slots with different limitations

[Foxx!]

Heroes!

 

For a fantasy campaign, I want to make a magic MP that has different limitations on each slot but still gets a limitation on the whole. I thought, “Sorry, all slots must have the same limitations, or you can put them on the slots only.†However, I realised that you can do it with Variable Limitations. If the whole MP has Variable Limitations, each slot can have different limitations each time you use it so long as the limitation totals are the same. The limitation total must be x2 the limitation value.

 

Here is the question. Should the limitation value increase if the limitations for each slot are set when the slot is bought? If so, what is a good value?

 

I feel like I’m just excited with a new idea. Let me know if it’s just bollocks.

 

Cheers!

[Hyper-Man]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

the variable limitation idea sounds good at first but...

 

if the limitations on one slot are effectively ignored by use of another slot the adage a limitation that does not limit the character is not worth any points might apply.

 

can you post an example of the special effect and powers that you want to apply this type of seperate but equal limitations to?

 

also, I seem to recall a similar discussion with regards to the use of limitations on powers in a Cosmic Variable Power Pool. Say you have an 80 point pool and want to use 2 different powers at the same time with 80 active points each you can if you give each a total of (+1) worth of limitaions to make each have a Real cost of 40. The tricky part is you really shouldn't allow limitations like charges since they do not affect the Pool as a whole and would be 'reset' as soon as the Pool distribution was changed.

[Foxx!]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Hyper-Man!

 

For example, the magic MP has -1/2 Variable Limitations. You need -1 Limitations any time it is used.

 

Slot 1 has a Flight spell and the limitations will always be OAF 'staff' (-1).

 

Slot 2 has a Light Beam spell and the limitations will always be Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), and x2 END (-1/2).

 

Slot 3 has a Magic Barrier (Force Wall) spell and the limiations will always be Concentration 0 DCV (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), and Incantations (-1/4).

 

 

I agree with you about Charges. I wouldn't allow it in this case.

 

Cheers!

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The rules FAQ specifically disallows using Variable Limitations to get around the restriction that all slots in a MP must have the exact same Limitation in order to put the Limitation on the reserve.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

I would also say that you are making things more complicated than they need to be. The FH magic system that says to just divide the real cost by 3 and that's the number of points a character pays was designed to eliminate the need, and exteremly low cost of an MP, while still providing a thematic cost break.

 

By doing this, assuming you can put -1 limitations on your spells, the active cost to real cost ration is 6:1. IMO this is better than the 10:1 or 20:1 that you will end up with a flex or ultra slot, and effectively spreads out the MP reserve cost.

 

Take a 60pt MP with -1 limitations (ignoring the whole variable issue). Cost 30.

Each slot, with the same -1 limitations, will cost 6 if flex, 3 if ultra.

Put 10 powers in there, total cost 30 + 10*6 = 90. I use flex slots because for comparison to the RC/3 system you could use powers simulatenously. However, the MP has the limitation that it is possible you will not have enough points to allocate for multiple powers simultaneously while the RC/3 system can handle that just fine.

 

Now, using the real cost/3 method: 10 powers at 10 pts each (60 active point powers) = 100 pts.

 

The end result: greater flexibility, nearly the same cost, simpler mechanics, and the ability to model limitations exactly like you want. That's my recommendation.

[Rapier]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The rules FAQ specifically disallows using Variable Limitations to get around the restriction that all slots in a MP must have the exact same Limitation in order to put the Limitation on the reserve.

Even if the Rules FAQ didn't cry "NAY, NAY I SAY!" I would. Its just to end-runny for my taste. I can understand someone looking at the Pool cost and sucking air in through his teeth. I've done it myself (85 points! OUCH!). However, thats the nature of the beast.

 

I would also raise an eyebrow or three (maybe raise one twice), as such a construct. Regardless of what the actual rules state (too lazy to reach over for the book), I would rule that all MPs must be linked somehow (similar to how ECs are handled). A weapons system MP on a powered armour character, a magic MP on a mage, an energy blast MP on a projector etc.

 

Because all slots are spells I would have a huge problem with Slot 1 (the Flight Staff) since it seems more to be equipment than spell. Since this is a magic MP (which I'm reading as Spell MP), then all the slots should have similar spelly lims (Gestures, Incantations, Foci Components, etc). Again, not sure about what the rules state, but I would even allow a character to buy the MP with a short version of a limitation (1/2 DCV Concentrate) and then buy a slot with a longer version (0 DCV Concentrate) and only get the bonus from the difference in the limitation on the slot cost.

 

Yes, sometimes those Pool costs are killers...but consider what you would be spending on each individual slot without the pool. Still well worth the time to cohese (a new verb?) them into a common theme.

[JMHammer]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The rules FAQ specifically disallows using Variable Limitations to get around the restriction that all slots in a MP must have the exact same Limitation in order to put the Limitation on the reserve.

True, but I'd allow it anyway. Not only that, but since each slot has immutable Limitations instead of true variable Limitations, I'd allow each slot an additional Cannot Change Limitations (-1/4) Limitation (for the slot costs only, not on the Multipower pool cost).

 

After all, if you just made the Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), and Concentration 1/2 DCV (-1/2) Limitations as a common pool/slot modifier you'd get a -1 total Limitation value. Using -1 Variable Limitation on Each Slot (-1/2) as common pool/slot modifiers and Cannot Change Limitations (-1/4) as a slot modifier gives you the ability to customize each slot as it's defined and paid for but you're only getting half the break on your pool cost. Seems like a more than fair trade to me; in fact, I think a power gamer would just go for the common fixed Limitations as they provide more power/fewer restrictions for the same number of points.

 

I would even allow a character to buy the MP with a short version of a limitation (1/2 DCV Concentrate) and then buy a slot with a longer version (0 DCV Concentrate) and only get the bonus from the difference in the limitation on the slot cost.

Me, too.

 

John H

[Dust Raven]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The rules FAQ specifically disallows using Variable Limitations to get around the restriction that all slots in a MP must have the exact same Limitation in order to put the Limitation on the reserve.

I'd look at this the same way I'd look at a VPP, where Variable Limitations are allowed (barring Cosmic Pools). It's ultimately not much different. I'd take a real close look at it though, just to make sure it's sufficently limited enough to warrent a smaller Limitation on the reserve.

 

As an alternative, you can always just put Variable Limitations on the reserve and have it apply as is, and at that value, to each of the slots. This is perfectly legal. It's not as great a point break as putting a -1/2 on the reserve and a -1 on the slots, but you get no arguements from the rules (and you get a more flexible MP).

[Foxx!]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Heroes!

 

Thank you for the advice. The more I think about it, the more it seems like too much trouble. Fixing every slot ruins the fun of having Variable Limitations anyway. Besides, it sounds like putting 0 END and Costs END on the same power.

 

I’m going to go with just Variable Limitations on the reserve. If someone wants fixed limitations on a slot, that will just be part of the conditions of the Variable Limitations.

 

Cheers!

[Gary]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

True, but I'd allow it anyway. Not only that, but since each slot has immutable Limitations instead of true variable Limitations, I'd allow each slot an additional Cannot Change Limitations (-1/4) Limitation (for the slot costs only, not on the Multipower pool cost).

 

After all, if you just made the Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), and Concentration 1/2 DCV (-1/2) Limitations as a common pool/slot modifier you'd get a -1 total Limitation value. Using -1 Variable Limitation on Each Slot (-1/2) as common pool/slot modifiers and Cannot Change Limitations (-1/4) as a slot modifier gives you the ability to customize each slot as it's defined and paid for but you're only getting half the break on your pool cost. Seems like a more than fair trade to me; in fact, I think a power gamer would just go for the common fixed Limitations as they provide more power/fewer restrictions for the same number of points.

 

 

Me, too.

 

John H

 

One problem with this is that the power game could have something like this:

 

slot A Doesn't work in Daytime

Slot B Doesn't work at Night.

 

Sure the power gamer doesn't get the full value of the limitation, but he's basically getting a freebie limitation on the reserve for something that's not truly limiting.

 

Or you can go with the infamous 4 charges on every slot and -1/2 variable limitation on the pool.

 

It can get very abusive very quickly.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The rules FAQ specifically disallows using Variable Limitations to get around the restriction that all slots in a MP must have the exact same Limitation in order to put the Limitation on the reserve.

 

I don't really see the point. -1/2 for "every slot has at least -1 in fixed limitations" seems no more effective/abusive a construct than -1/2 for "every slot has -1 in limitations which can be changed at will".

 

I would allow the variable limitation approach, and if the slot limits are fixed, I would also allow the full limitation (ie -1 rather than -1/2) on each slot where the limitations are fixed.

 

Hey, if your GM is more rigid, take the -1/2 on each slot and take a Psych Lim - Total against changing the limitations on the slots

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

One problem with this is that the power game could have something like this:

 

slot A Doesn't work in Daytime

Slot B Doesn't work at Night.

 

Or you can go with the infamous 4 charges on every slot and -1/2 variable limitation on the pool.

 

It can get very abusive very quickly.

 

This is valid to some extent, but a bit of a red herring IMO. Any GM who would allow such a structure with fixed limitations would also have it slide by as two choices for a standard variable limitation, so it doesn't really impact the decision of whether to allow a multipower where all slots are limited to place variable limitation on the pool.

 

By the book, shouldn't 4 charges on every slot be -1 to the pool - every slot has the same limit.

[JMHammer]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Gary,

 

That would certainly be abusive if the two slots are more-or-less identical except for those two Limitations. But it's so obviously a work-around of the limiting part of the Limitations that no GM would allow it and few players would try to slip it past. And I don't think it would be a problem if a character had, say, an Entangle that only worked at night and an Energy Blast that only worked during the day.

 

This is no different than the commonly accepted illegality of an "Only on Tuesdays" Limitation through Variable Limitations whenever it's Tuesday and then making it "Only on Wednesdays" whenever it's Wednesday.

 

I'm certain that most people would agree that a character created by someone attempting to abuse the system and which is not subject to some kind of review by a reasonable GM or third party will, by its nature, be abusive. So there's no need to point this out in every single thread.

 

Some day I'm sure I'll read a post from you that doesn't rely on some extreme and obviously abusive application of the rules to make your point.

 

John H

[Sean Waters]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Actually what the FAQ says is:

 

Q: The rules say a character cannot apply a Limitation to a Multipower’s reserve cost unless it applies to all the slots. Assuming a character has the same value of Limitations on each slot, could he get around this rule by applying the Variable Limitation Limitation to each slot?

 

A: No. That’s an attempt to avoid the spirit of the rules while still obeying the letter, and should be considered illegal unless specifically allowed by the GM.

 

Now if I was your GM, I'd allow it subject to a veto on anything I thought was abusive or plain powermongering. I mean the alternative would be a VPP and, frankly, they scare me.

 

Now I know someone, somewhere is going to pick me up on saying I agree with the use of any kind of power framework, but we'll debate that one if they notice, eh?

[Gary]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Gary,

 

That would certainly be abusive if the two slots are more-or-less identical except for those two Limitations. But it's so obviously a work-around of the limiting part of the Limitations that no GM would allow it and few players would try to slip it past. And I don't think it would be a problem if a character had, say, an Entangle that only worked at night and an Energy Blast that only worked during the day.

 

This is no different than the commonly accepted illegality of an "Only on Tuesdays" Limitation through Variable Limitations whenever it's Tuesday and then making it "Only on Wednesdays" whenever it's Wednesday.

 

I'm certain that most people would agree that a character created by someone attempting to abuse the system and which is not subject to some kind of review by a reasonable GM or third party will, by its nature, be abusive. So there's no need to point this out in every single thread.

 

Some day I'm sure I'll read a post from you that doesn't rely on some extreme and obviously abusive application of the rules to make your point.

 

John H

 

 

That was a simple example of a 2 power multipower. It's quite easy to setup a 5-8 power multipower each with different limitations that cover each other's weaknesses. And even to not be terribly obvious about it.

 

If your answer to everything is GM discretion, then why bother having rules discussions at all? You can justify any illogical or broken rule in the books by saying the GM can override it.

[Gary]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

This is valid to some extent, but a bit of a red herring IMO. Any GM who would allow such a structure with fixed limitations would also have it slide by as two choices for a standard variable limitation, so it doesn't really impact the decision of whether to allow a multipower where all slots are limited to place variable limitation on the pool.

 

By the book, shouldn't 4 charges on every slot be -1 to the pool - every slot has the same limit.

 

 

2 choices for one single power is ok. For a multipower where the slots can have different sets of limitations, you can get the limitations on the slots but not the reserve. Multipowers are already efficient enough compared to regular powers without allowing this.

 

As for your second part, that would be true except that the rules and the FAQ specifically disallow that.

[JMHammer]

There you go again...

 

Gary said:

If your answer to everything is GM discretion, then why bother having rules discussions at all? You can justify any illogical or broken rule in the books by saying the GM can override it.

 

No one is trying to justify an illogical or broken rule. Misrepresenting the point someone else is making is a stupid way to try to support your own case. Your answer to everything is "If it's possible to make an abusive construct, then the components of that construct shouldn't be allowed at all." Since you have, yourself, pointed out a multitude of abusive yet legal constructs – and there exist a near-infinite number of other exploits, some well-known and some not – then the logic you applied above would lead me to believe that you think the entire Hero System is a waste of time because it requires a GM to interpret the rules and moderate a game.

 

If the game allows you to legally buy a nuclear weapon for 3 points (as you amply demonstrated in another thread just today) but it costs 4 points for a normal person to increase their ground movement rate by +1/3, then yes: Everything has to be reviewed by a GM. As I pointed out in some other thread, this is why Hero is a terrible unmoderated competitive wargame - it could never be fairly played by two people who just want to sit down and have a combat with each other as one could do with, for instance, Star Fleet Battles or chess.

 

The Hero System isn't perfect; Steve Long's rules and his interpretation of the rules is not perfect; my interpretations of the rules and my house rules are not perfect. That is why, for example, some power modifiers have different values in different campaigns and even within the same campaign when applied to different characters. And it is also why every character, and every component of that character, has to be subject to GM review including the exclusion of strictly rules-legal constructs and the inclusion of constructs which aren't strictly rules-legal or which extend the published rules in some way.

 

John H

[Dust Raven]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

If your answer to everything is GM discretion' date=' then why bother having rules discussions at all? You can justify any illogical or broken rule in the books by saying the GM can override it.[/quote']

But isn't that what makes the Hero System great?

 

Seriously though, the Hero System, like every RPG, requires moderation. The Hero System requires a little more moderation than most because of it's flexibility and adaptability. Granted, you can play from the rules, no moderation, but you'll have to completely leave out all the Stop Sign and Exclimation Point Powers and Abilities (which require special consideration unavailable in an unmoderated game). You can also play a completely GM adjucated game, in which the rules are nothing more than a method of notation and the points don't matter. The Hero System is really that flexible.

 

Now, I don't know anyone who's answer to everything is GM discretion any more than I know anyone who's answer to everything is by the book rules. I doubt you, or anyone else on these boards have either.

[Dust Raven]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Back to the point however...

One problem with this is that the power game could have something like this:

 

slot A Doesn't work in Daytime

Slot B Doesn't work at Night.

 

Sure the power gamer doesn't get the full value of the limitation, but he's basically getting a freebie limitation on the reserve for something that's not truly limiting.

 

Or you can go with the infamous 4 charges on every slot and -1/2 variable limitation on the pool.

 

It can get very abusive very quickly.

Yes it can. But I fail to see how this example applies to the question at hand. Foxx, in the third post of this thread, presented his MP for review. I'm sure even you must admit that his example if far from this level of absurd abusiveness. We're trying to figure out if this specific example is abusive within the context of the campaign it's intended for, not a general idea of whether the concept could be abusive. We all know it could be. But is it?

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

I agree with JM and Hugh. I'd ignore the FAQ on this one. Let's look at the numbers:

 

Regular MP:

 

60 Reserve, 60 AP

6 Ultra Slot A, 60 AP

6 Ultra Slot B, 60 AP

6 Ultra Slot C, 60 AP

 

65 total points for three spells with no limitations - very flexible.

 

Variable Limit MP:

 

40 Reserve, 60 AP, -1 of Variable Limitaions (-1/2)

4 Ultra Slot, A 60 AP -1 of Variable Limitaions (-1/2)

4 Ultra Slot, B 60 AP -1 of Variable Limitaions (-1/2)

4 Ultra Slot, C 60 AP -1 of Variable Limitaions (-1/2)

 

52 total points for three spells with -1 of variable limitations - fairly flexible.

 

Foxx's MP:

 

40 Reserve, 60 AP, -1 of Variable Limitaions (-1/2)

3 Ultra Slot, A 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

3 Ultra Slot, B 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

3 Ultra Slot, C 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

 

49 total points for three spells each with -1 of different limitations - less flexible.

 

Limited MP:

 

30 Reserve, 60 AP, -1 of Fixed Limitaions, the same for all slots (-1)

3 Ultra Slot, A 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

3 Ultra Slot, B 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

3 Ultra Slot, C 60 AP -1 of Fixed Limitaions (-1)

 

39 total points for three spells that all have the same -1 of limitations - even less flexible.

 

The above constructs form a contiuous spectrum of decreasing flexibility for decreasing point costs - exactly as it should be. Foxx's proposed MP fits right in where it should, even though it is illegal according to the FAQ. She only saves 3 points out of the 52 she'd spend for the perfectly legal construct - less than 1/17. I would not consider that at all abusive. Therefore, I'd ignore the FAQ. Common sense takes priority.

 

Yes, you still need to watch out for abuses of this construct, such as the example Gary gave. But his example is abusive even if you constuct it legally:

 

Standard Power:

 

50 AP

 

50 total points

 

Variable Limitations MP:

 

40 Reserve, 50 AP -1/2 in Variable Limitations (-1/4)

4 Ultra Slot A, 50 AP -1/2 in Variable Limitations (-1/4) "Only in daytime"

4 Ultra Slot B, 50 AP -1/2 in Variable Limitations (-1/4) "Only at nighttime"

 

48 total points for the exact same functionality! And legal according to the FAQ!

 

Variable Limitations Single Power:

 

40, 50 AP -1/2 in Variable Limitations (-1/4) "Only at night" during the day, and "Only during the day" at night

 

40 total points for the exact same functionality! Without any MP at all!

 

The conclusion to be drawn here is not about what limitations can be applied to the reserve of a MultiPower, but what limitations are inapporpriate to take for a Variable Limitation. Namely: Never allow "Only works in X circumstance" nor "Doesn't work in X circumstance"-type limitations as Variable Limitations. (or alternately, allow them, but at -0) You can always come up with such limitations that aren't limiting, like "Only works on October 27, 2004 between 3:00 and 4:00 Pacific Standard Time, and only while in southern California."

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

The conclusion to be drawn here is not about what limitations can be applied to the reserve of a MultiPower' date=' but what limitations are inapporpriate to take for a Variable Limitation. Namely: Never allow "Only works in X circumstance" nor "Doesn't work in X circumstance"-type limitations as Variable Limitations. (or alternately, allow them, but at -0) You can always come up with such limitations that aren't limiting, like "Only works on October 27, 2004 between 3:00 and 4:00 Pacific Standard Time, and only while in southern California."[/quote']

 

BINGO!! I like to see a listing of limitations for "variable limitation". This could include "only if/not if", but not an unlimited variety of same. For example, perhaps an aquatic super has powers which have Variable limit. It can be "only underwater - 1" or a collection of Concentrate, Extra END and Extra Time totaling the same -1 (it's virtually effortless underwater, but otherwise it's hard to manifest).

[JmOz]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

Another vote for allowing VarLims such as not in water, as long as the GM keeps an eye on things and you have gotten to that point by reasoning from effect, it is all cool

[Dust Raven]

Re: slots with different limitations

 

BINGO!! I like to see a listing of limitations for "variable limitation". This could include "only if/not if"' date=' but not an unlimited variety of same. For example, perhaps an aquatic super has powers which have Variable limit. It can be "only underwater - 1" or a collection of Concentrate, Extra END and Extra Time totaling the same -1 (it's virtually effortless underwater, but otherwise it's hard to manifest).[/quote']I usually write mages up like this. If they have their superfoci, they're fine. If not, their spells require more concentration or lots of END to pull off. Of course, I tend to look as most spells with foci as really having "only if holding specific object".