Susano Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Greetings everyone. I'm looking to get some opinions on a power construct (listed below). Basically, does it look like it will do what I have written, and/or did I miss anything (or, is there anything I can remove)? Thank you. Feat Of Healing: A sure sign of Sidhe blood, this feat allows the character to be healed by sword (or other weapon) blows taken in combat. There is one catch however; it only works on every other blow, meaning the character will be healed, harmed, healed, harmed (and so on) in a battle. This feat carries over from fight to fight, so the player needs to keep track of how the last blow the character took affected him. Healing BODY 8d6, Trigger (being struck by a edged weapon; +1/4), Persistant (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (180 Active Points); Can Only Heal Up To Amount Rolled On Damage Dice (-1), Only Works On Every Other Blow (-1), Self Only (-1/2) (total cost: 51 points) plus Armor (48 PD) (72 active points); Linked (-1/2), Only Up To Amount Rolled By Healing (-1/2) (total cost: 36 points). Total Cost: 87 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Nice writeup, as always! I can't find any faults with it, it seems to do what you want it to do. I saw something like this in GURPS Celtic Myth, did you get the inspiration from there or from the myths themselves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susano Posted January 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Originally posted by Susano Yes. Talk about an exhaustive answer . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susano Posted January 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 In all seriousness, i was trying to decide if the "Only to amount rolled on Healing" limitation was valid. Or served any purpose. Basically it limits the STUN damage you *don't* take, which is a limitation. Further reading seems to indicate the Healing should be the amount you suffered from your *last* hit, not the one hitting you... OTOH, you don't take any damage from the blow hitting you either... so I guess what I developed is as valid as anything else. And yes, I do own GURPS Celtic Myth. I highly recommend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Yes, the formulation in G:CM is a bit iffy, I agree. But I think that your initial interpretation is the correct; that you sort of use the damage taken in the latest attack to heal yourself. Now you've gotten my curiousity piqued; exactly what are you up to . . . ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susano Posted January 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 An as-yet-unproposed project for HERO Games. And no, it's not Celtic Myth Hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Originally posted by Susano In all seriousness, i was trying to decide if the "Only to amount rolled on Healing" limitation was valid. Or served any purpose. Basically it limits the STUN damage you *don't* take, which is a limitation. Hmmm. Didn't think of this on the first look. It depends, I guess, on how you want it to ´taste´, so to speak. I'd drop the limitation, since it goes with the fact that you don't get damaged at all by the blow. And if any STUN get past that 48 rDEF + PD, well, A mighty blow like that ought to do something, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susano Posted January 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Okay. That's a valid point. I was alsolooking for ways to make it less expensive, but then, that's a powerful ability to have there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Originally posted by Susano Okay. That's a valid point. I was alsolooking for ways to make it less expensive, but then, that's a powerful ability to have there. A-yup! You know, you could always make it incremental. Begin at Heal 2d6 and let the player buy more as the game progresses . . . ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger3k Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 I'd just use the limitation at -1/2. The reason is the Absorption of damage done example used in Fred (p88). They use defenses with absorption, linked, with a -1/2 limitation, only up to amount rolled by absorption. So that part looks ok to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susano Posted January 15, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 Yeah, but that's against mutiple attacks, this is against one. I think the version without the lim does work better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavnn Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 I could be wrong, but wouldn't this construction require you to take an action resetting the trigger every time it goes off? Or does persistant avoid that problem? (I'm bookless at the moment). Of course, that might be deliberate, but I got the impression from the description that it should function without conscious effort. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.