Teleport / Flash Combo - 4th Ed

[nedoking]

Greetings Heroes!

Was asked about a concept - wanted to get some feedback on it.  Note that we are using 4th Ed.

 

A character wants to be able to teleport - and when he teleports the special effect of him appearing is so bright that it works like an 2d6 AoE Flash attack - and then he attacks.

 

The challenge that I have is thinking it through mechanically.  This means that the PC would teleport in - and it's attack action for that phase would be used upon appearing from the teleport if the Flash was Linked (and used) with the teleport.

 

My questions are:

1. Am I correct that the Flash would end the PC's turn?
2. Is there any combos of Power Advantages, Limitations, etc, allow the PC to teleport in, the Flash goes off, and then the PC attack?  I checked 5th Ed in case it had a clarification.  The Multiple Powers rules (around page 234) doesn't seem to allow this to be possible.   I thought about Damage Shield as that didn't require an attack roll - but it required an attacker to hit the PC.  I thought about a Linked Explosion - but that would still make it an attack action.

 

In the past people have offered some great suggestions - so I truly appreciate your thoughts. 

 

 

Thank you!

 

[steriaca]

5 minutes ago, nedoking said:

Greetings Heroes!

Was asked about a concept - wanted to get some feedback on it.  Note that we are using 4th Ed.

 

A character wants to be able to teleport - and when he teleports the special effect of him appearing is so bright that it works like an 2d6 AoE Flash attack - and then he attacks.

 

The challenge that I have is thinking it through mechanically.  This means that the PC would teleport in - and it's attack action for that phase would be used upon appearing from the teleport if the Flash was Linked (and used) with the teleport.

Depends on how the GM interprets the power. But, well...

5 minutes ago, nedoking said:

My questions are:

1. Am I correct that the Flash would end the PC's turn?

Yes it does. In 4ed unless the attack is Linked you can only do one attack and the phase ends. Question: can he teleport without using the Flash attack, or must he always Flash?

5 minutes ago, nedoking said:

1. Is there any combos of Power Advantages, Limitations, etc, allow the PC to teleport in, the Flash goes off, and then the PC attack?  I checked 5th Ed in case it had a clarification.  The Multiple Powers rules (around page 234) doesn't seem to allow this to be possible.   I thought about Damage Shield as that didn't require an attack roll - but it required an attacker to hit the PC.  I thought about a Linked Explosion - but that would still make it an attack action.

Trigger. I don't remember if the advantage was in 4ed or not. In your example it would be Trigger (when arriving from a Teleport by own power). 

5 minutes ago, nedoking said:

 

In the past people have offered some great suggestions - so I truly appreciate your thoughts. 

 

 

Thank you!

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

Trigger is indeed in 4th Ed.

[Ninja-Bear]

As far as I recall, if you linked Flash to T-port then the Flash wouldn’t end your turn. You should still be able to attack if you T-ported.

[nedoking]

Again, thank you to all who responded.

[LoneWolf]

Ninja-Bear is correct by linking the flash to the teleport it means it does not require an attack action. 

 

In addition to linked you should also take no range, and maybe personal immunity.  Not sure if personal immunity was in 4th edition, but if it is fits.

[Ninja-Bear]

14 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

Ninja-Bear is correct by linking the flash to the teleport it means it does not require an attack action. 

 

In addition to linked you should also take no range, and maybe personal immunity.  Not sure if personal immunity was in 4th edition, but if it is fits.

I’m almost positive that Personal Immunity is in 4th Ed. Good call on No Range.

[SCUBA Hero]

20 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

Ninja-Bear is correct by linking the flash to the teleport it means it does not require an attack action. 

 

Do either of you have a cite for that?  I re-read Linked and don't see anything indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action.

 

I thought Trigger would be the way to go... but there's also no text in 4E indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action, either.  Although I would allow it.  5ER specifically addresses this, "...even if activating the Trigger involves an attack or making an Attack Roll, it does not constitute an Attack Action (unless the GM rules otherwise)." (p. 270)

[LoneWolf]

I don’t have access to my books so cannot look up the specifics in 4th edition.  But considering the rules have not really changed that much the fact the latter editions clearly state that are indicative that it is true.  Most changes between editions are more about new rules or adjusting the cost of a power or modifier.

 

One of the fundamental rules in the game is that if a limitation that does not limit you it is worth no points.  That rule went all the way back to the original game.   While it is not actually stated that also means that an advantage that does not increase the power is no advantage.  

 

Trigger is an advantage because it allows you to create a situation where you can setup the power in advance.  This means the power with trigger is more useful than one without, so you have to pay more.  On the other hand, linked reduces the utility of the power so you pay less.  I am going from memory but if I remember correctly in 4th edition when you used linked power, they always went off together.  Even if I am mistaken about not having the option it is the default.
 

[SCUBA Hero]

I reviewed 5ER and 6E Linked and don't see anything indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action.

 

Yes, Linked does reduce utility so it's a Limitation... but changing an Attack Action to a non-Attack Action is an Advantage.  And Trigger explicitly does just that.

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, SCUBA Hero said:

I reviewed 5ER and 6E Linked and don't see anything indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action.

 

Yes, Linked does reduce utility so it's a Limitation... but changing an Attack Action to a non-Attack Action is an Advantage.  And Trigger explicitly does just that.

Good points. Consider though that if you Flash every time you T-port you will be noticed. No sneaking from that! Also consider that Flash can be defended against if someone is prepared. The old cover your eyes trick. So how long would it take for a smart villain to do that? Also Flash Def is fairly common too. I think this balances out the free attack from it being linked. 

[Ninja-Bear]

12 hours ago, SCUBA Hero said:

 

Do either of you have a cite for that?  I re-read Linked and don't see anything indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action.

 

I thought Trigger would be the way to go... but there's also no text in 4E indicating that it makes an Attack Action a non-Attack Action, either.  Although I would allow it.  5ER specifically addresses this, "...even if activating the Trigger involves an attack or making an Attack Roll, it does not constitute an Attack Action (unless the GM rules otherwise)." (p. 270)

I just read Linked in 4th and the closest it says it that “If two powers are Attack Powers then they go off simultaneously”. I suspect the reason why you find a qualifier in 5th because in 4th, Linked is a little grey and hence why the OP’s question. And I can see why a GM might rule otherwise.

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Good points. Consider though that if you Flash every time you T-port you will be noticed. No sneaking from that! Also consider that Flash can be defended against if someone is prepared. The old cover your eyes trick. So how long would it take for a smart villain to do that? Also Flash Def is fairly common too. I think this balances out the free attack from it being linked. 

So I should just Link one of my attacks to Running, always move at least 1-2 meters (in D&D, a 5' step), have that Linked attack go off automatically, then use my normal attack?

 

Linked is, by default, a one-way street in 6e.  You MUST use Power A to have the OPTION of using Power B.  If the Flash goes off only when teleporting, and goes off every time, that plus the drawbacks of being forced to Flash every time would justify a Linked limitation on both powers, at least in my opinion. 

 

All of the drawbacks you suggest for Flash also apply to a character with a standard Flash Attack.  Flashbulb is aiming at me?  Quick, cover my eyes!

 

"OK guys, everyone hold your action until Flashbulb aims at the Big Bad - then, when he covers his eyes and is blind, blast him at half DCV."

 

By the way, what if the SFX of his Flash + Teleport were a puff of smoke stinking of brimstone, which irritates the eyes of those exposed to it, instead of a blinding light?  "I'll cover my eyes" seems like a drawback of selecting the SFX of a bright light rather than irritation to the eyes, much like most knockout gases in early editions moved towards being skin-absorbed rathet than inhaled to require a higher level of Life Support to defend, and avoid "I hold my breath".

 

As to being obvious, a normal Flash is also obvious.  And isn't Teleport a Visible Power anyway?

[nedoking]

Wow - great discussion. 

 

Many of the comments above were part of the dialogue with my player and me trying to work this out.  For example, we captured the ideas of No Range, Personal Immunity, and AoE.  We had discussed the idea of sulfur burning the eyes - but that seemed to make it an AVLD.

8 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

So I should just Link one of my attacks to Running, always move at least 1-2 meters (in D&D, a 5' step), have that Linked attack go off automatically, then use my normal attack?

This is my biggest concern.  This sets that statue that a player can now link an attack power to movement and effectively have TWO attacks in a single phase.  I keep asking myself - "Is this balanced?", and "How will I keep this from being abused?"

 

Another thought was "in what hex does the Flash appear?"  The hex FROM which the PC moved or the hex into which the PC teleported?  Or both and split the dice between them? But that, to me, seems to border abusive.... or at least opens the door to a lot of abuse.....

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[SCUBA Hero]

Use Trigger.  If the Teleport is always accompanied by the Flash, put Linked on it as well.

[Ninja-Bear]

10 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

So I should just Link one of my attacks to Running, always move at least 1-2 meters (in D&D, a 5' step), have that Linked attack go off automatically, then use my normal attack?

 

And you can do a Mutli-Attack now (is that the right name.) Which was claimed that that was always an option-as long as you had the END. So it not really an argument is it?

1 hour ago, nedoking said:

Wow - great discussion. 

 

Many of the comments above were part of the dialogue with my player and me trying to work this out.  For example, we captured the ideas of No Range, Personal Immunity, and AoE.  We had discussed the idea of sulfur burning the eyes - but that seemed to make it an AVLD.

This is my biggest concern.  This sets that statue that a player can now link an attack power to movement and effectively have TWO attacks in a single phase.  I keep asking myself - "Is this balanced?", and "How will I keep this from being abused?"

 

Another thought was "in what hex does the Flash appear?"  The hex FROM which the PC moved or the hex into which the PC teleported?  Or both and split the dice between them? But that, to me, seems to border abusive.... or at least opens the door to a lot of abuse.....

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Nedoking, the biggest thing is whether or not the build is legal by RAW but rather does it overly unbalance game play? Just because it LS “legal” doesn’t mean that the GM has to allow a certain build in the game.

[LoneWolf]

The biggest thing that prevents a power from becoming abusive is a reasonable GM.  One of the best aspects of the Hero System is its flexibility.  The rules are fairly well designed to allow anything to be built.  In the very beginning of the book for every edition it states that special effect is everything and that powers will get some advantages and limitations based on the special effect. It also states that if the GM may require the character to take advantages or limitations if they think it appropriate. 

 

In this case I have to agree with Ninja-Bear that the advantages balance out the disadvantages. I don’t see a reason to require the player to take the trigger advantage on this power.   If the special effect was a smoke cloud, I would not use a flash.  To me that would be better represented as a change environment or maybe even darkness.  

 

I also want to point out that the Hero System forums are usually a lot more reasonable then some from other games.   The Pathfinder rules forum for example often gets in to heated arguments about some really stupid stuff.  
 

[Hugh Neilson]

18 hours ago, nedoking said:

Many of the comments above were part of the dialogue with my player and me trying to work this out.  For example, we captured the ideas of No Range, Personal Immunity, and AoE.  We had discussed the idea of sulfur burning the eyes - but that seemed to make it an AVLD.

This is my biggest concern.  This sets that statue that a player can now link an attack power to movement and effectively have TWO attacks in a single phase.  I keep asking myself - "Is this balanced?", and "How will I keep this from being abused?"

 

This is possible, using a variety of different mechanics, but each has its own costs, much like the Trigger advantage here, to avoid using an Attack action (and ending the character's phase) to use the Flash.  Nothing in Linked removes that requirement.  If the Flash is Linked to Teleport, it can only be used when the character Teleports.  He still needs an Attack action to use the Flash.  If Teleport is Linked to Flash, then the Flash attack must be used (requiring that Attack action) for the character to Teleport.  Here, Teleport Linked to Flash and Flash with Trigger Linked to Teleport would be my approach.  NOTE:  Pretty sure 4e Linked required both abilities to be used, or neither.

 

18 hours ago, nedoking said:

Another thought was "in what hex does the Flash appear?"  The hex FROM which the PC moved or the hex into which the PC teleported?  Or both and split the dice between them? But that, to me, seems to border abusive.... or at least opens the door to a lot of abuse.....

 

That comes down to power definition - I'd say the arrival location, as that seems to be the power envisioned, but the departure hex would be fine for a Triggered Flash as well.  I would not allow both (at least not without an added advantage).

 

16 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

And you can do a Mutli-Attack now (is that the right name.) Which was claimed that that was always an option-as long as you had the END. So it not really an argument is it?

 

Combined Attacks are what I think you are envisioning (6e terms - 4e terms may have been different, such as "Multiple Power Attack").  Both Combined and Multiple Attacks have their own restrictions, but are other means of having two or more attacks go off in the same phase.  Neither would allow the Flash if the character makes a full move, rather than a half move, with the Teleport as an attack action would still be required. 

 

As a combined attack requires attacking the same target, and the Flash is envisioned as AoE or Explosion (targeting a hex), the character's other attack would also have to target his hex.  So that's out.  A Multiple Attack requires a full phase (not sure we had Rapid Attack in 4e to cut that down to a half phase), so the character cannot Teleport and Multiple Attack. It also imposes OCV penalties and halves DCV.

 

16 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Nedoking, the biggest thing is whether or not the build is legal by RAW but rather does it overly unbalance game play? Just because it LS “legal” doesn’t mean that the GM has to allow a certain build in the game.

 

A crucial issue - regardless of how it is built or what it costs, will the "move and blind" be problematic in the game? I suspect the game will evolve to have a lot of opponents with enhanced senses, minor Flash defense or other means of getting around this ability.  If that results in the ability rarely or never being useful, the player will reasonably be unhappy at the points spent being useless.  If the ability becomes an "autowin" button, the detriment to the game is pretty obvious.  Striking a balance is the key, and it may take some time (and some in-game frustrations) to find that balance.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

18 hours ago, nedoking said:

We had discussed the idea of sulfur burning the eyes - but that seemed to make it an AVLD.

 

Perfectly legit interpretation, although I will note that Pepper Spray is a sample Flash power in 6e, and I am pretty sure I saw tear gas and sand in the eyes as Flash Attacks in prior editions.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

but changing an Attack Action to a non-Attack Action is an Advantage.  And Trigger explicitly does just that.

 

That is my interpretation as well.

[nedoking]

Again - many thanks.  I just completed a long character build session with the player - and we both finished happy with the result.  I think it will be balanced and a blast to play. 

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, nedoking said:

Again - many thanks.  I just completed a long character build session with the player - and we both finished happy with the result.  I think it will be balanced and a blast to play. 

Well? What did you decide? Don’t leave us in the dark! 😀

[dmjalund]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Well? What did you decide? Don’t leave us in the dark! 😀

*BAMF*

"My eyes!"

[nedoking]

Well, to make it short - we ended up removing Flash and replacing it with Darkness.  His concept was a "puff of smoke" that left his target blind.  I explained that was NOT Flash.  It last only last 1 phase so it got a Limited Power.  It is LINKED to his Teleport and he MUST use it with teleport.  Also purchased was Personal Immunity.  I must confess that I am still thinking about Trigger.... both seem right... I guess the question is "Advantage or Disadvantage".

 

Se he can teleport to a target, the Darkness activates, he can see, his opponent cannot (usually)

 

On 4/3/2022 at 9:54 PM, Ninja-Bear said:

Well? What did you decide? Don’t leave us in the dark! 😀

Hah - kinda funny - this character WOULD leave you in the dark!   🙂

 

 

Again - thank you to all who offered their thoughts.  This is a SUPER community!

[Hugh Neilson]

That's better than a Flash in some situations.  He can also teleport away from opponents and now they cannot see him for the next phase.

 

I made a Dr. Midnite homage some years back, and designed his blackout bombs as Darkness with Continuing Charges and Personal Immunity, plus an AoE Flash, Triggered by leaving the darkness field, as the smoke also irritated the eyes.