Avoiding Flash

[tesuji]

IMO...

 

The marauder throws a laser beam at our intrepid hero and the hero, with no forewarning "dodges" in a sudden flurry of abortive activity (whether this is a held action or a true abort lose next phase is irrelevent.)

 

Marauder throws a plasma burst that hits the ground and BOOM explodes and the intrepid heroes all announce "i dive for cover" in a sudden flurry of abortive activity (whether this is a held action or a true abort lose next phase is irrelevent.)

 

Both of these are ACCEPTED tactics and integral examples to the way the system works.

 

Marauder throws a prismatic blast at the still intrepid heroes to blind them and the heroes shout "i cover my eyes" in a sudden flurry of abortive activity (whether this is a held action or a true abort lose next phase is irrelevent.) But here the Gm says "nah you did not know that one was coming so i wont allow it. You are just so hosed!" with gleeful intent on his face.

 

Huh?

 

Why is it that when the flash is fired at me you seem to think its OK for me to dive for cover or dodge the shot as abortive reactions but if instead i want to cover my eyes (blinding me for a time) that suddenly its not within the realm of actions defined by "things a superhero might be able to do"??

 

I dont get it.

 

Can someone explain?

[JSenecal]

Why is it that when the flash is fired at me you seem to think its OK for me to dive for cover or dodge the shot as abortive reactions but if instead i want to cover my eyes (blinding me for a time) that suddenly its not within the realm of actions defined by "things a superhero might be able to do"??

 

To me all are the same. In any of those three cases, I would describe what Marauder is doing. If his hand glowed differently just before he fired, I'd discribed that also. For some villians that would be the case. For others (such as Foxbat), there is no way to tell what's coming.

 

If the player thinks he knows what's coming, he can do a defensive action. But if he guesses wrong, he'll do the wrong defensive action, which either won't help, or will make things worse.

 

But it's important to be fair to the players, and also to take into account that the characters may have spent more time studying Marauder than the player has. So if the characters are familier with the different Marauder attacks, then include that in the description. Example: Marauder is pointing his fist at you, the multicolored glow that procides his prismatic flash is building up. And he hits with with a flash attack...

[Hugh Neilson]

I said:

 

Similarly, wouldn't the vapors go around sunglasses rather than be dissipated by them?

 

You said:

 

Originally posted by Demonsong

If you reread my post you will see I said goggles not sunglasses. I was thinking any thing that has a positive seal. From a diving or gas mask or ski goggles. As long as it doesn’t have vents.

 

I was using sunglasses as a typical modern day example of flash defense, which I would anticipate the Blinding Vapors spell would circumvent based on its special effects. Let's try some more fantasy-based examples:

 

- my character is an astrologer. To better focus on the sun, he has a special set of eyewear which includes dark crystals and glass. These block out a lot of light, and therefore provide 10 points of Flash Defense. They are held in front of the eyes by one hend (Gestures), and are definitively not airtight. Will they block Blinding Vapors? Based on SFX, they should not. But since the Vapors are an ordinary flash, by rules mechanics they will.

 

- my character is a wizard. He has a magical Shield spell. It provides some force field, including 5 points of Flash defense. The special effect is a shield of force which darts about him, intercepting attacks and expands to block area effect attacks. It is not airtight. It blocks Flash damage by momentarily darkening to keep out Flash effects (much like sunglasses). Again, it will mechanically stop Blinding Vapors, but based on the latter's special effects, it should not.

 

- my character is a shapeshifter. One of his magical shapes is a beast that diugs a hole for itself to hide, then springs forth to attack. Because its eyes rapidly adjust to changes in ambient lighting, it has 10 points of sight flash defense. Again, should not stop Blinding Vapors, but mechanically it does.

 

The fact is that, while the rules do not specify Flash is a bright light, I cannot think of a single example of Flash Defense which has a special effect other than some means of mitigating the effect of a bright light.

 

One explanation is that Blinding Vapors is an NND flash and therefore circumvents common forms of flash defense. The defense is airtight eye coverings, (including any form of magic that prevents the vapors reaching the eyes). This would also be consistent with the fact that the vapors either reach one's eyes or they do not - a partial effect would not seem possible based on the attack's special effects.

 

Alternatively, perhaps anyone buying Flash Defense for sight based on avoiding bright light gets a limitation since it does not protect them from vapor-based flash atacks. Presumably, one culd then buy flash defense only against vapor-based flash attacks, which would be much cheaper - a magic bullet spell to protect against Blinding Vapors.

 

I do know that, if I were in your campaign, my wizard would work hard towards three spells. Blinding Vapors (of course), Nictating Membrane (which grants a nictating memnbrane to himself and any others he wishes) and Summon Lizard Creatures.

[Demonsong]

As I have said before, in my humble opinion, you’re reading way too much in to it. The villain that spits acid (or what ever in your face) is not an NND. And you could argue that that is a NND, because it could say that maybe it could bypass normal defensives because it blocks sight instead of blinding some one. In the end we look at it differently. And to your last statement, about being in my campaign. Well luckily my players are more worried about the story line and having fun than worried about one particular version of a spell and its possible abuse. And they certainly don’t go around trying to exploit a spell because they think it a rule loop hole. But you’re welcome to play how ever you like.

 

I believe I am done with this conversation now.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

Of course the party Warlock went out of his way to learn Burning Vapors and now it is a stable and often use spell of his. In the fantasy environment it is very effective for such a low powered spell (only 30pts).

 

and later...

 

Originally posted by Demonsong

And to your last statement, about being in my campaign. Well luckily my players are more worried about the story line and having fun than worried about one particular version of a spell and its possible abuse. And they certainly don’t go around trying to exploit a spell because they think it a rule loop hole. But you’re welcome to play how ever you like.

 

One of these is not like the other...

 

But seriously, as long as the spell is affected by Sight Flash Defense of any sort, I don't consider the spell a rule loophole. That's what I think the original poster, as well as I, have been asking. It sounds from SFX that normal flash defense would not affect this, and if this is the case, it's an advantage that should be paid for.

 

It's tough to see the logic of several of the SFX flash defenses I described stopping the vapors, but if it could all be explained scientifically, it wouldn't be magic, would it? And as long as flash defense works normaly, the spell should need no advantage.

 

To me, the spell is not overly powerful. It's quite efective if the opponent has no Flash Def, but the flash will only last on average 4 segments (1 phase in typical FH speed levels) at ground zero, less outside. If I were building the spell as a player, I'd change the SFX to "bright light" before I would make it an NND. If I were reviewing it as a GM, I would make it clear to the player that all special effects of Sight Flash Def will work against the spell. The only real concern is a player who thinks he's getting an effect that bypasses most forms of Flash Defense for free.

[Dust Raven]

Originally posted by Rick

A cloud of Tear gas could be Darkness W/a NND linked to it.

 

Spider-man can flash you W/his webs and your gogles would be useless in responce.

 

Spidermsn doesn't have a Flash. He has an Entangle that stops the Sight Group.

 

This is just another case of whether or not SFX trump the game mechanics or vice versa.

 

Demonsong, I know its a fantsy campaign, but if I were a player and wanted a pair of sunglasses (or mystic smoked lenses that let you see in the dark, and also have Flash Defense) that were bought as Flash Defense, would that protect my character from the Burning Vapors spell?

 

If so, then a normal Flash attack is fine, as it doesn't affect the mechanics of the game too much. If it wouldn't (because the sunglasses don't provide nigh-air-tight eye eovering) then that significently affects the mechanics and the Flash would have to be NND (or Flash Defense would be bought with Limitations, i.e. Only Versus Light Based Flashes).

[Demonsong]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Demonsong

Of course the party Warlock went out of his way to learn Burning Vapors and now it is a stable and often use spell of his. In the fantasy environment it is very effective for such a low powered spell (only 30pts).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

and later...

 

 

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Demonsong

And to your last statement, about being in my campaign. Well luckily my players are more worried about the story line and having fun than worried about one particular version of a spell and its possible abuse. And they certainly don’t go around trying to exploit a spell because they think it a rule loop hole. But you’re welcome to play how ever you like.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

One of these is not like the other...

 

He went out of his way to get the spell because of its cool special effect and the fact that it was effective. That was the point I was making. All the major spell casters are on multi-powers any way so we are only talking about a 1 point difference, if any. Now you’re just trying to belligerent and not trying to have a conversation and discuses things and make a point. Do you go out of your way act this way or is acting like an jerk come naturally to you?

 

 

 

Demonsong, I know its a fantsy campaign, but if I were a player and wanted a pair of sunglasses (or mystic smoked lenses that let you see in the dark, and also have Flash Defense) that were bought as Flash Defense, would that protect my character from the Burning Vapors spell?

Yes they would because they are magical. As I stated earlier flash defense and dispel magic are both good defenses against this attack.

[Rick]

"Spidermsn doesn't have a Flash. He has an Entangle that stops the Sight Group."

 

Well that's one way of looking at it (he does have that entangle), but if all it does is get in your eyes I'm hard pressed to see that as an entangle. This is in regards to the power that follows the occassional "Here's web in your eye" comment from spidey, it doesn't actually restrict the targets movement. You could call it an EXTREMELY limited entangle, but....

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Rick

"Spidermsn doesn't have a Flash. He has an Entangle that stops the Sight Group."

 

Well that's one way of looking at it (he does have that entangle), but if all it does is get in your eyes I'm hard pressed to see that as an entangle. This is in regards to the power that follows the occassional "Here's web in your eye" comment from spidey, it doesn't actually restrict the targets movement. You could call it an EXTREMELY limited entangle, but....

 

I'm almost inclined to do that. It is the effect he creates.

 

It's not really a Flash, since a high STR character with no Flash Def can rip it loose easily, where a low STR character with lots of Flash Def is blind until he can get the webbing removed. It lacks the permanence of a Transform, so that approach doesn't work. It seems to be an opaque Entangle that can't create barriers, doesn't restrict movement, etc. etc.

 

Kind of a bizarre construct but it seems a legit power.

[Rick]

THat is true. Or you can just say that the SFX of the flash wereing off is the target pulling it away. You could even give the Flash some type of continuos advantage only when the target doesn't activly try to remove it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

He went out of his way to get the spell because of its cool special effect and the fact that it was effective. That was the point I was making. All the major spell casters are on multi-powers any way so we are only talking about a 1 point difference, if any. Now you’re just trying to belligerent and not trying to have a conversation and discuses things and make a point. Do you go out of your way act this way or is acting like an jerk come naturally to you?

 

If you re-read your comments, you will note that you were the one impugning my gaming style

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Demonsong

And to your last statement, about being in my campaign. Well luckily my players are more worried about the story line and having fun than worried about one particular version of a spell and its possible abuse. And they certainly don’t go around trying to exploit a spell because they think it a rule loop hole. But you’re welcome to play how ever you like.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

and, in fact, the mage in your campaign (presumably a far better role player than I) adopted the same tactic of obtaining this spell, as you note

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Originally posted by Demonsong

Of course the party Warlock went out of his way to learn Burning Vapors and now it is a stable and often use spell of his. In the fantasy environment it is very effective for such a low powered spell (only 30pts).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I also note you did not do me the simple courtesy of responding to the sample Flash Defense mechanics I provided and saying "Yes, those would be effective. Blinding Vapors is subject to any form of flash defense." Your response to a different poster seems to clarify that the SFX do not enable the spell to evade ordinary flash defense. As noted previously, if the power enjoys no special advantage, it's clearly not an NND.

 

This does, however, beg the question (returning to the original topic) of why shaded lenses would block the vapors, as would a speedster quickly covering his eyes (bought as Flash Defense - and I guess we're mixing genres here; call him a Quickling instead of a speedster), but an ordinary human covering his eyes with his hands would get no protection. But depending on your campaign ground rules, that may well be the case for any type of flash - that's what the thread is all about.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Rick

THat is true. Or you can just say that the SFX of the flash wereing off is the target pulling it away. You could even give the Flash some type of continuos advantage only when the target doesn't activly try to remove it.

 

The joy of Hero - if you can't build it at least three ways, you realy aren't trying, are you?

[Rick]

So very very true!!!

[Demonsong]

You implied you wanted the power/spell because by the way you look at things you were getting some thing for free. Exploiting the rules. You wanted it because it was a loop hole. That is totally different from just wanting an effective power with a cool special effect. Try not to confuse the too. If you want I can explain it again in smaller words.

[Farkling]

ON Aiding Flash Defense

 

Everyone seems to picture DemonSong's Flash as a "thick billowing cloud of tear gas"

 

What if it is simply a mystical and thin acidic vapor that causes the eyes to water, sting, and blur? This necessitates rapid blinking in an attempt to clear the chemicals out of the target's ocular membranes.

 

The smoked lenses obviously protect the eyes by allowing a fluid buildup over the eyee that seals out the vapour. Mystical FD interrupts the magics that hold the vapours before the eyes.

 

Putting your hands in front of your eyes may or may not prevent the vapor effect, depending on whether or not you can create a seal before the vapor gets in.

You can have both rulings.

 

NOW...I have a crucial question on the subject of avoiding a flash by shielding the appropriate sense. [b}Will you allow a character WITH Flash Defense to BOOST his Flash Defense by performing the same action?[/b]

 

1) Single Target Flash attacks:: "I cover my eyes/ears/nose", for a single target effect, what is the absolute avoidance to counting it as a dodge manuever? That characters will complain about "wasting a phase to stop the attack?" then let it hit you. Closing the eyes may be a reflex action, but characters close their eyes briefly ALL THE TIME in response to SFX flashes from EB's and RKA's. Flash attacks are simply strong or long enough to cause sensory overload because reflex time is too "short" to deal with them. Keeping your eyes closed just isn't done in combat...

The game mechanic is clearly presented as is.

 

2) Area Effect Flashes. Characters can dive for cover to avoid them, losing a phase. So, they should be allowed to "cover their eyes/ears/nose" and stay in the area ignoring the effect? I like it as is. Characters that want to "cover their eyes/ears/nose" are literally standing in the area and attempting to ignore the attack. Fine. Buy Flash Defense. it's cheap. Bricks have to pay for the ability to stand and ignore EB's and RKA's, I think that a character should also have to pay for the privilege of ignoring a Flash Attack.

 

Flash Defense is cheap. Cheaper if you allow the limitation of "requires DEX (or PER or Combat Analysis or Power Knowledge) roll to activate" or even "must have prior knowledge of Flash usage" or some such -1/2 limit.

 

I think the breakdown in 5th comes from prior existence of Flash usage. Flash is priced equitably with other powers, both offense and defense. It's a cheap but limited AVLD or Entangle effect. Prior system users are simply not used to thinking that a small Flash attack is dangerous. By the way, House Rule (in 5th also, I believe) is that you cannot Flash a Flashed Target. They cannot percieve the attack...

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Demonsong

You implied you wanted the power/spell because by the way you look at things you were getting some thing for free. Exploiting the rules. You wanted it because it was a loop hole. That is totally different from just wanting an effective power with a cool special effect. Try not to confuse the too. If you want I can explain it again in smaller words.

 

Since you seem to want to hurl muck rather than discuss the issue, allow me to accomodate you. Hopefully, the small words will exclude "two", "too" and "to" Those ones appear to be giving you difficulty. Maybe we can mix a lesson into this post.

 

But Moooooommmm! Demonsong started it!

 

In any case, if you'll read my posts (I'm assuming you can read...if not, perhaps some kind soul will read it to you), you'll see that I have no problem with the power as written. The guy at ground zero will be blind for a phase, maybe two, and those close to him will be blind for a shorter time. It's not practical to use when your allies are already in close, as they'll also be affected. It's not weak, by any means, but it's not overpowered either. It would be if you simply allowed most flash defense to be avoided by special effects, but that's not the case from your followup posts. If someone wants that benefit too, they can pay for NND.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: ON Aiding Flash Defense

 

Originally posted by Farkling

NOW...I have a crucial question on the subject of avoiding a flash by shielding the appropriate sense. [b}Will you allow a character WITH Flash Defense to BOOST his Flash Defense by performing the same action?[/b]

 

I think if you allow the one, you have to allow the other. A character shouldn't lose an option because he buys a defense.

 

Originally posted by Farkling

1) Single Target Flash attacks:: "I cover my eyes/ears/nose", for a single target effect, what is the absolute avoidance to counting it as a dodge manuever? That characters will complain about "wasting a phase to stop the attack?" then let it hit you. Closing the eyes may be a reflex action, but characters close their eyes briefly ALL THE TIME in response to SFX flashes from EB's and RKA's. Flash attacks are simply strong or long enough to cause sensory overload because reflex time is too "short" to deal with them. Keeping your eyes closed just isn't done in combat...

The game mechanic is clearly presented as is.

 

2) Area Effect Flashes. Characters can dive for cover to avoid them, losing a phase. So, they should be allowed to "cover their eyes/ears/nose" and stay in the area ignoring the effect? I like it as is. Characters that want to "cover their eyes/ears/nose" are literally standing in the area and attempting to ignore the attack. Fine. Buy Flash Defense. it's cheap. Bricks have to pay for the ability to stand and ignore EB's and RKA's, I think that a character should also have to pay for the privilege of ignoring a Flash Attack.

 

Hmmm...there are other ways of ignoring an attack. Anyone can use the Block maneuver. Perhaps one option is to define covering one's eyes/ears/whatever as a Block. If you want to try to get your hand in the way of the (attack you believe is a) flash, abort to block and make the usual block roll. And too bad if it wasn't a flash after all, since yo aborted your phase for no significant benefit.

 

Originally posted by Farkling

By the way, House Rule (in 5th also, I believe) is that you cannot Flash a Flashed Target. They cannot percieve the attack...

 

Doesn't this logic support the ability to avoid the flash by voluntarily deadening the sense (eg. covering your hands with your eyes)? This has its own drawbacks, of course. "OK, while Light Lad takes aim, I'll watch. If anyone covers their eyes, I'll fire off a shot while he can't see me to get out of the way." Hey, if he's blind anyway, Light Lad can fire his laser burst instead of a flash and everyone wins (except the poor sucker with his hands over his eyes...oh well, you can't please everyone).

[Farkling]

Well, let's see.

 

I guess Hugh has said enough for me. Someone who wants to shield a sense against a Flash attack is going to roll a block against the attack. If successful, I suppose I will need to allow an amount of temporary Flash Defense related to the success of the block roll, AND impose the penalties for voluntarily neutralizing the sense until next action phase. I'm good with that. You need a held action or an abort. Yup. That works for me. 1/2 DCV sounds good.

 

Now I have to work out the amount of defense granted. Allowing a BLOCK to completely stop a ranged attack is counter to the established combat system, so it must therefore grant some amount of temporary defense. 1 to 1 is simply too efficient for those speedsters and martial artists out there. They'd be guranteed at least 4 points versus a standard Energy Projector.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Farkling

Well, let's see.

 

I guess Hugh has said enough for me. Someone who wants to shield a sense against a Flash attack is going to roll a block against the attack. If successful, I suppose I will need to allow an amount of temporary Flash Defense related to the success of the block roll, AND impose the penalties for voluntarily neutralizing the sense until next action phase. I'm good with that. You need a held action or an abort. Yup. That works for me. 1/2 DCV sounds good.

 

Now I have to work out the amount of defense granted. Allowing a BLOCK to completely stop a ranged attack is counter to the established combat system, so it must therefore grant some amount of temporary defense. 1 to 1 is simply too efficient for those speedsters and martial artists out there. They'd be guranteed at least 4 points versus a standard Energy Projector.

 

Well, discussions with Farkling always bring out the issues. So, if we're agreed Blcok makes a good starting point for a 0 point maneuver designed to avoid being Flashed, how does a normal Block work, and how would our "block flash" maneuver work?

 

Our maneuver is better than Block since it works on a ranged attack. It is equivalent in that it will cost an attack action, and can be aborted to. It is inferior to Block in that it has no positive effect if our guess about the incoming attack is in error (plugging your ears won't help against a Sight flash, for example), and in that it imposes penalties for loss of the sense in question.

 

hmmm...how about this? The player Blocking sets the benefit and penalty. You can completely deaden the sense (where reasonable - hold your breath for smell or cover your eyes for sight; even fingers in the ears don't block all hearing), in which case you can't use the sense before you get a free action, but the flash is ineffective. Or you can take a penalty on PER rolls related to that Sense, and get that number of Flash Defense.

 

What if we use only the latter (you can't be immune - bright enough light will blind you even though your hand is in the way), and cap both the penalty and the defense at 10? 10 won't block an average 12d6 Flash fully. And the chuaracter must still make the Block roll to get the benefit (the penalty's moot if he does take the flash, of course).

 

So Brick expects to get Flashed. He slaps his hands over his eyes (aborting his next phase), succeeds in the Block roll and chooses 10. The Flash does 9, so he's not blinded. But he's at -10 sight PER rolls, and must roll to perceive any attacker until his next phase (or he aborts to move his hands, after his already aborted phase passes) or he's treated as blind for purposes of avoiding that attack.

 

Hmmm...comes down to "yes you can do it, but it may have been better to just let the Flash hit." Well, you get what you pay for. Buy some Flash Def contacts if you don't like it!

[Pattern Ghost]

I might allow blocking a flash, but unless it was a held action, I'd give a minimum of one phase flashed if the character doesn't have any flash defense, since they're reacting to the flash and there is a delay. This also justifies a speedster buying flash defense with the same SFX, b/c he would have the reflexes to cover the sense after the attack started, but before it reached him.

[Pattern Ghost]

Oh, yeah: Did anyone else misread the topic line as "Avoiding FISH" ? I must be hungry...

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Hmmm...comes down to "yes you can do it, but it may have been better to just let the Flash hit." Well, you get what you pay for. Buy some Flash Def contacts if you don't like it!

or he may just dive for cover 1 hex away. requires an abort, requires an easy dex roll, and the woes of prone are really IIRC not worse than those of being blinded.

[Dust Raven]

I really don't think this needs any rules to arbitrate. It's all gonna depend on the SFX of the Flash, whcih sense group(s) it affects and how the target wishes to avoid the attacks. Making a rule for each any every possible (or even all the "general") circumstances would be making a mountain out of a mole-hill. Even with simply "bright light" Flashes it varies too much. A Viper Flash Grenade works differently than Crystallis' Blindng Light beam, which also works differently than Cobalt's Dazzle Beam.