Changing VPP and Using Power in One Go

[Cloppy Clip]

I'm playing around with some ideas for an improvised magic system, but I'm having a hard time expressing what I want to do in the rules. I want a mage to be able to make a Magic roll and cast a spell on the spot, which seems like a VPP. The problem is that a VPP has you make a skill roll and then gives you the power permanently until you want to change it again. It also doesn't cast the spell with the same action, which I would like my mages to be able to do.

 

I can resolve the first problem with a Limitation saying the VPP can only be changed at the moment the spell is cast, but what would be the best way to combine the two actions? Can you Link a power created by a VPP to the VPP itself, even if that power doesn't technically exist at the start of the action? Adding +1 to the Control cost to make changing the VPP a zero-phase action seems a bit overkill to me, since you're giving up the ability to repeatedly use the power, but that might be the best way to handle this.

 

Does anybody have any ideas on what Advantages or Limitations to use here? Or, if you can think of a way to do this without a VPP, that would be appreciated too.

[LoneWolf]

The way to do this according to the rules would be to buy a cosmic VPP (No skill roll, can be changes as a 0 phase) and take the requires skill roll as a limitation.  That would mean you can change the pool at will, but to cast the spell you need to make the skill roll.  

 

If you are the GM, you could simply hose rule it that the roll is to cast the spell instead of changing it.  If I were doing this in my campaign, I would probably use the this.  I would still have the character pay for changing the pool as a 0-phase action.   To me having to make the roll to cast is more limiting than for changing it.    The standard way you only need to make the roll once if you are going to cast it multiple times, the other way you have to make the roll each time you cast the spell.  
 

[Cloppy Clip]

Thank you LoneWolf, and I'm reassured you agree that this way of rolling is more limiting, if anything, than the usual way to use a VPP. While we're throwing ideas around, would forcing Trigger to be bought on every power work as a slightly-cheaper alternative to buying the VPP as a zero-phase action? I'm trying to get a sense of the different options, and want to make sense of what generally works (Zero-phase Advantage) and what doesn't (Linked Limitation).

[dmjalund]

I would however caution using this method (in general) as allowing characters and players to create spells on the fly can slow down combat immensely.

[Cloppy Clip]

In practice what I tend to do with VPPs is have a list of example powers written up before the game (ideally the player can do this, but if not there's always good old me), and then while the player can theoretically improvise any power in combat, if they start to slow down working out specifics it just defaults to one of the example powers. The option to make literally anything is there for players who are more confident with the rules, but we have a backup in case something goes wrong.

[Gauntlet]

4 hours ago, dmjalund said:

I would however caution using this method (in general) as allowing characters and players to create spells on the fly can slow down combat immensely.

 

I have definitely seen that happen!!!

[LoneWolf]

The easiest solution to slowing down the game is to simply require that when in combat the spells have to be prewritten.  Allow the player to change the special effect as a long as there are no changes to the power.  For example you have a generic blast prewritten and the player can define it as a fire, cold, electrical or any other allowed special effect on the fly.  They cannot make it AP or penetrating unless they have a prewritten blast with those limitations. 

 

Before the game starts the character can the character should have a long list of spells already written out.  If the character is actually out of combat allow them to write up a power if it can be done quickly.  Give a time limit on how long the character can take.   By out of combat I mean don’t mean don’t mean that the character is unaware he is about to be attacked or is ignoring what is going on.  I mean the game is not in phases. Unless the focus is on another character about a minute is about all I would allow the player to create the power during the game.  So, if the party split up and the GM is running the other group the character can do what they want.  If the focus is on the group the player is in they are under the limit.

 

This restriction is on the player not the character so the cost of the VPP is not affected in any way.

[unclevlad]

46 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

They cannot make it AP or penetrating unless they have a prewritten blast with those limitations. 

 

You can shortcut this, somewhat, if you're willing to.  Say the base attack is 12d6.  OK, well, that's 12 DCs...so 6d6 AVAD, or 8d6 Penetrating, or.....you get the idea.  Most of these are easy.

 

You can extend this further.  Your pre-written template have

--12 DCs with no limitations

--12 DCs with -1.4 limitation

--12 DCs with -1/2 limitation

 

This is assuming a complex VPP that typically supports multiple powers.

[Christopher R Taylor]

My house rule for power pools is that players can use any powers they have written up before the game begins, and any power they are able to cobble together while waiting for their phase to begin, but once they are called and the phase begins, they cannot create any new powers.  Too many times people waiting around for someone to take action.

[LoneWolf]

I would still require prewritten power instead of using the template @unclevlad presented.  The reason to do that is that not everyone has all the modifiers memorized.  The thing that slows down the game is having to look things up.  Very few people are able to write up a power in their head and get everything right.  To prevent seeming favoritism it is easier and fairer to simply say all powers need to be prewritten.  

 

In addition to having to look things up this also eliminates questionable powers or abusive powers that are legal.  The only way to ensure that there is no distracting discussion on powers during combat is to have all powers defined before the combat starts.  This would also mean any NND’s have to be defined before combat to prevent discussions on whether the defense is appropriate or how much of a limitation it is.  

 

Keep in mind that the problems affect both the player and the GM.  If the GM is not capable of checking the power in his head including the math that will slow the game down just as much as the player looking it up.  One of the main responsibilities of the GM is to ensure that the characters are appropriate for the game he is running.  Having a player able to create things on the fly makes this incredibly difficult.  

 

This is one time where the GM should give the players little or no slack.  Changing the special effect of a power that does not alter the game mechanics is fine.  Changing an attack from physical to energy should also be fine.  Changing the defense for an NND from immune to heat to mental defense is not.   About as far as I would allow would be change the defense of an NND from immune to fire to immune to cold, immune to fire to longevity would not be acceptable.   
 

[Gauntlet]

Another option is just going with the variable special effect and variable advantage advantages.

[Hugh Neilson]

Let's assume I want up to 60 AP, one spell at a time, all spells with -1/2 Requires a Skill Roll.  I need a 40 point pool (60 AP/1.5 = 40 real points) and a 30 x 3 /1.5 = 60 point control cost = 100 points total.  I can cast any spell I want as long as I make my skill roll.  If I want to cast another spell next phase (whether the same one or a different one), I need to make my skill roll again.

 

That sounds identical to what you are describing.

 

We had a new player some years back with an "attacks only" VPP.  She had a chart for dice and DCs at various advantage levels and a list of advantages, and had no problems picking attacks on the fly.

[Chris Goodwin]

20 hours ago, Cloppy Clip said:

Thank you LoneWolf, and I'm reassured you agree that this way of rolling is more limiting, if anything, than the usual way to use a VPP. While we're throwing ideas around, would forcing Trigger to be bought on every power work as a slightly-cheaper alternative to buying the VPP as a zero-phase action? I'm trying to get a sense of the different options, and want to make sense of what generally works (Zero-phase Advantage) and what doesn't (Linked Limitation).

 

I think Delayed Effect would probably suit your needs better than Trigger. 

[unclevlad]

29 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Let's assume I want up to 60 AP, one spell at a time, all spells with -1/2 Requires a Skill Roll.  I need a 40 point pool (60 AP/1.5 = 40 real points) and a 30 x 3 /1.5 = 60 point control cost = 100 points total.  I can cast any spell I want as long as I make my skill roll.  If I want to cast another spell next phase (whether the same one or a different one), I need to make my skill roll again.

 

That sounds identical to what you are describing.

 

We had a new player some years back with an "attacks only" VPP.  She had a chart for dice and DCs at various advantage levels and a list of advantages, and had no problems picking attacks on the fly.

 

Yeah, I build a basic "attack spell" template, almost always with Reduced END built in.  Then

--for advantages, I can just tweak the DCs

--I can list common limitation combinations, like -1/4, -1/2, -1...that's more useful if it's not attacks only.

 

Also, if it's attacks only, that should be worth a bit of a Limited Powers discount on the control cost.

 

Of note:  the alternate construction mentioned by LoneWolf is actually harsher in some ways.  He can't re-use the pool configuration;  it basically never has one.  So even if the base attack, for example, is solid in a situation...he doesn't get the benefit.  I'd really have to think about what I'd allow...and what the parameters on the VPP are.  Limited Powers?  Common limitations?  If those aren't there, then forcing +1 on the control cost, AND requiring paying for a skill roll...that VPP is gonna cost a LOT.  If we're talking pool size 60, control size 60 so control cost is also 60 (thanks to zero phase)...then the skill roll.  Why not buy an MP with a Skill Roll common modifier?  That 60 drops to 40;  the slots drop to 4 each.  It's not *as* flexible...but 25 separate MP slots?  That's getting kinda ridiculous, so it suggests to me that requiring the full +1 on the control size is probably too much.  

 

Note, tho, if the VPP is also heavy on non-attack powers...activating a power is a zero-phase action, so configure == cast is giving you the full benefit of 0 phase to switch.  It's on attack powers that things get more complex.

 

So I'd probably go with the simpler.  Either half phase to switch powers, or zero phase, take your pick.  No skill roll to switch powers.  RSR as a common modifier.  That should give the effect desired.

[Sketchpad]

20 hours ago, Cloppy Clip said:

In practice what I tend to do with VPPs is have a list of example powers written up before the game (ideally the player can do this, but if not there's always good old me), and then while the player can theoretically improvise any power in combat, if they start to slow down working out specifics it just defaults to one of the example powers. The option to make literally anything is there for players who are more confident with the rules, but we have a backup in case something goes wrong.

 

That's what I've always done as well. Often times, I ask the player to create a "spell" list (it's not always spells) that they can draw from, and those are the powers and abilities they can use in a session. They don't feel like working on stuff, they're stuck with what they have.

[Gauntlet]

I will have to say I usually do not like VPP. But I have allowed them in the past but only by those players with decades of experience.

[Cloppy Clip]

@LoneWolf I think, in theory, making up any power on the spot could be all right as long as everybody's happy to go along with it. Even a messy NND doesn't have to be a problem if everybody's okay with it at the time. Conversely, if somebody wants to challenge a power that seems like it should be clear-cut (like Reduced END and nothing else on Blast), it's probably best to skip over it to keep the game moving.

 

@Gauntlet Yes, Variable Advantages can shortcut a lot of uses for Frameworks. I remember one time I was trying to work out a Multipower of Naked Advantages, and it took me far too long to realise the obvious!

 

@Chris Goodwin Sorry I'm a little slow on the uptake here. What would Delayed Effect do differently to Trigger in this specific case? (It doesn't help that I can struggle to tell them apart at the best of times)

 

@Hugh Neilson I keep forgetting that you don't have to buy the full Pool amount in 6E any more, so the points don't actually work out to be that much more expensive even with the Cosmic Advantage. And, by the time you add on Limitations like Incantations and Gestures, it's back down to a much more reasonable level.

 

@unclevlad That's a good point about the Multipower, and useful to keep in mind when you don't need that many spells on one character.

 

And thank you to everyone else who's replied; I've got a much better picture in mind of what I want to do now, so it's all very much appreciated!

[unclevlad]

NNDs are easy, so long as you keep the defense clear-cut.  It's just a +1/2 or +1.  Just think in DCs.

 

Variable advantages are a *terrible* approach, IMO, because they're hideously expensive.  You're doubling the cost of the advantage.  The active cost is for the full cost of the VA...so the END is significantly higher, for a power you anticipate using extensively.  (And you'd better be using it a lot, to justify the cost of the advantage.)

 

Technically, naked advantages can't be put into a framework.  Naked advantages are special powers.  There are also some unusual considerations that you might have missed, WRT naked advantages.  That said, at times I'm willing tweak the rules...sometimes a lot.  Because that concept build was 2 multipowers.  One was the baseline powers;  the other was naked advantages that could be applied.  So, yeah, it also had 1 MP applying to another MP, which is generally a no-no.  It was amusing at the time.  

 

6E VPPs are VERY versatile.  Pool size is totally separate from control size, so you can have, say, a 90 point pool size with a 60 point control size.  (NOTE:  the rules use control cost, but IMO that's confusing.  Control size is the max active points in a power in the pool;  control cost is what you have after applying things like No Skill Roll, No Time.)  This is great when you want your VPP to cover, say, your attack, defense, and combat movement powers.

[Gauntlet]

6 hours ago, unclevlad said:

NNDs are easy, so long as you keep the defense clear-cut.  It's just a +1/2 or +1.  Just think in DCs.

 

Biggest problem I have seen with NND within VPP is that players like to continuously change the defense for the VPP. The option does make since in story terms, but in game terms it means that you have an attack that automatically fully damages everyone. The only defense is knocking you out or killing the attacking character before he/she make the attack. Because of this I normally do not allow NNDs in VPP despite or they have to determine exactly what NNDs they will use and cannot change it during a session. 

Anyone else have any better way to deal with this?

[dmjalund]

I would have any power that functionality based on Special Effect, Like NND and Desolidification, we should cost them like a Variable Special Effect

[Gauntlet]

13 minutes ago, dmjalund said:

I would have any power that functionality based on Special Effect, Like NND and Desolidification, we should cost them like a Variable Special Effect

 

Problem with that is what if the special effect is magic, or cosmic energy, or nanite technology. With those, and many others, they may have a variety of sub special effects. Such as for magic, perhaps an aging spell (defense LS Longevity), or Body Heat spell (defense LS Heat), or a magical dart spell (defense, force field or force wall), or a death spell (defense is Power Defense). All of these have the same special effect, magic, but all have a different NND Defense.

[unclevlad]

There isn't one, per se.  That's why they pay so many points for the control cost.  What I think is fair, tho, is to limit them to a very limited collection of exotic defenses...which generally won't be worth a Limited Powers limitation.  Or, flip side, if their VPP is "magic" and it can do anything, then perhaps there should be a Magic Defense that counters any direct magical attack (but not necessarily something indirect like the defense of an Entangle).  Or...how about, an esoteric-defense spell is harder to construct than a standard-defense spell.  AVAD vs. Power Def...easy when you've got drains and such.  NND vs. Teleport, XDM, or Desolid...a dimensional distortion attack, and one I'm quite fond of, for teleporters...for the typical VPP, might invoke a penalty, to both the power skill to formulate it, and to a skill roll, if there is one, to activate it.

 

Also, when I said NNDs were easy, that was in relation to defining the power.  What you're talking about is the problem from the GM's side...which is part of the reason why VPP is the STOP SIGN framework.

 

This is somewhat like the flip side...that, at higher point totals, the PCs are practically FORCED to buy some Power Def and Mental Def...because if they don't, they can be completely taken out in 1, maybe 2 phases.  Or heavily neutered by, say, a 6d6 STR drain against the brick...STR doesn't get halved.  Neither does OCV...so how about -4 to OCV?  That might be even more crippling, and that'll impact almost any non-mentalist.  Or Drain EGO...20 points will reduce the vast majority of non-psi types to 0.  If the EGO roll is based on current EGO, it's no better than 8-...not good.  There's also a good chance this'll need 2 turns to fade enough so the target can act again.

 

One suggestion I'll offer is, if you're gonna allow limitations like Gestures and Incants...enforce them.  Hearing Darkness fields prevents using anything with Incants, for example.  Have opponents Hold against people with Gestures, then attack.  Take damage while gesturing?  Power fails.

[Gauntlet]

Of course how is this as a Death Spell:

 

Power Work Kill

Killing Attack - Ranged 6d6, Target Must Hear Caster (Loud Noises or Darkness to Healing Will Stop It) (+0), Attack Versus Alternate Defense (Survive the Attack; All Or Nothing; +1), Does BODY (+1) (270 Active Points); OAF Expendable (Extremely Difficult to obtain new Focus; Dust or Bone from a Powerful Undead Creature (Vampire, Lich, Wraith, or the like); -2), Side Effects (Same Spell on Caster; -1), Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2), Requires A Roll (Magic roll; -1/2), Unified Power (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4)

49 Points

27 END

Edited October 6, 2023 by Gauntlet

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, dmjalund said:

I would have any power that functionality based on Special Effect, Like NND and Desolidification, we should cost them like a Variable Special Effect

 

If I am reading this correctly, dmjalund is suggesting that a power that is stopped by one specific ability or SFX (NND being blocked entirely; Desolid being affected by something) be costed in a VPP with the Variable Special Effect advantage because the VPP user can change the ability or SFX that stops the power.

 

That's worth considering.

 

Or price the NND based on the ability to change the defense making the defense extremely rare.

Edited October 6, 2023 by Hugh Neilson

[unclevlad]

3 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Or price the NND based on the ability to change the defense making the defense extremely rare.

 

Possible.  How about alternate language...NND doesn't become a -1/2 any more, it's a -0.  No one would take NND vs. Power Def, when it's the same cost as the AVAD vs. Power Def, but that's actually just as well.  Hasn't been brought up, but...if you're pretty sure your target doesn't have, say, Mental Def, then it's probably worth a try to nail him with an NND vs Mental Def...because that's only +1/2.  It's an extra 2 dice for a 12 DC attack...and if it does work, the target is MUCH more likely to be stunned, even with a higher CON.  8 dice averages 28, and how often do people buy that high without figured stats in the picture?  Even if they're not stunned, wow, getting 28 STUN through in a single attack is a LOT.

3 hours ago, Gauntlet said:

Of course how is this as a Death Spell:

 

Power Work Kill

Killing Attack - Ranged 6d6, Target Must Hear Caster (Loud Noises or Darkness to Healing Will Stop It) (+0), Attack Versus Alternate Defense (Survive the Attack; All Or Nothing; +1), Does BODY (+1) (270 Active Points); OAF Expendable (Extremely Difficult to obtain new Focus; Dust or Bone from a Powerful Undead Creature (Vampire, Lich, Wraith, or the like); -2), Side Effects (Same Spell on Caster; -1), Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2), Requires A Roll (Magic roll; -1/2), Unified Power (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4)

49 Points

27 END

 

So, who do you know that has a 40- or better skill roll?

 

Generally?  it's a good example of everything I hate about trying to do fantasy in Hero.