Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

[Snarf]

One of the players in my RPG group thinks an Obvious, Accesible Focus isn't worth a -1 limitation, when compared to other -1 limitations, and I tend to agree with him. We worked out these alternate costs which might become a house rule in our game:

 

-0: Inobvious, Inaccessible Focus

-1/4: Obvious, Inaccessible

-1/4: Inobvious, Accessible Focus

-1/2: Obvious, Accessible Focus

 

Has anyone else found focus overpriced in their games? Any hints on making foci more disadvantageous?

[Agemegos]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Any hints on making foci more disadvantageous?

 

Use more telekinetics and ranged grabs.

[SleepyDrug]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

How often do you try to steal foci?

 

One of my best momments happened when the villain did a takeaway on a players sword and then ran her through with it. He slipped away with her blade.

[Gary]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Have your 75 Str brick buy OAF's.

[Bengal]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

I kind of think that OAF is the baseline for a -1 advantage. It can be broken, stolen, or left in the car, so it's fairly common that a guy will end a battle without it. In my opinion, if you're getting way too many OAFs in your game, you ought to break, steal, and otherwise neutralize foci more often.

[tesuji]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

The answers already given point to the truth...

 

its worth X IF and ONLY IF in your game YOU prove it to be worth X by the frequency and severity of the problems it causes.

 

How often do you make it so that in an encounter the focus is successfully attacked and damaged?

how often do you make it so that in an encounter the focus is taken?

how often do you make it so that an encounter occurs when the character is without his focus?

how often do you make it so that you make it so that the time crunch series of rapid fire missions happens to fall in the "focus is in the shop" replace-the-focus period?

 

the emphasis in each of those is on "do you make it so". i could in each case have said "does it occur" but that would make this sound like its a thing that just happens naturally. It isn't.

 

Of course, that means that -1 is THE RIGHT VALUE if and only if in your game you make it show up enough and seriously impacting so that your players don't feel "its not worth -1" and they also don't feel "its worth a lot more than -1".

 

of course, this means that -1/2 is THE RIGHT VALUE if in your game you make it show up enough and seriously impacting so that your players don't feel "its not worth -1/2" and they also don't feel "its worth a lot more than -1/2".

 

etc etc etc.

 

The values aren't "right" because they were proven by playtesting or the guys at HERo are psychic, they WILL BE right (or wrong) because by script and design and deliberate intent with the scenario and the precise abilities of the enemy you PROVE them to be right (or wrong) in play.

 

So, if your players agree its not worth it, then thats simply an observation about how much so far your game has shown them the problems. Now, you have several options.

 

1. Change your style and game... increase the freequencies of the problems with scenario and script design to prove the printed values right. (Some may describe this as you working for the system or changing your game tofit the system or any such thing.)

 

2. change the vlues to match your game style and keep your game as it is but make the system adjust to suit you.

 

3. Don't fret it and play a focus heavy game.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Excellent points Tesuji, and ones I was planing to make myself.

 

A focus is one of those limitations that the GM has to work with to make it worth it's bonus. Others, like Extra Time or Concentration work for themselves, but not a focus. The GM has to actively try to take them away, break them, or put the character in a situation where he hasn't brought it with him. If you don't, the limitations isn't worth anything.

[Magmarock]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

How often do you try to steal foci?

 

One of my best momments happened when the villain did a takeaway on a players sword and then ran her through with it. He slipped away with her blade.

 

:hail:

 

Mags

[Snarf]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Thanks for all the great advice.

 

In my last game, people didn't lose foci at all, but it was a heroic game, so the value of the limitation was less important. This time I'm going to make sure some of the enemies can exploit the limitation.

[TheEmerged]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

It's too early for me to remember if this is an actual rule or just something I've done for years, but OAF's get dropped by Stunned ("CON Stunned") characters when we play.

[Vorsch]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Caps shield and Thors hammer are classic OAF focus.

 

But then again how often are they without them? But when some one really tries to take it away permanently the character is in real trouble, especially thor as he utterly hopeless without it.

 

I like the sugestion that stunning makes you drop a focus, have to spend a phase picking it up. nice

[SleepyDrug]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Caps shield and Thors hammer are classic OAF focus.

 

But then again how often are they without them? But when some one really tries to take it away permanently the character is in real trouble, especially thor as he utterly hopeless without it.

 

I like the sugestion that stunning makes you drop a focus, have to spend a phase picking it up. nice

 

Well, mjolnir (Thor's hammer) is really OIF due to the enchantment that causes it to return. As for Cap?

 

Crossbones has disarmed him in 3/5 fights. Once he nearly decapitated Cap with his own shield.

Molecule Man destroyed it once, so did Ultron, and Thanos, and it broke while lost.

Cap has lost the shield for extended periods and needed replacements: once as The Captain, once as Man Without a Country, once at the start of vol 3.

Cap has thrown the shield and needed to retrieve it later in the fight several times.

 

If you are a long time reader of Cap, you'll see he often has OAF style problems.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Never had a problem with the Focus values as written. IIF can be taken away, albeit with difficulty. It can be detected, although the circumstances are more limited than with an Obvious Focus.

 

Ranged takeaway of Accessible Foci with Telekinesis or shots targetted at the Focus are certainly one way to make the Limitation count for more. Another thing to keep in mind is the inherent practical limitations on hand-held objects. Does you demigod brick character wield a magic weapon? Well, does he walk around with it in his hand at all times, or does he carry it somewhere on his person where a sneaky opponent could snatch it away from him by surprise? What does he do with it if he needs to use both hands to lift or throw something?

 

Also, a Focus isn't just vulnerable in combat; watch out for those sneaky pickpockets with Sleight of Hand.

 

I agree with tesuji that the GM needs to make a Limitation worth its points by how he or she runs it; but IMO the rules pertaining to OAF leave lots of potential to do so.

[Vorsch]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Well, mjolnir (Thor's hammer) is really OIF due to the enchantment that causes it to return. As for Cap?

 

Crossbones has disarmed him in 3/5 fights. Once he nearly decapitated Cap with his own shield.

Molecule Man destroyed it once, so did Ultron, and Thanos, and it broke while lost.

Cap has lost the shield for extended periods and needed replacements: once as The Captain, once as Man Without a Country, once at the start of vol 3.

Cap has thrown the shield and needed to retrieve it later in the fight several times.

 

If you are a long time reader of Cap, you'll see he often has OAF style problems.

 

Thors hammer only returned if he deliberately threw it (EB). Otherwise he had to go get it, also Beta Ray Bill was able to use it ( among others ).

 

An OAF is a OAF no matter what, if your character just happens to be a combat god like cap or Thor ( literally in his case ) thats just covering his ass.

 

Arguments along the lines of Cap is to good to be disarmed so his shield is OIHID hold no water. Rant over, i know this has been discussed before.

 

OAF is a -1 lim the game says so, end of story. if you focus is a object that can be seen and can be simply picked up from your unconcious form or disarmed( without any sfx of teleports back to user on demand etc ).

 

When OAF plot come up then its worth the points, especially for unique focuses.

[Blue]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

OAF is a -1 lim the game says so' date=' end of story. if you focus is a object that can be seen and can be simply picked up from your unconcious form or disarmed( without any sfx of teleports back to user on demand etc ).[/quote']

 

Love it when people do that

 

It's an RPG. All rules are subject to the judgement of the GM. And a good GM gets any rule changes clarified with his players before hand.

 

Change away! Just don't expect Steve to start including alternate values based on house rules.

 

Personally, I think it's well priced. My only critcism was that originally I thought maybe it should be....

-1/4 IIF

-1/2 OIF

-3/4 IAF

-1 OAF

 

Reason for the IAF thing was that it seemed to me once you figured out it was a focus and you could take it, it was never ever safe again. Any combat, it became your first target. That seemed worth more to me than OIF. I still lean that way, but not enough so to recalculate every villain and hero. Status Quo is fine by me.

[Vorsch]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Love it when people do that

 

It's an RPG. All rules are subject to the judgement of the GM. And a good GM gets any rule changes clarified with his players before hand.

 

Change away! Just don't expect Steve to start including alternate values based on house rules.

 

Personally, I think it's well priced. My only critcism was that originally I thought maybe it should be....

-1/4 IIF

-1/2 OIF

-3/4 IAF

-1 OAF

 

Reason for the IAF thing was that it seemed to me once you figured out it was a focus and you could take it, it was never ever safe again. Any combat, it became your first target. That seemed worth more to me than OIF. I still lean that way, but not enough so to recalculate every villain and hero. Status Quo is fine by me.

 

If everone knows about your focus it qualifies as a OAF. I agree with your cost structure.

 

Thanks for the compliment by the way.

[BrandonQ]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Yes, it's very much worth the -1 limitation. Just look at it this way: If you have an OAF, you have the One Ring. Everyone knows that you have it, pretty much immediately, and that it's the source of your power. Plus, they can quite easily take it from you!

 

*smiles*

 

One way or another, it's going to cause all kinds of trouble.

[Pegasus]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Yes, it's very much worth the -1 limitation. Just look at it this way: If you have an OAF, you have the One Ring. Everyone knows that you have it, pretty much immediately, and that it's the source of your power. Plus, they can quite easily take it from you!

 

*smiles*

 

One way or another, it's going to cause all kinds of trouble.

 

I warn you, if you try to take my One Ring...I'll fall down at you!

[tesuji]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

An OAF is a OAF no matter what, if your character just happens to be a combat god like cap or Thor ( literally in his case ) thats just covering his ass.

 

in my hero games, i was more of a mind to follow the rules here.

 

if someone wanted a character who had his special object(s) but who, like the line says "just never seems to have the problems", then i would not balk at all to him taking a lesser lim such as OIHID or even no lim at all. Even though he had gadgets, he suffered no more problems than anyone did for their SFX.

 

On the other hand, anyone taking the focus lim or any other lim, was made to understand... the lims are not about "CAN be a problem." You DID get points back so their WILL be problems. The lims are not about "might be a problem". There was no "might get points for it" you GOT points back. So they understood going in that no matter how difficult they try and make it to enforce the lim, no matter how much time and effort they spent "covering their ass" so to speak... the lim would still occur and would still cause problems.

 

if it takes some evil group botching a balrog summoning and releasing a wave of chaotic magic energy that corrupts all magical devices until they can be cleansed with a several day long ritual ("are you going to go cleanse the staff of power or go stop the balrog rampaging through the mall hero?"), then thats what it takes. Your lim will be a lim.

 

if it takes a series of failures of your cybernetic parts whenever a specific enemy's radiation attacks hit, until you can shield them against it (a process involving several days) ("are you going to let radion run loose and complete whatever it is he is building with those stolen parts, hero?"), then thats what it takes.

 

You take the points, you spend the points, you better expect the l;egbreakers to come round knocking when the vig is due.

 

I can however definitely see games where the focus lims are halved, due to not wanting to bend the plan around them. i gotta say, i think in most games the focus lims are underenforced.

 

Ask yourself this... how many characters have you see willing to put OIF on almost every power or OAf on main powers? Compare that to how many have done double end or 14- act on every power OR triple end or ACT 11- on main powers?

 

The answer IMX is lots and lots of the former and few if any of the latter.

 

this tells me that at least in part OIF at -1/2 and OAF at -1 are seen as viable, playable etc while the others are not on that large or serious a scale.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

It's too early for me to remember if this is an actual rule or just something I've done for years' date=' but OAF's get dropped by Stunned ("CON Stunned") characters when we play.[/quote']

I use a similar rule.

 

There are two types of accessible foci: handled and worn.

A "handled foci" is like a gun, or something that requires it to be "in hand" when used. It uses up a hand or hands (that can't be used for other maneuvers, or can be targeted with a grab), and if stunned, the focus will drop. On the up side, you get your full STR to resist Disarms or Takaways.

A "worn foci" doesn't require hands to operate. Things like a necklace or amulet on a thin chain, or most hats. It just works whenever you need it to and it keeps your hands free. If you are stunned you don't lose it automatically. However, because you haven't got your hands on it, you only get casual STR to resist Disarms or Takaways.

[SleepyDrug]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Thors hammer only returned if he deliberately threw it (EB). Otherwise he had to go get it, also Beta Ray Bill was able to use it ( among others ).

 

This is not true. We saw Thor "call" his hammer as recently as JLA/Avengers and as far back as the Terminus Factor story in the annuals.

 

Arguments along the lines of Cap is to good to be disarmed so his shield is OIHID hold no water. Rant over, i know this has been discussed before.

 

Uhmm...I don't mind people commenting on my posts, but please be accurate. Let me repost my earlier comments here:

 

Crossbones has disarmed him in 3/5 fights. Once he nearly decapitated Cap with his own shield.

Molecule Man destroyed it once, so did Ultron, and Thanos, and it broke while lost.

Cap has lost the shield for extended periods and needed replacements: once as The Captain, once as Man Without a Country, once at the start of vol 3.

Cap has thrown the shield and needed to retrieve it later in the fight several times.

 

Note where I state the Crossbones DISARMED him.

 

OAF is a -1 lim the game says so, end of story. if you focus is a object that can be seen and can be simply picked up from your unconcious form or disarmed( without any sfx of teleports back to user on demand etc ).

 

And my point was that this may apply to Cap's shield, but not to Thor's hammer.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

Crossbones has disarmed him in 3/5 fights. Once he nearly decapitated Cap with his own shield.

 

Note where I state the Crossbones DISARMED him.

I'm not sure if I've got you here, but is there a difference between "disarmed" and "DISARMED"? Or were you talking about someone other than Cap in the second statement?

 

Sorry, but I'm not a Cap fan and no nothing of his exploits.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

I'm not sure if I've got you here, but is there a difference between "disarmed" and "DISARMED"? Or were you talking about someone other than Cap in the second statement?

 

Sorry, but I'm not a Cap fan and no nothing of his exploits.

FYI, I believe that Captain America in Marvel's Universe, like his combat cousin Batman from DCU, is considered to be the best non-superpowered HTH fighter. I've seen many write-ups which have most of his combat stats pegged at normal human maximum of 30 for STR, DEX, CON, etc. with a 6 SPD too. Batman may not be 'quite' as good but he still holds the same place in his world's normal human HTH rankings.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

I always thought Cap was a super soldier, chemically altered or something like the Silver Avengers in Hero. Not a "normal" but a guy that's gotten a bit more than just training.

 

I could be wrong... I watched cartoons as a kid.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is OAF worth a -1 limitation?

 

I always thought Cap was a super soldier' date=' chemically altered or something like the Silver Avengers in [i']Hero[/i]. Not a "normal" but a guy that's gotten a bit more than just training.

 

I could be wrong... I watched cartoons as a kid.

the super soldier serum gave him abilities at the maximum of human potential, hence a pretty solid baseline to define his stats right at 30. sort of like a permanent potion of heroism from D&D.