot of another framework is not allowed by RAW (no building a VPP inside one slot of a Multipower or the opposite example I posted earlier).

 

However, it is possible to build a Limited VPP that functions like a Multipower with a fixed number of slots when in use but during downtime the specific individual slots can be swapped out (no different than how a special forces operator can carry different loads depending on the specific mission). *The opposite is not possible (There is no single Advantage that can turn a Multipower into a VPP).  Variable Advantage comes the closest but its use means that no un-advantaged version of an ability can be used unlike the ubiquitous attack Multipwer with unadvantaged and Advantaged slots.

 

From my beginning version of Batman:

 

46 The Utility Belt: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 30 base + 30 control cost, Powers Can Be Changed As A Half-Phase Action (2 or more slots with a combined Real Cost of 30 Real Points can be active at any one time; +1/2), No Skill Roll Required (+1) (67 Active Points); Limited Class of Powers (Gadgets) Operates like a Multipower with a Dozen or so different slots ALL with the Extra Time (Half Phase) to Activate Limitation (The specific set of slots carried at any one time can be swapped out at the Batcave; -1/2); all slots Restrainable (Must be able to reach individual compartments; -1/2), IIF (The Belt is IIF (worn) Individual active slots are IIF at a minimum but can be OAF, OIF or IAF (in hand); -1/4)
[Notes: This is just a small sampling of what is typically carried.  For inspiration to create more slots see the example Utility Belt Multipower in the Hero System Equipment Guide (6e) on pages 186-187.]
0 1) Batarangs: Blast 6d6 (30 Active Points); OAF (-1), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), Beam (-1/4), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) Real Cost: 10 [Notes: Up to 8d6 with Batarang Fu Basic Shot.] - END=[6 rc]
0 2) Taser Knuckles: Hand-To-Hand Attack (vs. Energy Defense) +6d6 (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/4), 4 clips of 8 Charges (-0) Real Cost: 13 [Notes: Up to 12d6 with Bat Fu Martial Strike.] - END=[8]
0 3) Flash Pellets: Sight Group Flash 4d6, Area Of Effect (32m Radius Explosion; +1/2) (30 Active Points); IAF (-1/2), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), 16 Charges (-0) Real Cost: 13 - END=[16]
0 4) Batlines: Swinging 30m, x4 Noncombat (30 Active Points); OAF (-1), 4 clips of 12 Recoverable Charges (+1/2) Real Cost: 12 - END=[12 rc]
0 5) Bat Bolas: Entangle 2d6, 4 PD/4 ED (30 Active Points); OAF (-1), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) Real Cost: 12 - END=[6 rc]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New and old players really shouldn't be approaching Frameworks with the question "what can I fit into this?"

That is too meta.

 

They should be instead starting with "how do I model this special effect in HERO mechanics?"

Balance is usually an emergent property of this process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question has come up in our group before, e.g. the Weapon Master with a huge armory of different weapons (VPP, can only be swapped out between scenes), and he wants one of them to be a variable-fire weapon like an assault rifle. Or even simpler, a melee weapon with both a pointy end (HKA) and a blunt end (HA). So I understand the need, and you get full marks for a well-thought-out solution. But it seems overly complicated to me, and far too prone to abuse. And forbidding Limitations on the VPP cost makes things overly expensive for most powers.

 

It seems like Variable Advantage, Variable Effect & Variable Limitation can handle all the examples you listed above without the need to invent a new meta-framework structure. The only thing it won't let you do is change actual Power, such as changing from HKA to HA in my example above. You could handle that by allowing a very-narrowly-defined Variable Power Advantage only for the purpose of changing between Killing & Normal Damage since they're so closely related anyway. (Obviously multiple stop signs here, complete with flashing red lights to indicate "No, seriously, look over here!") Or for that matter, you could define it as a Killing Attack and use the Club Weapon Maneuver to simulate switching to Normal Damage.

 

One kinda-similar thing I have occasionally done is to build lists inside VPPs, simply as a way of grouping powers together. For example, I once built an NPC superhero whose powers cycled between earth-air-fire-&-water each Phase. I built it as a VPP containing 4 lists of powers for each element, with a Limitation that they could only select powers from one elemental list at a time. Complicated and kindof a bear to keep straight, but (in that instance) easier than building it as a Multiform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...