Would you allow this power in your Fantasy Hero game?

[Demonsong]

Would you allow this power in your Fantasy Hero game?

 

Say a Thief / Assassin that has a 60 point psionic multi-power and a 100 end reserve to power it. His swordsmanship and bow skills or not amazing but above average. So would you allow this power as a multi-power slot……

 

Physic Venom

 

1D6+1 RKA

+1 NND

+1 Does Body

-1/2 requires bladed weapon of opportunity

-1/2 Weapon must do body damage

 

With this build he could charge a sword and hit some one with it; or dagger and throw it; or an arrow and shoot some one.

 

To powerful or just cool and in character?

 

Thanks

 

Demonsong

[Killer Shrike]

Id have to see the rest of the character and have some idea of the general operating principles of the campaign and a rough estimation of the other PCs in the party to be rock solid on this, but nominally yes I would definately allow it, and in fact have played characters with similar (and more deadly) abilities.

[farik]

what's the NND defense? That would have a big impact on whether I'd allow it.

[Guest joen00b]

Shrike is right, I'd want to see the rest of the MP to see how this fits in with it. What's the REC of the END Reserve? What other Offensive abilities does the MP Have? It seems rather powerful, but if it's on par with the rest of the group powerbase, it should be fine. Does this add to the base damage of the weapon or treated as another hit? (I guess it doesn't matter as NND, really)

 

For an assassin it looks like a nifty ability. A write up would be welcome, though.

[lemming]

Everyone elses reservations and "I would require extra time to prep weapon"

[GrimJesta]

60 point psionic multi-power and a 100 end reserve to power it

Chances are, my post is based on ignorance (I play 4th, not 5th), but doesnt FH discourage power frameworks? Im curious now...

 

-=Grim=-

[Markdoc]

Yes, the original FH discouraged power Frameworks, but it had a very limited approach to playing fantasy games (not necessarily bad - I thought the books were well-written - just limited) with fairly low powered or expensive magic and a limited selection of abilities /powers for non-mages.

 

IIRC, there was poll a while back and about 2/3 of GM's used frameworks of some kind in their FH game. Like anything Hero, it's up to you, and personaly I like Frameworks in FH: but I tend to restrict starting points a bit to compensate.

 

As to the power listed above, I'd be a bit dubious as a GM: not because of the power per se, but because I don't like "catch-all" frameworks. If the player has a psychic powers multi, then (in my mind) it should contain psychic powers. What the Sam Hill is a "Psychic Toxin" and how can you coat a blade with a psychic power? OTOH, I'd be perfectly happy with the same power in a alchemical multi.

 

cheers, Mark

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Markdoc

As to the power listed above, I'd be a bit dubious as a GM: not because of the power per se, but because I don't like "catch-all" frameworks. If the player has a psychic powers multi, then (in my mind) it should contain psychic powers. What the Sam Hill is a "Psychic Toxin" and how can you coat a blade with a psychic power? OTOH, I'd be perfectly happy with the same power in a alchemical multi.

 

cheers, Mark

I think he's playing off of the "Ectoplasmic" aspect of Psionics introduced in D&D 3e Psionics.

 

I dont use that brand of thought regarding Psionics, but thats a personal preference as I dont like my Fantasy Psionicists feeling like Ghostbusters. Under such a paradigm however, the psychic toxin idea is tennable.

[SCUBA Hero]

Would I allow it?

 

Certainly, given that the assassin already has a 60-point Multipower. I'd think a straight 4d6 HKA would be a lot more deadly in a FH game.

 

IOW, given the power level already possesed by the assassin, I don't find it unbalancing (particularly with the 'Weapon Must Do BODY Damage' Limitation.

[Talon]

Given the existence of a 60 point MP and the fact that it doesn't apparently require much in the way of Limitations (Gestures, Extra Time, etc.), I assume that this is a fairly high-powered game.

 

Given that assumption, it seems like a reasonable power.

[Hugh Neilson]

Let's turn it around - would you feel you jhad been unfairly treated if your GM introduced a character with an identical power which was used against you?

 

I find that's a great way of identifying abilities which should not be allowed.

[Guest joen00b]

Actually, no. It would mean his defenses aren't too hefty. And if we figured out the Defense of the NND, it would render him Kitten-like.

 

I've seen many a GM whip out a baddy with a power none of us had and use it on us. We'd escape, plan a contigency, and sooner or later, we would overcome.

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by farik

what's the NND defense? That would have a big impact on whether I'd allow it.

 

Personally I would rule "weapon must do BODY damage" as a condition of the NND, and not give a Limitation for it.

 

In a FH game where a PC has a 60 point MP, I'd probably allow the power. Heck, when I started my current game, one PC had a 1d6 RKA, BOECV, Usable From Desol (definitely a case of the player's restraint dictating the permissibility of the power).

 

-AA

[SCUBA Hero]

Originally posted by austenandrews

Personally I would rule "weapon must do BODY damage" as a condition of the NND, and not give a Limitation for it.

I think that 'Weapon Must Do BODY' is given the same -1/2 Limitation for animal venoms in HSB.

 

I'd say the NND Defense would be the appropriate Immunity to Poison (hmm, what would that be for a psychic poison or Mental Defense, or something similar).

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by SCUBA Hero

I think that 'Weapon Must Do BODY' is given the same -1/2 Limitation for animal venoms in HSB.

 

I'd say the NND Defense would be the appropriate Immunity to Poison (hmm, what would that be for a psychic poison or Mental Defense, or something similar).

 

Are the venoms is the Bestiary also NND? What stops those?

 

Bestiary or not, I'd still rule that way. I don't find Immunity to X to be common enough to fulfill the NND requirements. YMMV.

 

-AA

[Hierax]

Since Psychic Venom is Psionic it should be somehow related to Mental Powers:

 

- it could be NND, Does Body - Not if have MD

- or AVLD MD

- or it could just be a linked EGO Attack

[SCUBA Hero]

Originally posted by austenandrews

Are the venoms is the Bestiary also NND? What stops those?

 

Bestiary or not, I'd still rule that way. I don't find Immunity to X to be common enough to fulfill the NND requirements. YMMV.

I'll look it up tonight, but I think they are NND - Does BODY, with the defense being the appropriate Immunity *or* the appropriate anti-venom.

 

I think that allowing a Limitation for the carrier attack must do BODY is debateable; I was more pointing out that it fits with DOJ precedent.

[Demonsong]

As to the power listed above, I'd be a bit dubious as a GM: not because of the power per se, but because I don't like "catch-all" frameworks. If the player has a psychic powers multi, then (in my mind) it should contain psychic powers. What the Sam Hill is a "Psychic Toxin" and how can you coat a blade with a psychic power? OTOH, I'd be perfectly happy with the same power in a alchemical multi.

 

The actual effect is the charging of a weapon with physic energy (causing the blade to shimmer lightly) and release that physic energy in to the victims nervous system as a kind of physic venom, if the weapon dose any real damage.

 

And I really liked the concept of a psionic assassin.

 

what's the NND defense?"

 

1-Immunity to poisons (all): If something is immune to all normal poisons then its immunity to this by default.

 

2-Mental Defense: Any amount will negate this poison. (To be fair psionic’s are rear, but no forbidden, in my world)

 

3-Having more that 25 points in psionic powers: A trained mind can easily render this poisons effect useless.

 

4-Being a Warlock: In my world Warlock’s are magic users who channel mana through shear force of willpower.

 

5-Not having a brain and nervous system.

 

Let's turn it around - would you feel you jhad been unfairly treated if your GM introduced a character with an identical power which was used against you? I find that's a great way of identifying abilities which should not be allowed.

 

Well that’s kind of what this is all about, it’s for a NPC. I don’t like to use a bunch of things in my campaign that I would automatically veto for a pc. This looks ok to me but I wanted some input.

 

Given the existence of a 60 point MP and the fact that it doesn't apparently require much in the way of Limitations (Gestures, Extra Time, etc.), I assume that this is a fairly high-powered game.

 

Well the default for your average caster type in my game is a 60 point multi-power. And the game is 75+75. I don’t know if that’s high powered to you or not. It is definitely above average I think. As I think Hero’s should be.

 

It seems rather powerful, but if it's on par with the rest of the group powerbase, it should be fine.

 

I think it about even with the characters power base.

 

Does this add to the base damage of the weapon or treated as another hit? (I guess it doesn't matter as NND, really)

 

This is a treated as another hit. But hit location is not relevant to this damage as it attacks the brain and nervous system (STUN multiplier will be default X3)

 

Wow …..thanks for all the good input.

 

Demonsong

[Demonsong]

I would also like to state for the record Scuba Hero that.....

 

"I wanna be a mean and lean killing machine, and carry a lot of massive kewl swordz"

 

Its a great character consept.

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by SCUBA Hero

I think that allowing a Limitation for the carrier attack must do BODY is debateable; I was more pointing out that it fits with DOJ precedent.

 

True dat.

 

-AA

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

Well that’s kind of what this is all about, it’s for a NPC. I don’t like to use a bunch of things in my campaign that I would automatically veto for a pc. This looks ok to me but I wanted some input.

 

From your other comments, I'd say it seems reasonable for your campaign. It's also noteworthy that many of the defenses you note are "invisible", so he's likely to use this on a few people who are immune.

 

That leaves the big question whether to allow -1/2 for "only if weapon does BOD". Not a big deal if it's in a multipower, but I'd say this merits a limitation - it means the power woh';t have its effect at times. How great a limitation depends on how often you expect his attack won't do BOD. Since Act 14- (also -1/2) works about 83.8% of the time [iIRC], I would expect the character to fail to inflict BOD maybe 1 time in 6 at a -1/2 level.

[Demonsong]

That leaves the big question whether to allow -1/2 for "only if weapon does BOD". Not a big deal if it's in a multipower, but I'd say this merits a limitation - it means the power woh';t have its effect at times. How great a limitation depends on how often you expect his attack won't do BOD. Since Act 14- (also -1/2) works about 83.8% of the time [iIRC], I would expect the character to fail to inflict BOD maybe 1 time in 6 at a -1/2 level.

 

We the power is based of normal poisons. That is where I got the limitation form and I think considering the special effect of the power that it is perfectly reasonable. At lease in my mind. (I guess that’s not saying much )

 

In a fantasy setting where relatively high PDr are available for free I think it is a good size limitation, isn’t it? Chain is Def 6 and Plate is Def 8, and I will not even get in to wizards shields. Hell even Heavy Ring Mail is Def 4. Your average weapon does 1D6+1 or 1 ½ D6. Sure PC’s and more powerful NPC’s can do a little more damage, but with average defenses like that, if said assassin is using this power against any of then it he will have to do enough damage for his venom to work. I don’t know maybe I am looking at it wrong? What do you think? It’s a good question. Any one else have a diffrent view?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

We the power is based of normal poisons. That is where I got the limitation form and I think considering the special effect of the power that it is perfectly reasonable. At lease in my mind. (I guess that’s not saying much )

 

SNIP SNIP

 

I don’t know maybe I am looking at it wrong? What do you think? It’s a good question. Any one else have a diffrent view?

 

I would look at the specific character to assess whether itr's reasonable. If he inflicts 2d6 KA, it's likely reasonable - he'll roll low enough to get no BOD on occasion. If he does 4d6 KA (how? You tell me! Deadly Blow + high STR/skill levels + big weapon?), it probably isn't worth -1/2. If he has a nakled advantage of Penetrating to apply to any weapon, I wouldn't give him a limitation.

 

In other words, I would base the limit on how often the specific character buying the power will likely fail to inflict BOD damage.