Rapid Fire

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The issue was what happens after you fire off the three NND shots, only to discover they did not affect yoour opponent because he has the defense. Do you even read what you are responding to?

 

I already responded to that. In fact, Tesuji had already responded to that. People very rarely used their NNDs against inappropriate foes. I was responding to the vast majority of situations where the opponent doesn't have the defense. If the opponent did have the defense, the NND guy would simply use another attack or hit a foe without the defense.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Whether I will or not depends on whether I actually SEE someone abuse it. No problem, and no purchaser, to date, so who needs to disallow it? Half DCV is also a significant penalty. You one punch one of theirs, they do the same to you. One opponent removed from each side of the battle. Your posts seem to indicate you only play solo campaigns, since you assume one opponent KO'd = battle over.

 

One opponent removed vs a decent chance that I'm not removed. Only those foes who attack me during that exact segment will get me at 1/2 DCV since I can abort, or have a teammate protect me while I'm wiping out an opponent a phase. A very efficient use of teamwork.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Yes, all villain groups stand stock still in small clusters, with no friendlies around, waiting to be attacked by the famous super who always fires area effect blasts. Seems I forgot that rule somewhere - what genre convention does it support?

 

Gee, my NND has a 4" radius. That means that all the villains would have to be at least 9" apart in order not to have more than 1 caught in the NND. How big of a battlemap do you use?

 

Even if all of them are 9" apart (which I find very hard to believe), that simply means that after I zap 1 of them, the range penalty from the rest of the villains will be at least -4. That cancels out the DCV penalty quite nicely. And every single foe caught in the area effect is going to be taking 16d6 straight damage.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The only poster who seems to have enountered **any** problem with this is youy, and even you haven't seen it in games, only modeled it mathematically. Until it's actually a problem, it doesn't merit fixing.

 

But I still look forward to seeing Gary's Perfect Game System on the market.

 

Umm, you've already stated that you probably intend to remove Rapid Attack as an available skill. And that you would disallow players buying lots of PSLs. That seems to indicate that you find a problem with Rapid Fire as well.

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Gary

Surely it stretches plausibility that every 350 pt villain has power defense or very high Bodies. But I do see your viewpoint on this.

Every 350 pt villain doesn't have powD and high body.

Many villains wont have these.

The one's who do, will make for challenging scenarios and interesting adversaries.

The one's who dont will often be those less interesting scenarios we dont highlight by making them something we run on stage.

One man's mook is another man's archnemesis.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

I already responded to that. In fact, Tesuji had already responded to that. People very rarely used their NNDs against inappropriate foes. I was responding to the vast majority of situations where the opponent doesn't have the defense. If the opponent did have the defense, the NND guy would simply use another attack or hit a foe without the defense.

 

Again, I reiterate: before you blast off 3 shots, how do you KNOW this guy does, or does not, have the defense. Being less obvious in this regard is a simple method of cutting down this abuse. "No, you can't "just tell" whether he needs to breathe, or whether that glowing numbus is a force fiel;d, damage shield or just a Distinctive Feature.

 

On a similar note, you assume that you know your opponent's DCV to optimize your decision of how many shots to fire. I don't know what your experience has been , but my characters don't make a habit of wearing their DCV's as a crest. It takes time to figure out most opponents' DCV's, and even then a judicious shift of levels and/or selection of combat maneuvers will do the trick.

 

On reduced END: perhaps a variant of the "mental power" rule should be adopted here. Mind Control, no END, still costs END to maintain the initial effect. Perhaps reduced END should apply only to the first shot fired unless you pay double (as you must for Autofire). I can see where 0 END multiple shots could exacerbate a powerful maneuver into an unacceptable one, although again I've never seen it in play.

 

Part of the problem with NND's is that we let players, and NPC's, expand the limits of an "acceptable defense". Read the advantage examples in FREd and compare them to what is used in practice. "Any resistant defenses" for a dart gun. "Need not breathe or holds breath" for gas. The force field is likely the easiest one to ID, but lots of villains have them. A very small, invisible force field will do the trick quite nicely, and is an easy solution to "NND Man" running rampant..

 

None of these indicate Rapid Fire itself is the problem, regardless of the attack type. It is permitting players to push the envelope on optimization of the character's offensiove punch.

 

Originally posted by Gary

One opponent removed vs a decent chance that I'm not removed. Only those foes who attack me during that exact segment will get me at 1/2 DCV since I can abort, or have a teammate protect me while I'm wiping out an opponent a phase. A very efficient use of teamwork.

 

Of course, your target cannot abort to Dodge, reallocation of skill levels, Desolidification or his experiemental Force Field belt commissioned due to his knowledge of your character, right? Better attack someone who already attacked this segment (hmmm...Force Field, Trigger when Meson Man fires his EB at me"), and hope he hasn't attacked you with a Rapidf Fire NND, I guess...

 

Originally posted by Gary

Gee, my NND has a 4" radius. That means that all the villains would have to be at least 9" apart in order not to have more than 1 caught in the NND. How big of a battlemap do you use?

 

Even if all of them are 9" apart (which I find very hard to believe), that simply means that after I zap 1 of them, the range penalty from the rest of the villains will be at least -4. That cancels out the DCV penalty quite nicely. And every single foe caught in the area effect is going to be taking 16d6 straight damage.

 

Actually, 4" rad is a 7" circleout both ways, plus the center point). Many villains have the option of "up" as a distance away. And if they KNOW your character regularly tosses off these aea effect attacks, they will work at staying further apart than you can engulf - villains have tactics too, and they can watch the news!

 

And you must also ensure that none of your teammates, or anyone else you wish not to harm, is in that radius. Do all your allies have the defense against your NND? That would logically indicate most other supers have it as well, or can easily obtain it. Do you have extra perception rolls to accurately and precisely determine exactly where everyone is standing? We assume our heroes can also benefit from that overhead view and careful hex counting we as players can do with the battlemat.

 

Is it OK, to KO innocent bystanders? "But my NND does not BOD", you say? Explain that to Old Aunt May, who broker her hip falling after being KO'd by your "no BOD" NND ("She had 3d6 Unluck andthe Age Disadvantage" isn't much defense against a civil suit). Or to Willy "Wheezy" Williams' parents (he had asthma, and the disadvantage "takes normal BOD from NND gas attacks"). For that matter, three hits with a 4d6 NND =42 STUN on average. On a high roll (or more than three shots, maybe due to overlapping areas), reducing a Norm to a comatose state (say -40 or -50 STUN) would seem a real risk. Not to say this should hapen constantly, but it is an excellent way of enforcing some restraint on the part of "our hero".

 

Note the FAQ, by the way, which states that you cannot voluntarily reduce your area of effect - a 4" radius is always a 4" radius - so you can't reduce the radius to leave your allies out of it.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Umm, you've already stated that you probably intend to remove Rapid Attack as an available skill. And that you would disallow players buying lots of PSLs. That seems to indicate that you find a problem with Rapid Fire as well.

"

 

No, I've stated that I would know that a character purchasing these clearly intends to make greater use of these attack options. This would ensure I consider the full ramifications, taking the character as a whole, in deciding whether the character is acceptable for the specific campaign. Just as I would have to consider whether Autofire is acceptable. And, as Tesuji has pointed out, I would ensure the opposition poses a credible threat to this character.

 

I don't have a "problem" with any specific options offered by the Hero system. I do, however, recognize that point-based systems are ripe for abuse, and watch out for combinations that may be excessive for the planned campaign. I don't use a srict mathematical formula, because I don't believe I will accurately consider every possible combination up front.

 

How often does a Supers PC take a CON of 17 or less? Does this indicate CON is overpowered, and must have a higher cost, or be disallowed? Or does it indicate the genre convention that Supers are tough, and healthy, so I accept it? In my world, the fact that I generally accept high CON's does not mean I must accept whatever CON each character chooses to by, with no thought to character conception. Similarly, the fact that I generally expect attacks in the 10 to 15 DC range does not mean I MUST accept every atack which fals within these parameters, nor that I would automatically disallow one faling outside them. The character as a whole must be considered.

 

Tell you what, Gary - make your Rapid Fire character, and get it into a game. Tell us how your GM restricts your rapid fire abilities (try several GM's if the first doesn't accept it). Once the character is in the game, let us know how overwhelmingly powerful he/she turns out to be. Then we'll have some real evidence of a problem, rather than your hypothetical concerns.

 

It doesn't have to be Gary - any GM's or players out there have experience seeing Rapid Fire used a lot (or abused as Gary suggests)? Posters to date say "no", but we're not the whole gaming universe.

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Again, I reiterate: before you blast off 3 shots, how do you KNOW this guy does, or does not, have the defense. Being less obvious in this regard is a simple method of cutting down this abuse. "No, you can't "just tell" whether he needs to breathe, or whether that glowing numbus is a force fiel;d, damage shield or just a Distinctive Feature.

 

Hugh,

 

In your games as player or as GM, about how many PC shot NND attacks out of 10 result in "ooops, no effect. he has the counter" and no damage dealt. Out of 10 NND shots taken by PCs which hit, how many are rendered ineffective by the counter in actual play? (Count area attacks which get some and bounce off others as effective.)

 

Just a guess would be fine.

 

IMX that number is under 20%, maybe under 10%.

 

What about you?

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Actually, 4" rad is a 7" circleout both ways,

 

This is why I have been stating all AOE descritpions in my games as DIAMETERS for some time now. For some reason, gamers I know tend to get annoyed when a 4" radius is 7" diameterinstead of 9" diameter and me, I want the sucker to be 8" diameter

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Again, I reiterate: before you blast off 3 shots, how do you KNOW this guy does, or does not, have the defense. Being less obvious in this regard is a simple method of cutting down this abuse. "No, you can't "just tell" whether he needs to breathe, or whether that glowing numbus is a force fiel;d, damage shield or just a Distinctive Feature.

 

It just means that it works against fewer targets. Against the targets that it does work against, it's every bit as devastating.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

On a similar note, you assume that you know your opponent's DCV to optimize your decision of how many shots to fire. I don't know what your experience has been , but my characters don't make a habit of wearing their DCV's as a crest. It takes time to figure out most opponents' DCV's, and even then a judicious shift of levels and/or selection of combat maneuvers will do the trick.

 

No, you don't have to know the opponent's exact DCV. Just whether he's "clumsy", "normal", or "agile". The numbers don't change a whole lot as long as you get somewhere between 12- and 15- final to hit. There is an optimal point where you maximize stun, but being slightly suboptimal isn't going to hurt you at all.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

On reduced END: perhaps a variant of the "mental power" rule should be adopted here. Mind Control, no END, still costs END to maintain the initial effect. Perhaps reduced END should apply only to the first shot fired unless you pay double (as you must for Autofire). I can see where 0 END multiple shots could exacerbate a powerful maneuver into an unacceptable one, although again I've never seen it in play.

 

That's a possibility. Although as Tesuji has pointed out before, if you spend triple end in one phase to drop your opponent, it's more efficient than spending normal end for 3 phases to do so.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Part of the problem with NND's is that we let players, and NPC's, expand the limits of an "acceptable defense". Read the advantage examples in FREd and compare them to what is used in practice. "Any resistant defenses" for a dart gun. "Need not breathe or holds breath" for gas. The force field is likely the easiest one to ID, but lots of villains have them. A very small, invisible force field will do the trick quite nicely, and is an easy solution to "NND Man" running rampant..

 

If every villain has the small invisible FF, that's unfair to the player. Not to mention highly unrealistic. And if not all of them do, then it's a matter of the "have nots" getting nuked and the "haves" being struck by an alternate attack.

 

Also, if a maneuver is this powerful, isn't it better to simply adjust the maneuver rather than modifying every villain in your campaign?

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

None of these indicate Rapid Fire itself is the problem, regardless of the attack type. It is permitting players to push the envelope on optimization of the character's offensiove punch.

 

None of the other manuevers allows this sort of devastation except maybe targetted hit locations. And it's magnified with nonstandard attacks. And it's even worse with things like area effect or ego attack where the CV difference is enormous in general.

 

A haymaker adds 2d6 NND with huge restrictions. Rapid Fire adds the equivalent of 6d6 NND or more with far fewer restrictions.

 

As a GM, you have to expect your players to optimize their character's offensive punch.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Of course, your target cannot abort to Dodge, reallocation of skill levels, Desolidification or his experiemental Force Field belt commissioned due to his knowledge of your character, right? Better attack someone who already attacked this segment (hmmm...Force Field, Trigger when Meson Man fires his EB at me"), and hope he hasn't attacked you with a Rapidf Fire NND, I guess...

 

The target can do all these things unless he's already attacked this segment. But simply the threat of this maneuver is going to make the foes dodge, desol, etc. far more. And the dodge doesn't affect things like ego blast or area effects.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Actually, 4" rad is a 7" circleout both ways, plus the center point). Many villains have the option of "up" as a distance away. And if they KNOW your character regularly tosses off these aea effect attacks, they will work at staying further apart than you can engulf - villains have tactics too, and they can watch the news!

 

And you must also ensure that none of your teammates, or anyone else you wish not to harm, is in that radius. Do all your allies have the defense against your NND? That would logically indicate most other supers have it as well, or can easily obtain it. Do you have extra perception rolls to accurately and precisely determine exactly where everyone is standing? We assume our heroes can also benefit from that overhead view and careful hex counting we as players can do with the battlemat.

 

Is it OK, to KO innocent bystanders? "But my NND does not BOD", you say? Explain that to Old Aunt May, who broker her hip falling after being KO'd by your "no BOD" NND ("She had 3d6 Unluck andthe Age Disadvantage" isn't much defense against a civil suit). Or to Willy "Wheezy" Williams' parents (he had asthma, and the disadvantage "takes normal BOD from NND gas attacks"). For that matter, three hits with a 4d6 NND =42 STUN on average. On a high roll (or more than three shots, maybe due to overlapping areas), reducing a Norm to a comatose state (say -40 or -50 STUN) would seem a real risk. Not to say this should hapen constantly, but it is an excellent way of enforcing some restraint on the part of "our hero".

 

Note the FAQ, by the way, which states that you cannot voluntarily reduce your area of effect - a 4" radius is always a 4" radius - so you can't reduce the radius to leave your allies out of it.

 

It could be an area effect cone, area effect any area, the player getting the drop on the villains (not an uncommon situation), or something as simple as the player having higher dex than the foes. That means that the foes either suck up 4 4d6 NNDs each, or dive for cover leaving them vulnerable for the rest of the heroes. And if the villains are space that far apart, it'll cause major problems with their range mods and ability to teamwork. Simply the threat of such a devastating maneuver is already causing problems to the villains without the maneuver even being utilized!

 

Essentially that maneuver is turning a 60 active point power (4d6 area effect nnd) into a 240 active point power (16d6 area effect nnd).

 

"

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

No, I've stated that I would know that a character purchasing these clearly intends to make greater use of these attack options. This would ensure I consider the full ramifications, taking the character as a whole, in deciding whether the character is acceptable for the specific campaign. Just as I would have to consider whether Autofire is acceptable. And, as Tesuji has pointed out, I would ensure the opposition poses a credible threat to this character.

 

I don't have a "problem" with any specific options offered by the Hero system. I do, however, recognize that point-based systems are ripe for abuse, and watch out for combinations that may be excessive for the planned campaign. I don't use a srict mathematical formula, because I don't believe I will accurately consider every possible combination up front.

 

How often does a Supers PC take a CON of 17 or less? Does this indicate CON is overpowered, and must have a higher cost, or be disallowed? Or does it indicate the genre convention that Supers are tough, and healthy, so I accept it? In my world, the fact that I generally accept high CON's does not mean I must accept whatever CON each character chooses to by, with no thought to character conception. Similarly, the fact that I generally expect attacks in the 10 to 15 DC range does not mean I MUST accept every atack which fals within these parameters, nor that I would automatically disallow one faling outside them. The character as a whole must be considered.

 

Tell you what, Gary - make your Rapid Fire character, and get it into a game. Tell us how your GM restricts your rapid fire abilities (try several GM's if the first doesn't accept it). Once the character is in the game, let us know how overwhelmingly powerful he/she turns out to be. Then we'll have some real evidence of a problem, rather than your hypothetical concerns.

 

It doesn't have to be Gary - any GM's or players out there have experience seeing Rapid Fire used a lot (or abused as Gary suggests)? Posters to date say "no", but we're not the whole gaming universe.

 

Yeah, I'm very curious to see if any GM has a player that would rapid fire an ego blast or area effect NND.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by tesuji

Hugh,

 

In your games as player or as GM, about how many PC shot NND attacks out of 10 result in "ooops, no effect. he has the counter" and no damage dealt. Out of 10 NND shots taken by PCs which hit, how many are rendered ineffective by the counter in actual play? (Count area attacks which get some and bounce off others as effective.)

 

Just a guess would be fine.

 

IMX that number is under 20%, maybe under 10%.

 

What about you?

 

I don't think my numbers would be a lot higher than yours. I find it's more common for "NND vs F Field Guy" to assume that glowing nimbus is a force field when it isn't, so he doesn't try it when the NND would have worked. I've seen them blow off their own NND for that reason a few times (certainly not more than 10% of opponents, though).

 

But when the attack does hit, and do nothing, the villain generally doesn't say "HA HA HA I have that defense!". He may brag it off (but he's probably dismissing non-NND's simialrly) if he's a tough guy who likes to brag. Maybe he shrieks in agony because he wants to fool you into using it again (don't be a cheapskate - pay for the Acting skill). Or maybe he just winces ("about to get hit" reflex) and shoulders on. As a result, if they have picked the wrong target, they commonly continue with it for more than a phase.

 

But I'm just as guilty of letting the defense envelope be pushed. Is the defense "need not breathe" or "is not breathing"? Under the old rules, how many gas attacks were skin-absorbed rather than inhaled? How common is "resistance to extreme cold" life support?

 

Official Hero material and our own campaigns tend to push the envelope on what constitutes a "reasonably common" defense. Maybe it's time to tighten that up some (or a lot!)

 

Thinking on it further, most of the characters in my campaign don't have an NND. The one I recalll using it a lot was an archer with a gas arrow. In hindsight, his opposition should have been nmore willing to hold their breath when he showed upo on the scene. Mind you, he used small area continuing charges, and often used it more to ensure the big opponent would stay down than to lay stun on them while they were mobile.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

It just means that it works against fewer targets. Against the targets that it does work against, it's every bit as devastating.

 

Do you run a lot of villains with 2x Stun from electricty against a group that includes an Electrical character? You need to assess how the dynamic will work. If he's vulnerable to electricity and it's fairly obvious, he's gonna get one punched by Electric Man.

 

Originally posted by Gary

No, you don't have to know the opponent's exact DCV. Just whether he's "clumsy", "normal", or "agile". The numbers don't change a whole lot as long as you get somewhere between 12- and 15- final to hit. There is an optimal point where you maximize stun, but being slightly suboptimal isn't going to hurt you at all.

 

Shifting from 1 level in OCV to Dodge + 1 level in DCV is a four point shift, and pretty much anyone can do that. Martial Dodge, more levels, etc. add to it. Missile deflection (or better yet, reflection to hit any target) could be a real surprise, though not common.

 

Originally posted by Gary

If every villain has the small invisible FF, that's unfair to the player. Not to mention highly unrealistic. And if not all of them do, then it's a matter of the "have nots" getting nuked and the "haves" being struck by an alternate attack.

 

If every villain sees the news and determines Meson Man alsays cold cocks everyone without a Field, how long will it be before some entrpreneurial superscientist is selling force field belts? Meson Suppresors are good too, but they cost too much!

 

Originally posted by Gary

Also, if a maneuver is this powerful, isn't it better to simply adjust the maneuver rather than modifying every villain in your campaign?

 

Lots of maneuvers are powerful. Do you look for EGO defense on every villain's character sheet if there is no mentalist in the group? Do you start looking if one has heavy Mind Control?

 

So far, we have no one saying it's an ACTUAL problem, just you touting the problem in theory.

 

Originally posted by Gary

As a GM, you have to expect your players to optimize their character's offensive punch.

 

No, I expect them to make reasonable characters. If I'm running a campaign where the average damage was to be 10d6, and everyone shows up with 15d6 powerhouses, the villains need to be upraded to be competetive.

 

Originally posted by Gary

The target can do all these things unless he's already attacked this segment. But simply the threat of this maneuver is going to make the foes dodge, desol, etc. far more. And the dodge doesn't affect things like ego blast or area effects.

 

By your logic, no one would ever attack before the end of their phase - otherwise, how can they abort to Dodge and shift their levels before they are counteratacked? Rapid Fire isn't the only reason to do this, yet how often does it happen?

 

Originally posted by Gary

Yeah, I'm very curious to see if any GM has a player that would rapid fire an ego blast or area effect NND.

 

Not looking for "would in theory". Looking for "has in practice". Egoists should be outlawed under your "it could be abused" theory. You have 350 points. Put 40 in Ego. You now have a 30 ECV. Put 150 in Mind Scan (say 18d6 and +20 roll). That leaves 160 for a multipower of mental attacks to use through your mind scan. Make them all Invisible so you can't be traced. Let's make them 16 DC (100 points as they're fully invisible). You can have six slots. Ego Blast, Mind Control, Mental Illusions and Telepathy cover four. Let's make the fifth Area Effect Ego Blast (5 1/2 d6 isn't so bad) and the last can be whatever oddball you want - maybe Mental Transform?

 

So I can attack anyone from anywhere in the world and they can't find me. Menton's invulnerable, I suppose, but we can control everyone around him. And wait 'til you see my sheet when I have 1,000 xp!

 

Legal? Sure, I guess. Alowed in my campaign? Clearly not. Have I had problems with mentalists? No, not really - the players have always stayed pretty reasonable.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

(snip)Official Hero material and our own campaigns tend to push the envelope on what constitutes a "reasonably common" defense. Maybe it's time to tighten that up some (or a lot!)

(snip)

 

This has long been a complaint of mine regarding the published characters, NND defenses have been too unachievable for too many characters, not the "reasonably common" they should be. I think this has been in order for a long time but given the lack of change, I think it's essentially official unfortunately that NND defenses may be a bit on the inaccessible side.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Do you run a lot of villains with 2x Stun from electricty against a group that includes an Electrical character? You need to assess how the dynamic will work. If he's vulnerable to electricity and it's fairly obvious, he's gonna get one punched by Electric Man.

 

With rapid fire available, it makes every non protected villain essentially have the vulnerability to the attack.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Shifting from 1 level in OCV to Dodge + 1 level in DCV is a four point shift, and pretty much anyone can do that. Martial Dodge, more levels, etc. add to it. Missile deflection (or better yet, reflection to hit any target) could be a real surprise, though not common.

 

That merely lowers the expected damage from the "sweet spot" in the curve. And the PC can simply spread slightly more to compensate. No big deal.

 

Missile deflection doesn't normally work vs NNDs. It certainly doesn't work vs ego blasts or area effects.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

If every villain sees the news and determines Meson Man alsays cold cocks everyone without a Field, how long will it be before some entrpreneurial superscientist is selling force field belts? Meson Suppresors are good too, but they cost too much!

 

Again, you're modifying every villain in the world rather than one single maneuver. Single shot NNDs aren't unbalancing at all. It's combined with rapid fire that it becomes a one shot knockout.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Lots of maneuvers are powerful. Do you look for EGO defense on every villain's character sheet if there is no mentalist in the group? Do you start looking if one has heavy Mind Control?

 

Not this powerful this cheaply. The only thing comparable would be someone spreading and/or buying PSLs and targetting the head every shot. Ego attacks and mind control is generally balanced, unless you rapid fire them.

 

Do any other combat maneuvers turn a 60 active point attack into a 240 active point attack?

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

No, I expect them to make reasonable characters. If I'm running a campaign where the average damage was to be 10d6, and everyone shows up with 15d6 powerhouses, the villains need to be upraded to be competetive.

 

You're completely missing the point. The average damage is 10d6 or 5d6 NND in this case. Well within campaign limits. It's the application of Rapid Fire that magnifies the damage well past your campaign limits. Now you're considering a simple NND or ego blast to not be "reasonable"?

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

By your logic, no one would ever attack before the end of their phase - otherwise, how can they abort to Dodge and shift their levels before they are counteratacked? Rapid Fire isn't the only reason to do this, yet how often does it happen?

 

Rapid Fire makes it imperative. If the other guy zaps you with a single 5d6 or 6d6 NND, it's not that big a deal most of the time. You suck up the damage and prepare your own attack. Simply the cost of doing business. If he rapid fires and zaps you 2-3 times, you're going to be out like a light unless you do something.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Not looking for "would in theory". Looking for "has in practice". Egoists should be outlawed under your "it could be abused" theory. You have 350 points. Put 40 in Ego. You now have a 30 ECV. Put 150 in Mind Scan (say 18d6 and +20 roll). That leaves 160 for a multipower of mental attacks to use through your mind scan. Make them all Invisible so you can't be traced. Let's make them 16 DC (100 points as they're fully invisible). You can have six slots. Ego Blast, Mind Control, Mental Illusions and Telepathy cover four. Let's make the fifth Area Effect Ego Blast (5 1/2 d6 isn't so bad) and the last can be whatever oddball you want - maybe Mental Transform?

 

So I can attack anyone from anywhere in the world and they can't find me. Menton's invulnerable, I suppose, but we can control everyone around him. And wait 'til you see my sheet when I have 1,000 xp!

 

Legal? Sure, I guess. Alowed in my campaign? Clearly not. Have I had problems with mentalists? No, not really - the players have always stayed pretty reasonable.

 

Of course not, you're comparing a 150 pt mind scan and a 100 pt mental multipower (probably violates all your campaign limits), with a simple 60 pt multipower combined with a single maneuver.

 

Thanks for proving my point. You have to pull out 250 pts worth of stuff, stuff well beyond any campaign limits, to match up with a simple ego blast matched with Rapid Fire.

 

A single 6d6 ego blast isn't abusive. A 6d6 ego blast combined with a 30 ego and rapid fire is.

[Gary]

Taking the sample 26 dex 3 skill levels guy, here's a comparison of Haymaker vs Rapid Fire for the area effect NND:

 

Haymaker. OCV 9 DCV 4/7 (4 to HTH attacks and 7 to range attacks). Adds 4 DC to the 4d6 area effect NND attack or 1d6+1. Hits 99.5% of the time if not stopped.

 

Attack lands on next segment and can be dealt with by defender dive for cover, moving out of area, doing knockback to attacker, or stunning or knocking out attacker.

 

Rapid Fire 4 shots. OCV 6 (vs DCV 3) DCV 5.

 

Adds 36 DC, +12d6 area effect NND 68% of the time.

Adds 24 DC, +8d6 area effect NND 7% of the time.

Adds 12 DC, +4d6 area effect NND 8% of the time.

Adds 0 DC, +0d6 8% of the time.

Misses 9% of the time.

 

Averages +26 DC (counting a miss as -12 DC).

 

Can only be stopped by target diving for cover (at some penalty to dex roll).

 

Hmm, a maneuver that adds +26 DC on average to a 12 DC base attack? And is hard to stop? Vs +4 DC for the maneuver that supposed to be the high damage maneuver and is much more restrictive?

 

How can anyone suggest that it's not abusive?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

How can anyone suggest that it's not abusive?

 

Yet we have not one single example of it actually being abused in play. Not one! Presumably, no one but Gary is smart enough to see this gaping flaw in the rules. Has everyone else banned this maneuver from their games?

 

Nor has Gary yet suggested a fix that rebalances things (ie equalizes Rapid Fire, Autofire and normal attacks). But keep ranting away, Gary!

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

With rapid fire available, it makes every non protected villain essentially have the vulnerability to the attack.

 

The question, which you have declined to answer, is, as a GM, do you adjust your scenarios and villains to take into account the abilities of your player characters?

 

Originally posted by Gary

That merely lowers the expected damage from the "sweet spot" in the curve. And the PC can simply spread slightly more to compensate. No big deal.

 

He can spread more on his next attack, when his opponent(s) can change their tactics. He's lost out on this attack. And spent lots of END, likely for sub-optimal results. That risk is why rapid fire tends not to be used to the extent you expect it to be.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Single shot NNDs aren't unbalancing at all. It's combined with rapid fire that it becomes a one shot knockout.

 

Transform is commonly a one shot KO. Shall we ban it as well - especially "all or nothing" transforms, which need to be one shot KO's to be effective at all?

 

Originally posted by Gary

Do any other combat maneuvers turn a 60 active point attack into a 240 active point attack?

 

No. Neither does Rapid Fire. It effectively converts it to a 90 AP attack (Autofire, 4-5 shots). You get to roll your normal to hit instead of an extra hit for every 2 you make the roll by, and you lose your other half phase, OCV per attack and half your DCV. I'm disinclined to restrict it until I see - in actual play - that these drawbacks are inadequate and the maneuver is actually unbalanced.

 

Originally posted by Gary

You're completely missing the point. The average damage is 10d6 or 5d6 NND in this case. Well within campaign limits. It's the application of Rapid Fire that magnifies the damage well past your campaign limits.

 

I DON"T HAVE CAMPAIGN LIMITS!!! How many times do I have to say that, Gary? I look to the reasonableness of the character AS A WHOLE. If a character has 4 less OCV and half the DCV of the campaign norm, and he has an attack which requires a full phase, and that attack exceeds the campaign norms, I'm going to look at the balance of the WHOLE CHARACTER and ask whether his weaknesses in OCV, DCV and moving offset his extra offensive power.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Rapid Fire makes it imperative. If the other guy zaps you with a single 5d6 or 6d6 NND, it's not that big a deal most of the time. You suck up the damage and prepare your own attack. Simply the cost of doing business. If he rapid fires and zaps you 2-3 times, you're going to be out like a light unless you do something.

 

I have news for you - if you just stand there delaying for the entire fight, I suspect you won't win either.

 

"Villain 1: Oh no! It's MightyMan and his Amazing Friends! What will we do??"

 

"Villain 2: You two stay here and stare at them so they won't move. I'll go finish what we came here to do."

 

"Villain 3: Why not? It worked last time!"

 

Now, since we're all scared to take an action since someone else might clip us, Villain 2 moves away while Villains 1 and 3 stand around looking menacing. Since whoever goes first loses, that's a big win for the villains. Of course, the authorities can build a prison around them while they stand there staring at each other!

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Of course not, you're comparing a 150 pt mind scan and a 100 pt mental multipower (probably violates all your campaign limits), with a simple 60 pt multipower combined with a single maneuver.

 

Let's make it fit campaign limits. We'll drop his ego to 20 (though lots of egoists have much higher, a 7 OCV should be quite adequate). That's 20 points.

 

We'll make the Mind Scan 4d6 Cumulative (+1/2), Invisible (+1/4) 0 END (+1/2) - that's another 45 points. Is that within your campaign limits, Gary? Must be - a 60 point Ego Blast was OK.

 

I'll buy +20 with the targetting roll - most GM's don't factor skill levels into campaign limits, remember? That's 40 points (really should be 30 - I'm just offsetting a penalty to my OCV, aren't I?) If you want to be uinreasonable and disallow it, I'll use the points for a base so I can wait for a news broadcast to better pinpoint my target.

 

So let's just follow that process - he can have 4d6 Mind Control, Mental Illusions and Telepathy, all with the same advantages. I could put them in a multipower and add in a 4 1/2 d6 Ego Blast. Or I can just buy all four powers for 45 each.

 

That's 285 points spent - way less if I use the multipower. No attack power has more than 45 points - well within campaign limits. So I guess I can run him, huh Gary? Tell you what - I'll take a -1/4 on all my powers that they "cannot rapid attack". See - I've eliminated the biggest poroblem with egoists!

[Fenixcrest]

I see no problem whatsoever with rapid fire. It screws your DCV all the heck up. Sure, you can pay for Penalty Skill Levels to compensate, but then you have points invested in them.

Lo and behold, you've paid extra points to create your powerful ability. Anyway, you lose 2 OCV per extra shot, and the first miss means they all miss. As long as the fighting characters are properly balanced against each other for that campaign (made/adjusted by the GM.. the secret ingredient is love... the explosive kind, anyway...), then that's a pretty steep penalty.

 

And if the guy does have an astoundingly low DCV, he's probably a brick anyway. And while an NND will bypass all of his defenses, he probably has a bloody huge number of STUN and BODY points to boot. Also, NND's (especially ones that do BODY) are really, really expensive. If a character's trump card is his giant, well-balanced rapid fire NND, then his other powers (defenses, movements, whatever) will likely suffer, or at least his characteristics and/or skills will be in the hole.

 

On a standard 200-point super with reasonable disads, I think the problem would solve itself via mathematical balancing in an attempt to salvage as many characteristics/skills/powers as can be recovered in order to make sense for the character. On the other hand, I pretty much make the PCs to specification from my players (because I have more experience with the rules.. maybe next time they can have more of a hand in creation), so I'm careful to keep the whole thing pretty well balanced. So if a character did have an NND optimized for rapid fire, then it would be there to compensate for crappy... other stuff. Plus, the villains in my campaign aren't that stupid. They'd figure out the reasonably common defense(s) for the NND after a session or two of fleeing like sissies.

[zornwil]

I had to look back at my own rules - apparently I did notice Rapid Fire as it's "semi-banned", as part of "Blazing Away, Hipshot, Hurry, and Rapid Fire will generally not be allowed. If any of these are intrinsic to your character concept, I am open to discussion." I should have made better notes, but when I see it in this context it reminds me that I didn't see Rapid Fire as super-heroic generally. something more sub-superheroic. My concern with Rapid Fire was both genre and balance with higher-powered attacks. Also, I require all action in a phase be simultaneous (both PCs and NPCs will get a shot off almost no matter what, exceptions for heroic actions such as saving innocent NPCs, etc.); hipshot and hurry violate that. I left an opening to be reasonable though.

 

So I can't say if it's a problem in my game as it isn't only that we're seemingly all curmudgeonly old-time players who only hesitatingly are adopting 5th's new aspects, but also my own house rules that have dissuaded experimentation.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The question, which you have declined to answer, is, as a GM, do you adjust your scenarios and villains to take into account the abilities of your player characters?

 

If one maneuver is as unbalancing as Rapid Fire, it's easier to ban that single maneuver or adjust it, than to give every single villain in the campaign the proper defense.

 

For example, if there was a maneuver that added +20 DC per attack at 1/2 DCV penalty, it's easier to get rid of that maneuver rather than to fix 50+ villains.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

He can spread more on his next attack, when his opponent(s) can change their tactics. He's lost out on this attack. And spent lots of END, likely for sub-optimal results. That risk is why rapid fire tends not to be used to the extent you expect it to be.

 

Not really. He's hurt his opponent and his opponent has done squat to him. Plus as pointed out previously, it's really cheap to add reduced end on an NND attack.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Transform is commonly a one shot KO. Shall we ban it as well - especially "all or nothing" transforms, which need to be one shot KO's to be effective at all?

 

Transform is a 2-3 phase knockout at "standard" power levels. It's balanced at that point. If it can reliably KO foes in one phase, it's not balanced. Transform is fine. Rapid Fire Transform is ugly.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

No. Neither does Rapid Fire. It effectively converts it to a 90 AP attack (Autofire, 4-5 shots). You get to roll your normal to hit instead of an extra hit for every 2 you make the roll by, and you lose your other half phase, OCV per attack and half your DCV. I'm disinclined to restrict it until I see - in actual play - that these drawbacks are inadequate and the maneuver is actually unbalanced.

 

This is a good sign that autofire area effect NNDs are unbalanced as well. You're getting 240 pts of effect for 90 pts. Rapid Fire area effect NND is even more unbalancing. For 65 pts (including Rapid Attack), you're getting the same 240 active points of effect. That's because 4 separate 4d6 NNDs is functionally equivalent to a single 16d6 NND.

 

At the 60 pt level, the autofire area effect NND is only 2.5d6. 4 hits is 10d6 NND. Still respectable, but nowhere as bad as 16d6 NND.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I DON"T HAVE CAMPAIGN LIMITS!!! How many times do I have to say that, Gary? I look to the reasonableness of the character AS A WHOLE. If a character has 4 less OCV and half the DCV of the campaign norm, and he has an attack which requires a full phase, and that attack exceeds the campaign norms, I'm going to look at the balance of the WHOLE CHARACTER and ask whether his weaknesses in OCV, DCV and moving offset his extra offensive power.

 

Would you ban the sample character that Tesuji posted with 26 dex, 3 skill levels, and 60 pt multipower?

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I have news for you - if you just stand there delaying for the entire fight, I suspect you won't win either.

 

"Villain 1: Oh no! It's MightyMan and his Amazing Friends! What will we do??"

 

"Villain 2: You two stay here and stare at them so they won't move. I'll go finish what we came here to do."

 

"Villain 3: Why not? It worked last time!"

 

Now, since we're all scared to take an action since someone else might clip us, Villain 2 moves away while Villains 1 and 3 stand around looking menacing. Since whoever goes first loses, that's a big win for the villains. Of course, the authorities can build a prison around them while they stand there staring at each other!

 

Who says I'm delaying? I can just fight normally and save this at opportune times. If a foe has just attacked, I nuke him. Otherwise I can take single shots.

 

Or if I have the area effect NND, I just nuke the entire enemy group or force them all to dive for cover and let my teammates nuke them.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Yet we have not one single example of it actually being abused in play. Not one! Presumably, no one but Gary is smart enough to see this gaping flaw in the rules. Has everyone else banned this maneuver from their games?

 

Nor has Gary yet suggested a fix that rebalances things (ie equalizes Rapid Fire, Autofire and normal attacks). But keep ranting away, Gary!

 

And yet, you haven't pointed out A SINGLE THING WRONG WITH MY ANALYSIS. If you can't argue with the numbers, you attack the poster. Nice tactic.

 

I'd suggest banning Rapid Fire nonstandard attacks.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Let's make it fit campaign limits. We'll drop his ego to 20 (though lots of egoists have much higher, a 7 OCV should be quite adequate). That's 20 points.

 

We'll make the Mind Scan 4d6 Cumulative (+1/2), Invisible (+1/4) 0 END (+1/2) - that's another 45 points. Is that within your campaign limits, Gary? Must be - a 60 point Ego Blast was OK.

 

I'll buy +20 with the targetting roll - most GM's don't factor skill levels into campaign limits, remember? That's 40 points (really should be 30 - I'm just offsetting a penalty to my OCV, aren't I?) If you want to be uinreasonable and disallow it, I'll use the points for a base so I can wait for a news broadcast to better pinpoint my target.

 

So let's just follow that process - he can have 4d6 Mind Control, Mental Illusions and Telepathy, all with the same advantages. I could put them in a multipower and add in a 4 1/2 d6 Ego Blast. Or I can just buy all four powers for 45 each.

 

That's 285 points spent - way less if I use the multipower. No attack power has more than 45 points - well within campaign limits. So I guess I can run him, huh Gary? Tell you what - I'll take a -1/4 on all my powers that they "cannot rapid attack". See - I've eliminated the biggest poroblem with egoists!

 

And after your mentallist spends umpteen phases scanning for mine, My mentallist will rapid attack yours through the scan and wipe out yours.

 

Of course the way you built your mentallist, he's nothing but a joke. He can only get up to 24 pts of effect on anyone.

[tesuji]

"Again, you're modifying every villain in the world rather than one single maneuver. "

 

Again, not every villain in the world. We just choose the one's who will be apprppriately challenging to highlight on stage in the scenes we run.

[Hugh Neilson]

Seems to me we're just going around in circles here so, unless I see something new, I'm chalking this up to "You see it your way and I see it my way" after these posts. Thank you to all who have chimed in so far with their comments.

 

Originally posted by Gary

If one maneuver is as unbalancing as Rapid Fire, it's easier to ban that single maneuver or adjust it, than to give every single villain in the campaign the proper defense.

 

Maybe the better answer is to just ban NND's. They seem to be causing the problem. You've indicated you see no problem with Rapid Fire on normal attacks.

 

Originally posted by Gary

For example, if there was a maneuver that added +20 DC per attack at 1/2 DCV penalty, it's easier to get rid of that maneuver rather than to fix 50+ villains.

 

There isn't. And it would be unbalancing. Perhaps Steve and the boys at Hero did some playtesting with the maneuvers before unleashing 5e, hence we get the modified haymaker and some new ptional maneuvers. [i do agree with Zornwil, BTW, that Rapid Fire isn't a great fit with the superhero genre, which is the main reason I would carefull;y consider any character planning to use this frequently.]

 

Originally posted by Gary

Not really. He's hurt his opponent and his opponent has done squat to him. Plus as pointed out previously, it's really cheap to add reduced end on an NND attack..

 

To reiterate, you Rapid Fire your NND attack, using your whole phase and halving your DCV. Your opponent Dives for Cover, because he was expecting that. He does not get hit. He has taken no damage. His teammates then use yur tactic of waiting to the very end of the segment, then Rapid Fire to take you down. Or they just all coordinate on you since your SCV is halved. You're out of the fight, and they, as a group, lost 1 phase.

 

Originally posted by Gary

This is a good sign that autofire area effect NNDs are unbalanced as well. You're getting 240 pts of effect for 90 pts. Rapid Fire area effect NND is even more unbalancing. For 65 pts (including Rapid Attack), you're getting the same 240 active points of effect. That's because 4 separate 4d6 NNDs is functionally equivalent to a single 16d6 NND.

 

If we banned everything you've complained about as potentially unbalanced on these boards, I wonder what would be left.

 

Originally posted by Gary

At the 60 pt level, the autofire area effect NND is only 2.5d6. 4 hits is 10d6 NND. Still respectable, but nowhere as bad as 16d6 NND.

 

Net effect is "take 35 Stun" or "take 56 Stun". To be materially different, the character being hit needs a 35+ CON and, of course, more than 35 STUN. That's not the average in my games.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Who says I'm delaying?

 

YOU - every time anyone points out the drawbacks of Rapid Fire!

 

Originally posted by Gary

Or if I have the area effect NND, I just nuke the entire enemy group or force them all to dive for cover and let my teammates nuke them.

 

What teamates? Are they all standing outside the area of effect, or do they all have the defense against your NND? If they do, why is it surprising of the villains do as well?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

And yet, you haven't pointed out A SINGLE THING WRONG WITH MY ANALYSIS. If you can't argue with the numbers, you attack the poster. Nice tactic.

 

The fact it isn't happening in games indicates the power level you perceive isn't there, or that everyone has banned the tactic. I see no real evidence of the latter other than Zornwil's comment. Your analysis focuses in on the damage potential without considering the drawbacks.

 

I'm not sure where you perceive yourself being attacked, by the way. Your posts read like "anyone who disagrees with me must be an idiot", so I don't see you having much basis for complaining about comments made by others anyway.

 

Originally posted by Gary

I'd suggest banning Rapid Fire nonstandard attacks.

 

Very creative of you. What else should we ban because it's potentially abusive?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

And after your mentallist spends umpteen phases scanning for mine, My mentallist will rapid attack yours through the scan and wipe out yours.

 

Of course the way you built your mentallist, he's nothing but a joke. He can only get up to 24 pts of effect on anyone.

 

As noted previously, he's not goint to attack a mentalist - he'll mind control others into dealing with mentalists. With a 20 EGO, he's not optimized for dealing with a mentalist - pretty much any Mental Defense would make him ineffectual.

 

[Allegations that MindMan has telepathically stolen defense secrets and sold them to terrorist organizations shocked the nation today. The President today ordered the Joint Chiefs to bring in MindMan dead or alive, under charges of high treason.]

 

Mind you, the option is tempting - how much would his enemies pay to have MindMan waste a phase and go to 1/2 DCV...So I'm knocked out in the process - my bed's pretty comfy anyway!

 

Or I could spend all those leftover points on a swack of Mental Defense, I suppose. Sticking, of course, to the campaign maximum.

 

And cumulative doesn't cap out IIRC (don't have the book in front of me, but I seem to recall the example being a 2d6 mind control or some such).

 

One further thought: No, I wouldn't approve this character in my campaign. He's not four colour enough, even getting over his ability to ruin your life anonymously from half a world away.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Maybe the better answer is to just ban NND's. They seem to be causing the problem. You've indicated you see no problem with Rapid Fire on normal attacks.

 

As I've said often (but apparently wasn't heard), single shot NNDs aren't a problem. Rapid Fire NNDs are a problem because they stack. 3 4d6 NNDs do just as much damage as 1 12d6 NND at a fraction of the cost. That doesn't work the same way with normal attacks.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

There isn't. And it would be unbalancing. Perhaps Steve and the boys at Hero did some playtesting with the maneuvers before unleashing 5e, hence we get the modified haymaker and some new ptional maneuvers. [i do agree with Zornwil, BTW, that Rapid Fire isn't a great fit with the superhero genre, which is the main reason I would carefull;y consider any character planning to use this frequently.]

 

I just showed you that the 4d6 area effect NND adds +26 DC on average when you rapid fire. I'm glad you finally think it's unbalancing. Thank you for agreeing with me.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

To reiterate, you Rapid Fire your NND attack, using your whole phase and halving your DCV. Your opponent Dives for Cover, because he was expecting that. He does not get hit. He has taken no damage. His teammates then use yur tactic of waiting to the very end of the segment, then Rapid Fire to take you down. Or they just all coordinate on you since your SCV is halved. You're out of the fight, and they, as a group, lost 1 phase.

 

To reiterate, if the whole enemy team has to dive for cover to escape the area effect NND. And there's no defensive maneuver that'll protect against the Ego Blast. And the guy who dives for cover has 1/2 DCV anyway and will be quickly wiped out (using your logic that 1/2 DCV = automatic knockout).

 

And if the entire opposing team is just holding their actions to react to me, and I don't have area effect or ego blast, the rest of my teammates just attack and I don't. The entire opposing team is paralyzed by my threat and will start losing actions simply due to the threat of a basic attack. Sounds like a win in my book.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

If we banned everything you've complained about as potentially unbalanced on these boards, I wonder what would be left.

 

And yet, you haven't shown why you think Rapid Fire NND is balanced.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Net effect is "take 35 Stun" or "take 56 Stun". To be materially different, the character being hit needs a 35+ CON and, of course, more than 35 STUN. That's not the average in my games.

 

Big material difference. I'm shocked that you don't think that 21 stun is materially different. First of all, with the randomness of the dice that 10d6 NND could just as easily roll out 29 for example. That would leave the opponent still standing. You won't have the same problem with 16d6 NND. Even if you roll low, you'll still put out any non-brick opponents. Secondly, even if both rolled average, the first one will allow the opponent to take immediate recoveries. The second means GM optionland, or reasonably close.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

YOU - every time anyone points out the drawbacks of Rapid Fire!

 

I've acknowledged the drawbacks. And 1/2 DCV just isn't enough to counter adding +26 DC to an attack.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

What teamates? Are they all standing outside the area of effect, or do they all have the defense against your NND? If they do, why is it surprising of the villains do as well?

 

As I've said before, it could be an area effect cone or area effect any area. It could be the player getting the drop on the villain group, or simply the player having a higher dex than the majority of the villain group.

 

Or gasp, it could be as simple as the player being able to target the area effect optimally. Generally, the two teams are some distance apart in the beginning of any fight. Throwing the attack a few inches in the air or behind the opponents is standard tactics in any world, except apparently yours.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The fact it isn't happening in games indicates the power level you perceive isn't there, or that everyone has banned the tactic. I see no real evidence of the latter other than Zornwil's comment. Your analysis focuses in on the damage potential without considering the drawbacks.

 

Since you've already agreed that +20 DC is too much reward for 1/2 DCV, and I've shown that Rapid Fire can add +26 DC easily, I'm not sure we have a disagreement anymore now that you've seen the light.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I'm not sure where you perceive yourself being attacked, by the way. Your posts read like "anyone who disagrees with me must be an idiot", so I don't see you having much basis for complaining about comments made by others anyway.

 

Oh comments in the post I was answering like:

 

"Presumably, no one but Gary is smart enough to see this gaping flaw in the rules."

 

and:

 

"But keep ranting away, Gary!"

 

Certainly sounds like an attack to me.

 

I don't know if you've noticed it Hugh, but you get very abrasive when someone corrects your math or disagrees with you.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Very creative of you. What else should we ban because it's potentially abusive?

 

Many things. For example, megascale movement usable as an attack. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't allow 1" superleap usable as an attack megascale to allow people to punch other people into orbit, no matter how 4 color or appropriate it is.

 

I wouldn't allow extradimensional travel usable as an attack either since it's cheap and wipes out most opponents in one shot even though the comics do have several characters with that ability.

 

I wouldn't allow 1 googol charges that never recover, or charges of end reserve, or a host of other stuff that's technically legal but highly abusive.