Extra Limbs

[Ninja-Bear]

Christopher Taylor I do agree that if you hold to of the horses legs then it would be hobbled. Hobbled as in it would have reduced running but not 0 running. Now if you grabbed two limbs of a spider, I would rule, that it doesn't affect the spider.

[Ninja-Bear]

Cantriped can you give an example of how the skills being imploded makes backward compatibility so difficult? So if I have gambling with cards in 6th, in CC it becomes a straight up gambling skill. In the reverse, a simple question is asked-which game of chance would like this gambling skill towards? Really if you want some fun conversions, look up old 1st and 2nd ed characters and then try to remember things they used to get for free. Like extra limbs used to give OCV bonuses!

[Cantriped]

It isn't an issue of the "difficulty" of converting a character from one ruleset to another. What matters is whether the character has to be converted at all.

 

The litmus test in this case is series of binary questions, where burden of proof lies on being unable to disprove that they are functionally the same ruleset:

"Can [Any Given Game Element] Generated In One Ruleset Be Used In The Other Ruleset Without Modification For Compliance With That Ruleset"

If the answer is "Yes" to every given example, than they are functionally the same ruleset. If the answer is "No" to any given example, than they are not the same ruleset. If they are not the same ruleset; their level of compatibility can be measured based on the ratio of Yes and No results.

One potential exception to this binary test being that if the test fails only because the selected game element was omitted from one of the two rulesets, than the selected game element might have been acting as a supplemental rule to the 'core ruleset', or one of those rulesets might be acting as a supplement to the other. Allowing for this exception, CC and FHC pass the litmus test if you exclude omitted game elements from the test, likewise I imagine 6th Edition and Hero System Basic would pass the test as well (but I haven't tested it). Meanwhile, CC/FHC and 6th Edition still fail the litmus test even after you exclude omitted game elements from the test.

 

Lets looks at a fictional example of an especially incompatible character:

"Animal Tamer" is the master of all forms of animal empathy. He was originally built in Champions Complete as a 400-point character (with 0 Experience), but now the GM wants to convert him to Hero System 6th Edition. He has 12d6 of Telepathy and Mind Control, all of which take Only Vs. Animals (-1/4). He also has 20 PRE, and a roll of 17- in Animal Handler (including his Presence), representing his ability to train and control any kind of animal even without using his powers. In CC the described Game Elements cost a total of  48 (12d6 Telepathy; Only Vs. Animals (-1/4)) + 48 (12d6 Mind Control; Only Vs. Animals (-1/4)) + 10 (20 PRE) + 11 (Animal Handler +4) = 117 points.

Converting the character to 6th Edition means that Animal Tamer's mental powers no longer qualify for their -1/4 Limitation, because now that Classes of Minds exist such powers would now simply select "Animal". The Cost of PRE remains unchanged. The conversion also means that Animal Tamer's Animal Hander skill is now categorized, and in order to still affect any kind of animal he has to purchase all 13 categories from 6e1 pg 64. In 6e the described Game Elements cost a total of 60 (12d6 Telepathy (Animal Class Minds)) + 60 (12d6 Mind Control (Animal Class Minds)) + 10 (20 PRE) + 22 (Animal Handler +4) = 152 points.

152 points - 117 points = 35 points.

After conversion, Animal Tamer is now short 35 points for his selected Game Elements, and the GM must now decide whether or not to force the Character to sell off game elements to bring the Character back down to 400 points, or 'grandfather' him in by granting Animal Tamer 35 experience to pay for the abilities he would have lost from the GM's decision to convert the campaign from CC or 6th Edition.

Obviously this is an extreme example specifically designed to illustrate my point. But the fact remains that if 6th Edition and CC were actually members of the same edition of the rules, such an example would be impossible to design.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah I think dialing back the skills a bit couldn't hurt.  I appreciate what Steve Long had in mind, but it got a bit out of control.  Nobody should be able to spend 24 points in navigation skill for a base roll.  But I can do it everywhere! 

[Cantriped]

I like the concept of categorized skills (such as Animal Handler, Gambling, and Navigation) in theory, but in practice I much prefer the 'imploded' versions used in CC/FHC. Likewise, I think the concept of Classes of Minds was cool, but in practice think it was too easily abused. I prefer CC/FHC specifically because they made those two changes to the base ruleset. Even discounting being much shorter, much better organized, and lacking all those awkward corner case exceptions and "you can't do this, except when the GM says you can" contradictions (all of which are aspects also I think make CC/FHC superior to 6th Edition).

[Hugh Neilson]

I would not say that removal of Classes of Mind, and simplifying "categorized skills" constitutes a whole new edition. The author did not intend it to do so, and with that in mind, I interpret the rules in accordance with the author's stated intention.

 

All those "you can't do this, except when the GM says you can" contradictions remain in CC - Derek noted that, rather than reiterate this every time it applied, he simply stated that the GM can allow things the rules state are not allowed once, up front. The goal was to reduce word count, and that was a lot of word count.

[Cantriped]

I would not say that removal of Classes of Mind, and simplifying "categorized skills" constitutes a whole new edition. The author did not intend it to do so, and with that in mind, I interpret the rules in accordance with the author's stated intention.

Like I said above, the intent may not have been to create a new edition, however that was the end result. By making any changes (regardless of how inconsequential they are) to the ruleset, he created a distinct (albeit highly compatible) edition of the ruleset. The author's intent is simply irrelevant to me, and to the arguments I've used to support my opinions.

 

All those "you can't do this, except when the GM says you can" contradictions remain in CC - Derek noted that, rather than reiterate this every time it applied, he simply stated that the GM can allow things the rules state are not allowed once, up front. The goal was to reduce word count, and that was a lot of word count.

No they don't, because the issue was one of presentation. In CC/FHC the rules are now defined in clear and concise terminology; the fact that any given Game Element is subject to GM Fiat is now cited as a Core Concept instead. The positive differences being that the rules no longer presume to tell the GM what things they can and can't modify or how to modify them, and the players no longer have to question which of the hundreds of "At GM's Option" clauses are applicable to any particular campaign before they can build a legal character.

[steriaca]

Honestly, this discussion was about having a bonus arm or such. Not about classes of minds and compressed skills and if CC&FHC are together 6.5 edition or 7th edition of the Hero System rules.

[Cantriped]

Well I am prone to digression, but as tangents go 10 posts isn't a very long one (as I'm only counting from post 71 on where Hugh attempted to undermine the credibility of my arguments by attacking the validity of my source material as an independent rules reference). Up until then the topic was still primarily about Extra Limbs and the various odd rules surrounding it.

 

Attempting to somewhat get back on topic:

The rules for Extra Limbs themselves have always struck me as somewhat odd. One of the Core Concepts of the game is that "You Get What You Pay For". So it seems strange to me that we have a power whose benefits aren't in any way linked to its pricing model. With Extra Limbs there is little to no mechanical distinction between having extra arms, extra legs, or extra heads (in either pricing or actual effect). Plus for some god-awful reason having Two Extra Arms costs the same as having Sixteen Extra Arms, despite that fact that it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the latter would be more beneficial to certain types of characters (such as high-strength Grab specialists).

I've sometimes toyed with the idea house-ruling a more granular pricing structure for Extra Limbs. For example, 5 APs per doubling of the number of Arms (or Arm-like limbs), 4 APs per doubling of the number of Legs (or Leg-like limbs), and 3 APs per doubling of the number of Heads or (Head-like limbs). The cost of anything that isn't functionally like an arm, leg or head would be decided by the GM based on how useful it is.

 

Tangent: Has anybody else noticed that creatures with Wings (even those with wings in addition to arms and legs) almost never purchase Extra Limbs for their Wings? Even though in theory you should need to purchase Extra Limbs (2 Wings) before you could declare said Wings to be the Point of Origin for your Flight.

[steriaca]

Wings should be an extra limb. How many bird wing supers can use there wings to preform a strike in comic books?

[PhilFleischmann]

My rule of thumb (or is it rule of limb?) has always been, if you can operate a TV remote with it, it's an Extra Limb.  If you can hold onto something or pick something up with it, it's an Extra Limb with Limited Manipulation.  If all you can do is whack something or someone with it, it's not an extra limb.

 

And I would NEVER allow a limitation on STR for "only for the extra limbs".  ALTILIWAPS!

 

And I would NEVER allow a power with both Inherent and Focus.

[steriaca]

The cost of Extra Limbs is 5 points points per almost unlimited limbs. That is the base "power" of the extra limb. It allows the character to strike and manipulate with it. Want it to do more? Then buy that something more, using the extra limb as a special effect. If the limb is so fragile that you can't strike with it, and can't manipulate things with it? Then it is a special effect, and not an extra limb.

[Hugh Neilson]

At one time, there was a more granular structure, and a concrete OCV bonus, for Extra Limbs. To me, that was changed largely because the ancillary benefit of more extra limbs was pretty limited. But we can always make Extra Limbs like Animal Trainer and vary the cost for every minor increment of benefit achieved.

[Ninja-Bear]

At one time, there was a more granular structure, and a concrete OCV bonus, for Extra Limbs. To me, that was changed largely because the ancillary benefit of more extra limbs was pretty limited. But we can always make Extra Limbs like Animal Trainer and vary the cost for every minor increment of benefit achieved.

Actually like the idea that if you want extra benefits for extra limbs, them with special effect extra limbs. Want four punches (if you have four arms that is) buy auto fire x4 or (my favorite) one hex AOE-accurate. (All punches fire but one usually lands).

[Lucius]

Second, and perhaps more importantly, Extra Limbs costs 5 points whether you have one Extra Limb or 100 - the difficulty in Grabbing all limbs has increased markedly, but the cost not at all. Based on this, I do not think the cost of Extra Limbs relates to the marginally increased difficulty of Grabbing all limbs.

 

... 

 

As noted above, having 1 extra limb, 10, 100 or an unlimited number which can be grown and retracted at will all cost 5 points. With that in mind, I do not believe the benefit of being harder to Grab all limbs is one which is priced.

So just what exactly DOES the cost of Extra Limbs relate to? I can't think of anything you get with one extra limb that you don't get MORE of by having MORE of them.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary declines to sprout a third head

[steriaca]

In 4th edition on, all it does is allow you more options to grab/strike/move/manipulate. It doesn't allow extra attacks, or bonuses to OCV (unlike 3rd edition to when Extra Limbs were created for the system). In fact, eventually with logic, you eventually get to the part where the sear number of limbs is a negitive (as the limbs entangle each other).

[Hugh Neilson]

Extra Limbs have been around since 1e. They originally added an OCV bonus.

 

It seems like a bit of a holdover in that many abilities could be envisioned with the SFX of "extra limbs", other than the "you have a greater ability to manipulate objects" aspect. But you can have an unlimited ability to manipulate extra objects, at range, by buying Telekinesis, so +1/2 on STR is an excessive price. Thinking on it, having more limbs is, at least currently, essentially an "adder" on STR.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I liked that Extra Limbs became 5 points for "however many you have" because really there's not much benefit there, not enough to justify much expense.

[steriaca]

I liked that Extra Limbs became 5 points for "however many you have" because really there's not much benefit there, not enough to justify much expense.

When you boil down the Extra Limbs power to the base idea around the power, the ability to strike/manipulate/move with an extra option, that should not be more than 5 points. In fact, 5 points might be to much.

 

My guide to Extra Limbs.

 

Can you strike with the limb and do damage to your opponent? Extra Limbs.

 

Can you manipulate objects with it? Extra Limbs.

 

Can you use it to move about, but is to fragile for combat? Special effect, prehaps with Restranable.

[dsatow]

One of the good things about extra limbs is what a brick uses it for in my current game.  He basically makes a grab with his normal limb and then passes the grabbed target to his extra limbs.  He can then pummel the target into submission or grab more targets. 

[Ninja-Bear]

Wings became the poster child for restrainable limitation. Also to hit with a wing usually people bought HA defined as wing strike.

[steriaca]

Wings became the poster child for restrainable limitation. Also to hit with a wing usually people bought HA defined as wing strike.

Both are examples of Extra Limbs as a special effect of a power, and not a power itself.

[Ninja-Bear]

I can see though that if you want to use your wings (assuming you a Hawkman type character) then extra limbs to be able to strike would be reasonable.