Jump to content

Unified power vs Elemental Control


Recommended Posts

One the big complaint on 6th edition is that they eliminated the elemental control framework and replaced it with the unified power limitation.   On the surface this seem like a straight downgrade that makes the character more expensive in 6th edition.  But since the limitation can be put on all game elements including characteristics and frameworks, it seems like this could actually save you a lot more points than the previous elemental control.  Now, there are downsides to doing so, but it seems to me you end up getting more out of this than you would with an elemental control.

 

It is suggested that the GM might want to limit the power to about the same active cost, but that is not an actual rule.  If this is not implemented, it would allow for even more benefit.  This would allow you to create a character that has lower powered benefits to the main power.  For example, I was working on character whose main power was precognition and put the limitation on a couple of skills like deduction and tactics to simulate his ability to see into the future.   He did not figure out what you were planning to do he simply knew what you were going to do.  

 

I wanted to get others feedback on this and see what other people thoughts are on this. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I was a little bit concerned with dumping Elemental Control, but to be honest, the power framework always felt to me like a bit of a cheat.  It was essentially free points for having a tight concept, and I think a lot of GMs didn't really enforce any of the few drawbacks.  Unified Power feels more like it has the drawbacks more clearly worked into the concept without being as much of a cost break. 

 

And as you noted, it allows builds that were technically illegal in the past such as skills being included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 the power framework always felt to me like a bit of a cheat.  It was essentially free points for having a tight concept

 

 

I have been hearing this same argument for decades, and here is why it is invalid:

 

All power frameworks are a cheat; all power frameworks (save one) reward you for having a "tight concept."

 

The difference was the type of concept:  having three different multipowers, each filled with powers that you know in advance you will not use concurrently (anyone else old enough to remember when the "movement Multipower" was so accepted that we all know to this day what was in it?  Or the "attack multipower" for your blaster character?).

 

The difference is that rewards for _tactically_ tight concepts were somehow A-OK, yet rewards for _thematically_ tight concepts were "ooh!  That's a horrible dirty cheat!"

 

Then along came power pool or, as I prefer to think of it, the mutlipower of everything, which allows a 250-or actual Superman, and is still somehow way more okay than a tiny discount for sticking to a theme.

 

The whole argument is wierd.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unified Power is cleaner.  Elemental controls have funky aspects, like implicitly 0 END powers can't be but into an EC...but a power with 0 END can be.  A big structural difference between 5E and 6E comes into play:  in 5E, Force Field is a basic defense.  It costs END, so it's fine in an EC...even though, if you're gonna toss on, say, Hardened, it's *cheaper* than Armor because of the math of advantages.  8/8 Armor is 24 points, Hardened --> 30.  8/8 Force Field is 16 points;  0 END, Hardened --> 28.  OTOH, Unified Power can run into the nuances of limitations math...they always have diminishing returns.  In 6E, Force Field is gone;  Armor is just Resistant Protection, and costs 0 END normally.  Same with Damage Negation and Damage Reduction...so basically, the entire class of defense powers can't be put into an elemental control without tweaking.  OTOH, they can all take Unified Power.

 

The other structural aspect is that the most efficient EC has all powers within a pretty narrow range of active points.  Plus, they share an issue with multipowers:  limitations specific to individual powers in the framework, are generally worth less.  In an MP, this doesn't have to be the case...if the MP is sized to support multiple powers at once, rather than one power at a time.

 

The other thing to remember is that VPPs are decoupled;  pool size and control cost are no longer related.  This allows for exceptional flexibility.  Say you want a 3-aspect VPP...attack, defense, and movement.  You can mix and match, you can include stuff like STUN Only on your Negation or Damage Reduction, and Limited Range on your attacks, and these let you reduce the pool size...while maintaining the campaign guideline for the active points of most powers.  Slap on Unified Power where possible, and it helps reduce the control cost AND the pool size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still on the fence with Unified Power, yes it allows more... but ultimately that is because more and more rules kept getting piled onto ECs.   Even with some of those, it feels more like rules that were created to stop that ONE player instead of putting more of a focus on Genre or GM campaign limits.  

As @Duke Bushido mentioned, all Frameworks are a 'cheat' to milk more points into a character build, and EC are no better or worse than the others.  Ultimately some of this should come down on the GM saying "ok, maybe by the RAW you could do this, but I am going to say no.  You need to make X changes and then we are fine."    

Personally I like Elemental Controls more for various reasons, even if one of the biggest is just how it nicely gathers all the associated powers into one place.  I would ignore many of the limits placed over the various editions for the sake of proper concepts...but I am also not afraid to say 'no' or "we tried this but it needs reworking"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't agree with that.

 

Many comic book supers can use their powers in quite a few different ways.  What's GL's power ring...even just considering the TK-like effects?  How many different things can it do?  How many different effects can Spidey create using his web shooters?  The Hero rules are highly specific;  getting them to do the numerous specific stunts we see regularly, is going to be exceptionally difficult or expensive.

 

Mind, I will agree that ECs do tend to be this way, especially if you allow the 0 END powers in.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if part of the motivation for ECs was linked to the fact that bricks are so cheap to build with figured characteristics.  +10 STR gives 21 points of benefits;  +10 CON costs 20 points, but gives 21 points worth of derived characteristics.  +6 DEX costs 18...but gives +2 OCV and DCV (16, using the "with any 2 categories" combat levels), 6 points of SPD, 9 points for initiative determination, and call it 10 points for +2 to a group of similar skills.  This is a huge advantage for building anything or anyone with a Characteristics focus, relative to anyone with a Powers focus.  So it's plausible the EC exists in part to try to balance this.  

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...