5-point Doubling for Innate Powers

[Cloppy Clip]

I've been playing around with HERO Designer, and have finally spotted the Quantity option for powers that lets you apply the 5-point doubling rule from 6E2 p181. That rule says that it's only available for equipment though, and explicitly rules out innate powers or abilities, which has me wondering: what exactly defines equipment bought as a power? Does it mean the power has to be bought as some sort of Focus, or is it a matter of SFX? If the character concept justified it then would the game break down terribly if you allowed 5-point doubling for any power, or would you want there to be some checks and balances in place?

[Hugh Neilson]

Never been a fan of the doubling rule.  Consider The Modified Mandarin

 

+5 PD/+ ED 5 rDEF IIF Thumb Rings (12 points) doubled (+5).

 

60 point Multipower with 8 Fixed attack slots, IIF Finger Ring (86 points), Doubled 3 times (+15).

 

Or let's be really gross:

 

+1 PD/+1 ED/+1 Mental Def/+1 Sight Flash Def/+1 hearing Flash Def/+1 Smell/taste Flash Def/+1 Touch flash def/+1 Power Def rDEF IIF Thumb Rings (10 points) doubled 5 times (+25) so 32 rings (35 points).

 

60 point Multipower with 8 Fixed attack slots, IIF Finger Ring (86 points), Doubled 7 times (+35) so 128 rings (121 points).

 

Extra Limbs: 16 Arms, 5 points

 

That's 161 points spent.  I'll be needing either a big END reserve or a lot of END and REC!

 

For another 10 points, I can double it all again and have 32 arms - we'll wait and buy that with xp...

[Duke Bushido]

Generally it is for things bought via Focus, as I understand it.  Do be aware that I am _not_ your best source for 6e answers, and am in the bottom half for 5e as well.

 

The idea being that you could have another gun for 5 pts, or three more for 10, or seven more for 15, or 15 more for twenty more points.

 

Just within the last day or two, there was mention of talents and how the "tool kit" approach kind of wrecked them as unique things and robbed them of genre-specificity.

 

This is another example of that.

 

Ideally, it allows a weapons master to pass out swords or guns or what-have-you to the entire party in a heroic-level game.

 

Supers-wise, it allows me to build a powerful gadget for dirt cheap by stacking limitations such as single-use only or high-level burnouts or other really nasty self-destruct type things, dropping what might be an eighty-point gadget down to five or six points, then spend twenty five more points to give myself 32 of them, which should see me through any combat, right?  I mean, the rules allow me to define my  gadget as being the size of a shirt button and with half the mass, so why spend thirty points plus the initial six or ten points to run around with 64 of my eighty-point semi-disposable gadgets?

 

It works twice as well becauase there is a large majority subset of HERO gamers who will scream their throats raw that any Foci must ultimately be recoverable, findable, or otherwise make their way back to the character, so I will always have them no matter how self-destructive they are.

 

As to the question of using it for innate powers, well, you got me.  If you are going to allow Super GunGuy and Super GadgetMan to use it, well, if I have innate "eye lasers" and eight eyes, why can't I build my eye laser, take three doublings, and use it 8 times per phase?

 

Eh...  Okay, so that last one was a bit tongue in cheek, seing as how we don't expect Super GunGuy to use all twelve of his guns every phase, but here's a neat thing 5e brought us that 6e didnt undo:

 

While it has always been a thing according to a number of players (no shade:  just as may people assumed it was correct as there were people who assumed it wasn't, since it was never really specified in the early days and neither group was wrong at the time), 5e codified rules for "multiple power attacks," meaning there were rules for unloading every attack you have at your target.

 

Since the Focus rules themselves don't specifically prevent it, and MPA rules don't specifically prevent it, and "weapon" is just a special effect which, under the SFX rules, have no impact on mechanics, Super GunGuy can legally unload all 32 of his one-shot super guns in a multipower attack in spite of having just the two hands.

 

All that being said, this is an interesting bit of equipment rules that works great in specific genres for specific purposes, but got tool-kitted into something so abusable that I highlighted it with black Sharpie in my own rules.

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by Duke Bushido

[Cloppy Clip]

Thanks, both. If I'm understanding things correctly then, the 5-point doubling was originally intended to be used only for mundane equipment and was later extended to equipment built as powers? When I looked at the current rules it seemed to me that the intended use was to double up on attacks cheaply and, in that case, that it didn't make much difference whether the attack was bought as a Focus or not, so I couldn't see why the equipment restriction was in place. But if the current set-up where any power (not just an attack power) can be doubled is a bit of an aberration caused by rule updates over the years then that makes a bit more sense.

 

If you restricted yourself to the main use I saw: one attack doubled once or twice, without Reduced END or any similar advantages, and nothing egregiously broken like doubled defences then is there any benefit to this rule over just building the attack as an Autofire power? It seems that the two methods fill a similar niche in this case, so are there any uses of the 5-point doubling rule that would be all right and don't have alternatives already baked into the rules?

[unclevlad]

Well, there are numerous powers that have doubling built in...Mind Link and Summon come to mind.  There are some others where I think it's only reasonable...Fixed Locations for Teleport (and, for me, Clairsentience) SHOULD be covered by the doubling rules.

 

In many cases, tho...I'll argue that the problem's less with the doubling rule, and more about the lack of explanation for when it can be used.  Maybe my power's to create energy blades.  I can buy 2 of em for use in a Multiple Attack...or for saying my off-hand has a weapon for Off Hand Defense.  I should not be able to use them for a Combined Attack.  If it's not a focus, obviously, I can't share it.  If it is, then I'd allow sharing one of them *occasionally* when it makes sense to do so...but I'd never allow "I buy 8 and pass them out to everyone" or let it happen regularly.  If you want to be able to pass things around like that, then buy it as UBO...and forget the doubling rule.  If it's a focus and I buy 2, then if you disarm me of one, I don't need to retrieve it, necessarily;  I switch to the other.

 

You don't want to invoke Autofire very often, as that gets expensive in a hurry...either from high END cost, or because Reduced END is now an extra +1/2.  It's also an advantage, so it's likely more points, and it's raising the active point cost for stashing into a framework.  In a 50 point MP, you get 10d6 single-shot, but only 8d6 3-shot AF.  In a 62 point MP, you get 10d6 at 1/2 END, but only 7d6 if you want the autofire at 1/2 END too.  That's also assuming a standard attack power;  Autofire has that big honkin +1 for a non-standard attack power.

 

 

[Duke Bushido]

Sorry; tried to edit a few typos and accidentally quoted myself.

 

If you happen by, Hermit, feel free to wipe this post.

 

Thanks!

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by Duke Bushido

[Cloppy Clip]

15 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

 

You don't want to invoke Autofire very often, as that gets expensive in a hurry...either from high END cost, or because Reduced END is now an extra +1/2.  It's also an advantage, so it's likely more points, and it's raising the active point cost for stashing into a framework.  In a 50 point MP, you get 10d6 single-shot, but only 8d6 3-shot AF.  In a 62 point MP, you get 10d6 at 1/2 END, but only 7d6 if you want the autofire at 1/2 END too.  That's also assuming a standard attack power;  Autofire has that big honkin +1 for a non-standard attack power.

 

I think this gets to the crux of the matter for me. If I was thinking of buying Blast 12d6 and then buying three more copies of the power for 10 points with the intention of using them as a Multiple Attack then it seems to me that fictional concept was already covered by the Autofire advantage. That Autofire can be expensive and rack up the points says to me the game thinks this concept is worth a lot of points, so I'm wary about an alternative that seems to do the same thing for much less, let alone all the unintended powers that can be created with it on top of that.

 

That's just my impression, however, and I don't have enough experience to tell where the breakpoint is.

[unclevlad]

You can do that...+3 copies then Multiple Attack...but that's because you don't *need* the 3 copies to do that.  Multiple Attack does not require multiple weapons or copies of a weapon, or power.  Multiple Attack is fairly pricey in its own way;  if Multiple Attack is part of my concept...and for some settings, it's a given for a combat-oriented character...I'll always pick up both Rapid Attack (6E1) and Defensive Attack (APG, your defense doesn't get nuked).  But those aren't increasing active point costs, and they play much more nicely with an HA or Blast that's AVAD.

 

I *believe* most doublings that refer to size or capacity, like Summon, Mind Link, and Duplication, and for advantages like the size for AoE radius, or the number of people you can affect with a UBO, are explicit enough.  They're the parameters of a single power.  The breakdown is thinking that you can use the Doubling rule on a power, then use the copies simultaneously.  In most cases, you can't, unless it's for a justification like Two Weapons Fighting or Off Hand Defense, or when you actually don't need the second copy for what you want to do anyway like Multiple Attack.  Hugh's examples are pretty egregious;  worse would be to "buy" a 60 point MP or VPP...then copy that 3 times.  (Even if the ruling tries to be "well they all have to be set to the same thing!!"...well, fine.  I just make them all 1/4- or 1/3-sized powers...and even play abuse games with END costs by keeping them cheap.  And hey, I've got 240 freaking points to use here.  I can be lavish if I want, like +10 STR, 0 END in each.)  HD has Quantity on frameworks, just like everything else.

[Cloppy Clip]

I went and double-checked Multiple Attacks, and you're absolutely right. I'd misread it when I first went through the rules and had the wrong idea this whole time!

3 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Hugh's examples are pretty egregious;  worse would be to "buy" a 60 point MP or VPP...then copy that 3 times.  (Even if the ruling tries to be "well they all have to be set to the same thing!!"...well, fine.

Which ruling is this? I have to admit that when looking at 5-point doublings I did think about a VPP copied 100 times or so for 35 points, but I hope you'll credit me with at least enough sense to see where that could go wrong. But I haven't seen anything about a ruling saying they need to have the same setting. It would be stupendously open to abuse otherwise, so I wouldn't be surprised to see such.

[unclevlad]

There is no such ruling.  

 

If I can buy 4, 60 point VPPs, with NO limitation on how I can set them, and set them all separately?  Then I've got even more flexibility.  If I can buy a VPP with 60 pool, 60 control, and 0 phase, that's 120 points...3 more, goes to 130.  For what is no different from a 240 pool, 60 control VPP.  I just tossed out "all have to be set the same" because of the notion that they are copies of the same thing, so...set one, set all.  Otherwise they're not copies.  But then, I'm saying...yeah, there's some things I can't do, but for the most part, I just build with the incremental, additive powers anyway, at small levels, and I'm still getting ridiculous amounts for nothing.

[Hugh Neilson]

To me, the "doubling for 5 points" rule was meant to provide a backup focus if the original were lost, damaged, etc.  It was not intended to mean you had multiple devices all usable simultaneously.  That has never made its way into the rules explicitly, though, leaving the door open for MultiArm Ring Man.

[greypaladin_01]

34 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

To me, the "doubling for 5 points" rule was meant to provide a backup focus if the original were lost, damaged, etc.  It was not intended to mean you had multiple devices all usable simultaneously.  That has never made its way into the rules explicitly, though, leaving the door open for MultiArm Ring Man.

 

This very much seems to be the Rules As Intended concept for it.   You purchase Big Iron (RKA/OAF) then for 5 points you can get another Big Iron as a back up.  Either to use when first runs out of charges or if it was disarmed, dropped, etc.

 

However this is where the variance of HERO rules gets weird again and this should fall into the GM approval category.  Heroic level games often do not make you pay points for gear anyway, so it is pointless.  When playing Superheroic then you are facing weird abuse/logic failings.   (like the Ring example above, I cant think of any GM that would approve it..but RAW there is nothing saying no)   However I am pretty sure the 5 point doubling came about specifically for us in the Dark Champions / Action Hero game genre, where the game wanted to make people pay for gear but did not want to make characters 500 points to cover it all.   (In fact the option rules for Equipment Pools came from this as well)

 

If the doubling rule fits the game you are doing then great, if not then just say no,  or put limits to 1 copy only.   It is a system that is much more open to abuse than normal for HERO. 

[LoneWolf]

One thing that can prevent abusing this is to make it so that duplicates do not stack.   Wearing 10 of the same magic ring does not give you 10 times the defense.   The items are supposed to be the same so why would they stack?  

[Cloppy Clip]

To be honest, that's how I assumed the duplicated defences worked when I first saw that power. I suppose there's nothing in the rules explicitly saying it must work that way, but I figured 10 1d6 Blasts aren't treated as a 10d6 Blast, so why should 10 lots of 2 ED be treated as 20 ED?

 

Thank you for the responses and elaboration, everyone. I think this is another case where the rules on their own don't quite explain what the designers meant for someone only reading the 6E core, which is a hazard when building rules upon each other for so long in a single game! But knowing what was likely intended makes it easier to provide a reason when saying no to abusive powers.

[unclevlad]

Defenses stack.  Your 5 PD and 5 rPD mean you've got 10 total DEF.  You can buy Resistant Def in multiple ways...perhaps innate toughness (Always On), reinforced costume (focus), and a force field (costs END to maintain).  They all stack. 

 

The rules for attacks are far, far less clear.  The combined attack section is silent on a case where you have 2 attack powers, doing the same fundamental damage, e.g. normal energy damage, and how to treat them.  If one's PD and one's ED, the target's defenses would clearly apply separately to each.  To me, the most reasonable interpretation would be to use the Coordinated Attack rules...without needing a Teamwork roll, if both attacks are coming from you.  Defenses apply separately to each damage source;  you do get to combine STUN that gets past defenses, to see if your target gets stunned.  That feels like a sensible ruling.

 

BUT!!!!!  The rules also allow "+X"...a build pattern you see is a build-up style.  You can fire an 8d6 with a standard half-phase action...but if you want to add +3d6, it's full phase.  Another 3d6 would cost 3 END.  So you've got a potential 14d6 attack, when all is said and done, but you've made parts of it harder to use.  The rules would seem to allow, then, that this is how you build the power here.  Each copy isn't a 1d6 attack, it's a +1d6 to an existing attack.

 

[Ninja-Bear]

On 6/4/2023 at 4:38 PM, Hugh Neilson said:

Never been a fan of the doubling rule.  Consider The Modified Mandarin

 

+5 PD/+ ED 5 rDEF IIF Thumb Rings (12 points) doubled (+5).

 

60 point Multipower with 8 Fixed attack slots, IIF Finger Ring (86 points), Doubled 3 times (+15).

 

Or let's be really gross:

 

+1 PD/+1 ED/+1 Mental Def/+1 Sight Flash Def/+1 hearing Flash Def/+1 Smell/taste Flash Def/+1 Touch flash def/+1 Power Def rDEF IIF Thumb Rings (10 points) doubled 5 times (+25) so 32 rings (35 points).

 

60 point Multipower with 8 Fixed attack slots, IIF Finger Ring (86 points), Doubled 7 times (+35) so 128 rings (121 points).

 

Extra Limbs: 16 Arms, 5 points

 

That's 161 points spent.  I'll be needing either a big END reserve or a lot of END and REC!

 

For another 10 points, I can double it all again and have 32 arms - we'll wait and buy that with xp...

I like the doubling rules When used in reason. Seeker should have have 2 sais not one. However Hugh all you showed that a rule can be abused past its intended use. So how is that really different than than any power in Hero System?

[unclevlad]

Having 2 sais has only a few, very narrow, rules implications...disarming one doesn't leave him weaponless, and if he's bought it, Off Hand Defense and Two Weapon Fighting.  Otherwise, it's nothing but justification for Multiple Attack, or for "I feint with one to attack with the other."  

 

WIthout even trying to get seriously abusive, tho, why can't I define a pair of rings giving, say, 5/5 rDEF, and get a total of 10/10?  The rules are *silent* on this.  And even if they're IIFs, something this small would still save 7 points.  Or get more complex.  The thing that makes Hugh's obviously abusive is extending the doubling ad absurdem to drive the point home, but hey, how about 2 PD, 2 ED Negation, IIF (16 points)....x4.  Arm bands.  26 points for 80 points of negation, and it's...semi-plausible.

 

The doubling rule isn't the issue per se;  it's the failure to explain it properly.

[dmjalund]

foci would also have the limitation - uses hand, so if the person only has two hands, he can only wield two weapons.

[Ninja-Bear]

10 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Having 2 sais has only a few, very narrow, rules implications...disarming one doesn't leave him weaponless, and if he's bought it, Off Hand Defense and Two Weapon Fighting.  Otherwise, it's nothing but justification for Multiple Attack, or for "I feint with one to attack with the other."  

 

WIthout even trying to get seriously abusive, tho, why can't I define a pair of rings giving, say, 5/5 rDEF, and get a total of 10/10?  The rules are *silent* on this.  And even if they're IIFs, something this small would still save 7 points.  Or get more complex.  The thing that makes Hugh's obviously abusive is extending the doubling ad absurdem to drive the point home, but hey, how about 2 PD, 2 ED Negation, IIF (16 points)....x4.  Arm bands.  26 points for 80 points of negation, and it's...semi-plausible.

 

The doubling rule isn't the issue per se;  it's the failure to explain it properly.

I really don’t think that its explained poorly. I was a way for weapon users (I think primarily) to cheaply pay for an addition weapon. It does follow the logic of buying vehicles and Bases. I mean we can go back to having a weird OAF (-3/4) I believe this was suggested Dark Champions 4th ed. The OAF is reduced because with Seeker if someone Disarms his Sai, he has another one or someone would have to do a Sweep Disarm to remove both in a single phase.  I see this doubling as allowing a player to buy a redundant power to “make sense”. That is the spirit of the rule. And anything that goes against the spirit of the rule shouldn’t be allowed. Isn’t that Hero 101?

Edited June 14, 2023 by Ninja-Bear
Thought of something else

[Ninja-Bear]

As soon as I posted, I thought of your point of clarity of the rule. Yes what is implied I believe but should’ve made clear that the doubling doesn’t add to the doubled power. I.e. Seeker having two Sais doesn’t give him a +6D6 HA he still does +3D6 HA but could lose one. So the same way that the armor example. You shouldn’t be able to add two pieced of armor together to get tougher armor. You lose one ring and you still have the same amount of armor Def. That should be explained a little better.

[Ninja-Bear]

@Hugh Neilson, since you don’t like the 5pt doubling rule (which is fair) how then would Seeker’s character buy the second Sai? Would you charge the player full points for a second weapon? Or custom limitation like OAF (-3/4)? Or something else? 

[Hugh Neilson]

On 6/14/2023 at 8:32 AM, Ninja-Bear said:

@Hugh Neilson, since you don’t like the 5pt doubling rule (which is fair) how then would Seeker’s character buy the second Sai? Would you charge the player full points for a second weapon? Or custom limitation like OAF (-3/4)? Or something else? 

 

This comes down to what Seeker is actually getting for his 5 points.

 

Does he now get to attack twice as a combined attack because he has two Sais?  If so, that sounds like he should pay full points for the second attack, just like anyone else wanting to use two attacks at the same time as a combined attack.

 

Can he use one and had the second one to Obsidian?  That sounds like he should be paying for both powers separately, again as he is using them separately.

 

As I think on it, he could have a Sai, a Bow and a Sword in a Multipower, using one weapon at a time. Perhaps he could simply buy another Sai slot representing that second Sai, which he can use if the first one is damaged or disarmed. Or we could simply allow a 5-point Adder to have a backup focus (or a second use of the same innate power) that can be used if the first is broken, suppressed, disarmed or what have you.

 

The key is in defining what the ability does, and setting a commensurate point cost, ideally with an existing mechanic.

[unclevlad]

Using another slot in an MP is dodging the issue, because it doesn't address when the build doesn't have an MP or VPP with the first one in it.  Sure, it works, but it's incomplete, AND it doesn't address the core fact that the rules have that 2x Items for +5 points included.  So that you could do something like this in an MP is not useful to address the general question.

 

Basically, we've said it several times, N-B.  The 2x rule doesn't work if you can use them in a combined manner...a combined attack, or when the powers stack;  or when you can hand one off to someone else for their independent use.  The 2x rule is fine for clips...empty one, swap out;  for (presumably) foci or Phys Manifestations, where if one becomes unavailable, you have another.  Also for Multiple Attacks, because a multiple attack can be made using a single weapon.  I'd allow it for Two Weapons Fighting;  you're getting +2 OCV but paying 10 points for the privilege.  Same argument applies to Off Hand Defense.

 

Can there be somewhat tricky, borderline cases?  Yeah.  I was goofing off with a power armor build.  A pair of typical Iron Man gauntlet blasters run from END Bats.  The blasters can use the x2...no problem.  Can the END Reserves?  Not if they both can Recover at post-12...because now they're being used in a combined manner.  You couldn't, for example, alternate shots from different gauntlets, then see them both Recover on post-12.  If you use one until it's drained, then switch to the second one...the "recovery clock" for the first one has to be frozen when it's off-line.

[Hugh Neilson]

22 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Using another slot in an MP is dodging the issue, because it doesn't address when the build doesn't have an MP or VPP with the first one in it.  Sure, it works, but it's incomplete

 

Much like the rule on 6e V2 p181 is incomplete, as noted by the OP, in not addressing innate abilities.  The above discussion also does not consider the discussion of Multiple Foci on V1 p 380 (are the extra foci enough that this is no longer Accessible?)

 

Seeker could buy a Multipower of two slots, one for each Sai, if he so desired.  A VPP muddies the waters further - can I just go ahead and create a second Sai when the first is damaged or lost?  Note that I can't use the Doubling rule within a framework.

 

22 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

AND it doesn't address the core fact that the rules have that 2x Items for +5 points included. 

 

I don't really consider a statement outside the character construction rules  as heavily caveated as

 

Quote

At the GM’s option, characters in any type of campaign may double the number of a particular piece of equipment, weapon, or object they have for +5 points. Thus, if a sword costs 20 Character Points, for 25 points the character could have two such swords. This is a quick and easy way to simulate characters who carry lots of “back-up” weapons or who want to own a fleet of vehicles. If the equipment is unusual (such as an Unbreakable Focus, an enchanted item, or the like), the
character should get the GM's permission to buy it using this rule.

 

to be a "core rule".

 

22 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Basically, we've said it several times, N-B.  The 2x rule doesn't work if you can use them in a combined manner...a combined attack, or when the powers stack;  or when you can hand one off to someone else for their independent use. 

 

**koff koff**

 

From 6e v2 p 181, the OP's reference:

 

Quote

Items of equipment bought with the 5-point doubling rule are considered “separate” from the original item. They’re distinct from each other, each with its own identity and uses even if they’re defined identically in HERO System rules  terms. Thus, a character could use two of them for Two-Weapon Fighting, a Multiple Attack, or the like.

 

They are, in fact, separate and distinct by the rules set out in the core rules.

 

Among other things, that would give them separate charges or clips.  As END reserve has a rule for creating more than one, I would say that this "specific" overrides the "general".

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

5 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

This comes down to what Seeker is actually getting for his 5 points.

 

Does he now get to attack twice as a combined attack because he has two Sais?  If so, that sounds like he should pay full points for the second attack, just like anyone else wanting to use two attacks at the same time as a combined attack.

 

Can he use one and had the second one to Obsidian?  That sounds like he should be paying for both powers separately, again as he is using them separately.

 

As I think on it, he could have a Sai, a Bow and a Sword in a Multipower, using one weapon at a time. Perhaps he could simply buy another Sai slot representing that second Sai, which he can use if the first one is damaged or disarmed. Or we could simply allow a 5-point Adder to have a backup focus (or a second use of the same innate power) that can be used if the first is broken, suppressed, disarmed or what have you.

 

The key is in defining what the ability does, and setting a commensurate point cost, ideally with an existing mechanic.

And that’s fine. And what I defined Seeker’s second sai was to have two and if one got disarmed then he has a second one. Now sfx wise, that second one probably be in use as a descriptor but no extra mechanical bonus. For example, I might described them as being crossed when Blocking but no additional DCV unless paid for. Or one sai is in guard postion while the other one strikes. No adding damage, no multi-attack. (Mainly cause I could never figure out the thing and multi-attack always seemed over powered.) As to lending it to Obsidian, why not, in the short term anyways though personally if I bought it as defined in one if the martial supplement, I would only allow the HA to be used unless Obsidian somehow knew how to use a sai or similar weapon. Using those tines to aid in Disarming takes some skill. But lets not forget that that having the second sai being OAF can be used against Seeker also.