5-point Doubling for Innate Powers

[Ninja-Bear]

So if and that’s a big if, I understand Muti-attack, I can hit the same opponent more in the same phase? If that’s true, I did some very rough math. So say I put on AF x2 (+1/4) on the sai-represent hitting twice with two sais. At 15 ACT pt and with the advantage you’ll be paying 19 ACT so it actually cheaper than the 5pt rule. At 20 act pt then it works out to to an even 5 pt. 30 pts you do get it cheaper as then it goes to 7 pts. Plus Multi-attacks incur a cumulative penalty.  So no, the rule itself isn’t abusive

[unclevlad]

You miss the point.

 

Multiple attack doesn't care if you have 1 sai or 2.  You can strike as many times as you want with just the 1 sai.  

 

There are nuances...like Two Weapon Fighting.  But that's a separate 10 points, and it's to offset the initial OCV penalty...which could be done with standard combat levels, probably, that wouldn't call for a 2nd weapon. 

 

Autofire is something entirely separate.  It also doesn't require a second copy;  in this case, the second copy is nothing more than SFX.  But you could define something as an ultra-light, supremely manipulable blade where you're making 2 separate, quick slashes...or perhaps a double-headed flail.  One head hits solidly, the other glances off.......  Or it's a magical multi-strike dagger, which makes copies of itself.

 

Autofire is an advantage on an attack power.

Multiple Attack is a combat maneuver, with a lot of flexibility.

 

Which is better?  It's very much build-dependent.  I generally prefer Multiple Attack, so I can avoid the gotchas in Autofire, like using it with any non-standard damage invoking a huge markup.  Same with Reduced END, for that matter, it's double cost.  But YMMV.

[Duke Bushido]

Request for clarification:

 

Arw we uaing "multiple attack" and "multiple power attack" interchangeably, or are we discussing two different things?

 

Thank you.

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

9 hours ago, unclevlad said:

You miss the point.

 

Multiple attack doesn't care if you have 1 sai or 2.  You can strike as many times as you want with just the 1 sai.  

 

There are nuances...like Two Weapon Fighting.  But that's a separate 10 points, and it's to offset the initial OCV penalty...which could be done with standard combat levels, probably, that wouldn't call for a 2nd weapon. 

 

Autofire is something entirely separate.  It also doesn't require a second copy;  in this case, the second copy is nothing more than SFX.  But you could define something as an ultra-light, supremely manipulable blade where you're making 2 separate, quick slashes...or perhaps a double-headed flail.  One head hits solidly, the other glances off.......  Or it's a magical multi-strike dagger, which makes copies of itself.

 

Autofire is an advantage on an attack power.

Multiple Attack is a combat maneuver, with a lot of flexibility.

 

Which is better?  It's very much build-dependent.  I generally prefer Multiple Attack, so I can avoid the gotchas in Autofire, like using it with any non-standard damage invoking a huge markup.  Same with Reduced END, for that matter, it's double cost.  But YMMV.

Yeah, I am missing because I thought the argument was because of buying the second sai you could then use the multi-attack. 
 

Btw, two weapon fighting is neat but it has it problems of reduced DCV. 
 

7 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Request for clarification:

 

Arw we uaing "multiple attack" and "multiple power attack" interchangeably, or are we discussing two different things?

 

Thank you.

 

 

Good question because well I’m not sure either. 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Ninja-Bear

[Hugh Neilson]

8 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Request for clarification:

 

Arw we uaing "multiple attack" and "multiple power attack" interchangeably, or are we discussing two different things?

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

The terminology has changed over the editions. The 6e terms (discussed starting on V2 p 73) are:

 

Multiple Attack - you can use the same power multiple times, to strike the same opponent more than once and/or to strike multiple opponents. This takes a full phase (Rapid Attack skill reduces it to a half phase), halves the character's DCV and imposes a cumulative -2 penalty for each attack beyond the first. Miss one, and all the subsequent ones miss as well. I would say this grew out of the Multiple Move By, which is early enough edition-wise to be familiar to Duke.  That term still gets used, and the "only once for each time you circle the target" rule is still there in Multiple Attack.

 

Combined Attack - using two or more powers or similar abilities once each against a single target is a Combined Attack, not a Multiple Attack, and takes no penalties. It's a single attack action.  Presentation is bad in 6e - it's on V2 p 74, buried in the middle of Multiple Attack and gets no other discussion.  So if you paid for a Blast and a Drain (in a manner that both are usable at the same time), you could make a Combined Attack against an adjacent opponent Blasting, Draining and (with your STR) Punching that opponent.  You could not use a different combat maneuver (e.g. Trip with your STR while Striking with the Blast and Drain), direct the attacks at different targets or use any of the attacks more than once.  All of those would require Multiple Attack.

 

But if you have a sword and a dagger, two Sais or two Colt .45s, nothing precludes using Combined Attack.  Two-Weapon Fighting does not discuss the possibility of using a Combined Attack, but applies only to offset penalties from Multiple Attack.  Since there are no penalties for a Combined Attack, Two-Weapon Fighting would be irrelevant.  But it would allow Seeker to Block with one Sai and Strike with the other, Strike two different opponents, etc.

 

As each item of "doubled equipment" is "distinct from each other, each with its own identity and use even if they're defined identically in Hero System rules terms", they should be usable as a Combined Attack. If a character with a gun and a knife can shoot and stab one target as a combined attack, why would a character with two guns or two knives not be able to use both against the same target, the same way?

[Duke Bushido]

Thank you, Hugh.

 

That clears up a cinsiderable amount of the confusion I was having while dollowing this thread.   Twelve hours of sleep should clear up the rest.

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

On 6/16/2023 at 9:38 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

As each item of "doubled equipment" is "distinct from each other, each with its own identity and use even if they're defined identically in Hero System rules terms", they should be usable as a Combined Attack. If a character with a gun and a knife can shoot and stab one target as a combined attack, why would a character with two guns or two knives not be able to use both against the same target, the same way?

I got two points for you Hugh and honestly and either one really are unsatisfactory.

 

1) Even though they are distinct I feel they still fall under Multi-attack. Multi-attack uses the same mechanical attack in each strike. I guess Steve considered HKA and RKA as being different enough.

 

2)Well by default a Viper agent who successfully blocks Ogre takes no damage nor knockback. (I had to explain this to a friend). Does it make sense? Depending how “realistic” you see your game, no. (I told him that there are ways to deal with that.) IOW, I really don’t know. Its a wrinkle in the rules. I also allow you to grab an agent and throw him into another agent in the same phase which seems to become outlawed in 5th ed.  I can’t find that being a no-no in previous editions and I still House Rule that you can anyways.

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

1) Even though they are distinct I feel they still fall under Multi-attack. Multi-attack uses the same mechanical attack in each strike. I guess Steve considered HKA and RKA as being different enough.

 

Combined attack specifically says it is not a Multiple Attack.  It's a Combined Attack (6e rulebook emphasis). The example is two ranged weapons, but 6e does not indicate that both attacks must be HTH or ranged, only that they must be made against the same target.  The logic remains sound - the duplicate gear will be the same attack type, so consider two knives compared to a sword and a dagger, or two Colt .45s versus a .38 S&W and a derringer.

 

And if combined attack is part of multiple attack,  note that p 181 says the equipment can be used in multiple attacks "and the like".

 

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

2)Well by default a Viper agent who successfully blocks Ogre takes no damage nor knockback. (I had to explain this to a friend). Does it make sense? Depending how “realistic” you see your game, no. (I told him that there are ways to deal with that.)

 

To me, this is SFX.  The agent does not catch Grond's hurtling fist with his outstretched hand, stopping it cold. I would describe a block of that nature more as redirection, pivoting and avoiding the blow while setting up for a quick counter-maneuver (which should be "run away" - you aren't going to win OCV vs OCV contests against Grond forever).

 

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

 IOW, I really don’t know. Its a wrinkle in the rules.

 

This comes down to the approach taken.  The reasoning and expected use of the doubling rule gets limited discussion.  So we can accept that the +5 doubled gear is a backup and you can't use both at the same time for the same reason you can be immune to extreme heat or cold but still damaged by attacks with those SFX - you didn't pay for the utility, so you don't get that utility - the character simply never dual weilds the duplicate weapons, however logical it may seem for him to do so.  You want them both used at the same time, pay for both Sais without the 5 points to double rule. 

 

Or we accept that you can spend just 5 points to double any focus and they can both be used at the same time.  Even RAW cautions "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."  Which seems odd as it's really designed for mundane equipment games where you don't pay points for gear anyway.

 

Or we disallow of the doubling rule entirely (recall it is "GMs Option as introduced) - multiple foci are SFX and may move you down to "inaccessible" as you are harder to disarm.

 

Or we allow the doubling rule for gear and innate powers, with whatever mechanics applying to those as well.

 

It comes down to how you want your game to work.  To me, +5 to get Combined Attack seems cheap, especially when someone with innate powers is denied the same option.  LAZER should shell out 5 points and cut his rifle into 2 pistols!  If everyone used gear, the field would be leveled and everyone would probably be a dual weapon Combined Attacker.

 

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I also allow you to grab an agent and throw him into another agent in the same phase which seems to become outlawed in 5th ed.  I can’t find that being a no-no in previous editions and I still House Rule that you can anyways.

 

Moving away from the topic at hand, but this seems like a "clarification" to me.  You made an attack roll to Grab the first agent, and you can follow that by throwing him.  But throwing him at a specific target requires an attack roll, which is a second attack in the phase. I could see the original intent being "grab and throw to the ground or off the cliff is one action" with "Grab and then throw at another opponent, requiring much more precise aim, is two attack actions, the first to Grab and hold, and the second to target a precise throw attacking someone else".

 

Would you also let him Grab one of the agents surrounding him, and immediately spin around to use the Grabbed agent as a Multiple Attack against all the other agents, getting a damage bonus because Agent #1's armor and helmet make him a great club?

 

EDIT: Actually, as I post that, I have the answer.  Sure - that is a Multiple Attack. You want to Grab Agent #1 and Club Agents 2 - 6, so apply the OCV penalties for six attacks, halve your DCV and use your full phase and start rolling.

 

And that also can be used to Grab one agent and Throw him at a second, can't it?

Edited June 17, 2023 by Hugh Neilson

[Duke Bushido]

To make certain, I have this clear:

 

Under 6e, multiple attack is Sweep, but you have to keep hitting the same target.  Like Zangief's tornado: punch punch punch punch-  same attack, several times, against a single target.

 

Combined attack is using two or more of your powers in a single attack.  Is this also limited to a single target?

 

 

And getting back to the five point doublings as a universal part of the tool kit, there is my own concern that Super GunGuy can combine attack all 32 of his identical hand cannons.

 

I see more than one suggestion that it is for having a "back up" for your focus.  Understandable, but ultimately not acceptable.  A player may build his focus in such a way that he saves thirty or more points on his powers, with the risk of being temporarily deprived of them because they are via Foci.   But if he is willing to spend 10 of the points he saved, he has three backups, considerably reducing the odds that he will ever actually be deprived of the focus expect through absolute ham-fisted game mastering.

 

 

The more I review rhis thread, the more I find myself aligned with those who suggest that this is an element suited for certain aspects of certain powers-   teleport locations, even teleport additional mass.  Additional magazines for clip-type charges, additional wardrobe options for Ins2rant Change-  k2ots of other things--

 

But not a universal toolkit element that can be bok2ted to anything.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Duke Bushido

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

To make certain, I have this clear:

 

Under 6e, multiple attack is Sweep, but you have to keep hitting the same target.  Like Zangief's tornado: punch punch punch punch-  same attack, several times, against a single target.

 

6e took a lot of the various elements from past editions, including Sweep and Multiple Move By (remember the maneuver that knocked two opponents' heads together?) and consolidated them into Multiple Attack.  It can use the same attack, or mix different attacks, against one or multiple targets.  So run down a line of agents hitting each once?  Multiple Attack.  Fire your Blast at the big opponent three times in rapid succession?  Multiple attack.  Fire your Colt .45 three times, at three targets, and stab that guy who thinks he's sneaking up behind you with your knife?  Multiple attack.  Or punch punch punch that one target.

 

All are at 1/2 DCV, the maneuver requires a full phase and it's -2 OCV per attack after the first, so 5 attacks is -8 OCV to each attack.  The first miss means the rest miss as well.

 

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

Combined attack is using two or more of your powers in a single attack.  Is this also lumited to a single target?

 

Combined attack is two or more powers as a single attack against a single target.  It imposes no modifiers.

 

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

TI see more then one suggestion that it is for having a "back up" for your focus.  Understandable, but ultimately nit acceptable.  A player may buuld his focus in such a way that he saves thirty or more points on his powers, with the risk of being temporarily deprived if them because they are via a Focus.   But if he is willing to spend 10 of the points he saved, he has three backups, considerably resucing rhe odds that he will wver actually be deprived of the focus expect through absolute ham-fisted game mastering.

 

How much did the one gun cost?  Let's say 90 points, so you made it OAF and dropped it to 45.

 

It could have been OIF for 60 points, and could only be removed when you were helpless.  That's not too far off having 8 guns on your person.  For the same 60 points, it could have been Restrainable - he can Summon the gun to his hand with a gesture.  Do we need the 5 and 10 point costs in between?  It doesn't hurt to have that tool in the toolkit, I suppose.

[Cloppy Clip]

I don't know if I'd be as strict on the subject as Duke, as paying 5 points for a backup Focus seems reasonable enough to me. Maybe I haven't thought it through enough, but it seems like a useful option to have. But I'm not convinced that Combined Attacks should be a valid way to use the doubling rule. I understand Combined Attacks to be the reward you get for buying powers individually, without putting them into a Multipower. But if you can get powers for 5 points that can be used without penalty, that seems open to abuse. On the other hand, attacking twice in one turn because you have two guns seems like an obvious thing to want to do, and the second gun is going to have reduced utility compared to the first one because of its redundancy.

 

All of this to say I'm a bit conflicted, and not sure what the best approach to take it. Maybe it's a matter of degree: 2 guns feels like a different use-case than 1,000 guns, so maybe it's a case of not letting players get carried away.

[greypaladin_01]

Thinking a little more on it, the 5 point doubling rule really feels like a Special Rule that would apply to specific types of games but should not be used universally.   This is in part because of how much 5 points means depending on the point totals of a character.

 

A superheroic character with 400 points could use the 5pt Doubling rule to get a silly number of various gear items, to the point where the Focus, Charges and other limitations stop being a limitation.   At this level 5 point investments are rather cheap.

 

A heroic level character for say, Dark Champions or the like have much less points to work with 175/250 range  (if I remember right)  and while in many campaigns their equipment would be 'free' and only require money not character points, if they did have to buy gear then 5pt for getting a second sword or gun is more fair.  Especially when you consider it is a considerably more significant investment for the character.   While they could still buy the same silly numbers of the items as superheroic characters could, they would be investing a significant percentage of their character points to do so.

 

Personally I am not sure I like the doubling rule,  mostly because it is so fixed cost for so variable of an effect.   You have a 3 real point cost Focus and want to double it?  5 points.....    you have a 150 real point cost Focus and want to double it?  5 points....   It just feels like a house rule for a specific playstyle that was made official but does not scale well to all games.

[Duke Bushido]

On 6/18/2023 at 7:57 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

I don't know if I'd be as strict on the subject as Duke, as paying 5 points for a backup Focus seems reasonable enough to me. Maybe I haven't thought it through enough,

 

I cant say I am strict on it; as a 2e player, I don't ever encounter it.  Even if I were to go forward, I don't know that I actually care enough to have a firm opinion.   How can I say this?  I am the guy who has spent a lot of time trying to get folks to understand why points do not equal balance and why the "you get what you pay for" mantra is incorrect specifically because points don't create, measure, or enforce balance.

 

However, I am content being in a miniscule minority with that opinion.  I am, however, trying to subtly point out that this is a great example of points don't relate at all to balance, and just like the Normal Characterisitcs Maxims debates of days gone by, this five-point doubling thing is a great way to get "free" disadvantage points.  Like most rules-lawyering, it is not perfect, and is a little screwy, but let's take a look at the majority opinion on foci:

 

You are taking a cost discount with the understanding that you may (or can or should) be deprived of it now and again (or with some sort of regularity).

 

If you spend half of the discount of 5-point doublings to create fifteen back-ups, the odds that you are going to be deprived of this thing are considerably lower, and you still get that discount

 

 

Again-  I dont care either way; I just find that given the majority opinion on foci, the overall positive reception of this idea is a bit of a surprise.

 

Whatever it is called now: combined, multi, sweep, Death's Head Panoply-- whatever; the ability to unload all of your similar attacks at a single target does not have restrictions that prevent you from firing thirty-two pistols at a single target.  For an extra twenty-five points, you can have those thirty-two pistols.  There are assessed penalties, but if I was going to get this squirrelly, I could spend fifteen point for eight pistols and some more points for hyper-specific skill levels like "only with this one model of Beretta pistols" or "only with Death Blossom maneuver" and still be startlingly more effective than easily half the other people at the table.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 6/18/2023 at 7:57 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

but it seems like a useful option to have. But I'm not convinced that Combined Attacks should be a valid way to use the doubling rule.

 

For the reasons above and more, I am not convinced it should be anything but a feature of certain powers, and not some sort of universal fits-all add-on.

 

 

On 6/18/2023 at 7:57 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

I understand Combined Attacks to be the reward you get for buying powers individually,

 

Each additional focus is an individual and separate thing.  "Identical" does not deny that they are separate,  as the rules state that for 5 points you can have twice as many, you are still buying them and they are still individual things.

 

 

On 6/18/2023 at 7:57 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

 

without putting them into a Multipower.

 

There is no reason non-ultra Multipowers are not valid.  If I have three similar types of attack in a Multipower and that multipower is constructed in such a way that I can to at least some degree use all three of them, then I can do so.

 

 

 

On 6/18/2023 at 7:57 AM, Cloppy Clip said:

But if you can get powers for 5 points that can be used without penalty, that seems open to abuse.

 

 

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Duke Bushido

[Cloppy Clip]

I don't know if you'd agree with me Duke, but it seems sometimes that the purpose of points in HERO isn't to balance characters so much as to give players the opportunity to feel proud of themselves when they find a clever way to save them. I don't mean that in a pejorative way because I think there can be a lot of satisfaction to be had in optimising a character build for the right kind of person, and there's no sense in not letting them have their fun. But, at the same time, the game balance doesn't depend so strictly on points spent that, as long as everyone's mature about it, you can't have characters with wildly different points totals.

 

The big problem that I can see with doubling for back-up Foci is that the amounts of weapons you're throwing around can get ridiculous very quickly. 5 points for a second gun probably isn't too much to stress about. Your opponent has to disarm you twice, but that still feels manageable. 50 points for 1,000 guns, though, feels very unfair to the poor henchman who has to take them off you to make the drawback of your Focus limitation apply! Like greypaladin says, I wonder if this was really just a niche houserule for a specific kind of game that gets applied to many more situations than it really should be.

[greypaladin_01]

I am not sure really if I would say it was to "make them feel clever"  but more that you have to have SOME baseline.  Since points are the currency of creation, they use that.

 

To truely "balance" things for HERO, the GM has to set the baseline points.  Set the guidelines for CV, AP, DEF and Skills.  Then ALSO carefully work with each player to go over concept and build to look for any potential issue.   Finally, they have to reserve the right to require players change something if it proves to be abusive.   Or at least adjust and adapt with the GM.   It is an ongoing process.

[Cloppy Clip]

I wouldn't really say the goal is to make players feel clever either, but rather it lets people express their cleverness, if that makes sense? I might be seeing a distinction where there is none, but I think a game with as heavy a system as HERO works well with the kind of player who finds fun in getting their character concept in the most efficient way, or finding just the right combination of modifiers to perfectly express their character. A reasonable gaming group won't push things too much, and will have an agreement about what the average character is supposed to look like, but if it's all set by guidelines you could go for a much simpler system that doesn't have all the points accounting and get a similar experience.

 

This might just be my personal preference for tinkering with mechanics coming through, but I genuinely thought this is a big selling point for HERO to its players. Would you disagree then?

[Hugh Neilson]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

You are taking a cost discount with the understanding that you may (or can or should) be deprived of it now and again (or with some sort of regularity).

 

If you spend half of the discount of 5-point doublings to create fifteen back-ups, the odds that are going to be deprived of this thing considerably lower, and you still get that discount.

 

 If half the discount was 20 points, them the original power must have cost 80 and then become an OAF to save 40.  It would have been 53 as an OIF ("I have so many backup weapons that you can't really remove them all unless I am helpless").  That's only a 7 point difference.  Of course, if you can fire all 16 all at once that's a bigger issue.

 

A specific 5-point adder to the Focused power ("backup") to have a second gun?   Not so big a deal.  Cap it at one, or charge 5 points for each backup, and define it as "can't be used in tandem".

[greypaladin_01]

31 minutes ago, Cloppy Clip said:

 

This might just be my personal preference for tinkering with mechanics coming through, but I genuinely thought this is a big selling point for HERO to its players. Would you disagree then?

Depends on players.  Some don't care for the mechanics and just want to play something without hard set restrictions like a D&D class.  But yes, for some mechanics is a feature for sure.

[LoneWolf]

Like anything in the Hero System this can be abused.  Just because something can be abused does not mean that non-abusive uses need to be banned.  Most heroic games the character does not pay for equipment, so this is probably going to come up more in a superhero campaign than a heroic.  

 

There are a couple of things that will reduce some of the abuse.  First in a game where you are paying points for a weapon you are considered proficient in that weapon.  When a character starts handing out his spare foci the characters, he hands them out to did not pay for the weapon, so are not automatically considered proficient in the weapon.   That means unless the character using the weapon paid for weapon familiarity with that weapon or the group it belongs to they take a penalty to hit.  Also, chances are any skill levels the characters have are not going to be applicable to the weapons.  This means the characters ability to use said weapons will usually be reduced.   

 

Second most characters only have two hands.  Purchasing an extra 32 does not mean the character can fire all 32 at the same time.   A character could buy extra limbs to be able to do so, but how many characters actually do that.  If you are buying extra limbs just to use extra weapons to exploit the doubling rule the GM should veto that hard.  Drawing a weapon is usually a half phase action so even if the character is dropping the weapons after being fired, they are still limited to how many weapons they can draw.  A character could purchase fast draw for this, but that means extra points and a there are still limits to how many actions you can perform in a phase.  

 

What it comes down to is the best way for the GM to prevent abuse is to simply tell the players to stop the abusive behavior.  You can usually find some reason to veto these types of things, so you don’t seem too heavy handed, but in the end, it is up to the GM to control the game.   If the character paid points for fast draw and two weapon fighting than allowing them to draw and fire two weapons should not be a problem.  If that same character wants to draw and fire 32 weapons that is not something a GM is required to allow.    
 

Edited June 19, 2023 by LoneWolf

[Ninja-Bear]

When I get the chance I’mll look at Combined Attack but my gut says that Hugh is wrong. Combined was designed to allow two different attacks to he fired off at the same time else why is there also Multi-attack which does allow you to fire off the same attack more than once? Also Combined Attack is an optional maneuver right? So the GM just says no? -Right?

 

And I noticed that we as a group hafe seem to have gotten away from the rule about Sfx. That in defining a sfx you may get minor benefits and drawbacks. As Lonewolf pointed out, having 32 pistols should allow a typical human to fire all 32 at once. In fact when I have allowed Two weapon attacks, I limited them to two attacks only. It limits rolls and the drag on the game extra rolls can cause. 

[Hugh Neilson]

9 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

Like anything in the Hero System this can be abused.  Just because something can be abused does not mean that non-abusive uses need to be banned.  Most heroic games the character does not pay for equipment, so this is probably going to come up more in a superhero campaign than a heroic.

 

First, it's an option, not a rule, which adds further justification to a GM limiting its use.  That could go as far as limiting it to computers, vehicles, bases and followers (which need not be identical), although clearly it is also directed at weapons and gadgets.

 

GM permission is invoked again for "unusual equipment".  It could be used for signature gear in a heroic game, but that tends not to come up all that often.

 

9 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

There are a couple of things that will reduce some of the abuse.  First in a game where you are paying points for a weapon you are considered proficient in that weapon.  When a character starts handing out his spare foci the characters, he hands them out to did not pay for the weapon, so are not automatically considered proficient in the weapon.   That means unless the character using the weapon paid for weapon familiarity with that weapon or the group it belongs to they take a penalty to hit.  Also, chances are any skill levels the characters have are not going to be applicable to the weapons.  This means the characters ability to use said weapons will usually be reduced.  

 

The proficiency rules are definitely a start.  I find this is seldom enforced for one-off picking up a gadget on the battlefield. It's also only useful for weapons (see below), but resolves the combined attack issue.

 

9 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

Second most characters only have two hands.  Purchasing an extra 32 does not mean the character can fire all 32 at the same time.   A character could buy extra limbs to be able to do so, but how many characters actually do that.  If you are buying extra limbs just to use extra weapons to exploit the doubling rule the GM should veto that hard.  Drawing a weapon is usually a half phase action so even if the character is dropping the weapons after being fired, they are still limited to how many weapons they can draw.  A character could purchase fast draw for this, but that means extra points and a there are still limits to how many actions you can perform in a phase. 

 

Especially in a Supers game, why does the focus need to be hand-held?  It could be a necklace, a wristband, a ring or what have you.  It need not even be a weapon.  That Ring of Mystical Protection (+10 rPD, rED, Power Defense, Mental Defense and Sight Flash Defense, IIF) seems pretty handy investing 15 points to have 8 and hand them around  to the teammates.  Or consider a Ring of Invisibility.

 

9 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

What it comes down to is the best way for the GM to prevent abuse is to simply tell the players to stop the abusive behavior.  You can usually find some reason to veto these types of things, so you don’t seem too heavy handed, but in the end, it is up to the GM to control the game.   If the character paid points for fast draw and two weapon fighting than allowing them to draw and fire two weapons should not be a problem.  If that same character wants to draw and fire 32 weapons that is not something a GM is required to allow.  

 

For experienced GM's, great. But for the game to attract and retain new blood, it cannot assume every reader is an experienced GM.

[Hugh Neilson]

4 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

When I get the chance I’ll look at Combined Attack but my gut says that Hugh is wrong. Combined was designed to allow two different attacks to he fired off at the same time else why is there also Multi-attack which does allow you to fire off the same attack more than once? Also Combined Attack is an optional maneuver right? So the GM just says no? -Right?

 

Multiple attack is a standard maneuver (I had to look that up).  Combined Attack (6e p 74 for those wanting to read it) does not include any "at the GM's option, two separate attack powers can be used together like this", so it is as standard as Multiple Attack. None of which says the GM can't alter the rules, but the 5 point doubling rule is much more "optional" in its presentation.

 

The example is a robot with an attack built into each hand.  Why would the rule be different if it had the same attack built into each hand, or doubled gear each of which is separate from the other?

 

Clearly the robot did not need Two Weapon Fighting to use Combined Attack, but firing each weapon at a different target could benefit from Two Weapon Fighting (still a Multiple Attack, though, with the half DCV and full phase action in that maneuver).

[Hugh Neilson]

14 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

And I noticed that we as a group hafe seem to have gotten away from the rule about Sfx. That in defining a sfx you may get minor benefits and drawbacks. As Lonewolf pointed out, having 32 pistols should allow a typical human to fire all 32 at once. In fact when I have allowed Two weapon attacks, I limited them to two attacks only. It limits rolls and the drag on the game extra rolls can cause. 

 

In fairness, the discussion has fallen even further away from the OP's question of why this is OK for gear/gadgets but not for innate powers.

 

What if the innate power is a gadget, but one so difficult to remove that it is not eligible for a Focus limitation?  "I can Summon these guns to my hands with but a thought, so they are Restrainable, but not a Focus" - can I use the 5 point doubling rule?

[Cloppy Clip]

I think my original question was borne out of not knowing the history behind this rule. I was looking at it from the perspective of a Superheroic 6E game, since that's what I have the books for, where a Focus is just a power with a limitation. So I then wondered why only that limitation was counted for the doubling rule. Now that I know the rule was originally designed for Heroic games to be used with equipment, it makes more sense since Foci are the powers equivalent of equipment. I do wonder, though, given you already have to watch out for abuse with this rule, if there are limitations other than Focus that might be limiting enough to qualify a power for the doubling rule? It's all a bit pointless ultimately, but I quite like stress-testing this system to see what can be done with it, so bear with me please!

[greypaladin_01]

This might stray from your question slightly, but the concept of x2 effect for 5 points can be found through many powers in HERO.   Right off the top of my head Non-Combat Multiplier for the various Movement Powers and X2 number of Minds for a Mind Link.

 

In this case there is no limit to the power from them, it is just the mechanic to get more ability for specific circumstances.

 

I believe in older editions there was a x2/5pt mechanic for getting extra lower point followers and maybe even Multiform slots... but I would need to research the books.  Hopefully others know more off hand.

 

Still none of these are limitations.   Right off the top of my head, I have a hard time seeing anything other that Foci applying to the Doubling Rule we are talking about.

 

Stress Testing Hero can lead to Stress Testing your brain.     But we'll help where we can!