4, 5 or 6?

[Netzilla]

Still wrong.

 

The Questionite Shield can be used to Block Ranged attacks targeted at the user of the shield.  Deflection would absolutely be necessary to block an attack targeting someone else more than 1m away (the definition of Deflection). 

 

HM

 

Exactly. 

 

Deflection's primary purpose is to block attacks (melee or ranged) that target someone or something that is out of your reach.

 

Reflection's primary purpose is to reflect ranged attacks that were aimed directly at your character or a target within reach.  With an Advantage, you can also reflect melee attacks aimed directly at your character or a target within reach.

[Ninja-Bear]

Netzilla I'm referring to sfx. HM I meant Block ranged attacks. Not blocking at range. Now that can be confusing. I seem to be presenting my question very confusing. Btw if helps, Im converting older characters and trying to devise a guideline. So if a character just has missile Deflection then I just buy Deflection. If they bought MD with reflection then I only need to buy Reflection.

[Netzilla]

If you have an SFX for Reflection, then you should be able to use it to Block ranged attacks.  Otherwise, that would make the Reflection power pointless as you cannot Reflect what you cannot Block.  So, hopefully, the GM either allows it as is or works with the player to come up with an SFX that does work.  In the case of a shield, I'd look askance at any GM that didn't allow it.

 

Similarly, a character could buy both Reflection and Deflection using the same SFX (perhaps some sort of mirror-like force wall).  Again, it's up to the GM as to if this would be allowed.  Even if it is allowed, however, unless the GM is willing to bring in an optional rule from APG1, your character would not be able to Reflect any attacks that had to be stopped via Deflection.  Only attacks within reach that were Blocked could be Reflected, even if the SFX is still a mirror-like force wall.

[Ninja-Bear]

If you have an SFX for Reflection, then you should be able to use it to Block ranged attacks. Otherwise, that would make the Reflection power pointless as you cannot Reflect what you cannot Block. So, hopefully, the GM either allows it as is or works with the player to come up with an SFX that does work. In the case of a shield, I'd look askance at any GM that didn't allow it.

 

Similarly, a character could buy both Reflection and Deflection using the same SFX (perhaps some sort of mirror-like force wall). Again, it's up to the GM as to if this would be allowed. Even if it is allowed, however, unless the GM is willing to bring in an optional rule from APG1, your character would not be able to Reflect any attacks that had to be stopped via Deflection. Only attacks within reach that were Blocked could be Reflected, even if the SFX is still a mirror-like force wall.

Right. I believe you are saying what I'm trying to express.

[Scott Ruggels2]

I had a problem in that my gaming dried up the first time about 1998, so I have No experience  on the 5th or 6th editions, other than I saw  FRED once at a convention.  So all my experience have been 1st, 2nd, 3rd. and 4th Editions.

 

My current gaming is Pathfinder, though I do want to run Hero at some point, soon.

[Netzilla]

Btw if helps, Im converting older characters and trying to devise a guideline. So if a character just has missile Deflection then I just buy Deflection. If they bought MD with reflection then I only need to buy Reflection.

 

A clarification on this part, since I haven't addressed it directly. 

 

If a pre-6e character only has the base Missile Deflection, then you don't need to purchase Deflection at all.  The 6e Block rules allow you to block ranged attacks without the need for any extra powers.  You may be at a penalty, depending on the GM's ruling (you could potentially counter this by purchasing PSLs).

 

If a pre-6e character has Missile Deflection with the Missile Deflection at Range Advantage (+1), then they would need to purchase Deflection in 6e.  Note, that this does not apply if the Missile Deflection at Range was only purchased at the +1/2 level because that only allows MD to work in the adjacent hex abd 6e Block already allows blocking for the adjacent "hex" (though at a -2 penalty; again PSLs can help).

 

If a pre-6e character has bought levels to improve their Missile Deflection roll, then the 6e version needs to buy Ranged CSLs with Block to emulate the improved odds.

 

If a pre-6e character has Missile Deflection with the +20/+30 Reflection ability, then the 6e character needs to buy Reflection up to a level to match what seems reasonable for the 5e character to reflect.  If the 5e character was in a campaign with a 50-70 AP range for attack powers, the 6e version would need to be able to Reflect 70 AP powers to maintain similar utility.

 

So, I might build a 6e Questionite Shield like so:

 

Questionite Shield, MP (60 pool), all slots OAF (Questionite Shield)

f - Blocking (20 AP total) +3 CSL with Block (6 AP) plus +3 CSL with Ranged Block (6 AP) plus +4 PSL to counter 'Block vs Ranged' penalties (8 AP).

f - Bounce Attack, Reflection up to 60 Active Point Attack (40 AP), OAF (Questionite Shield)

f - Thrown 12d6 Blast (60 AP), Range Based on Strength, 1 Recoverable Charge, Lockout

f - Bash: Hand Attack +4d6 (20 AP)

[Ninja-Bear]

 

A clarification on this part, since I haven't addressed it directly.

 

If a pre-6e character only has the base Missile Deflection, then you don't need to purchase Deflection at all. The 6e Block rules allow you to block ranged attacks without the need for any extra powers. You may be at a penalty, depending on the GM's ruling (you could potentially counter this by purchasing PSLs).

/quote]

 

Yeah I have been thinking more about this. And I really see Deflection as avoiding all the above you mentioned. It like how you buy a power defined as super skill so as to avoid some of the rules of skills. I.e. Clinging bought as super climbing allows you to move a lot faster than a climbing skill. And speaking as a GM, I really don't like how you suggest someone like Crusader shouldn't buy deflection because based on a whim, he may or may not be able to deflect it at maybe a penalty or not.

[Netzilla]

Eh, you asked me for clarification on the interaction between Deflection and Reflection and I provided one based on RAW.  If you want to house rule things, then house rule away.  There's no need to justify it to me as I'm not playing at your table.  From your POV, I'm just some random dude on the internet.

[Ninja-Bear]

Eh, you asked me for clarification on the interaction between Deflection and Reflection and I provided one based on RAW. If you want to house rule things, then house rule away. There's no need to justify it to me as I'm not playing at your table. From your POV, I'm just some random dude on the internet.

Netzilla your information is helping me. The problem I have with RAW is it's ambiguous. If I understand the RAW, there really is no reason for Deflection. Am I missing something?serioudly what is Deflection for? Btw I'm not against penalties to block however again it's the ambiguity of it. It's funny on how on other uses of block there is a definite penalty. If you what to see in the dark we know how much penalty to buy off because we know how much darkness incurs. Block/ranged is by RAW (if I understand correctly) is GM fiat. Right?

[Ninja-Bear]

Btw another point of my confusion. If the GM decides if, when and what penalty you are allowed to Block ranged attacks, then how is it by me (the GM) house ruling if I state when you need Deflection?

[Netzilla]

Netzilla your information is helping me. The problem I have with RAW is it's ambiguous. If I understand the RAW, there really is no reason for Deflection. Am I missing something?serioudly what is Deflection for

Deflection is primarily the ability to Block attacks at range.

 

Deflection would absolutely be necessary to block an attack targeting someone else more than 1m away (the definition of Deflection). 

 

from 6e1 page 187

 

Deflection's primary purpose is to block attacks (melee or ranged) that target someone or something that is out of your reach.

 

 

If a pre-6e character has Missile Deflection with the Missile Deflection at Range Advantage (+1), then they would need to purchase Deflection in 6e.  Note, that this does not apply if the Missile Deflection at Range was only purchased at the +1/2 level because that only allows MD to work in the adjacent hex abd 6e Block already allows blocking for the adjacent "hex" (though at a -2 penalty; again PSLs can help).

Btw I'm not against penalties to block however again it's the ambiguity of it. It's funny on how on other uses of block there is a definite penalty. If you what to see in the dark we know how much penalty to buy off because we know how much darkness incurs. Block/ranged is by RAW (if I understand correctly) is GM fiat. Right?

Champions Complete suggests a minimum penalty of -4 for an unarmed Block of a ranged attack. This is no more ambiguous than an unarmed block vs an armed melee attack.

 

Btw another point of my confusion. If the GM decides if, when and what penalty you are allowed to Block ranged attacks, then how is it by me (the GM) house ruling if I state when you need Deflection?

You're not allowed to use Reflection with Deflection by RAW. {snip}

 

This is another reason why Deflection isn't required to be able to Block a ranged attack RAW. Since Reflection cannot work with Deflection, if you only allow blocking ranged attacks via Deflection, then you can never Reflect ranged attacks.

[Chris Goodwin]

I would rule that if you've bought Reflection, then you can Block ranged attacks.  You've essentially paid for that much, and like Netzilla said, I can't think of any SFX for Reflection that wouldn't also let you do that.  

[Tech]

The campaign I'm part of is a mixture of 4th, 5th & a little 6th editions. And now back to our regularly scheduled broadcast.

 

I like the newest edition of Reflection. I also wouldn't have a problem with someone adding Deflection with Reflection as long as it was broken down.

[Ninja-Bear]

Got it now about Deflection. It is different than Missile Delfection. For the record I did know that you could use Reflection with Deflection in CC.

 

However still left with how to charge points to allow a character to block anything yet restrict another?

[Ninja-Bear]

I would rule that if you've bought Reflection, then you can Block ranged attacks. You've essentially paid for that much, and like Netzilla said, I can't think of any SFX for Reflection that wouldn't also let you do that.

That was what I was saying!

[Ninja-Bear]

If you like the old Missile Deflection rules, then there's really no reason not to port them forward. Plenty of people have done exactly that for different aspects of the system (some liked the old Stun Lotto, some liked the old Transfer, etc).

 

However, I spent a few minutes thinking about a "formalized" set of modifiers for Block and came up with the following:

Defender Is...	  Attack Is...	    Block Mod
--------------------------------------------------				    
Unarmed*		    Unarmed*		    +0
				    Normal Attack	   -1
				    Killing Attack	  -2
Any				 x2 blocking weapon  -1 per doubling
					  DC
				    Ranged			  x2 (min -4)
--------------------------------------------------				    
* Natural weapons such as claws, horns and fangs should be considered as "armed".

An unarmed normal person (STR 8) blocks a Broadswoard (1d6+1 HKA) would be -2 (Unarmed 
  vs Killing) -1 (4 DC attack vs 1.5 DC defense) = -3 total.

The same person trying to block a Thrown Spear (1d6+1 RKA) would double that for a -6.

Colossus (STR 60) trying to block Cyclops's eye beams (12d6 Blast) would be -1 
  (Unarmed vs Normal) x2 (Ranged) for a total of -2 unless he could find an improvised 
  weapon to block with.

I structured it the way I did mainly because I'm not a fan of tying costs to SFX like the old Missile Deflection did, so this all triggers off mechanics. It's not been playtested, as I just came up with this after about 5 or 10 minutes thought. So, use at your own risk, etc, etc.

 

If you really want to keep it tied to SFX, I'd recommend going by the idea posted by Hugh (?) of putting the onus on the attacking power for being harder to block (I believe a linked Change Environment was the construct he suggested for this). So, setting a minimum of -4 for blocking ranged attacks (as suggested under the Block rules on pg 149), anyone who wanted their power to be harder to block would purchase an appropriate linked CE.

 

Alternatively you could set a higher base modifier for blocking a ranged attacks and allow attacks to add a Limitation for being easier to block. For example, if you decide that the base penalty for blocking a ranged attack is -8 (to pick an arbitrarily high number), then a thrown spear might be built with "Easy to Block (+4 to defender's Block roll at range; -1/2).

Nice write up however it's too complex for my uses. My daughter is goin to GM and I assist with 3rd shift brain with my two boys 9 & 7.

[Ninja-Bear]

Hugh really what happened with the droids was the Stormtroopers we're aiming at them and just hit the Rebels!

[Ninja-Bear]

Netzilla I honestly thought you were against buying deflection at all. If I understand you, you would not be against me buying it for your game if I wanted it to be relialbe. Else if I want to use block/range it will act more like oif oppurtunity with penalty for free. Example Shadow my ninja wants to knock down arrows, I pay for it ( and extra skill levels!). Shadow fights Lazer and i say can I use that mirror to deflect his shot? No points, you say yes. Shadow tries to deflect Boras wind blast with my nunchuks-for free. You say no dice.

 

Did I get it?

After much thought, this what I am going with. I'm not going to disallow block/range but if you want to be certain and no penalty, then you buy Deflection or Reflection depending if you want to send it back. (And most write ups I see will be Deflection with no range).

[Ninja-Bear]

Oh and fwiw, at least in CC, you can't point a focus limitation on CSLs anymore, they go on OCC/DCV characteristics.

[Hugh Neilson]

Hugh really what happened with the droids was the Stormtroopers we're aiming at them and just hit the Rebels!

Where are the Hero rules for hitting a different enemy when you miss your target?

 

Seriously if you think the droids were blocking, I can't argue with you however good luck trying to get a GM to agree with you

I think that they look no more like they were dodging or had high levels of resistant defenses than like they were blocking. I also think a major strength of Hero is its neutrality to special effects. 

 

Oh and fwiw, at least in CC, you can't point a focus limitation on CSLs anymore, they go on OCC/DCV characteristics.

Skill levels are just OCV/DCV anyway. My recollection is that the "All Combat" level was priced as a Multipower of +2 OCV, +2 DCV, +1 DC (floating DC being a bit of a kludge) in Flexible slots. Divide by 2 and that's one All Combat level. Toss in slots for bonuses to DEX, PRE and INT rolls and you have an Overall Level. Reduce what it can be used for and you have more limited skill levels.

[Netzilla]

 

 

Oh and fwiw, at least in CC, you can't point a focus limitation on CSLs anymore, they go on OCC/DCV characteristics.

I don't think you're reading that right.  The section on CSLs with Limitation reads:

 

 

CSLs with Limitations automatically apply only to OCV (not DCV or damage). “Only for OCV” or “Only for DCV” are not valid Limitations for CSLs. (For that effect, simply buy more of the OCV or DCV Characteristics.)

 

In 6e1, the wording's a bit more detailed:

 

COMBAT SKILL LEVELS WITH LIMITATIONS
With the GM’s permission, characters can put Limitations on CSLs (for example, to build equipment, like a laser sight for a gun). The GM may restrict which types of CSLs a character can Limit; for example he might rule that only 3-point or more expensive CSLs can have Limitations.  Unless the GM rules otherwise, CSLs with Limitations can only increase the user’s OCV, not DCV or damage. (Limitations such as “Only For OCV” or “Only For DCV” are not legal for CSLs; if a character wants that, he should just buy he should just buy more of the OCV or DCV Characteristics.)

 

So, if you buy +3 CSL w/ Swords (9 AP), OIF (Ring of Swordsmanship, -1/2), then that +3 can only be used to improve your OCV rather than DCV or Damage.  There's no specific prohibition against using Focus, only a limitation in how the CSLs can be applied.

[Hugh Neilson]

Why can't I build a Multipower of OCV, DCV and added DCs for swords as a ring of swordsmanship? +1 OCV for all combat costs 5 points if unlimited - it should not cost 8 because it comes from my IIF Ring of Combat Accuracy.

[Netzilla]

Why can't I build a Multipower of OCV, DCV and added DCs for swords as a ring of swordsmanship? +1 OCV for all combat costs 5 points if unlimited - it should not cost 8 because it comes from my IIF Ring of Combat Accuracy.

 

I'm not saying I agree with the rule, just that is what it says.

[Netzilla]

BTW, Going back over my old SETAC notes, the costs for CSLs were based on the equivalent Multipower.  Here's my attempt to re-create the math:

10    All Combat: Multipower, 10-point reserve
2v    1)  +2 OCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
2v    2)  +2 DCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
1f    3)  +5 STR or +1d6 Blast, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points)
Total = 15 for +2 or 8 for +1.
 
10    +1 with All Attacks

5    Large Group: Multipower, 10-point reserve,  (10 Active Points); all slots Predefined Large Group (-1)
1v    1)  +2 OCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
1v    2)  +2 DCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
1f    3)  +5 STR or +1d6 Blast, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points)
Total = 8 for +2 or 4 for +1

5    +1 with a large group of attacks

3    Small Group: Multipower, 10-point reserve,  (10 Active Points); all slots Predefined Small Gropu (-2)
1v    1)  +2 OCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
1v    2)  +2 DCV (10 Active Points); Nonpersistent (-1/4)
1f    3)  +5 STR or +1d6 Blast, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (7 Active Points)
Total = 6 for +2 or 3 for +1

3    +1 with a small group of attacks

1    Single Attack: +1 OCV (5 Active Points); Only with Single Attack (-3)

2    +1 with any single attack

Interestingly, only the Small Group actually comes out even (with Single Attack being the worst off ratio-wise).  In all other cases, you're better off with the MP.  I recall something about CSLs not being Drainable as part of the justification for the increased premium, but it does seem the structure would have been better as 8/4/3/1 for All/Large/Small/Single, as the disparity just gets worse the more CSLs you take.

 

I have no idea where the restriction on Limited CSLs came from.

[Tech]

Why can't I build a Multipower of OCV, DCV and added DCs for swords as a ring of swordsmanship? +1 OCV for all combat costs 5 points if unlimited - it should not cost 8 because it comes from my IIF Ring of Combat Accuracy.

I agree with you.