"Mobility" as an Adder

[JDRook]

This was originally inspired by a "popular mutant superhero film." (Everyone seems to be careful about stepping on trademarks.) Specifically, the scene where an "amphibious" villain-type slimes the telekinetic woman in the eyes, effectively blinding her until her energy-projecting boyfriend blasts off the hardened slime.

 

That to me would look like an Entangle of, let's say, 5D6 (50) with the adder Stops Sight Group (+10). Easy enough, except that save for the blinding, TK woman is completely unrestricted in her movement. Considering it's a -1 Limitation for Allows Accessible Focus use OR Hands/Feet Only, I figure that for Does Not Restrict Movement At All could arguably be a -2 Limitation.

 

(Of course, the attack itself could be a Slime Power Trick if you like, but keep following me here . . .)

 

So we have a highly effective blinding that could last anywhere from 1 phase (for characters with 10DC+ attacks available) to indefinitely (for characters too weak to break the Entangle), at a Real Cost of 20 points, which would buy you 4 segments of Flashed Sight Group.

 

This didn't seem balanced to me, so then I thought, what if you treat Mobility like a built-in Adder for Entangle? Say, "Sense of Mobility (10)" (the ability to move freely, not to be confused with Motion Sensing). The base Entangle is designed to block that "sense" with a 1 DEF/1 BODY barrier for every 10 points. Looked at like that, one could easily swap out Mobility for a Sense Group (in this case, Sight) and make an Entangle based purely around Sensory Deprivation. So the Entangle used in the above example would more likely be a 5D6 Entangle (50) with a real cost of 50, and a 20 point level of the same power could be broken out of by agent level characters (but not too easily). That seems more balanced.

 

Of course, now I've opened up a new can of worms with Mobility Adder. The first thing that came to mind was a Mobility Flash, or Flash-Freeze. Basically, it would be like a quick paralysis that would last for segments and be unaffected by the target's strength or firepower. Some SFX could be slowing time, freezing as an Ice Power, or even as a Presence Attack that completely overwhelms the target. Of course, Mobility Flash Defense could be tricky, but I think the basics are sound.

 

So what do you guys think? Should I run it past Steve?

 

JDRook

Minor Deity of Understanding

[SleepyDrug]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

Why isn't this just a Flash vs. sight group. Said amphibious guy's attack didn't stop our lovable telekinetic from moving in any way, shape, or form. It stopped her from seeing. She couldn't remove it (sounds like Flash which would take dispel to remove). But was long lasting (zero end, continuous) until removed (to end continuous as required by rules).

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

It was just a flash with a Physical Manifestation.

 

Since JG was blinded she apparantly couldnt target it with her TK, and it had too much DEF and BODY for her to get through with her barehands.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

It was just a flash with a Physical Manifestation.

 

Or it is an Entangle with Blocks Sight, which has existed as far back as third edition.

[Southern Cross]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I'm with Archer on this one.Remember, the girl in question couldn't breathe while slimed.I'd buy it as an Entangle that Blocks Sight with a Limitation "Must target specific hit location".

[Dust Raven]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I'm in the group for using Entangle. It just doesn't fit the mechanics for Flash at all, but fits the mechanics perfectly for Entangle. The only difference is that it allows complete mobility. As an Entangle, I'd say that a -2 is a bit much for "Set Effect (Senses Only)" but a -1 1/2 might be just right.

 

 

Sorry about the font size. I'm trying out the new buttons on the forum.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I'm in the Entangle group for the most part (blocks sight group, only affects a single hit location), and in this case Takes No Damage From Attacks. I might be coerced into a Sight Flash with a limitation that it can be cancelled by taking a full-phase action to wipe off the eyes, though.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

As much as I love entangle, I'm in the continuous, 0 end, uncontrolled camp. Uncontrolled requires a set of circumstances to remove the effect, and 1 DEF 1 BODY per 2d6 Flash seems to work for me, possibly per 1d6 w/ difficult to dispel

 

27

Blinding Goo: Sight Group Flash 4d6, Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Difficult To Dispel (x2 Active Points; +1/4), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Continuous (+1) (60 Active Points); Can Be Missile Deflected (-1/4), Does Not Work Against Desolidified Characters (-1/4), Limited Range (Spitting Distance; -1/4), Physical Manifestation (-1/4), Restrainable (Only by means other than Grabs and Entangles; Hold Mouth Shut; -1/4) [Notes: Effects are dispeled by any attack which does 1 DEF 1 BODY per 1d6 Flash (due to difficult to dispel)]

5

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

Reasoning from Effect, it blinded her for a time and had a physical manifestation which ended the power when destroyed.

 

Toad-Goo: Sight Group Flash 3d6 (standard effect: 3 Segments), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Continuous (+1) (45 Active Points); Physical Manifestation (This Limitation signifies a power that, while not built as a Focus or the like, has some physical embodiment that other characters can attack.; -1/4), Limited Range (-1/4), Extra Time (Delayed Phase, -1/4); Real Cost: 26 points

 

Seems a bit more logical to model an effect that prevents sight on a Flash than on an Entangle (which restricts movement); but whatever. The world wont end, so whatever floats your boat.

[Dust Raven]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

The problem (and only problem) with using Flash is that Flash Defense would protect against it. The SFX present a opaque barrier rather than something that affects they eyes/vision directly. Having Flash Defense protect against this type of attack is like using Flash Defense to see through walls.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

The problem (and only problem) with using Flash is that Flash Defense would protect against it. The SFX present a opaque barrier rather than something that affects they eyes/vision directly. Having Flash Defense protect against this type of attack is like using Flash Defense to see through walls.

Thats just SFX, IMO. If the FD came from goggles, then maybe the goo slides off of it. If it was a natural function of the characters eyes, then maybe they just "blink" it out and it doesnt affect them as much. If its modeled to reflect a character with good reflexes that is able to look away fast enough or sheild their eyes then the goo didnt get them square.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

Reasoning from Effect, it blinded her for a time and had a physical manifestation which ended the power when destroyed.

 

Toad-Goo: Sight Group Flash 3d6 (standard effect: 3 Segments), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Continuous (+1) (45 Active Points); Physical Manifestation (This Limitation signifies a power that, while not built as a Focus or the like, has some physical embodiment that other characters can attack.; -1/4), Limited Range (-1/4), Extra Time (Delayed Phase, -1/4); Real Cost: 26 points

 

Seems a bit more logical to model an effect that prevents sight on a Flash than on an Entangle (which restricts movement); but whatever. The world wont end, so whatever floats your boat.

 

Considering that Entangle has been a valid construction for something like this for at least 20 years (3rd edition came out in 1984) I think that, based on the description of the effect and the descriptions of Flash vs. Entangle, Entangle would be a better choice.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

Considering that Entangle has been a valid construction for something like this for at least 20 years (3rd edition came out in 1984) I think that' date=' based on the description of the effect and the descriptions of Flash vs. Entangle, Entangle would be a better choice.[/quote']

Thats like saying that since using leeches to drain bad humors has been around for centuries its better to use that method rather than modern medical techniques for symptomatic diagnosis and treatment. IMO, of course...

 

Automatic starters are bad too....should probably go back to the winch method.

 

Older <> better IMO

[Vondy]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I think an entangle that blocks a sense is the most sensible (simple) way to build it (see my concern about flash attacks below). A simple limitation "does not impede mobility (-1)" would define it well.

 

I can also see a flash attack with a physical manifestation working, but it would mean the manifestation "dissolved" once the segments ticked off, which doesn't really fit the SFX from the movie that shall not be named do to copyright infringement concerns that was described. For the flash method to work you would have to apply continuous (+1) to the power, as well as Only Costs End At Startup (+1/4).

 

There are always multiple ways of doing things with Hero.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I think an entangle that blocks a sense is the most sensible (simple) way to build it (see my concern about flash attacks below). A simple limitation "does not impede mobility (-1)" would define it well.

 

I can also see a flash attack with a physical manifestation working, but it would mean the manifestation "dissolved" once the segments ticked off, which doesn't really fit the SFX from the movie that shall not be named do to copyright infringement concerns that was described. For the flash method to work you would have to apply continuous (+1) to the power, as well as Only Costs End At Startup (+1/4).

 

Both of the flash based builds posted thus far have applied Reduced END and Uncontrolled as well.

 

Toad-Goo: Sight Group Flash 3d6 (standard effect: 3 Segments), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Continuous (+1) (45 Active Points); Physical Manifestation (This Limitation signifies a power that, while not built as a Focus or the like, has some physical embodiment that other characters can attack.; -1/4), Limited Range (-1/4), Extra Time (Delayed Phase, -1/4); Real Cost: 26 points

 

 

There are always multiple ways of doing things with Hero.

True that; Im not protesting alternate builds, Im just rejecting the line of thought that one way is better than another way solely because the mechanics for it have been around longer. I believe in comparing according to merit, not elapsed lifespan.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

True that; Im not protesting alternate builds' date=' Im just rejecting the line of thought that one way is better than another way solely because the mechanics for it have been around longer. I believe in comparing according to merit, not elapsed lifespan.[/quote']

 

I never said that Entangle was better solely because the mechanics have been around longer. It's better because it more closely matches the described ability, because Flash works differently and has different connotations, and because making Flash Uncontrolled and Continuous means that the Flash dice are rolled every Phase, which would leave the Power in the bizarre position of sometimes not leaving the target blinded. (Per the FAQ, a character who is Flashed is immune to further Flash to the same sense until the original Flash wears off.)

 

The described ability was a substance sprayed or squirted at the eyes of the target, which blinds the target until the substance is removed. Entangle can do that. To do it with Flash you have to bend over backwards, and you end up with something that's not quite right.

 

You previously appeared to be claiming that Entangle was not a valid choice for this. I was pointing out that it was and that there's no basis for claiming that it's not.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I never said that Entangle was better solely because the mechanics have been around longer. It's better because it more closely matches the described ability' date=' because Flash works differently and has different connotations, and because making Flash Uncontrolled and Continuous means that the Flash dice are rolled every Phase, which would leave the Power in the bizarre position of sometimes not leaving the target blinded. (Per the FAQ, a character who is Flashed is immune to further Flash to the same sense until the original Flash wears off.) [/quote']

In this case the Flash would never "wear off" until the Physical Manifestation was removed. Even if a segment or two passed between the flash effect stopping before the next roll was made the Physical Manifestation is still in front of the targets eyes and would need to be removed, just like a cloak or some other physical object could be pulled over someones eyes to block their LOS without invoking a Flash. Also, this Flash is Continuous; does the FAQ rule cover a Continuous Uncontrolled Flash affecting the same sense or just repeated uses of an Instant Attack Flash? If not then simple application of 1 hex accurate solves that issue -- as a Continues AoE the target would be reaffected by the flash as soon as they were eligible for it again.

 

The described ability was a substance sprayed or squirted at the eyes of the target' date=' which blinds the target until the substance is removed. Entangle can do that. To do it with Flash you have to bend over backwards, and you end up with something that's not quite right. [/quote']You dont have to bend over any further to do it w/ Flash than Entangle.

 

 

You previously appeared to be claiming that Entangle was not a valid choice for this. I was pointing out that it was and that there's no basis for claiming that it's not.

Im never claimed that Entangle wasnt a valid choice; I merely stated that reasoning from effect, if you want to blind someone it seems more logical to use Flash, not Entangle with a restriction "Does not Entangle".

[Legendsmiths]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

It depends on your definition of bending over backwards. Coming up with a limited power limitation that negates the immobility aspect of entangle, one of the fundamental aspects of the power. The flash write ups use established advantages to extend the duration of the flash.

 

"does not limit mobility" seems to be right up there with using entangles to build bridges. It makes sense, sure, but that's not what the power is for.

 

What about Darkness, usable as attack, with the same ads/lims as the flash powers?

[JDRook]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder <----

 

This is sparking a lot of discussion, as I'd hoped, but it hasn't really addressed what I was most curious about, that being the concept of Mobility as an inbuilt Adder for Entangle which could therefore be swapped out with a Sense Group, and the other possibilities inherent in the existence of a Mobility Adder.

 

Did anyone read to the end of the original post? Or at least wonder what the title was referring to? Am I thinking too far outside the box here?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

In this case the Flash would never "wear off" until the Physical Manifestation was removed. Even if a segment or two passed between the flash effect stopping before the next roll was made the Physical Manifestation is still in front of the targets eyes and would need to be removed, just like a cloak or some other physical object could be pulled over someones eyes to block their LOS without invoking a Flash. Also, this Flash is Continuous; does the FAQ rule cover a Continuous Uncontrolled Flash affecting the same sense or just repeated uses of an Instant Attack Flash? If not then simple application of 1 hex accurate solves that issue -- as a Continues AoE the target would be reaffected by the flash as soon as they were eligible for it again.

 

I take part of that back; Steve does allow for SFX.

 

Im never claimed that Entangle wasnt a valid choice; I merely stated that reasoning from effect, if you want to blind someone it seems more logical to use Flash, not Entangle with a restriction "Does not Entangle".

 

Unless you want the mechanical effect provided by Entangle that is bought Stops A Given Sense. To me, the original description fits the Entangle that Stops A Given Sense more closely than it does Flash.

 

It depends on your definition of bending over backwards. Coming up with a limited power limitation that negates the immobility aspect of entangle, one of the fundamental aspects of the power. The flash write ups use established advantages to extend the duration of the flash.

 

I can think of at least one other Power in which a Limitation is used to negate one of the fundamental aspects of the Power to create a particular effect, which is official and listed in FREd.

 

"does not limit mobility" seems to be right up there with using entangles to build bridges. It makes sense, sure, but that's not what the power is for.

 

Limiting the "entangleness" of Entangle is perfectly valid for simulating other kinds of Entangle effects. In particular, the example in FREd of Handcuffs limits the Entangle to "Hands Only", which would not limit the character's mobility. There are other SFX of Entangle that don't require embedding a target in a substance.

 

Overall, I don't believe anything about Entangle or the system in general prohibits using it in this manner. YMMV, and if you're the GM, run it your own way.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

I dont think a person's mobility could or should be treated like a sense such as sight or hearing. That is a very "left field" concept to me, and I dont see any potential benefit to the idea worth twisting ones brains around the implications of it.

 

Just one man's opinion, but there you go.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder <----

 

This is sparking a lot of discussion, as I'd hoped, but it hasn't really addressed what I was most curious about, that being the concept of Mobility as an inbuilt Adder for Entangle which could therefore be swapped out with a Sense Group, and the other possibilities inherent in the existence of a Mobility Adder.

 

Did anyone read to the end of the original post? Or at least wonder what the title was referring to? Am I thinking too far outside the box here?

 

I think I see what you're saying. You could use Entangle to by default either prevent mobility or stop a sense. I don't see that it's necessary to alter Entangle in this way, but if you want to run it that way, go for it.

[JDRook]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

It depends on your definition of bending over backwards. Coming up with a limited power limitation that negates the immobility aspect of entangle, one of the fundamental aspects of the power. The flash write ups use established advantages to extend the duration of the flash.

 

"does not limit mobility" seems to be right up there with using entangles to build bridges. It makes sense, sure, but that's not what the power is for.

 

What about Darkness, usable as attack, with the same ads/lims as the flash powers?

 

This is kind of my point. I'm actually redefining Entangle to a degree. I think most people were too intrigue with my "X-ample" to see that.

 

Instead of defining the base Entangle as "an attack that creates a DEF+Body barrier to mobility" by default, I'm saying that Entangle can be defined as "an attack that creates a DEF+Body barrier to one particular game mechanic [in this case either Mobility or Perception]."

 

This creates the idea of Mobility as a separate game mechanic, not as a Sense but possibly similar in point cost.

 

Other uses of Mobility as an adder intrigue me, particularly the straightforward Flash-Paralysis I outlined in my original post. I'm sure other applications could be theorized by my fellow forumeers.

[Dust Raven]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder

 

It depends on your definition of bending over backwards. Coming up with a limited power limitation that negates the immobility aspect of entangle, one of the fundamental aspects of the power. The flash write ups use established advantages to extend the duration of the flash.

 

"does not limit mobility" seems to be right up there with using entangles to build bridges. It makes sense, sure, but that's not what the power is for.

 

What about Darkness, usable as attack, with the same ads/lims as the flash powers?

The way I see it, Entangle is meant to restrict. It does this two ways. Movement and Senses. Removing the movement restriction still leaves a Power that restricts.

[Dust Raven]

Re: "Mobility" as an Adder <----

 

This is sparking a lot of discussion, as I'd hoped, but it hasn't really addressed what I was most curious about, that being the concept of Mobility as an inbuilt Adder for Entangle which could therefore be swapped out with a Sense Group, and the other possibilities inherent in the existence of a Mobility Adder.

 

Did anyone read to the end of the original post? Or at least wonder what the title was referring to? Am I thinking too far outside the box here?

I think your idea is a great one! Would I use it, or even recomend it? No. That's just me.

 

Overall, it's about fair. 0 DCV and no movement vs blind. I'd say it's close to balanced. Personally, I'd go with a Limitation similar to Hands/Feet Only though.