Regeneration

[Dust Raven]

Re: Regeneration

 

Doh! I knew I was missing something. This is what I get for doing things from my poor memory. Anyway' date=' BODY Only should still be a Limitation.[/quote']

To me, that's like saying Drain BODY should have a BODY Only Limitation because it doesn't automatically Drain STUN along with it.

 

If you want to talk points, compare a STUN Regen to REC. With the standard, official write-up for BODY Regen, you'd Regenerate 3 STUN per Turn for 8 points. The same cost of REC nets you 8 STUN, 8 END and you can use it on each Phase if you take a Recovery. Looking at it this way, Regeneration is very expensive.

[GamePhil]

Re: Regeneration

 

I don't understand how you could point out that "most valid" was key, then ignore it in your examples.

 

(a) An EC is always cheaper than buying all the powers without one. EC's violate the mega rule.

 

A set of powers that logically follow the restrictions for an EC would be more valid in an EC. That is, where losing one causes you to lose the rest, you can't use them as an MPA, and so on. Therefore, they do not violate the mega rule.

 

If they do not logically follow the restrictions set down for EC's, then it is less valid, and you should not be putting them in there, yes.

 

( A 12d6 0 END EB costs 90 points. A 12d6 EB with an END battery of 6xSPD and a REC equal to its END is effectively 0 END. So, if I have a 3 speed, that battery would cost 2 (for 18 END) and + 18 (for 18 REC) = 80, and is an illegal construct under the mega rule. But if I have a 5 SPD, I should be required to pay 3 (for 30 END) + 30 (for 30 REC), because that's more expensive than 0 END.

 

If by special effect you have an EB that is effortless to throw, or somehow has unlimited energy, the 0 END one is more valid, and is therefore the one you should use. If it has energy that it is drawing from some limited source other than yourself, then the Reserve is more valid and is the one you should use, regardless of whether or not it is normally going to be functionally the same.

 

I say "normally" since it leaves the character with the Reserve open to another method of depriving him of the Power, for instance by Power Draining the Reserve. If it is logical that this be true, the Reserve should be purchased; otherwise, 0 END.

 

© See Ego Attack example above.

 

That one's is actually a bit of a challenge, since both powers are functionally equivalent, unlike the two above examples. However, I'd say that since there is a pre-built option in the rules, that it is the more valid Power, and therefore the one that should be used rather than building it up from scratch. Again, this does not break the rule.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration

 

I don't understand how you could point out that "most valid" was key' date=' then ignore it in your examples.[/quote']

 

Probably not too clear in my post; sorry.

 

The "examples" are intended to poke fun at the manner in which some try to interpret the Mega Rule to say "this is more expensive and therefore miust be the right way to build it" rather than "this is the valid mechanic under the rules".

 

Dust Raven sets out an excellent example with his comparison of REC to Healing. No character should be permnitted to buy +6 REC for 12 points.

 

You should have to buy 2d6 Healing Stun - Regeneration (16 points) + 1d6 END Healing regen (8 points), and buy 2d6 Healing STUN 0 END + 1d6 Healing END, 0 END Linked (both standard effect and full phase, of course) for another 37 points. That's 61 points, please! Plus you need to buy the very slow acting BOD regen, and Persistent on the second slots, but only when you're at -9 or less STUN.

 

Gets the effect, at way more cost, but REC is still the valid approach.

 

For the record, in my limited world view, a construct which achieves the effect but is overpriced for the benefit is equally invalid to one which achieves an effect at a cost too low for its benefit. Call me crazy but I like to think that characters should neither be allowed ti underpay nor forced to overpay.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Regeneration

 

Absolutely correct. Just because a power construction is most expensive *should* not mean that you have to buy it that way. Overpayment is just as bad as underpayment.

 

Why?

 

Because no matter what some players might say or do We are still limited to the points provided in the system. That system must work logically and consistently, otherwise we are back to a game of Shogun Warriors running around the park and screaming "No! I hit you with Grandizer's Rainbow Beam. You have to be injured!"

 

Hawksmoor

[Arthur]

Re: Regeneration

 

To me, that's like saying Drain BODY should have a BODY Only Limitation because it doesn't automatically Drain STUN along with it.

 

I see where I went wrong. I was thinking that Regen was based on Simplified Healing, when it is instead based on Healing BODY. That means the "Standard Effect" of 3 on a die should be 1.5 BODY, and there should be a Lim of -1/2 for that. I also note that you're supposed to get an additional -1/4 for each step slower than 1 Turn above and beyond the Extra Time. I guess that's a nod in the direction I was thinking of, since my way is +1/4 less of Advantages for each step slower.

 

Still too cheap, IMO, and no reason to hand-wave the "once per day" rule on Healing. If you're going to do that, it's easier to just make Regen a separate Power once again. It has been for 20 years, why change it now? "If it ain't broke, wait'll I get done with it".

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Regeneration

 

For those of you interested in constructing Regen as an Advantage to REC, try this:

 

REC Heals back BODY at a faster rate +1/2* per level up the time chart. Since REC is 2 cp per point, each 1 REC that heals BODY faster is 1 cp per time level. So for 1 point, you could heal back 1 BODY per week (in addition to whatever BODY you get back per month for the rest of your REC). Since there are 8 steps between month and turn, 1 BODY Regen costs 8 points - almost exactly what it costs in FREd! What a coincidence!

 

* This value is based on nothing more than what makes the end result most equal to the normal cost of Regen in FREd. If you want it to be +1/4, then Regen effectively costs 4 points per BODY/turn. If you want it to be +3/4, then it will be 12 points for 1 BODY/turn.

 

Oh, and because this method creates Regeneration as an advantage to REC, there is an implied requirement that your Regen can't exceed your REC (which usually won't be a problem). Oh, and this method doesn't have any clear built-in way to heal back limbs or come back from death. I guess you'll still have to by those adders separately.

 

And BTW, it's "meta-rule," not "mega-rule." And I regard that particular meta-rule as one of Steve & Co.'s brain farts, along with "No Temperature Level 0 exists" and the upcoming cubic feet masses of objects in the UB, when everything else in the game is in metric. The meta rule should be "The power construct with the most fair and equitable cost is the one that should be used," or perhaps "The simplest power contruct should be used," or even "The power construct that doesn't use Transform, EDM, or Change Environment should be used."

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration

 

Oh' date=' and because this method creates Regeneration as an advantage to REC, there is an implied requirement that your Regen can't exceed your REC (which usually won't be a problem). Oh, and this method doesn't have any clear built-in way to heal back limbs or come back from death. I guess you'll still have to by those adders separately.[/quote']

 

Now, let's stop and think about the limitation to REC that doesn't increase STUN or END...

 

It's interesting that you gtet the 8 points for REGEN 1/turn precisely, though. Maybe that can be the 6e fix since the 5e model is so reviled

[Tech]

Re: Regeneration

 

On a somewhat related topic' date=' I think the way Light is done as a form of images is just behind Regeneration in Hero's most unecessarily complex and counterintuitive official power builds. It's annoying to me how there are no particular rules that describe how it works, except in the FAQ. I'd probably make seperate powers for Regeneration and Light if I weren't using Hero Designer.[/quote']

Aw, you just had to mention 'unnecessarily complex', didn't you.

 

Rant on: I agree that building light, as well as Regeneration & Instant Change, is burdensome in it's creation. I'm not talking about points but seeing huge amounts of creative text describing what a power can & cannot do just to create something simple. Instant Change used to be simple stating 'Instant Change' for either 5 or 10 pts. Now, it's bogged down in creative text. I simply dumped the new Instant Change to go with the older version. Yeah, I can simply write it on my villain or hero sheet as Regeneration or Instant Change but then I see all these lines for published villains and sigh deeply. It's the case of 'it's built this way because that's the way it's built' instead of it being shown in simplicity, as in previous editions. I don't deny the 5th ed has good adders, though. I've also seen plot items built, such as Slug's changing people to slugs. Yeah, I suppose someone might use it regularly but I doubt it. Again, it is pointless text.

 

Ok, I'm finished. Rant off

[austenandrews]

Re: Regeneration

 

I'd probably make seperate powers for Regeneration and Light if I weren't using Hero Designer.

 

Statements like this make me weep.

 

-AA

[Dust Raven]

Re: Regeneration

 

I don't much mind the "pointless text". I don't see it as any different than the "pointless text" accompanying by Sleep Gas Grenade or even my Danger Sense (out of combat, immediate vicinity, discriminatory, 14-).

 

What's better is that "pointless text" can be modified to my personal tastes. Say I want to Regen something other than BODY. Perhaps I want to make a Healing Aura which grants Regen to everyone around me. The 5e construct allows this and represents the points effectively (such a Power should be worth more than 10 active points).