Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

[Wanderer]

Taking into account that the revision of HERO 5th ED. is currently being written, I humbly and respectfully but officially propose a rule change:

 

Making the point of origin for powers flexible. As the default, a power may originate from any part of the character's body. It is no more fixed, as in the current system.

 

The reason: in most cases where a character has Powers (cfr. wizard spells, superhuman abilities), generally the SFX allows for the power being released from different points of the character's body (eg. hands, eyes, forehead, mouth). It is only in a minority of cases that the origin has to be fixed, typically when the Power has the Focus Limitation AND the Power is directly generated by the Focus (eg. an Energy Blast is released by the Focus blaster, or through a Power Armor), or the SFX implies a fixed origin (eg. Super-Breath). But these cases are generally the minority.

 

When the PoO must be fixed, generally it means it may be impeded somehow by restraining or grabbing the body part involved. Therefore, it might be treated as a special case or side effect of the Restrainable Limitation (maybe with a -1/4 value if it does not completely fulfill the prerequisites of the full Lim: e.g. it may be grabbed, but not entangled).

 

This rule change would remove a unnecessary rigidity from the system that is not justified enough by the source material to be done the default. Better to make free origin the default, anf fixed origin the special case.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

It is only in a minority of cases that the origin has to be fixed

 

Let's see... supers who have ranged attacks with fixed points of origin...

 

Superman

Green Lantern

Batman

Green Arrow

Human Torch

Cyclops

Ice Man

Iron Man

The Vision

(I can think of plenty more, but that's enough for now)

 

And those which don't are...

 

Storm ("Indirect", in Champions terms)

 

Hmm. I can't think of any others, offhand.

 

Which superheroes were you thinking about?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

 

Um.....cant think of many characters that can project from whereever they like.

[Insaniac99]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Let's see... supers who have ranged attacks with fixed points of origin...

 

Superman

Green Lantern

Batman

Green Arrow

Human Torch

Cyclops

Ice Man

Iron Man

The Vision

(I can think of plenty more, but that's enough for now)

 

And those which don't are...

 

Storm ("Indirect", in Champions terms)

 

Hmm. I can't think of any others, offhand.

 

Which superheroes were you thinking about?

 

actually, Ironman, Batman, Green Arrow, Greenlantern,superman, and Cyclops all fit in either the Focus catagory, or the SFX implied origin*. however, can't the Human torch shoot flame out of either hand? does he always have to use both hands, or always the right right hand? the same goes for Iceman.

 

I see what Wanderer is gettting at, but I haven't actually found a reason for my chatacters to buy the flexible point of origin, the munchkin in me says what real bennefit do you get that is worth the loss of points in your EB. and I'm sure that I'd abuse the "free limitation" of taking fixed point of origin for most of my powers for the nice point break.

 

 

*I haven't read any comics** with Vision in them so I don't know his powers.

 

** or indeed, any comics in a LONG time, so I'm working off of memory

[JJR]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

 

I must agree with the others here. Very few characters have flexible origin points for powers. You can take the +1/4 indirect advantage on a power to make it body flexible. That will allow you to shoot it from any part of your body at will.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

...the Focus catagory...

 

Irrelevant. Deal with one issue at a time: the point of origin of the power.

[JJR]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

actually' date=' Ironman, Batman, Green Arrow, Greenlantern,superman, and Cyclops all fit in either the Focus catagory, or the SFX implied origin*. however, can't the Human torch shoot flame out of either hand? does he always have to use both hands, or always the right right hand? the same goes for Iceman. [/quote']

I believe if you define the hands as the origin point it can be any hand or both at the same time due to the sfx of a rapid fire or mpa attack. The difference is that while most characters can shoot out of either hand they cannot change the PoO to be eyes for the next attack because the hands are entangled. The +1/4 indirect advantage allows for that.

[Wanderer]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Let's see... supers who have ranged attacks with fixed points of origin...

 

Almost all of the supers you mention have a Focus as power source, and belong to the exception I mentioned: power is a Focus, or is generated by one.

 

Green Lantern: Focus

Batman: Focus

Green Arrow: Fcous

Iron Man: Focus

The Vision: Focus (solar gem, just like Warlock)

 

Human Torch, Ice Man: don't be silly. There is nothing in their powers' nature that mandates a fixed power PoO. Using hands is just practicality, but they could just shoot power blasts from their asses if they wished. They belong in the "flexible" list.

 

And those which don't are...

 

Storm

Phoenix

Dr. Strange

Loki

Firestorm

Invisible Woman

Scarlet Witch

Human Torch

Ice Man

Electro

Thanos

Odin

Silver Surfer

Thor (seen releasing power bolts with and without hammer)

Jenny Sparks

Jack of Hearts

Captain Marvel

 

Cyclops and Superman have indeed fixed point origins, but they are the absolute minority among Focus-less superhero characters.

 

Therefore, point of origin should be flexible among heroes that do not draw powers from a Focus.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Um... someone may be able to direct me to a section of the rules where this is specified differently, but AFAIK for all practical purposes that is the default.

 

The game mechanic effect of specifying a point of origin for one's powers is the implication that neutralizing that point of origin will make those powers unusable, e.g. confining a person's hands. That's covered by the Restrainable Limitation. If it has no game effect, though, where the power originates from is solely a matter of SFX, without a need for an Advantage or Limitation or any change in the cost. To my knowledge there's nothing in the rules that says you can't define the power as coming from any part of your body, or from every part of your body. Even if you do define it as coming from one part of your body, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's Restrainable unless you buy it that way.

 

Again, if someone can direct me to a section of one of the published books where it does say that, I'd be grateful.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

[snipped]

 

How to put this delicately... you've established that you can't separate unrelated game mechanics (point of origin vs. anything else, be that Focus or whatever else), and you've verified your suggestion has no significant basis in the genre.

 

Case closed, imo. [edit: that seems harsh, so I've clarified it further down]

[caris]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Lord Liaden,

 

Page 71 - Is where the fact that a power has to have a specified point of origin without the Indirect Advantage. While the rules do not state that the powers are neutralized. The section where it talks about each point of origin having its own benefits and drawbacks, and the example it gives of a eye-beam, implies that the nature of the point of origin should fall into the category of “common sense, dramatic sense, and sense of game balance.†While I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the power should be neutralized, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be impacted by something like a grab if the blast is coming out of your hands.

[Wanderer]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Um... someone may be able to direct me to a section of the rules where this is specified differently' date=' but AFAIK for all practical purposes that [i']is[/i] the default.

 

Fred: p. 71

"...the attack might come from the character's fingrtips, eyes, forehead... eahc point of origin has its own benefits and drawbacks (an eyebeam is easy to aim, but it's hard for a character to use it free himself if his hands are tied behind its back. Once chosen, the point of origin cannot be altered."

 

pp. 167

"You can also define Indirect at +1/4 value as allowing a character to alter the point of origin of a particular power... apower can originate from whatever part of a character's body he desires... However, once that point of origin is chosen, it cannot be altered. With Indirect, it can be changed; the blast could come from the eyes one Phase, and the hands another Phase"

 

but see Restrainable, pp. 200:

 

"A Power with this -1/2 Limitation is generated by or based upon an area of the body that can be restrained... If that area or part of the body is grabbed, entangled, or otherwise restrained, the character cannot use the Power. When he breaks free of the restraint, or it is removed, the Power functions normally again."

 

Can you see the contradiction ? A Power without Restrainable is assumed not to be liable to blocked by restraining the generating body part, yet mandating a fixed point of origin is assuming just that. And yet, requiring a +1/4 Advantage for allowing a purely cosmetic freedom would be grossly unbalanced. Nor, due to system granularity, you can make an Advantage cost less, except making it 0-value. So why not making this version of Indirect 0-value (or making flexible point of origin the default, which is the same) ? If one wishes to have a SFX fixed PoO, let him take Restrainable.

Moreover, source material really does not require this rule, except for Focus-using heroes. Other cases, like innate power heroes preferentially shooting blasts from hands, is merely artistic convention. There is really nothing in the power's SFX that would *require* it.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Case closed' date=' imo.[/quote']

 

On re-reading that, it seems harsh to me. So I'll try to clarify it.

 

On the one hand, it's pretty clear to me that characters whose ranged attacks have a fixed (or mostly-fixed) point of origin are the norm in the genre.

 

On the other hand, there is the Indirect advantage for those characters who don't fit into that category.

 

So it seems to me that, within the context of this subject, the game is fine as-is, and I, personally, don't see any need to discuss it further, so I, personally, don't plan to discuss it further.

[schir1964]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Fred: p. 71

"...the attack might come from the character's fingrtips, eyes, forehead... eahc point of origin has its own benefits and drawbacks (an eyebeam is easy to aim, but it's hard for a character to use it free himself if his hands are tied behind its back. Once chosen, the point of origin cannot be altered."

 

pp. 167

"You can also define Indirect at +1/4 value as allowing a character to alter the point of origin of a particular power... apower can originate from whatever part of a character's body he desires... However, once that point of origin is chosen, it cannot be altered. With Indirect, it can be changed; the blast could come from the eyes one Phase, and the hands another Phase"

 

but see Restrainable, pp. 200:

 

"A Power with this -1/2 Limitation is generated by or based upon an area of the body that can be restrained... If that area or part of the body is grabbed, entangled, or otherwise restrained, the character cannot use the Power. When he breaks free of the restraint, or it is removed, the Power functions normally again."

 

Can you see the contradiction ? A Power without Restrainable is assumed not to be liable to blocked by restraining the generating body part, yet mandating a fixed point of origin is assuming just that. And yet, requiring a +1/4 Advantage for allowing a purely cosmetic freedom would be grossly unbalanced. Nor, due to system granularity, you can make an Advantage cost less, except making it 0-value. So why not making this version of Indirect 0-value (or making flexible point of origin the default, which is the same) ? If one wishes to have a SFX fixed PoO, let him take Restrainable.

Moreover, source material really does not require this rule, except for Focus-using heroes. Other cases, like innate power heroes preferentially shooting blasts from hands, is merely artistic convention. There is really nothing in the power's SFX that would *require* it.

 

Actually, there is no contradiction here. You're making a false assumption.

 

Here's the difference between POO and Restrainable:

 

Fixed Point Of Origin does not imply that the power stops functioning.

 

Example: If Superman is Blindfolded, it does not stop him from using his Heat Vision. He might not be able to attack someone until he's freed himself of the blindfold, but he can still use his power and suffer any consequences of doing so.

 

Restrainable specifically states (per your own quote) that the power in question can not be used, therefore it stops functioning.

 

Example: Hawkman is unable to fly when his wings are entangled/tied up. He loses the power to fly at all.

 

So there is no contradiction here.

 

Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Ah, thank you, Wanderer and Caris. I see what you're getting at now.

 

Wanderer, I can see why this issue would bother you. For the most part, though, I'd agree with Caris that this tends to fall within the parameters of "common/dramatic sense." I should have specified when I brought up SFX of Powers that the GM incorporating minor benefits and drawbacks to particular SFX have long been a part of the game. It's not unlike a STUN Only Energy Blast being a net +/-0 because the pros and cons tend to cancel each other out.

 

The difference with Restrainable and Indirect IMO is that they're assessing a specific significant penalty or benefit based on where the Power is coming from. In the case of Restrainable, identifying the point of origin allows someone to completely neutralize it; while Indirect eliminates any of the potential minor drawbacks to point of origin, leaving only the potential benefits from being able to choose the origin. Under those circumstances I'd say that the Advantage and Limitation assessed for them is reasonable.

 

Certainly YMMV, and I wouldn't declare you wrong. I would have to add, though, that given Steve Long's assertion that there will be no changes in the rules to 5ER, I wouldn't hope for this to be considered before 6th Edition.

 

Edit: schir1964 makes the point much more clearly than I did, although perhaps a tad brusquely. A theoretical blindfold capable of blocking Superman's sight might require him to use his Heat Vision to burn through it before he could see clearly, but he could still use his Heat Vision. If it were Restrainable he wouldn't be able to use it at all before the blindfold was removed.

[JJR]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Can you see the contradiction ? A Power without Restrainable is assumed not to be liable to blocked by restraining the generating body part' date=' yet mandating a fixed point of origin is assuming just that. [/quote']

You are confusing different things here. Restrainable means that the power cannot work if the body part is restrained. You tie up Angel and he cannot fly, but if you tie up Superman he can fly.

 

A restrainable attack would be one where the person can be grabbed or have something happen to him to keep his powers from being used at all. Restrainable attack powers are rare both in comics and the game. Restrainable is most often used to define non-focuses such as wings or Wolverine's claws. Things which are not a focus due to the "can be removed" barrier but are able to be stopped from being used.

 

A character with restrainable on an energy blast would be one that could not use his power if entangled, no matter which body part it came from, while someone who did not have the limitation could still use his hands or eyes or nose or whatever to attempt to break from the entangle.

[Wanderer]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

It's not unlike a STUN Only Energy Blast being a net +/-0 because the pros and cons tend to cancel each other out.

 

Exactly. I was asking for "Power may come from any part of the character's body" Indirect be made +/- 0, just like that.

 

However, given that

 

I would have to add, though, that given Steve Long's assertion that there will be no changes in the rules to 5ER, I wouldn't hope for this to be considered before 6th Edition.

 

which I was not aware of, I have to recognize this thread has no point at all. Well, I hope at least he will consider the issue at least for the Ultimate Energy Projector, or Ultimate Mystic, as this rule mostly affects them (and cosmics), if not 6th Ed.

 

I have to remark, however, that nobody has given me a really good reason why the extant rule should not be changed. Again, the fact that energy projectors, mystics and cosmics with innate ranged attacks are usually drawn releasing power from a preferential body location (usually hand) is an artistic convention (it is generally more dramatic that way, or occasionally from eyes) that has nothing to do with power being actually *fixed* in that position by its nature. Supers that have power really restriced that way are rare (Superman, Cyclops). Otherwise, the rule only has justification when the power is generated by a Focus (which is a minority of cases, in the genre): point of release for a laser pistol blast *should be fixed, it only makes sense. Rule should be limited to Foci (gods know if Foci are barely balanced as they are) and Restrainable Powers. I challenge you to give a reason why the rule should be maintained, except for Focus-using character.

 

Enforcing a restrictive rule with game effects just to mirror an artistic convetion seems quite silly (and annoying) to me, especially given the "look at the real effects" Hero philosophy, and I don't see why I have to pay for a +1/4 advantage to be rid of it.

[schir1964]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

I have to remark' date=' however, that nobody has given me a really good reason why the extant rule should not be changed...[/quote']

 

First off, if you are wanting know why the rules are the way they are, you are asking the wrong people. You need email DOJ to get the true why things are the way they are.

 

Second, I've been reading and waiting for you to give a really good reason for this change to be made. In my opinion, you haven't so far, but I'll keep reading. However, if you don't like the rules, then change it for you games. This is encourage by DOJ and the book itself.

 

 

 

 

Again, the fact that energy projectors, mystics and cosmics with innate ranged attacks are usually drawn releasing power from a preferential body location (usually hand) is an artistic convention (it is generally more dramatic that way, or occasionally from eyes) that has nothing to do with power being actually *fixed* in that position by its nature. Supers that have power really restriced that way are rare (Superman, Cyclops). Otherwise, the rule only has justification when the power is generated by a Focus (which is a minority of cases, in the genre): point of release for a laser pistol blast *should be fixed, it only makes sense. Rule should be limited to Foci (gods know if Foci are barely balanced as they are) and Restrainable Powers. I challenge you to give a reason why the rule should be maintained, except for Focus-using character.

 

Enforcing a restrictive rule with game effects just to mirror an artistic convetion seems quite silly (and annoying) to me, especially given the "look at the real effects" Hero philosophy, and I don't see why I have to pay for a +1/4 advantage to be rid of it.

 

The fact that comics use artistic convention has no bearing on how things are evaluated in a game system such as this, where cost is evaluated based on benefit/detriment to the character. Therefore, if something is more beneficial, it will generally cost more. Hence, if being able to blast someone from any point on your body is more beneficial than not, it will cost more.

 

Generally, the system starts with the basic concept and builds up from there. So it makes more common sense (just to me) that the default should be a fixed point of origin, and then if the character wants to have the additional benefit of having variable point of origin, then it should cost more. But that's just me.

 

You say the system enforces a rule. Actually, it doesn't, you don't have to pay +1/4 for anything you don't want, especially since you are the GM. If you are the player, then you accept the rules enforced by that GM.

 

Now to address the more general nature of rules. There are many things that the fans don't agree with Steve Long on. Damage Shield cost being one of the major issues. So if you don't like something about the system and want DOJ to change it, then that's great, you are in fine company, but you'll need to get in line with the rest of us. (8^D)

 

The thing is, your post came across as trying to convince the fans here, that this particular rule was wrong or didn't make sense. It would appear that you are in the minority concerning this view.

 

Good luck with your games, and have fun. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[yamamura]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

I have to agree with keeping things as they are. Imagine if you let someone freely change the point of origin for their powers.....

 

GM: Someone grabs you from behind.

Player1: I send forth a blast of energy from my shoulder blades.

 

No unless a player buys the advantage, it would be abusive IMHO. Also in Anime fixed locations seems pretty much the standard too and if they have a power that changes that location, it tends to be a different power.

 

G

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Well, Wanderer, if what's been said here already on both sides of the issue hasn't persuaded either camp, we should probably just respectfully agree to disagree.

[KA.]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Wanderer,

First let me say that this post is not intended to persuade you away from your point of view.

For one thing you are welcome to your own opinion.

For another, I am not totally sure that I disagree with you.

I am getting ready to do some "thinking out loud" on this topic, so please don't blast me for inconsistencies, or failures in logic, because I am not arguing a case, I am just "brainstorming".

 

1) "real world" concerns.

I don't have any super-powers.

But, in the real world we sometimes do things that somewhat simulate them.

I am able to fire a gun, which is somewhat like a Ranged Killing Attack.

Now, while the gun is the "focus" (obviously), most guns are fairly small portable objects.

Let's say that I spend some time on the pistol range and get fairly good at hitting a target by firing a gun with my hands in the standard positon.

 

Now let's say I decide to fire the gun by attaching it to my elbow with a strap wrapped around the grip, and a string tied to the trigger.

 

Could I fire the gun?

Yes.

 

Could I fire it with the same accuracy that I had when using both hands in the standard position?

No. Not without an extreme amount of practice.

 

Now let's say that I mount the gun on the side of my boot, and tie the trigger string to my other boot.

 

I could get it to fire, but I would have to start learning to aim all over again.

 

Every time I change the point of origin, I have to re-learn the aiming process.

 

Now there are people who are "trick shot artists" that seem able to fire from all sorts of improbable positions. But that seems like a special skill, or a special ability.

 

Maybe this is part of what "Indirect" gets you. Not just that you can use the power from any angle, but that you can aim the darned thing.

 

Now I know that what I am talking about only applies to attack powers, but I don't think anyone would argue that Superman can't fly because you are holding his arms or hands. For one thing, that is how he carries people. I have seen him fly with people hanging on his legs, and sitting on his shoulders, too.

The same goes for Force Field, Armor, etc. they just seem to come from "all over" and no one seems to think about any point of origin for them.

 

And most Mental powers seem to come from the head area, but I don't think that wearing a hat would throw them off.

 

I guess what I am saying is, that only attack powers seem to really have a relevant point of origin, unless it is something like Blastarr, who flies by firing blasts out of his arms while they are down his sides.

(And I think that is more like slots in a Multipower, you can't Blast and Fly at the same time, or doing one limits the power of the other)

 

So I guess I am saying that most people, if they had an attack power, would have some default point of origin just by force of habit, or the best aim, and they would not vary from it, unless they didn't care what they hit.

Now villains may not care where their blast goes, as long as it hurts someone, but most heroes would.

 

2) Fictional concerns.

One of the main uses of RPG's is the creation of "fiction" based on existing fiction. People want to emulate comics, or sci-fi, or fantasy, or whatever genre they like. In many of these stories, it is common to neutralize someone by binding their hands. If they are supposed to be extremely strong, very heavy, thick manacles may be used, but it still seems to usually work.

 

Now there are some cases where someone has such exceptional abilites that this does not stop them, but that is fairly rare.

 

With the change you propose, it seems like many genres would begin to tend toward the "bondage" category.

 

Rather than just saying,

"Okay, Scarlet Sorceress, the villain binds your hands. You will have to figure out how to escape without your powers."

 

The GM would have to spend an uncomfortable amount of time saying:

"Okay, Scarlet Sorceress, first the villain binds you with a tight-fitting leather hood with cold iron studs all over it.

Then your arms are strapped behind your back.

Your hands have been forced into the "prayer" position and then bound with leather straps.

Then your elbows are tightly manacled together.

Now straps are wound around your ankles, binding them together.

Then a chain is run from your ankle bindings to a tight collar around your neck.

And tight leather straps are bound around your thighs and calves, preventing you from opening your legs.

The hood has a zippered opening in the front, and the villain unzips it and attaches a clamp to your tongue.

Now he begins attaching clamps to your . . ."

 

This is not really the direction I want my campaign to go in.

 

3) Game concerns.

At this point the above example looks pretty extreme and ridiculous.

But, unless there is some default point of origin established for powers, what is the alternative?

Well, powers can work the way they do now, everyone would just get a small (-1/4) Limitation on all of them to reflect a fixed point of origin.

 

Except that means that every published character is now unbalanced points-wise.

Most of them are going to have, for Standard Superheroes, up to 70 extra points to play with.

And, every existing character write-up will have to be changed to reflect the -1/4 Limitation on all their powers.

And, every power description in things like the Until Superpowers Database that was not intended to be "omnidirectional" would have to be rewritten.

This is a pretty massive and sweeping change for something that most people seem to be okay with as written.

 

That's it.

Just some thoughts.

 

KA.

[Vorsch]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please

 

Small note, Green Lantern is not limited to "ring as point of origin". Typically has green glow around him from which powers may manifest omni-directial .

[Wanderer]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

 

OK, let's say that while I'm not persuaded at all that the current rule is a good or necessary thing, I also agree that truly "omnidirectional" attacks (blast released from shoulder blades) may signficantly alter game balance in a way that may be worth paying for with an Advantage.

 

At the same time, I am still strongly persuaded that an enemy being able to hamper use of an Attack Power by grabbing or somehow restraining the origin body part is something that the character should be indemnified for, by taking a Limitation (if not by taking the full -1/2 Restrainable, that does not let use the Power at all if Grabbed, by a -1/4 version, giving penalties to rolls using the power if the origin body part if Grabbed).

 

Let's seek a compromise position. Why not interpret or change the rule so that any character must select an unchangeable point of origin, but is not obliged to choose "one" point of origin. Any character may have up to a reasonable number of different points of origin, typically three, and generally to be chosen among classical origin points: eyes, forehead, chest, mouth, hands (maybe also feet). That's just what I was advocating for: the possibility for the character to switch between some of the classical origin poins and not be "disarmed" by someone grabbing their one origin body part, which I do not think it's fair the system may inflict on the character "free". STR and TK and Mental Attack Powers do not have this problem, and I really do not think other Attack Powers should suffer this unbalance.

 

I realize that be freely able to switch between eyes, hands, and mouth or forehead is what I seek from the system, not blasting from between shoulder blades or the crotch (images of hentai anime dancing before my eyes... :grin:

 

Do you think this is viable?

[JJR]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

 

At the same time' date=' I am still strongly persuaded that an enemy being able to hamper use of an Attack Power by grabbing or somehow restraining the origin body part is something that the character should be indemnified for, by taking a Limitation (if not by taking the full -1/2 Restrainable, that does not let use the Power at all if Grabbed, by a -1/4 version, giving penalties to rolls using the power if the origin body part if Grabbed).[/quote']

The -1/4 version is called gestures.

 

Let's seek a compromise position. Why not interpret or change the rule so that any character must select an unchangeable point of origin, but is not obliged to choose "one" point of origin. Any character may have up to a reasonable number of different points of origin, typically three, and generally to be chosen among classical origin points: eyes, forehead, chest, mouth, hands (maybe also feet). That's just what I was advocating for: the possibility for the character to switch between some of the classical origin poins and not be "disarmed" by someone grabbing their one origin body part, which I do not think it's fair the system may inflict on the character "free". STR and TK and Mental Attack Powers do not have this problem, and I really do not think other Attack Powers should suffer this unbalance.

Your idea is not supported by the genre. Few characters have origin point options. The ones which do in comics probably paid for the +1/4 advantage.

 

Do you think this is viable?

Anything is viable in your own games. In the official rules it would make a character too versatile. You put a bag over their head to block the eyes and forhead blasts and still get hit with the chest blast. There's a reason it should be an advantage, so that both players and their opponents do not become impossible to defeat.

[JmOz]

Re: Proposed Rule Change for 5th Ed Rev. flexible Power point of origin Steve please note

 

First let me say that looking at your list of characters that can change them, most are wrong or have some form of VPP (those can change Point of Origins for free).

 

Second, I would say that your comprimise would depend on the F/X involved. If you take a couple dice of HA and define it as "Brawling" I will allow you to kick and Knee and punch the opponent, but something like an Energy blast I want coming from one point (though it could be both hands, both eyes, etc)