Selective Invis...

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

any more than being Invisible to the Hearing Group prevents a character from talking.

 

Interesting.  The APG isn't official core Hero rules but this does indicate that at least Steven Long thinks you can talk if you're invisible to sound, which strongly implies that you can voluntarily shut off parts of your invisiblity without losing the whole.  I think its clear that being able to is more of an advantage than not being able to, which means in this case perhaps not being able to is worth a limitation?

[unclevlad]

If it's worth a limitation, it's no more than -1/4...partially because of the structure of limitations.  

 

Let's start by considering a simple Invis to Hearing Group.  How often would the character be disadvantaged?  Walk up quietly, shout at someone?  No problem.  Giving orders aloud?  Blows the invis anyway...UNLESS you've got something like a headset.  I mention it because a mic and earbud are things the GM may well say are free.  If invis to sound means you can't speak *here*...then it becomes a problem if you want to give reports/updates as you infiltrate, for example.

 

I'd be inclined to say no limitation, because too often limitations are simply attempts to shave points...and mild problems like not being able to be heard, can add flavor and depth.  

[Duke Bushido]

More importantly, there is nothinf in the power description that says you can't use it paetially the way that you can ise almoat any other power.

 

The focus of this conversation jas been backwards for some time-  dont get me wrong!  I understand that most of ua have been playing for years and tend to assume we are correct: "I have never done it that way, so it must be advantageous."

 

Even as the person who suggested that we xonsult the rules, it took me two days to get around to acrually doing that!  We used to do studf like that all the time here; now we woukd rather post in the rukes quesrions and wait a month or two dor Steve to say something. 

 

anyway, nothing,in the rules forbids doing it this way, and a day or two later we have a sort-of Steve answer that seems to confirm that what is not in the rules is, in fact, not part of the rules.

 

so the more-correvmct direction foe this conversation is "how much of a Limitation shouls my characters have received for  adding a restriction to their power that prevenrs them from doing something that they otherwise could?"

 

for my money, I say -0; perhaps -1/8 if I am feeling generous or I can be convinced that it might possibly somehow pose a genuine inconvenience at least once wirhout having to construct a special corner case to actually create a problem.  As a limitation, I don't see "all or nothing" invisibility as any more limited than I find  "I can do piecemeal" to be advantageous.

 

 

[steriaca]

Ok. Duke is right (but needs a better spell checker. Then again, who am I to talk...). It is not exactly an advantage or disadvantage to be partly invisible. There is nothing in the power as written which forbids being partly visible or partly invisible (same difference). No adder is needed. No advantage. No power limitation.

 

We all simply think it is a switch with two settings, "power on" and "power off", because we never see The Invisible Woman be partly invisible. But it doesn't actually have to be that way. 

 

I'm reminded of the cowboy Ghost Rider, whose costume is covered with phosphorous dust and wears a cape which one side is treated with the glow dust and the other side is not. He could wrap himself in the cape with the glow side inside in darkness to be "invisible", but also he could do things like leave his head uncovered to spook the hell out of various owlcats (western speak for outlaws). It is a typical tactic of his (he also has a "friendly" reputation as being a ghost). He doesn't get a discount or pay more for the Invisibility power itself. It is just how the power is (it is already limited in needing almost total darkness to work...etc.)

 

Remind me to find a Cowboy Ghost Rider image (aka Night Rider/Phantom Rider) showing this off.

[steriaca]

Here we go. Phantom Rider using his cloak to either be a floating head or headless body.

 

It should also be noted that he has used lantern which project his image elsewhere so he could do the floating head thing and headless body thing at the same time.

[Ninja-Bear]

8 hours ago, steriaca said:

Here we go. Phantom Rider using his cloak to either be a floating head or headless body.

 

It should also be noted that he has used lantern which project his image elsewhere so he could do the floating head thing and headless body thing at the same time.

Or that could be Images or Extra PRE-attack only. 😁

 

Fwiw, I’m in the -0 camp.

[steriaca]

27 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Or that could be Images or Extra PRE-attack only. 😁

 

Fwiw, I’m in the -0 camp.

This is of course, long before they turned him into a flaming skeleton cowboy...

[Duke Bushido]

2 minutes ago, steriaca said:

This is of course, long before they turned him into a flaming skeleton cowboy...

 

Hey!

 

That is a comic book I actually _did_ read when I was a kid!  (I liked the western; not so much the superheroes, except for Captain Marvel (the real one. ).

 

I couls be wrong, but I think he went from school teacher to flaming skeleton in that Nick Cage movie.... 

 

 

 

[steriaca]

1 minute ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Hey!

 

That is a comic book I actually _did_ read when I was a kid!  (I liked the western; not so much the superheroes, except for Captain Marvel (the real one. ).

 

I couls be wrong, but I think he went from school teacher to flaming skeleton in that Nick Cage movie.... 

 

 

 

Well, yes. They originally called him the Ghost Rider (after the song Ghost Riders In The Sky), but decided to change his name when they started to publish stories about a flaming motorcyclist. The first attempt at rebranding him was "Night Rider", which went over like a lead balloon when they found out that the name was a nickname for klansmen. They then went with Phantom Rider.

 

Believe it or not, Ghost Rider began not as a comic book character but a pulp novel character. Same with Ka-zar (who was Marvel's Tarzan clone).

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I'd be inclined to say no limitation, because too often limitations are simply attempts to shave points...and mild problems like not being able to be heard, can add flavor and depth.

 

Yeah I think in the end that makes sense given the way the power seems to be set up in Hero, although I very much prefer the adder approach: you're all this way all the time unless you buy a special ability to not be.  Invisibility in Hero already is really powerful compared to pretty much every other game (it stays on when you fight, for example), so a small surrender to make the ability less potent isn't unreasonable and fits better how most people conceive of the ability.

 

Quote

This is of course, long before they turned him into a flaming skeleton cowboy

 

More a Flaming Skeleton Biker.  The Ghost Rider in the 40s was just a cowboy in a somewhat spooky but cool outfit, like a variant Lone Ranger.

[steriaca]

39 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

 

39 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

 

39 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

More a Flaming Skeleton Biker.  The Ghost Rider in the 40s was just a cowboy in a somewhat spooky but cool outfit, like a variant Lone Ranger.

Well, after a certain movie they went back and said eventually he made a deal with Mephisto and such, so yes he eventually does become a blazing skeleton cowboy. Years after he raped Mockingbird. 

 

Way to celebrate your classic heros Marvel. Except Marvel didn't first create that version of the Ghost Rider...

[Tech]

Don't ask me where this is because I don't know specifically. However, it is stated somewhere that when you use a power, you don't have to use at at full power. You can shoot your 9d6 Blast of Air at a low 2d6. Not using your power at full applies to all. In this case, not using your invisibility at full power can easily mean part of you isn't invisible.

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, Tech said:

Don't ask me where this is because I don't know specifically. However, it is stated somewhere that when you use a power, you don't have to use at at full power. You can shoot your 9d6 Blast of Air at a low 2d6. Not using your power at full applies to all. In this case, not using your invisibility at full power can easily mean part of you isn't invisible.

That’s very reasonable.

[unclevlad]

4 hours ago, Tech said:

Don't ask me where this is because I don't know specifically. However, it is stated somewhere that when you use a power, you don't have to use at at full power. You can shoot your 9d6 Blast of Air at a low 2d6. Not using your power at full applies to all. In this case, not using your invisibility at full power can easily mean part of you isn't invisible.

 

True for incremental powers, not always true for unit-purchase powers.  This is a unit purchase.  

 

For purposes of Drain, for example...say my Invis is sight group, no fringe, 1/2 END.  37 active.  You roll a 9d6 Drain...get 30.  Nothing appears to happen.  If you drain my 9d6, 1/2 END blast...same 30 points of drain knocks it down to, what, about a 4d6 tickle attack.  Flip side:  standard Desolid is completely all-or-nothing without a MAJOR!!! advantage.  In the middle is Shape Shift, where it specifically allows partial shifts.

 

The rules are silent.  That doesn't imply it's denied;  it doesn't imply it's permitted.  I'm *particularly* opposed to the "anything not expressly forbidden is permitted" school;  I'll grant that the converse is also not optimal, but it's far better starting point.  I'd much rather make specific rules to extend things.  MUCH easier for the players to accept, in my experience.

 

BTW, narrow, specific examples don't mean anything, as the comic writers are just doing whatever they want to do.  There is no systemic underpinning, no accounting.  IF!!! there's a predominant treatment, then that can be informative, but it's rarely definitive.  Especially in the broader Hero context, as it covers different genres.  

 

 

[Tech]

26 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

 

True for incremental powers, not always true for unit-purchase powers.  This is a unit purchase.  

 

For purposes of Drain, for example...say my Invis is sight group, no fringe, 1/2 END.  37 active.  You roll a 9d6 Drain...get 30.  Nothing appears to happen.  If you drain my 9d6, 1/2 END blast...same 30 points of drain knocks it down to, what, about a 4d6 tickle attack.  Flip side:  standard Desolid is completely all-or-nothing without a MAJOR!!! advantage.  In the middle is Shape Shift, where it specifically allows partial shifts.

 

The rules are silent.  That doesn't imply it's denied;  it doesn't imply it's permitted.  I'm *particularly* opposed to the "anything not expressly forbidden is permitted" school;  I'll grant that the converse is also not optimal, but it's far better starting point.  I'd much rather make specific rules to extend things.  MUCH easier for the players to accept, in my experience.

 

BTW, narrow, specific examples don't mean anything, as the comic writers are just doing whatever they want to do.  There is no systemic underpinning, no accounting.  IF!!! there's a predominant treatment, then that can be informative, but it's rarely definitive.  Especially in the broader Hero context, as it covers different genres.  

 

 

 

You missed the point. You just said "The rules are silent." It's not implied that it's denied or permitted. I gave a possible interpretation of the rule used elsewhere. Since nothing's stated certainly, I'll stick with with partial use on Invisibility because it's not denied.

[Ninja-Bear]

15 hours ago, Tech said:

Don't ask me where this is because I don't know specifically. However, it is stated somewhere that when you use a power, you don't have to use at at full power. You can shoot your 9d6 Blast of Air at a low 2d6. Not using your power at full applies to all. In this case, not using your invisibility at full power can easily mean part of you isn't invisible.

I believe where you read it is in the use of Powers section. I certainly read it too. (And can’t rightly remember too.)

[unclevlad]

6E1, page 131, under Using Powers.  First subhead is Full Powers.

 

However, that's not useful.  ARE there intermittent steps with invisibility?  To a point, yes...if you have invis to sight and sound, you can select to only be invisible to sound.  You can disable No Fringe.  

 

But that doesn't address whether you can selectively make specific parts visible. 

[Tech]

You wanted opinions because apparently, there are no rules specific to your request. We've given our opinions. Choose what you think works best for you. If you're part of a gaming group, ask them and/or the GM (unless you ARE the GM) for their input. If you want something concrete, although I never use it (nor does anyone else in my group), use the skill called Power.

[steriaca]

If you want the "official word" on part Invisibility, the best thing to do is ask Steve Long about it. Prehaps he'll talk about it in the Advance Player's Guide 3.

 

I just asked Derek (I forgot he took over the rules q&a from Steve Long). We'll see what his answer is.

[Duke Bushido]

Gauzy, hazy, diaphanous, glassy, ghostly, ephemeral, and more-

 

These are All words for things that are _partially_ transparent.

 

The concept of see-through-but-not-completely-invisible is a well-entenched one.

 

We have already established that there is no rule extant that prevents someone from using less-than-all of their invisibility.

 

We have established that the author of the current set of rules has used less than all of invisibility.

 

We have astablished that the rules have actually spelled out (and until the last few posts, I was floored as to why Steve had actually gone to that trouble: we all know it is possible to eun slowly, to hit softly, and pick up less than a colon-collapsing amount of weight.  Until the end od this thread, I would have thought "why do that far, Steve?  People can easily infer that you don't do everything full-on every time," but I realize now that expect too much) that one need not use a power at its fullest potential.

 

At this point, all we are doing is establishing that we need a rule that says if it is not in the rules, then it is not rule.

 

 

I love you guys; I really do- I hang out here all the time-  but watching stuff from  page 2 get rwdiscovered in page 4, and then this....

 

 

I want no part in the continued mistreatment of this poor horse.

 

You folks have fun.

 

Peace.

[dmjalund]

Most of those can be covered by "Fringe Effect"

[unclevlad]

13 minutes ago, dmjalund said:

Most of those can be covered by "Fringe Effect"

 

No.  None of them are invisibility.  They're all variations of translucent, as Duke noted...partially transparent.  Still means you can see the entire shape.  Fringe effect means something else.

 

But I agree with Duke.  I got my opinions on page 1 on the rules question, and I thank those who understood the issue.

 

Just drop any further comments.  Simon, feel free to lock this thread.  I'm cool with it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Well, before someone locks it...

 

We see a lot of comments on Rules Bloat, as the rules seek to formally address every possible permutation and combination.  "Can't we leave corner cases to gamer

judgment?", we moan.

 

Oh, but we need official rulings for issues so common and pressing as the ability to leave your finger visible while the rest of you is invisible!

[steriaca]

44 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Well, before someone locks it...

 

We see a lot of comments on Rules Bloat, as the rules seek to formally address every possible permutation and combination.  "Can't we leave corner cases to gamer

judgment?", we moan.

 

Oh, but we need official rulings for issues so common and pressing as the ability to leave your finger visible while the rest of you is invisible!

Depends on which finger you want visable. Take the middle one for example...

 

Of course, your looking at a detached finger. Does it actually look like a middle finger if you don't have the rest of the hand?

 

Sorry for the vulgar example...

[Ninja-Bear]

Did any one mention that it could be a function of Power Skill?