Jump to content
jimofpeace

Full Power

Recommended Posts

If I create a suit of powered armor and one of my attacks is an Energy Blast, 12D6 described as mini-rockets and has 6 charges, could I instead of using all 12D6 use only 8D6 or 6D6 power?  In other words, do charges ALWAYS have to be used at the power level you bought the charge at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jimofpeace said:

If I create a suit of powered armor and one of my attacks is an Energy Blast, 12D6 described as mini-rockets and has 6 charges, could I instead of using all 12D6 use only 8D6 or 6D6 power?  In other words, do charges ALWAYS have to be used at the power level you bought the charge at?

 

Unless you take the Limitation "Beam Attack" (-1/4) you can adjust the d6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how I would define my mini-rocket doing less than 12D6 damage?  I guess I could say that the suit just doesn't put as much gun powder into the rocket when I only use it at 6D6 as opposed to its maximum damage of 12d6, but that sounds kind of lame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tom Cowan said:

Have the warheads blowup 1 inch or 6 inches  from the target for less damage then a contact boom?

Yeah, that's cool too.  I was also thinking maybe the armor has different sizes of mini-rockets stored in it and could always say that the lower damage rockets are just smaller (micro-rockets?).  Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is probably a build that has the, "base damage" using one charge, an intermediate level using two, and the full effect using three. "Requires Multiple Charges" looks right, but I think it's designed to apply to Multipowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jimofpeace said:

I wonder how I would define my mini-rocket doing less than 12D6 damage?  I guess I could say that the suit just doesn't put as much gun powder into the rocket when I only use it at 6D6 as opposed to its maximum damage of 12d6, but that sounds kind of lame.

 

Your armored suit doesn't sound all that high-tech if it's still employing gun powder. ;)

 

There are plenty of rationales you can use : modular interchangeable warheads with variable payloads; injection of varying amounts of explosive and/or propellant before firing; changing the pressurization of the firing chamber so the initial velocity of the rocket is reduced. If instead of rockets you define the weapon as a mini-railgun, just varying the power to the magnetic accelerator will reduce the velocity and force of the projectile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess my biggest question relating to this topic is this:  If you buy a power with charges can you use less power than your max?  Since they don't use END, I was just curious as if you could use charges at a lesser power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Short answer, Yes. :)  Charges define number of uses, but not the amount of damage you can set them for with each use. As others have mentioned, always at full power is a separate Limitation.

 

But you couldn't lessen the damage on a modern rifle or machine-gun because they are usually bought with the Limitation, Beam, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jimofpeace said:

 

But you couldn't lessen the damage on a modern rifle or machine-gun because they are usually bought with the Limitation, Beam, right?

 

You could say you were aiming to wound and not to kill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jimofpeace said:

Even if the weapon was bought with the Beam Limitation?

Beam weapons cannot be reduced (amongst other things). I usually split Beam up into several modifiers that I can apply more liberally to weapons they are appropriate to. For example: swords generally take Cannot Be Reduced and Does Not Leave Holes in my campaigns.

 

Otherwise, by default you can modulate the damage (or cause knockback with) any weapon that doesn't take Beam (such as almost all normal projectile weapons).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jimofpeace said:

 

But you couldn't lessen the damage on a modern rifle or machine-gun because they are usually bought with the Limitation, Beam, right?

 

That's right. That is exactly why you get the -¼ Limitation bonus on Beam. Generally you probably should buy Beam on attacks whose special effects suggest it, such as conventional guns. On the other hand, a thrown weapon, or one shooting projectiles accelerated by a magnetic field may be tunable.

 

If you were thinking in terms of using less charges for a lower powered attack, selective Autofire can be handy. That allows you to dial it back or ramp it up as needs be, for appropriate charge consumption. A classic anime rocket pod (or real life MRL) can be built like that.

 

Boostable Charges are another way to vary damage by varying the number of charges used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 8:04 PM, Lucius said:

 

There is also a Limitation, "Must be Used at Full Power" if I'm not mistaken.

 

Isn't that  limitation intended for body-affecting powers (i.e. Density Increase, Growth, Shrinking, etc.), and doesn't it normally default to -0?  (Reference: 6e1 p146).

 

I'm asking because I don't recall seeing it anywhere else.  Is there some RAW context for this limitation's use on something other than body-affecting powers?  I'm asking because I can think of a lot of places I could readily use this limitation outside of the body-affecting power context ... but I'm not sure its legit per RAW.  (A GM might rule it's ok, but that's not what I'm looking for; I'm looking for RAW support of legitimate use on something other than body-affecting powers.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Surrealone said:

Isn't that  limitation intended for body-affecting powers (i.e. Density Increase, Growth, Shrinking, etc.), and doesn't it normally default to -0?  (Reference: 6e1 p146).

 

I'm asking because I don't recall seeing it anywhere else.  Is there some RAW context for this limitation's use on something other than body-affecting powers?  I'm asking because I can think of a lot of places I could readily use this limitation outside of the body-affecting power context ... but I'm not sure its legit per RAW.  (A GM might rule it's ok, but that's not what I'm looking for; I'm looking for RAW support of legitimate use on something other than body-affecting powers.) 

Yeah, even in my 5th Edition Revised I only found it under body-affecting powers.  I'm not sure if it's mentioned anywhere else because I couldn't find it in the Limitations section either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Must Be Used At Full Power made it into CC/FHC. However, the Limited modifier is RAW Support for any odd specific limitation they didn't think to publish in advance. Corner-Cases are why Catch-All powers and modifiers exist.

 

I generally consider the "Cannot Be Reduced" modifier to be worth -1/4, and is generally only applicable to Attack powers that cause BODY Damage (which complications like CVK might prevent you from using because they are too lethal). I also generally prohibit such attacks from being reduced by other means such as Pulling A Punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Surrealone said:

Isn't that  limitation intended for body-affecting powers (i.e. Density Increase, Growth, Shrinking, etc.), and doesn't it normally default to -0?  (Reference: 6e1 p146).

 

I'm asking because I don't recall seeing it anywhere else.  Is there some RAW context for this limitation's use on something other than body-affecting powers?  I'm asking because I can think of a lot of places I could readily use this limitation outside of the body-affecting power context ... but I'm not sure its legit per RAW.  (A GM might rule it's ok, but that's not what I'm looking for; I'm looking for RAW support of legitimate use on something other than body-affecting powers.) 

 

6E Vol 1, Page 382

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says Cantriped beat me to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cantriped said:

I don't think Must Be Used At Full Power made it into CC/FHC. However, the Limited modifier is RAW Support for any odd specific limitation they didn't think to publish in advance. Corner-Cases are why Catch-All powers and modifiers exist.

 

I generally consider the "Cannot Be Reduced" modifier to be worth -1/4, and is generally only applicable to Attack powers that cause BODY Damage (which complications like CVK might prevent you from using because they are too lethal). I also generally prohibit such attacks from being reduced by other means such as Pulling A Punch.

Cantriped:
You have pivoted to the Limited Power limitation, which doesn't address the actual inquiry I made -- which, as a refresher was: "Is there some RAW context for this limitation's use on something other than body-affecting powers?" ( Note: "this limitation" was contextually the "Must Be Used At Full Power" limitation ... a limitation that exists on its own within RAW ... separately (in the body-affecting power verbiage on 6e1 p146) from the Limited Power verbiage on 6e1 p382.)

Put another way -- you didn't actually address my question -- which means it still remains unanswered.  (Worse, Limited Power relies entirely on a GM call as to its value -- and in my inquiry I also specifically pointed out, "A GM might rule it's ok, but that's not what I'm looking for; I'm looking for RAW support of legitimate use on something other than body-affecting powers.")

 

5 hours ago, Lucius said:

 

6E Vol 1, Page 382

You did the exact same thing Cantriped did ... which was pivot to a different limitation ... which basically amounted to a martial dodge of my inquiry (hence me calling it out).  As a result, my inquiry still stands ... and, presently, it remains unanswered with an actual RAW citation that legitimizes the use of the "Must be Used at Full Power" limitation (read: not the Limited Power limitation, but the actual "Must Be Used At Full Power" limitation) for something other than body-affecting powers.  Again, I'm not looking for GM fiat/judgment (which is what Limited Power wholly relies upon for valuation) ... I'm looking for something concrete in RAW.

 

 

 

IMPORTANT:
I'm not trying to be a jerk, here. My inquiry was made with the following thinking in mind.

 

The Beam limitation (6e1 p145) entails three components and is, itself, worth only (-1/4) per RAW:

  • Cannot Be Spread
  • Cannot Be Used At Reduced Effect (which is similar to Must Be Used At Full Power ... except Must Be Used At Full Power is specifically called out for body-affecting and is usually worth -0 per RAW)
  • Only Punctures Small Holes Instead of Creating Human-Sized Holes

 

Now, if all THREE of those components are worth (-1/4) in aggregate per RAW ... then giving any one of them (-1/4) on its own is likely giving too much for that particular component.  Moreover, Must Be Used At Full Power defaults to -0 by itself for body-affecting powers, so I'd think one would abide by this when giving a value for its equivalent component (Cannot Be Used At Reduced Effect) by itself ... if applying it to non-body-affecting powers ... if nothing else because it's merely a component of the Beam limitation and the Beam limitation is only worth (-1/4) per RAW.

 

If someone can show me where Must Be Used At Full Power (or even Cannot Be Used At Reduced Effect) is codified in RAW (without using GM fiat or input, which is what Limited Power relies upon) to be usable on non-body-affecting powers at a value of (-1/4), then either that's over-valued/inappropriate ... or Beam is too cheap given its constituent parts.  (i.e. There's potentially an issue to be fixed.)  If, however, there is no such citation, then -0 is likely most appropriate for Must Be Used At Full Power (or Cannot Be Used At Reduced Effect) ... unless a GM using his/her fiat also increases the value of the Beam limitation (to -1/2?) in his/her game -- just to keep it relevant.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Limited Power pretty much spells it out. Seem to me very much a case of losing less than a fourth of its overall effectiveness and thus being -0.

 

If you have to use Blast at full power but are also allowed to spread it, you can in practice fire it at any desired strength. Otherwise it basically IS Beam (the punching holes part is very much the least of Beam's three effects. I'd still rate it at -¼ for the other two).

 

Some powers might be worth the -¼ (or more). I'm thinking in particular ones that can't be Spread and whose use might be problematic at full effect.

 

Acid Bomb: 4d6 RKE, Penetrating, AoE radius, Only at Full Strength.

 

Never being able to use that at a lower power level or smaller radius limits its use more than Beam does on a simple 2d6 RKA. Whether that would be worth bumping it from -¼ to -½ depends on context. A vile psychopath would find it less of a hinderance than a heroic crusader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it seems patently unfair to give -1/4 for Must Be Used At Full Effect (i.e. Cannot Be Used At Reduced Effect) ... and only give -1/4 for Beam.

 

With valuations like that in Cantriped's game (for example), why would anyone take the Beam limitation in his game when s/he could be less limited and get the same cost break?  Inquiring minds want to know how Beam has been kept relevant alongside such valuations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×