Superleap UAA???

[PoorWandering 1]

MR. Long declined to answer this one so i'll throw it open to herodom. I am wondering why Superleap UAA is specifically forbidden? Flight, Teleport and the other movement powers are fine UAA. So why not superleap? I think superleap UAA would be a good sim for a gravity control supers' ability to hurl opponents away from him or her. Something like x" superleap, UAA, aoe rad, personal immunity, targets must move directly away from super, no noncombat move. Can the collective genius that is this board explain this one to poor blockheaded me? Why is Superleap treated differently than other movement powers in this case?

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

For the effect gained, it would be far too cost-effective. Cost out how much it would cost to do the same distance with other forms of motion and compare the two numbers.

 

That gives you the reason right there, in my opinion.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Actually Movement Powers UAA are not fine & ok in my book -- it's one of the most abusive and overly point effective abilities in the game. I wont allow them without some significant limitation on the ability to use it.

 

Consider, Movement UAA offers no defense other than the named one. In this way it is like an NND, but in some ways worse because most Movement Powers are Constant.

 

Some variations are also better than other Powers in the game, at least in certain situations. For example, Flight UAA is better than TK at moving people around, and better than Entangle at trapping people; the affected target can't get out of it no matter how strong they are -- if they dont have the defense, they are hosed.

 

Consider a Tunneling UAA Power also.

 

It's also an exploitable loophole -- one of the few ways to get "free damage" is to use a UAA Movement power to "drop" targets.

 

As far as Leaping specifically being disallowed, I wish all the Movement Powers were similarly disallowed. I dont see why Leaping UAA should be bought as TK but Flying UAA is ok either. Maybe because the only use of Leaping UAA is to effectively hurl the target, where as Flight could be used to hover them, but same deal -- using flight to just hover targets should be done with Entangle IMO.

 

A head scratcher.

 

I understand why Steve doesnt answer this kind of question in general -- it would just invite a deluge of "Why?"'s , but sometimes I think an answer that serves to illuminate the metagame thinking behind certain odd cases would be a good thing.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Consider a Tunneling UAA Power also.

 

Especially if you buy it with the "fill in the tunnel behind" Adder.

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Actually Movement Powers UAA are not fine & ok in my book -- it's one of the most abusive and overly point effective abilities in the game. I wont allow them without some significant limitation on the ability to use it.

 

 

Same here movement UAA's with the possable exception of Teleport are major cheese. I'm just asking whi this bit of Brie was excluded while the rest of the Chedder, Gouda and Limberger gang got in.

 

If i ever see a movement power UAA the first question is why not use TK. Or if a tunneling UAA why not use transform. I live in fear of seeing something like 1" flight UAA 4 lvls Mega Scale, Combat Acc. In a published source.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

If i ever see a movement power UAA the first question is why not use TK. Or if a tunneling UAA why not use transform. I live in fear of seeing something like 1" flight UAA 4 lvls Mega Scale' date=' Combat Acc. In a published source.[/quote']

 

 

Well, Ult Brick had the MegaScale STR, only for throwing distance. What was that construct called? "Throw It Into Orbit?"

 

I have to admit, though, I'm tempted to build someone with Mega Scale STR only for purposes of Knockback Distance - i.e. "Knock Him To Wyoming."

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Well, Ult Brick had the MegaScale STR, only for throwing distance. What was that construct called? "Throw It Into Orbit?"

 

I have to admit, though, I'm tempted to build someone with Mega Scale STR only for purposes of Knockback Distance - i.e. "Knock Him To Wyoming."

 

 

Ugly. Uncontrolled mega scale involentary move throughs vs. mtn ranges. Ugly.

 

Mind you this would ring the cheese alarm berfore the sheet was even out of the players briefcase.

[Blackjack]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

If I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment:

 

Consider, Movement UAA offers no defense other than the named one. In this way it is like an NND, but in some ways worse because most Movement Powers are Constant.

 

Some variations are also better than other Powers in the game, at least in certain situations. For example, Flight UAA is better than TK at moving people around, and better than Entangle at trapping people; the affected target can't get out of it no matter how strong they are -- if they dont have the defense, they are hosed.

 

Your point is well made. However, consider that using Flight as a TK doesn't allow you to _damage_ the opponent, just move them. If you try to move them into a wall or something, then you do so with a 0 STR. Even if the GM allows you to use the Move Through rules under these conditions, unless you have a LOT of movement UAA (it takes 30" = 10d6 using Mv Thru), you aren't going to do much damage to your target.

 

Also remember that the attacker must pay the END for the power - which will be doubled from the base movement END because of the +1 Adv. That means that the attacker must pay DOUBLE the END of the movement EVERY phase if he wishes to use it as an Entangle (FRed p. 177). The attacker can also not make any other attacks, or take any defensive actions, because of the 'attacking or aborting ends your phase' rules. Immobilizing your own character to immobilize an opponent seems like a poor strategy to me, especially if you have to pay a HUGE amount of END to do it and your opponent can 'shoot back' with impunity...

 

Personally, I'd use Entangle or TK if I'm trying to trap, bind, or damage my opponent because I believe they are far MORE efficient at what they do than Movement UAA is...

 

Consider a Tunneling UAA Power also.

 

It's also an exploitable loophole -- one of the few ways to get "free damage" is to use a UAA Movement power to "drop" targets.

 

True, but also remember that it takes time to fall from any distance that could conceivably damage most supers. A fall of 10" or less will only do up to 10d6 (not insignificant, I grant, but not enough to Stun most supers), and takes _two full_ segments for the damage to be applied (that's more than twice as long as it takes for a Haymaker to land...)

 

Longer falls do considerably more damage, for certain, but it takes a LOT of Movement UAA to move someone that far: 11" of Movement X2 for the +1 Adv = 44 Active Points (assuming the GM doesn't take the 1/2 for straight up movement into account or the attacker is using Teleport). Sure, that means he takes 15d6 when he hits the ground, but also takes a lot more time for the damage to land (at least 3 full segments)... time that can be used either by the target or his teammates to rescue him. The target can also still attack while falling if he has ranged attacks or affect combat in other ways.

 

As for Tunneling, again, you can't damage or Entangle a person with a Movement power... Even assuming a GM lets an attacker bury his target, despite common sense, the rules simply don't let the target be held or damaged by such an attack.

 

As far as Leaping specifically being disallowed, I wish all the Movement Powers were similarly disallowed. I dont see why Leaping UAA should be bought as TK but Flying UAA is ok either. Maybe because the only use of Leaping UAA is to effectively hurl the target, where as Flight could be used to hover them, but same deal -- using flight to just hover targets should be done with Entangle IMO.

 

A head scratcher.

 

I understand why Steve doesnt answer this kind of question in general -- it would just invite a deluge of "Why?"'s , but sometimes I think an answer that serves to illuminate the metagame thinking behind certain odd cases would be a good thing.

 

Shrike, I certainly understand and respect your thoughts on this. For the record, if ay GM were to say to me, "I don't allow Momement UAA," I'd have no problem with that. I agree that holding an opponent in place to damaging them should be done with other powers. For me, though, if your just going to move someone around, I don't have a problem with Movement UAA.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

At least Teleport UAA ("Go play in traffic") and Running UAA ("Don't slip on that banana peel") are valid constructs although should allow a Acrobatics or a DEX-based roll to allow the martial artists to get out of the way (if the Brick teleports into traffic, it's not fatal for him).

 

I don't know why Superleap was specifically banned, except for those lethal forced non-combat move throughs. SPLAT!

 

Although Fastball Specials are comic book standard although I guess thoses are on *willing* guys.

"Dos vidanya, Wolverine!"

[MitchellS]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

I understand why Steve doesnt answer this kind of question in general -- it would just invite a deluge of "Why?"'s ' date=' but sometimes I think an answer that serves to illuminate the metagame thinking behind certain odd cases would be a good thing.[/quote']

I agree here. Sometimes you just need an official answer, even if it does lead to some disagreement. I feel that one of the flaws of the system can be that it is too open at times. There are too many places where it says: "at the GM's option." I would much rather have the rules say: "This is the official rule. You can change it if you choose."

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Ugly. Uncontrolled mega scale involentary move throughs vs. mtn ranges. Ugly.

 

Mind you this would ring the cheese alarm berfore the sheet was even out of the players briefcase.

 

Interestingly, the megascale for KB means the *distance* gets mega'd, but not the actual velocity. You can knock a guy 10" with each 1" = 100 miles, and it does no more damage than knocking him 10" with each 1"=1".

 

It's still abusive, and not logical, but it is fun and does mimic a certain aspect of the genre.

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Interestingly, the megascale for KB means the *distance* gets mega'd, but not the actual velocity. You can knock a guy 10" with each 1" = 100 miles, and it does no more damage than knocking him 10" with each 1"=1".

 

It's still abusive, and not logical, but it is fun and does mimic a certain aspect of the genre.

 

Granted, but that's an odd corner of the genre pool.

 

I am not thinking about MEGA distance 1" velocity as I am low on dried frog pills.

[That Masked Man]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Interestingly, the megascale for KB means the *distance* gets mega'd, but not the actual velocity. You can knock a guy 10" with each 1" = 100 miles, and it does no more damage than knocking him 10" with each 1"=1".

 

It's still abusive, and not logical, but it is fun and does mimic a certain aspect of the genre.

 

If the velocity doesn't get multiplied, then the time must be increased to compensate. So with 4 levels of megascale (1" = 1000km) each scale inch is 500,000 times the standard scale inch (1" = 2m) but velocity is still in standard scale inches. The poor victim of megascale knockback would be moving backward for 500,000 seconds or about 5.8 days!! Even one level of megascale would have him knocked back for over 8 minutes.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

If the velocity doesn't get multiplied' date=' then the time must be increased to compensate. So with 4 levels of megascale (1" = 1000km) each scale inch is 500,000 times the standard scale inch (1" = 2m) but velocity is still in standard scale inches. The poor victim of megascale knockback would be moving backward for 500,000 seconds or about 5.8 days!! Even one level of megascale would have him knocked back for over 8 minutes.[/quote']

 

You'd be correct if physics came into play here. But it doesn't. This is comic books. If the Fury hits Rachel Summers-Gray hard enough to knock her 30 miles out into the North Sea, she should have an incredible velocity... enough that when she impacts the water, she should go splat like a pumpkin dropped off the Sears Tower. It doesn't happen that way, though. Somehow a MegaScale punch knocks people long distances without commensurate increases in velocity - or, if you will, their velocity increases, but they still do/take no more damage when they hit something than they would if they'd been knocked the non-Mega amount of damage.

 

We're talking logic regarding the conventions of a fantasy genre here - one in which people wear their undies outside their pants without getting laughed at, and in which being a mutant lets someone turn themselves to liquid or energy or a chicken, rather than just being deformed or having slightly better eyesight or something like that.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Granted' date=' but that's an odd corner of the genre pool.[/quote']

 

It's the whole DC and Marvel Universes.

 

In SUICIDE SQUAD several years back, there was a murder that involved some guy being thrown a couple hundred feet or so. Commissioner Gordon asked Batman if he felt Superman could be responsible. His response was "Jim, be real. If Superman threw him, he'd have landed in North Dakota.'

 

In PUNISHER, The Hulk punched Wolverine hard enough to knock him from NYC to Boston or somewhere like that.

 

In UNCANNY X-MEN a couple months back, the Fury hit Rachel/Phoenix hard enough to knock her several miles in the time it took Cannonball to have about six panels of Claremont internal monologues. That'd be like, what, mach 73?

[Metaphysician]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Um, isn't the whole *point* of Flight UAA the fact that, unlike TK, it can't be resisted by strength??

 

Doesn't seem to me any different that building and balancing NNDs.

[That Masked Man]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

You'd be correct if physics came into play here. But it doesn't. This is comic books.

 

Thats too bad. It would be fun to knock someone into next week... literally.

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

It's the whole DC and Marvel Universes.

 

In SUICIDE SQUAD several years back, there was a murder that involved some guy being thrown a couple hundred feet or so. Commissioner Gordon asked Batman if he felt Superman could be responsible. His response was "Jim, be real. If Superman threw him, he'd have landed in North Dakota.'

 

In PUNISHER, The Hulk punched Wolverine hard enough to knock him from NYC to Boston or somewhere like that.

 

In UNCANNY X-MEN a couple months back, the Fury hit Rachel/Phoenix hard enough to knock her several miles in the time it took Cannonball to have about six panels of Claremont internal monologues. That'd be like, what, mach 73?

 

I post corrected.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

I post corrected.

 

Eh, no worries. I just wanted to point out that the "toss people into orbit" kind of motif isn't that unusual in comics. It's even more common in the Silver Age DC books, especially the Weisinger-era Superman books.

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Um, isn't the whole *point* of Flight UAA the fact that, unlike TK, it can't be resisted by strength??

 

Doesn't seem to me any different that building and balancing NNDs.

 

so say you use your 1" flight UAA on Grond. Who grabs onto an I beam set in several tons of reinforced concrete. The fact that his 100 some points in STR will not be able to resist your, what 10 at most points of flight doesn't seem a bit cheesey? Admittedly this is an extreme example but hey even a STR 10 agent should have a chance to resist a 1" flight UAA.

 

Seems to me anyway

[Ternaugh]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Thats too bad. It would be fun to knock someone into next week... literally.

 

That would be:

 

Knock You into Next Week: Extra-Dimensional Movement (One week into future), Usable As Attack (+1) (40 Active Points) [Notes: With this attack, the character literally knocks the target into next week.]

Powers Cost: 40

 

YMMV,

JoeG

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

so say you use your 1" flight UAA on Grond. Who grabs onto an I beam set in several tons of reinforced concrete. The fact that his 100 some points in STR will not be able to resist your' date=' what 10 at most points of flight doesn't seem a bit cheesey? Admittedly this is an extreme example but hey even a STR 10 agent should have a chance to resist a 1" flight UAA.[/quote']

 

 

Actually, I would let Grond grab the I Beam and hold on. 1" flight only exerts so much pressure, and it's not enough to break the I Beam, just as someone flying at 1" and hitting the I Beam would not damage it.

 

In addition, I would be inclined to significantly reduce the damage someone would take from "flight UAA into a tree".

 

A person running uncontrolled into the tree takes total inches of velocity in damage (just like a person falling).

 

A person doing a move through on that same tree takes 1d6/3" velocity (1d6/6" if he knocks it back) plus STR (1/2 STR) damage.

 

What about a person who collides with the tree using his arms and legs to cushion the impact as much as possible? Logically, he should take even less damage.

 

As I see it, "Flight UAA" means the target can still move and act normally, except that they are forced to fly. They can attempt to cushion any blow they would otherwise inflict. If Grond is being flown at 30", he could use that momentum to add to damage (do a move through). He's moving his body while flying in such a fasdhion that he'll maximize damage inflicted (*trying for a tackly, or shoulder strike, for example). That's 18d6 + 10d6. If he doesn't knock the target back, he will take 28d6. He'll take 14d6 even if he knocks the target back.

 

At a minimum, he should be able to choose not to use his STR to increase the damage, in which case it's down to 0d6.

 

However, why can't he use that STR to strike for LESS damage? Sure, he's mpoving at 30" - if he pushes his target wout of the way, will he do as much damage? What if he pushes against the wall, using his arms and/or legs to cushion the impact? Here, I would allow Grond to use his STR to REDUCE the move througth damage. He can effectively use those mighty emerald muscles to cushion the blow, subtracting 18d6 from the velocity damage - which leaves nothing.

 

If you are flying towards Grond at 30", he can catch you and reduce the damage. Why can't he do the same when he's flying at you?

 

Alternatively, analogize it to a fall and let him subtract 1" of movement for each 5 STR exerted. He ends up with a 12" velocity for damage purposes (4d6 move through or 12" = 12d6 "splat" damage).

 

Suddenly, that Flight UAA is not such an effective damaging attack, is it?

 

To me, the above is consistent with the genre, anmd a reasonable restriction on a relatively inexpensive power construct which, realistically, should not do a lot of damage from a game balance perspective.

 

Comments?

 

BTW, are there any official characters with non-teleport movement UAA?

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

BTW' date=' are there any official characters with non-teleport movement UAA?[/quote']

 

Gravitar has Flight Usable As Attack.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

so say you use your 1" flight UAA on Grond. Who grabs onto an I beam set in several tons of reinforced concrete. The fact that his 100 some points in STR will not be able to resist your, what 10 at most points of flight doesn't seem a bit cheesey? Admittedly this is an extreme example but hey even a STR 10 agent should have a chance to resist a 1" flight UAA.

 

Seems to me anyway

 

Um, why exactly couldn't he resist if he grabbed something on the ground??

 

The point of Flight UAA ( AFAIK ), is to keep people from resisting with strength just by virtue of being strong. 50 STR TK will *never* hold Grond in the air, for instance, even though its far more lifting capacity than he weighs.

[Rapier]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

We've got a couple Movement Usable vs Others spells in our campaign (late 19th century, with magic).

 

One is "On the Wings of Angels" which is UAA (caster pays the END).

The other is "Wings of the Eagle" which is UBO (castee pays the END).

 

While I usually discourage most Movement Usable vs Others powers, there are legitimate uses for them. Albeit, supers is a different kettle all together, because powers are less restricted.

 

Keep in mind too that any UAA power is No Range (unless bought with Ranged which would kick up the point totals another bit, if even allowed), and you would be totally within your rights to require a To Hit roll as part of the activation (SFX related).

 

Even if someone did want to have a Movement Usable vs Others power, having one that inflicts damage is so costly that the construct quickly become more expensive than purchasing the power straight out.

 

Consider:

 

Average 35 STUN, 10 BODY - 10d6 Energy Blast (50 pts)

Average 35 STUN, 10 BODY - 20" Flight UAA (80 pts)

 

Assume both Attacker and Victim are standing in a parking lot. The EB can be used every phase to inflict damage, while the Flight UAA takes 3 segments to inflict the same damage (1 segement to fly Victim up 10" and then 2 segments for the character to hit the ground).

 

It just seems silly to waste all the points, the extra time and the cheese when I can do the same thing much simpler and more effectively with a straight out power and a SFX.