Jump to content

HERO Philosophy: What is a Focus?


Recommended Posts

Over on the how to do Cap's shield thread:
 

Focus OIF:  Our flag waiver always seems to control the shield.  He throws it and if it does not boomerang back it stays out of the enemies reach just long enough.  Even in the rare instances where his opponent wrenches the shield from his grasp comic book karma delivers it back to him so long as he keeps up he good fight.
 
To truly get that shield an enemy must defeat him so it is not accessible.

...
 
Seems reasonable to me.  Where am I wrong.

 
 

Perhaps in making it a Focus. Is it ever taken away at all?

 
 

In the movies he did not have it briefly because it got battered away and had to fight without it and Bucky the winter soldier took it from him and used it against him before Cap got it back.  In the end I look at it is if you want caps shield you will have to knock him the f out and take it from him.

 
 

Very rarely does Cap lose his shield, but it does on occasion happen.  Its been destroyed at least once as well.  But those could be a limited restrained and plot effect.


Probably when Cap was a lowly 250 point character, new to adventuring, his shield was an OIF or even an OAF, but nowadays? You may as well just give it a custom -1/4 Limitation: Cap's Shield, rather than Focus.  We've got a lot of various Modifiers that say how a character can be deprived of their Power and how obvious it is.  There's also been a lot of discussion over the years of, for instance, does Iron Man's armor really count as a Focus, or is it OIHID, or something else?  (None of the above; it's -1/4: Iron Man's Armor.)   That -1/4 is enough to make it GM driven, and seems like something that over years of play a GM might house rule into their campaign, given that everyone knows what it means and how it's used.  

 

Focus is one of the few game mechanics that hasn't really changed in a long time.  It's almost identical now as in 3rd edition.  I remember one of the earlier books that talked about using XP to buy Limitations down or off, but Focus was given as an exception.  "You can't make a milkshake out of your magic ring and drink it to gain its powers!"  No, but you can work to make the fact that it's a device less limiting.  

 

It almost looks like the original design for the Focus Limitation was something like: Inaccessible is -1/4, Accessible is -1/2, double the value if it's Obvious.  (IIF: -1/4; IAF: -1/2; OIF: -1/2; OAF: -1.)  The idea behind Obvious was that it made it obvious that the Power came from the Focus.  But we also have Visible and Invisible Power Effects, and some weirdness in the interactions there... 

 

We also have Restrainable, which was a relative latecomer to the system, and Gestures and Incantations.  The latter two seem to me to be specific implementations of the former, but also with specific special effects associated with them, so let them slide.  

 

We have Real Weapon and Real Armor, which are intended to represent ordinary items rather than magical or superheroic items.  

 

There's also occasional questions about calling something an OIF of Opportunity.  I'd like to formally propose Opportunity as an additional class of Focus, so that a Focus can be either Inaccessible, Accessible, or Opportunity.  That also lets us write something like OOF: Rocks (-1/2), and saves us having to write "of opportunity" all the time.  IOF would probably be -1/4, same as IIF.  Who's with me?  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since I finished up the Fantasy Codex, I've had misgivings about Focus.  The more I dug into it and how to explain its use with magic in the book, the more puzzled I became.  What you usually think of as a focus is more of a "material component" in D&D terms: something you need to activate a power, but don't use after.  But it also means something that always manifests the power, like a sword.  But then there's the kind of focus like a totem you can hand out and anyone can use.  And there's the focus that's a location, needed to do things but that can be interfered with.

 

As easy as Focus is to use, it actually starts to get kind of odd as you build things with it.  Is an OAF sword really the same as an OAF totem, or an OAF pistol?  Does a power with focus on it have the power all the time or only when its activated?

 

The system in use right now is the bare bones simplest, which is probably best, but it raises a lot of questions because its such a big tent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with putting the "Of Opportunity" suffix on the Foci modifier. Although if we're gonna go to the effort to defining a new quality of Foci, I think that "Of Opportunity" should be a separate quality from either Obviousness or Accessibility that halves the value of the Focus (minimum -1/4 perhaps).

That way you can have an OIF Of Opportunity (Aluminum Cap; -1/4) that is 'obviously' providing Magnet-Man his Mental Defense, can easily be replaced at any grocery story, but can't easily be taken away (by disarm and such); or have an IAF Of Opportunity (Notebook & #2 Pencil; -1/4), that doesn't 'obviously' provide The Teacher with his ability to edit enemy statistics (defined as a suite of Boost/Suppress Powers), can easily be replaced at any office supply store, but can easily be taken away (by disarm and such)

 

Personally though It bothers me much more that Foci of Opportunity are officially considered OIF instead of IAF by default. They have the same modifier value, so it doesn't really matter much; but in terms of principle it has always seemed backwards to me. I think Foci of Opportunity should be considered Inobvious by default because the powers they represent most often involve the character's ability to use a mundane object in an unintended or downright impossible manner. For example, even in a superheroic world I doubt most folks would expect Magnet-Man's mental defenses, or The Teacher's statistical editing to actually come from those commonplace foci. Further, being easier to replace isn't the same as being harder to take away, so it makes sense to be able to define a foci that is both​ easy to replace and difficult to take away (as an IIF of Opportunity).

 

In terms of the Design Principles behind Foci, it also really bothers me that after all these years there is still this disconnect between the rules for Foci and the rules for Objects. Foci have rPD/rED, and lose a power whenever they take BODY damage until they run out of powers to lose. Foci also have a fixed size and mass, mechanically speaking. Meanwhile, Objects have rPD/rED and BODY, and cease to function when their BODY is depleted (and are destroyed when they reach Negative BODY, much like Characters). However they also have mechanics based on their actual size & mass (their BODY is typically derived from their Mass). I dislike this disconnect so much I adapted and simplified the Expanded Focus Creation Rules (from APG II I think...) creating a simpler system where Foci work like other Objects, and you can simply define the Size and Mass of your Foci (which then determines to-hit modifiers and the Foci's BODY more realistically).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a GM, focus to me means, item which can be taken away to prevent use of power.  Accessible means it can be taken away even if the character doesn't want it to in combat.  Inaccessible means it must be taken away from an unresisting owner.  Obvious means it obviously the source of the power.

 

Usage of restrainable or OHID, in my eyes are just different takes.  Its like asking how do you make a lightning strike.  One person may use Blast.  Another might use a killing attack.  Just different ways to skin the power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a GM, focus to me means, item which can be taken away to prevent use of power.  Accessible means it can be taken away even if the character doesn't want it to in combat.  Inaccessible means it must be taken away from an unresisting owner.  Obvious means it obviously the source of the power.

 

Usage of restrainable or OHID, in my eyes are just different takes.  Its like asking how do you make a lightning strike.  One person may use Blast.  Another might use a killing attack.  Just different ways to skin the power.

Pretty much, with the clarification that and Accessible Foci isn't just easily taken away, you can be disarmed of it. An Inaccessible Focus can only be taken away "over your dead (or unconscious) body", and doing so should basically take as much time as it takes to 'equip' the foci to start with (which is why Full-Plate/Powered Armor doesn't typically take the crazy amounts of Extra Time it deserves).

 

I'm not really fond of OIHID so I cannot comment on it... but Restrainable is really great for representing items that might normally be Accessible Foci, but aren't because they cannot be taken away or broken; such as an indestructible magic sword you can summon/banish at will, but still can't use to escape a Grab/Entangle.

 

All of the above being why Dr. Destroyer doesn't take Focus, Restrainable, or OIHID on his "suit of powered armor". The armor is protected by mechanical fiat from being be destroyed, disabled, removed, stolen while he sleeps, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The system in use right now is the bare bones simplest, which is probably best, but it raises a lot of questions because its such a big tent

 

For "basic" Foci, it works pretty well.  When you start looking at 50+ years of comic book history and try to figure out how Captain America's shield or Iron Man's armor are Foci, it gets a little more tricky.  

 

In terms of the Design Principles behind Foci, it also really bothers me that after all these years there is still this disconnect between the rules for Foci and the rules for Objects. Foci have rPD/rED, and lose a power whenever they take BODY damage until they run out of powers to lose. Foci also have a fixed size and mass, mechanically speaking. Meanwhile, Objects have rPD/rED and BODY, and cease to function when their BODY is depleted (and are destroyed when they reach Negative BODY, much like Characters). However they also have mechanics based on their actual size & mass (their BODY is typically derived from their Mass). I dislike this disconnect so much I adapted and simplified the Expanded Focus Creation Rules (from APG II I think...) creating a simpler system where Foci work like other Objects, and you can simply define the Size and Mass of your Foci (which then determines to-hit modifiers and the Foci's BODY more realistically).

 

Completely agreed.  Foci aren't quite objects with DEF and BODY.  I'll have to go back to the APGs to see what they have to say about Foci. 

 

Robot Warriors, IMO, always handled them pretty well.  Weapons already start with a Mass value; technically a single hit disables a weapon there, but it's not too hard to give them a BODY score based on their Mass.  

 

As a GM, focus to me means, item which can be taken away to prevent use of power.  Accessible means it can be taken away even if the character doesn't want it to in combat.  Inaccessible means it must be taken away from an unresisting owner.  Obvious means it obviously the source of the power.

 

Usage of restrainable or OHID, in my eyes are just different takes.  Its like asking how do you make a lightning strike.  One person may use Blast.  Another might use a killing attack.  Just different ways to skin the power.

 

Sure, but pretty much any Limitation defines how to prevent a Power from activating, or under what circumstances it can't, or under what circumstances it stops.  "Not In Severe Magnetic Fields" is almost the same as Restrainable (by Severe Magnetic Fields).  

 

 

Pretty much, with the clarification that and Accessible Foci isn't just easily taken away, you can be disarmed of it. An Inaccessible Focus can only be taken away "over your dead (or unconscious) body", and doing so should basically take as much time as it takes to 'equip' the foci to start with (which is why Full-Plate/Powered Armor doesn't typically take the crazy amounts of Extra Time it deserves).

 

I'm not really fond of OIHID so I cannot comment on it... but Restrainable is really great for representing items that might normally be Accessible Foci, but aren't because they cannot be taken away or broken; such as an indestructible magic sword you can summon/banish at will, but still can't use to escape a Grab/Entangle.

 

All of the above being why Dr. Destroyer doesn't take Focus, Restrainable, or OIHID on his "suit of powered armor". The armor is protected by mechanical fiat from being be destroyed, disabled, removed, stolen while he sleeps, etc. 

 

That was my thinking on Iron Man's armor, and to an extent on Cap's shield.  If something is an OAF, the rules are pretty well defined for how it is taken away; the shield doesn't meet those criteria.  It's closer to an OIF, if you're looking at it as an object, but even then Cap is almost, but not quite, never without it.  That "not quite" to me says it could be worth a Limitation; the smallest we can go is -1/4, unless the GM wants to go smaller (-1/8?  -.05?)  

 

I'm perfectly comfortable with making it a -1/4 Specialized Focus.  At that level the GM still gets to mess with it, but it's still less than an OIF.  Maybe at -1/4 it's an Obvious, Almost-Never-Removable Focus.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is questions like these, where we delve deeply into the philosophy of Hero, that really drives me to consider using a system like FATE. These are not bad questions nor is it bad to ask them. It's just that deconstructing the system leaves room to find every little flaw within the system; flaws which my OCD twitch on. Of course, sometimes you also get to see the brilliance in design, which is what keeps me with Hero.

 

As to a Focus, like many elements of the game, it is written with a lot of assumptions. It is assumed that it creates a "back door" that allows a character to be deprived of a power for a little while at least. That's why it's a power limitation. It also has the corollary that the item can either be regained (more often with unique items) or replaced (like that off-the-shelf AR15 that Punisher just lost over the edge of the Brooklyn Bridge). So at it's core, Focus is the Player giving the GM permission to take away a power for some length of time. Everything in Hero (indeed all role playing games) is a social contract between Players and GM. The Player, by choosing to define his power as a Focus, gives the GM that mentioned permission and in return gets a cost discount on buying the power. In addition, one of the foundations that Hero is built upon is that points you spend aren't just magically lost when something happens, so the expectation is that you will see the utility of those points returned.

 

Now picking what special effects are defined as a Focus as opposed to OIAID as opposed to Restrainable are entirely up to the contract negotiation between the Player and GM. There are established baselines (swords are foci), but there are always exceptions to those baselines (the Sort of Gray Paladin has a magic sword summoned from the Essence of the Aether). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No game system is immune to in-depth analysis. I'm sure FATE and Savage Worlds have their own issues when you dig into them.

 

I admit that a lot of Hero System discussions can end up devolving to the level of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No game system is immune to in-depth analysis. I'm sure FATE and Savage Worlds have their own issues when you dig into them.

 

I admit that a lot of Hero System discussions can end up devolving to the level of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" though.

 

As many as wants to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Issues like these are extremely rare in the campaign I'm part of. I'm not saying this hasn't ever happened but, to my memory, this issue has never come up. You, as a GM, are responsible for what limitation you allow a player to get if a foci is taken as a limitation. If a character is allowed a -1 for OAF and you never use the limitation, the fault for the character getting a big break on cost is on you. Trying to quote a line "If a limitation doesn't limit a character, it's not worth any points."

 

I personally don't think much on the Captain America shield/Iron Man armor because it doesn't affect my game. It someone feels Cap deserves a -1/2 or -1 limitation, good for them. If someone feels Iron Man only deserves a -1/4, kudos. No one's going to tell you how to run your game. Different people build different characters different ways. I can't count how many versions of Capt America, Hulk, Superman, etc I've seen. It's up to you to decide how they'd be built and since no two campaigns are the same, people will always have a differing view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How to build Cap's shield and what exactly a Focus is are two different questions.

 

In the game, the Focus limitation basically means that the power won't be available to be used some of the time.  But that's true for many of the limitations.  What distinguishes Focus from other limitations that prevent the power from being used?

 

Focus, unlike other limitations, involves one or more of the following limiting situations:

 

1. Sometimes, the character is caught without it.

2. Sometimes, an opponent may yank it out of his hands.

3. Sometimes, an opponent may remove it from him when he can't stop it.

4. Sometimes, it may break.

4a. If broken, it may need to be replaced, rather than repaired.

5. Sometimes, it may be stolen.

5a. If stolen, it may need to be replaced, rather than recovered.

6. Sometimes, perhaps on a critical miss, the character might drop it, or it could be knocked out of his hands, intentionally or accidentally.

7. If someone else has it, that person may be able to use it himself, without the consent of the character.

8. It might be expendable, in which case it definitely will need to be replaced.

8a. It might be easy, difficult, or extremely difficult to replace.

 

This is not necessarily an exhaustive list, but it's all I can think of right now.

 

OIHID basically means that only #1 applies.  Accessible means that #2 applies.  Obvious only means that an opponent might think to try #2-5, but that really depends on the intelligence/strategy/abilities of the opponent.

 

I've always thought Restrainable was a bit of a problem.  All powers have a "POO" - a point of origin - which means that all powers are restrainable in some sense, by default.  If I have wings, I can fly, but my Flight is restrainable if you grab my wings.  But my Running is also restrainable if you grab my legs.  Does that mean everyone gets to take the Restrainable limitation on their legs?  My vision is restrainable if you cover my eyes.  Does that mean everyone's vision gets to take the Restrainable limitation?

 

A -1 limitation is supposed to reflect a power that is about half as useful as it would otherwise have been.  If I have an OAF, I'm probably not going to be in situation #2 half the time.  Chances are, it'll be a lot less than that, which means some of these other things have to happen some of the time.  And #7 at least doubles the limitingness of #2, 3, and 5, and maybe 6.  And depending on how difficult it is to replace, that may greatly increase the limitingness of #4 and 5.

 

Of Opportunity is a bit tricky as well.  You can't just tell your opponent to wait patiently while you make a quick run to the hardware store.  A rock or a stick on the ground is an "opportunity", but most campaign worlds don't have specialized hardware lying around or growing on trees.  Going to the hardware store to replace a focus is not sufficient to be "of opportunity" - unless a very large portion of your battles take place in or near hardware stores.  Going to some store to buy a new focus is mot that much different from going back to your base to get a replacement focus.  Either way, you have to leave the active combat going on.

 

Big Strong Guy in a fight in the middle of Campaign City can probably easily find a parked car or other large object to pick up and throw at his enemy, just for a simple bashing attack.

But if Scarred Wizard Boy loses his magic wand, he won't necessarily have the "opportunity" to pick up another wand to use - assuming it takes more to make a wand than just breaking a twig off of a tree.

Somewhere in between, is Sir Robin the Brave whose sword broke in the midst of a battle.  There may in fact be other swords lying around among the slain bodies on the battlefield which he has the "opportunity" to pick up and use.  But if he's not in a large-scale battle (such as if he's fighting a monster one-on-one, or if he and a few of his loyal friends on on a quest), and he needs a "sword of opportunity", there won't likely be one available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point of origin rules need some tweaking; it seems to me more of a limitation to have only one spot a power comes from rather than a default you pay more to avoid.  Cyclops only being able to use his eyes is a limitation over The Human Torch who can blast out of his left butt cheek if he wants to, rather than Cyclops being the norm and Human Torch spending extra.  Focus provides that limitation by putting it on the object, so does restrainable by locating it.

 

But yeah, those are the kinds of things that were coming to me as I worked over focus, and that doesn't even bring up the "one and done" material component sort, where its required to activate, but not maintain a power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Of Opportunity to work as a limitation it has to be a limitation,

 

So if you are David fighting Goliath are there times or places that there are not stones on the ground for you to use.  If that answer is "No there are always stones" then no limitation however if the stones have to be smooth pebbles like those on a riverbed made aerodynamic by water then David has to always fight by a river or he might run out of ammo.

 

In his case you have to define the difference between of opportunity and recoverable charges, your arrows or sling stones replace if you can find them, etc.  Perhaps this reduces an accessible focus by 1/4 so OAF, opportunity is a +3/4A, etc.

 

Some characters the opportunity is just a prop effect like fire or icicles.  Think of Deadshot who can kill with paperclips and playing cards.  He probably has RKA, Armor Piercing, Physical Manifestation (throws anything).  The physical manifestation illustrates that a wall of fire for instance could destroy the object in flight or something ending the attack.  For Deadshot it is not a focus anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No game system is immune to in-depth analysis. I'm sure FATE and Savage Worlds have their own issues when you dig into them.

Granted. The primary difference is volume. I want something "lighter" than Hero because that volume can be overwhelming. I am always looking for that middle ground between Fate Core and Hero.

 

I admit that a lot of Hero System discussions can end up devolving to the level of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" though.

There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is that the Hero community can grind a topic to a fine dust and still not agree on build theory. One of the potentially negative aspects of a toolkit system.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many points do you have to spend on angels?

 

Angel Pin: (Total: 157 Active Cost, 70 Real Cost) Summon 33,554,432 5-point Tiny Dancing Angel, Friendly (as long as you want them to dance) (+1/4) (157 Active Points); OAF (Pin; -1), Incantations (sing "Lord of the Dance") (-1/4) (Real Cost: 70)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says you need to decide how much to spend before we can pin down the number

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:whistle: 

There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is that the Hero community can grind a topic to a fine dust and still not agree on build theory. One of the potentially negative aspects of a toolkit system.

I don't think I've ever seen any evidence of that... :whistle: 

 

 

How many points do you have to spend on angels?

 

Angel Pin: (Total: 157 Active Cost, 70 Real Cost) Summon 33,554,432 5-point Tiny Dancing Angel, Friendly (as long as you want them to dance) (+1/4) (157 Active Points); OAF (Pin; -1), Incantations (sing "Lord of the Dance") (-1/4) (Real Cost: 70)

:tsk:  :stupid: Clearly, the pin itself is a base, and the Angels should be purchased as followers within the base...when Hero finally gets The Ultimate Angel Pin on the schedule, you'll see. 

 

I believe it's being delayed while they determine whether that content can be squeezed into only seven volumes, or an eighth will be required, :snicker:

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...