Reverse Vampire Invisibility

[steriaca]

How much limitation would you give to a person with the power to become invisible BUT he can be seen in reflections, mirrors, photographs, and recordings? The power has nothing to do with vampires, it just the opposite of how vampires are visible to everyone except reflections, mirrors, photographs, and recordings.

[Duke Bushido]

Personally, I would build it by not buying the "No Fringe" Adder and defining the Fringe Effect as exactly that:  their reflection still shows in appropriately-reflective surfaces.

[foolishvictor]

In most situations I don't see that limitation coming into play.  In other words, "Power loses less than a fourth of its overall effectiveness" which is worth -0  The limitation itself is not that obvious and even if an attacker is aware of the limitation it is still a complicated matter to fight someone when you have to look into a mirror to do it.

 

In contrast, if the character is visible using something fairly common like polarized sun glasses that might justify -0.25  

 

Also, if the character is hunted and the hunters are aware of the limitation and happy to share their knowledge with the character's enemies that might be worth -0.25

 

Bottom line, it is a neat concept but I don't see it being that much of a limitation.

[Ninja-Bear]

2 hours ago, foolishvictor said:

In most situations I don't see that limitation coming into play.  In other words, "Power loses less than a fourth of its overall effectiveness" which is worth -0  The limitation itself is not that obvious and even if an attacker is aware of the limitation it is still a complicated matter to fight someone when you have to look into a mirror to do it.

 

In contrast, if the character is visible using something fairly common like polarized sun glasses that might justify -0.25  

 

Also, if the character is hunted and the hunters are aware of the limitation and happy to share their knowledge with the character's enemies that might be worth -0.25

 

Bottom line, it is a neat concept but I don't see it being that much of a limitation.

I rather see at least a -1/4 limitation in a modern world. I would say that if you can be recorded then anyone wearing special visors like Defender should be able to see you too. And how many high Heroes/Villains are there? So even a -1/2 wouldn’t be that much of a stretch.

[unclevlad]

It comes into play heavily if you take the position that...if you can be photographed, you show up on cameras generally.  So it wouldn't let you sneak in;  rather the opposite, in fact.  In some cases you become much MORE noticeable...eyeballs say nothing, camera says something???  OHHHHhhh something's up!!!  

 

This is a pretty common interpretation of invisibility as a *mental* power, rather than a physical one.  What's it worth?  Depends, unfortunately, on the campaign and even the character.  In a combat-heavy campaign it might not be worth much.  If stealth and/or infiltration are a big part, it's significant.

[foolishvictor]

On 8/18/2021 at 12:59 PM, unclevlad said:

It comes into play heavily if you take the position that...if you can be photographed, you show up on cameras generally.  So it wouldn't let you sneak in;  rather the opposite, in fact.  In some cases you become much MORE noticeable...eyeballs say nothing, camera says something???  OHHHHhhh something's up!!!  

 

This is a great point however... the limitation is on the character with the power becoming invisible.  From my reading of the OP there was no suggestion that the character with the power could not turn it on and off at will.

 

If the character could not shut it off then I think an "Always On" limitation would be appropriate.  You are clearly correct.  The value of the limitation depends on context, not some number written in a book.

 

Regarding Context: I am playing a campaign and one of the other characters in the group has LS: "No need to breath" and LS: "No need to sleep" with both having the -0.25 limitation "does not work in water."  That limitation is in the book under "limited power" but I do not believe it was intended to be used this way...   In my mind, "No need to breath" with "does not work in water" is worth -0.75 and "No need to sleep" with "does not work in water" is worth nothing unless there is a reason to sleep in water...  That said, if the GM does not dunk the characters in water, suffocate them or make them need to sleep then perhaps these powers should be free...  In my mind the value of a limitation is completely dependent on context.  

[unclevlad]

Nothing I said had anything to do with turning it on or off.

 

The scenario I presented was:

a)  Mental Invis Man (MIM) is attempting to sneak through a yard with guards...and cameras...using his invisibility.

b)  The guards don't react;  they don't see him.

c)  The cameras DO spot him;  the guards monitoring those cameras call up the guards on the wall/in the yard, "hey who's that guy???"

d)  The guards in the yard go "what guy, there's no one there!"

e)  ALARMS!!!!!!!!!

 

On the context:  you actually aren't defining the context there.  Is this Supers, is it spies, is it fantasy...?  Is it combat-focused, social-focused?  Stealthy or smashmouth?  That's the questions related to context.

 

The other player's powers...No need to sleep, doesn't work in water...I start by asking, what does this mean?  If he goes underwater, suddenly he may need sleep.  That makes little sense;  as a GM I'm asking "why?"  What is it about being underwater that makes him require sleep?  That's *before* we start assessing what it's worth, if anything.  Is it somehow expected that he would have to, some reasonable percentage of the time?  That would also require that he *could* do so....so, it would demand he can breathe underwater.

 

So that one's flat out.

 

Now, no need to breathe...but must breathe underwater?  First principles:  why?  Describe it to me why he can sit atop Everest contemplating the universe for as long as he likes, or ignore an atmosphere that has 20% carbon dioxide and 10% carbon monoxide...but it doesn't work underwater.  If it can be justified...I'll admit I'm more of a stickler than many on things like this...how often will this be a factor?  Is it really expected that the adventures will be underwater extensively?  Last:  the workaround for this is TRIVIAL.  Air tanks or rebreathers.  Which most likely MOST of the characters will require so they'll need to be avaialble, and more than likely won't cost the PCs anything.

 

So, I don't readily see a path to allowing that limitation at all, either.

[LoneWolf]

Being able to be recorded and seen in camera’s is enough of a limitation to be worth -1/4.  It would also not work against robots or other artificial creatures.  

 

Maybe being underwater causes the characters life support to fail because water is his weakness.   In the Harry Dresden novels being under waters or even on water makes it harder to use magic.  It could also be that water is acting like a very weak susceptibility to the character.  It does not do enough damage go actually hurt him but causes a kind of allergic reaction that prevents him from drawing substance form his surrounding (Makes him  need oxygen and sleep).  
 

[JackValhalla]

I've got multiple character builds with exactly this, and I always set it as a -1/4. Invisibility, not vs recording equipment - which is of little use against robot opponents, and a different version - Invisibility, not versus recordings or memory - for a character that everyone can remember after the fact, but could not perceive or react to while she is present. It doesn't really impact Invisibility's combat utility, or its ability to infiltrate a space, but /does/ negate invisibility's ability to act without consequence or to deny involvement in events. It just made sense to accept that invisibility has more components than the immediate scene.

As for the mirror thing, I really think that "fringe" is the best way to implement.

[Tech]

Off-hand, I'm going to go with a -1/4 limitation but it depends on the campaign setting.

[indy523]

On 8/17/2021 at 6:10 PM, steriaca said:

How much limitation would you give to a person with the power to become invisible BUT he can be seen in reflections, mirrors, photographs, and recordings? The power has nothing to do with vampires, it just the opposite of how vampires are visible to everyone except reflections, mirrors, photographs, and recordings.

 

I would say that in a fantasy setting this would be a 0 pt. limitation.   That is because the only issue is mirrors and even then only the extremely wealthy would have them.  Assuming that you are in the 1500's .  It is worse circa Dark ages as the only mirror is reflecting pools and polished shields.

 

I would say in a Victorian era setting it is a -1/4L.  This is because there would be situations where they would show up.  I would say this goes into the modern era until the 1990's.

 

Around late 1990 when everyone has a cell phone with a camera, and there is a camera on every street corner and in every shop this limitation might be a -1/2L  This is because the issue will come up constantly.

 

Now in the CyberPunk era this is probably a -1L if you adjudicate it they way you state it regarding cyber vision.  A cybernetic eye would essentially be a camera that is linked directly to someone's brain.  Even if the person does not have cyber eyes they could be using a helmet with a heads up display that has a smart link for weapons to aid in targeting.  The helmet would be using some form of digital camera as well.  In this case your invisibility is worthless against any cyber samarai that has eyes replaced and upgraded and any TAC officer, SWAT cop or military soldier with a HUD helmet as they would not be affected by the invisibility real time.

 

 

[Greywind]

Vampires lack of reflection, depending on how far into the legends you want to go, didn't cast reflections in mirrors due to the fact that, back then, mirrors were made of glass and silver. Silver was the reflector. Similar thing to werewolves/silver bullets. Silver inherently doesn't like evil things.