Superleap UAA???

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

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.

 

Can't you move the "victim" 4" up at a 30 degree angle to the ground (accelerating him to 20" velocity at the time), turn 60 degrees to point him straight down and ram him into the ground at 20" in a single half move? That would be 20d6 (based on falling damage) so 70 STUN, 20 BOD.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Um' date=' why exactly couldn't he resist if he grabbed something on the ground??[/quote']

 

Assuming the item is attached to the ground, why not indeed? He does, however, need something strong enough to stand up to the pressure of x" flight pulling against it. If that's only 1", then I'd say that's only 1d6, so it doesn't take much. If it's 20", then I'd call that 20d6 of [pressure - now he needs something firmly attached to the ground and very sturdy.

 

The point of Flight UAA ( AFAIK )' date=' 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.[/quote]

 

And even 1" does the trick if there's nothing Grond can hang on to. Even if there is, he's still feet-first in the air trying to fly away - if he lets go, he flies. Seems a very effectiver power construct to me.

 

Let's make that 1" Flight (2 points) Usable Against Others (+1) ranged (+1/2) - that's 5 whole points, and can lift Grond off the ground an inch (half inches round up, right?), holding him there indefinitely.

 

Let's add Based on ECV (+1). That makes it even harder for Bricks to avoid, and gives it LOS range. Let's suck up an extra point and make it 0 END (+1/2). Now it costs 8 points.

 

All bricks without ranged attacks are now helpless before the power of NormalMan. He has straight 8 stats, the above (8 points) and +6 OCV with Flight UAA (12 points). Is that a reasonable and balanced result? Imagine if he had been designed with 350 points instead!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Gravitar has Flight Usable As Attack.

 

Are the effects discussed in the book (CKC, right? or CU?), or am I wasting my time if I look it up tonight?

[Metaphysician]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Assuming the item is attached to the ground, why not indeed? He does, however, need something strong enough to stand up to the pressure of x" flight pulling against it. If that's only 1", then I'd say that's only 1d6, so it doesn't take much. If it's 20", then I'd call that 20d6 of [pressure - now he needs something firmly attached to the ground and very sturdy.

 

 

 

And even 1" does the trick if there's nothing Grond can hang on to. Even if there is, he's still feet-first in the air trying to fly away - if he lets go, he flies. Seems a very effectiver power construct to me.

 

Let's make that 1" Flight (2 points) Usable Against Others (+1) ranged (+1/2) - that's 5 whole points, and can lift Grond off the ground an inch (half inches round up, right?), holding him there indefinitely.

 

Let's add Based on ECV (+1). That makes it even harder for Bricks to avoid, and gives it LOS range. Let's suck up an extra point and make it 0 END (+1/2). Now it costs 8 points.

 

All bricks without ranged attacks are now helpless before the power of NormalMan. He has straight 8 stats, the above (8 points) and +6 OCV with Flight UAA (12 points). Is that a reasonable and balanced result? Imagine if he had been designed with 350 points instead!

 

Well, yeah, that particular construct is cheap and nasty, against bricks. However, the fact that bricks are mostly helpless against the technique is not a valid argument against it, any more than saying that ego blasts are unbalanced because only those with mental defense can stop them.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Are the effects discussed in the book (CKC' date=' right? or CU?), or am I wasting my time if I look it up tonight?[/quote']

 

The effects are discussed. She uses it to pick up opponents and keep them trapped - in her description, she's mentioned as having used this ability to neutralize Durak in her fight with Eurostar.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Assuming Let's make that 1" Flight (2 points) Usable Against Others (+1) ranged (+1/2) - that's 5 whole points, and can lift Grond off the ground an inch (half inches round up, right?), holding him there indefinitely.

 

Let's add Based on ECV (+1). That makes it even harder for Bricks to avoid, and gives it LOS range. Let's suck up an extra point and make it 0 END (+1/2). Now it costs 8 points.

 

All bricks without ranged attacks are now helpless before the power of NormalMan. He has straight 8 stats, the above (8 points) and +6 OCV with Flight UAA (12 points). Is that a reasonable and balanced result? Imagine if he had been designed with 350 points instead!

 

If all you want to do is grab someone and hold them helpless in the air, you can cheese it even further/save points by purchasing the Flight as Levitation Only (I believe that's a -1/2).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

The effects are discussed. She uses it to pick up opponents and keep them trapped - in her description' date=' she's mentioned as having used this ability to neutralize Durak in her fight with Eurostar.[/quote']

 

Thanks - that's what I would expect it to be used for. Specifically, it sounds like there's nothing related to using it to do damage to its targets (one major concern noted above).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Well' date=' yeah, that particular construct is cheap and nasty, against bricks. However, the fact that bricks are mostly helpless against the technique is not a valid argument against it, any more than saying that ego blasts are unbalanced because only those with mental defense can stop them.[/quote']

 

The fact that it can be purchased for 12 points and render such characters helpless is, in my view, a valid argument aganst it. That same 12 points would buy a whopping 1d6 Ego blast with +1 OCV. My guess is that NormalMan won't be nearly as successful against Grond (who has a substandard EGO and, IIRC, no mental defense) as he would with that 1" flight construct. And there's no other type of character he would be more successful against to compensate.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

The fact that it can be purchased for 12 points and render such characters helpless is' date=' in my view, a valid argument aganst it. That same 12 points would buy a whopping 1d6 Ego blast with +1 OCV. My guess is that NormalMan won't be nearly as successful against Grond (who has a substandard EGO and, IIRC, no mental defense) as he would with that 1" flight construct. And there's no other type of character he would be more successful against to compensate.[/quote']

 

Yeah, but you could also build an NND Entangle on about the same points. Yeah, that particular construct you built is abusive, but most actual usages of the same concept are not.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Yeah' date=' but you could also build an NND Entangle on about the same points. Yeah, that particular construct you built is abusive, but most actual usages of the same concept are not.[/quote']

 

Entangle based on ECV is the closest Ive seen. For 12 points, you won't get much.

 

And 20" of Flight UAA woud exert a lot more pressure, and would, in fact, likely se our hypothetical brick hurled into the air, although possibly with an uprooted lamppost or tree.

[Krieghandt]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

You could make it weaker, by saying str cancels out UAA movement char pt vs base power pt. Thus it would take 2 str to hold on with 1" flight and 20 with 20" flight. I would also cancel damage the same way.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

You could make it weaker' date=' by saying str cancels out UAA movement char pt vs base power pt. Thus it would take 2 str to hold on with 1" flight and 20 with 20" flight. I would also cancel damage the same way.[/quote']

 

I think this overly weakens UAA (but that's just my view). In particular, I think STR should be able to be used in some fashion - if the Brick is in the middle of a field, he's got nothing to hold onto using his STR, so off he goes.

 

As for whether it should equate to AP, I'm comfortable with as much as 5 STR to offsett 1" of flight, but a lower ratio such as you suggest wouldn't disturb me. On the other hand, 1" flight UAA at range costs 5 points, so that's an "equalization of AP" after a fashion.

[cutsleeve]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

So far no ones mentioned clinging and the effect of UAA movement powers.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

So far no ones mentioned clinging and the effect of UAA movement powers.

 

I'd be inclined to allow a character with clinging to automatically have a grip on the ground (o whatever surface is) beneath him. Whether the pressure from the movement power breaks that grip depends on the " in the power.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

The only special effect for Superleap UAA would be something like Black Harlequin might build ... some kind of jack-in-the-box that, if the target steps on it, it opens and flings him skyward.

 

So far, however, everybody's compared Superleap UAA to TK Throws, which is pretty fair, really. If I were going to design just a 'fling' power, I'd probably use an Energy Blast (Physical), Double Knockback, Indirect (from beneath the target)?

 

I guess my problem with Superleap UAA is that you grant the target the power, then you control how he uses it ... which means the target would, in fact, bend his knees and jump in all likelihood. I could see using that as a form of Mind Control (with a limitation that keeps him from leaping farther than he normally could), or rather biophysical control, but as a gravity 'toss', I'd go with either TK Throw or Double KNB Blast.

 

As far as Flight UAA goes ... well, it makes sense that, no matter how strong you are, you're not going to be able to muscle your way out of an Anti-Gravity Field ... unlike TK, there's nothing to 'press' against. But, again, it mulls back around to game balance, since a simple 5" Flight UAA screws people solidly (doesn't Flight still have a 10pt minimum cost?) if they don't have ranged attacks. I would go with the TK option, myself ... or, perhaps simply putting Constant on that Indirect double KNB Attack?

[cutsleeve]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Id make it so knockback resistance, strength by virtue of grabbing scenery, and clinging have an effect on the Flying/leaping UAA. That way you cover alot of ground have the KBR effect it inch per inch the stregth effect it 2 or 3 str to inch and clinging strength point per inch. This seems equitable to me and still make the flight/leaping UAA still viable.

 

Handle the grab scenery as an abort action like dive for cover.

 

The handle clinging effect if its active

 

and let Knockback resistance be automatic cuz i dont see a guy with density increase getting flung as far as someone who weighed a normal weight.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

and let Knockback resistance be automatic cuz i dont see a guy with density increase getting flung as far as someone who weighed a normal weight.

 

Well, if it's a Gravity Reversal effect, shouldn't the heavier guy fly farther, just like he would fall faster?

[G.W.Lerose]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Well' date=' if it's a Gravity Reversal effect, shouldn't the heavier guy fly farther, just like he would fall faster?[/quote']

 

Huh? Weight has nothing to do with falling speed, either in RL or in Hero game mechanics. Objects fall at the same sped reguardless of weight. Shape on the other hand....

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

Huh? Weight has nothing to do with falling speed' date=' either in RL or in Hero game mechanics. Objects fall at the same sped reguardless of weight. Shape on the other hand....[/quote']

 

In which case, his weight shouldn't be a defense against it, either.

 

Actually, his DENSITY might matter. I'm no physicist, but I think that a denser subject, while still accelerating at the same rate, would have a higher terminal velocity. Again, I could be wrong and any evidence to the contrary will make me retract my hypothesis.

[cutsleeve]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

I think you mean ballistic energy as in a bigger weight being thrown at the a particular speed has more energy then one thats lighter thrown at that speed.

 

Your right density increase shouldnt protect against a reverse gravity attack but I do still think knockback resistance should. But then again that would also be up to what the gm felt is reasonable.

[Kristopher]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

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.

 

 

I know I've been over this one often and extensively in the past, but it is my personal preference to approach the genre in a far less "anything goes" manner than many other people do. I prefer to insert the "what-if" elements into an otherwise normal world, rather than an outright fantasy world. If someone is KBed to Montana, and can't survive what physics tells us would have to go on in such an event, then in my games, that someone is in serious trouble.

 

In other words, see my signature below.

 

As to the matter at hand, IMO, UAA movement should only be allowed if it's absolutely necessary to construct the power in question. IMO, that leaves only UAA Teleport as a valid construct.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

To the issue of weight impacting acceleration/velocity - I believe the original premise was that extra weight should reduce the ability to "fly" the target away because it would take more energy to accelerate a heavier object. Reversing gravity, however, would imply the effect is not caused by accelerating the target, such that weight shouldn't matter.

 

Bottom line: there's some SFX issues to work out here. And maybe the better approach would be that KB resistance (weight or otherwise) reduces the impact of movement UAA, and you can buy it NND (what's another +1 advantage anyway?) to avoid the impact of KB resistance. Not a bad house rule if you see a lot of movement UAA.

[GhostWing]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

In addition, there must be a reasonably common set of defenses that will cancel out the attack. (HS5e pg 177)

 

Seems to me this statement allows the GM to prevent the power from being too abusive - besides all the Usable On Other advantages are STOPs, which I've told my players are subject to GM approval.

 

Leaping UAA isn't impossible to justify (a hero steps on a spring-loaded trap and goes flying through the air - check out the 1960s Batman movie, this was an actual trap, the target hex involved an exploding octopus).

 

I might allow such a UAA I'd only allow it to work on characters on the ground (and give no extra limitation for that) and my set of common defenses would be clinging and allow a character a DEX roll to avoid hurling themselves to oblivion.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

I know I've been over this one often and extensively in the past' date=' but it is my personal preference to approach the genre in a far less "anything goes" manner than many other people do. I prefer to insert the "what-if" elements into an otherwise normal world, rather than an outright fantasy world. If someone is KBed to Montana, and can't survive what physics tells us would have to go on in such an event, then in my games, that someone is in serious trouble. [/quote']

 

That's fine as a preference for you to apply within your campaigns, but the Champions rules offer a wide range of options for representing different sorts of things that happen in comics... and some of what we see in comics doesn't have much to do with real world physics. The "knock someone into orbit" motif, along with things like pushing planets, is amply represented within a subgenre of superhero comics - particularly, the high-powered action superhero, ala Green Lantern, Superman and to some extent the X-Men. In Justice League stories, both long-ago and as recently as a couple years ago, Superman, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern moved the planet earth - dragging it through space by circling it with big, green chains and Wonder Woman's magic lasso, thus giving Superman and Wonder Woman something to hang onto. When things like this happen in the comics, the result is not tidal catastrophes, the earth crumbling or any other significant destruction, regardless the effects of gravity, planetary momentum, etc. within the real world.

 

Your preference is certainly a valid way to do things, but it's no more valid than portraying the silver-age concepts of someone able to lift buildings and battleships. One can approach comics from a "how would this work if it was real?" approach, or one can assume that such things happen because - and more or less as - the stories say they happen... realism vs. mythic storytelling, more or less. Both are fine.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superleap UAA???

 

That's fine as a preference for you to apply within your campaigns' date=' but the Champions rules offer a wide range of options for representing different sorts of things that happen in comics... and some of what we see in comics doesn't have much to do with real world physics. [/quote']

 

Bingo. I always find it amusing when we hear comments on the "realistic" result of fantasy concepts. For example, a person being struck by a fist that sends him across three state lines should "realistically" be killed on impact. Wouldn't being hit with that much force "realistically" have killed him when he was struck? Near-instantaneous acceleration to several hundred kph, with no protection, is unlikely to leave one hale and hearty to begin with.

 

Similarly, I'm not overly sympathetic to concerns that a magic system is "unrealistic", as I think wizards limited to "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat" would dampen the game somewhat.

 

 

I don't find a need for superhero comics to be realistic, so I see no need for a game simulating them to be realistic. They should be internally consistent, so such knockback should either always be fatal, or never, but either choice works for me.

 

Now, if I were playing a "police TV show" game, then I would expect such a trip to be fatal. I can't imagine someone having the ability to cause someone to accelerate to such velocity, however, in such a game.