Force Field Limitation

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

FF visibility defined as "I use my body as a shield" does not satisfy visiblity requirements.

 

The source of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

The effect of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

 

END OF STORY.

 

No, its a description of an action. Thats the SOURCE portion of the visibility. It is obvious that your character is the source of the effect, but the actual outcome of the effect is not visible; it looks exactly the same as if your character had Dmg Resistance or Armor and interposed their body between the attacker and the target via a normal means. Thus the actual SFX portion of the attack is not visible.

 

The source of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

The effect of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

 

END OF STORY.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

1" flight X256 NCM (+2) Instant Acceleration/Deceleration (+1) 0 End (+1/2). 9 pts. Vs 1" Flight X256 NCM (42 base points) Instant Acceleration/Deceleration (+1) 0 End (+1/2) for 105 pts. The adder makes it a lot harder to abuse at lower power levels than the advantage.

 

Okay, good point. But that's a Movement power, and we're talking about something entirely different.

 

You can do it that way as well. However, you would have to have extremely high power levels before the adder becomes significantly better. It just doesn't seem to be that big a deal, in exchange for the convenience and simplicity of the adder vs clunky advantages.

 

Hmpf. "Clunky Advantages" vs "Utterly Ridiculous Made-Up Limitations" is more like it. I still think -2 is completely outside the realm of the reasonable. Only being able to use the power to defend others is nowhere near as limiting having No Conscious Control over your power, or having your power be Independent, or having it Only Work In Intense Magnetic Fields.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

So basically what youre saying is "I dont like Protects Carried Adder so Im going to crap on any Power Construct that uses it"?

 

I don't like it being used as a cheap run-around the UBO Advantage. I think it's abusive. I also don't think it should be an adder, I think it should be a +1/2 Advantage on Force Field since it does the exact same thing as buying Usable Simultaneously on Force Field.

 

Also, it's cheese, and it shouldn't be in there. It just helps to point out how broken the rules are - as it stands, if I have a force field and a vase bought as a focus, the vase is protected by my force field. But if I have a force field and pick up a vase off a shelf, the vase isn't protected by my force field. That's dumb.

 

A force field should always protect small carried items or it should never protect small carried items, and if it's going to be used to protect another person in addition to the user, it should be bought as Usable Simultaneously.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

The source of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

The effect of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

 

END OF STORY.

 

 

 

The source of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

The effect of the power is clearly visible to at least three senses.

 

END OF STORY.

The source is, not the effect.

 

How is the effect of this power different from the effect of Armor or Damage Resistance?

 

It isnt.

 

Armor and Damage Resistance are not "visible", what makes you think this effect is?

 

 

(By the way, BOLDFACING YOUR IMPERATIVE ASSERTIONS DOES NOT MAKE THEM CORRECT OR TRUE.)

[Gary]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Okay, good point. But that's a Movement power, and we're talking about something entirely different.

 

 

 

Hmpf. "Clunky Advantages" vs "Utterly Ridiculous Made-Up Limitations" is more like it. I still think -2 is completely outside the realm of the reasonable. Only being able to use the power to defend others is nowhere near as limiting having No Conscious Control over your power, or having your power be Independent, or having it Only Work In Intense Magnetic Fields.

 

 

All -2 limitations aren't created equal. NCC or Only Work In Intense Magnetic Fields or Only Work Under Full Moon is far more limiting than Act 8- or X5 End cost. Or OAF with 8 Charges and Act 14-. Champions generally has a floor of -2 on limitations in general, to prevent abuse.

 

Consider that the primary ability of a FF is to protect the user. In 90+% of the game situations, that's what FF is for. Taking away the primary ability of a power as purchased is a pretty hefty limitation. I don't know about you, but the vast majority of my FF characters generally don't need the FF to protect anything other than themselves.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Okay, good point. But that's a Movement power, and we're talking about something entirely different.

 

 

 

Hmpf. "Clunky Advantages" vs "Utterly Ridiculous Made-Up Limitations" is more like it. I still think -2 is completely outside the realm of the reasonable. Only being able to use the power to defend others is nowhere near as limiting having No Conscious Control over your power, or having your power be Independent, or having it Only Work In Intense Magnetic Fields.

 

 

Having it only work on others when you are holding/carrying them while offering no protection to the character themselves, and requiring the character to position themselves in such a way as to interpose themselves between attacker and target is extremely limiting. It eliminates almost all of the functionality of the base power. Its a throw-away ability, barely worth purchasing. It's effect on the game is minimal. Its simply not worth many points in an average superhero game. Personally I would only consider taking it in a Brick Tricks MP in which case limitations have marginal impact anyway.

 

You can continue to get lathered up about it, but it quite simply doesnt matter. I would give it a -2 in my games. You wouldnt. Since you'll never play in one of my games and vice versa, it's not exactly the end of the world.

 

But thanks for playing "Wheel of Limitations"!

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

The source is' date=' not the effect.[/quote']

 

The effect is "interposing your body between the target and the attack". That is the effect, not the source. The EFFECT. Anyone observing the action can clearly see that Brickman is interposing his body between the target (Normalguy) and the attack.

 

Do you get that? The effect of the power isn't "bullets bounce off my arms" it's "I move my bulletproof arms between the bullets and their target."

 

The source is "the person interposing his body between the target and the attack."

 

That is entirely different than Armor and Damage Resistence.

 

How is the effect of this power different from the effect of Armor or Damage Resistance?

 

It isnt.

 

The justification for the power is high Armor and/or Damage Resistance.

 

You are totally confusing why the character has this power with what the effect of the power is.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Having it only work on others when you are holding/carrying them while offering no protection to the character themselves' date=' and requiring the character to position themselves in such a way as to interpose themselves between attacker and target is extremely limiting.[/quote']

 

The power doesn't actually require any of that. In theory, the defended character only has to be in the same hex as the defender. It does not hinder the defender in anyway.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

The effect is "interposing your body between the target and the attack". That is the effect' date=' not the source. The EFFECT. Anyone observing the action can clearly see that Brickman is interposing his body between the target (Normalguy) and the attack.[/quote'] No, the EFFECT is the protected person gets the benefit of your force field.

 

Do you get that? The effect of the power isn't "bullets bounce off my arms" it's "I move my bulletproof arms between the bullets and their target."

No that is the source of the power -- your characters bulletproof skin is the source of the protection effect.

 

That is entirely different than Armor and Damage Resistence.

What it looks like is entirely the same.

 

The justification for the power is high Armor and/or Damage Resistance.

The justification of the power is not in question.

 

You are totally confusing why the character has this power with what the effect of the power is.

On the contrary, you are "totally confusing" the difference between visible SFX vs not visible SFX.

 

Justification for the power is not even a topic of discussion.

 

Here is the description of the Power:

 

"Character Interposes His Body Between Target And Attacker"

 

Here is the mechanics of the Power:

 

Force Field Protects Carried

 

Here are the ramifications of that mechanic:

 

FF is a visible effect.

However, a visible FF should not be seen to surround and protect the protected individual.

 

Here is the resolution:

 

Invisible Power Effects, SFX Only +1/2

 

 

 

Thanx for playing though! Vanna will hand you your consolation prize on the way out.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

The power doesn't actually require any of that. In theory' date=' the defended character only has to be in the same hex as the defender. It does not hinder the defender in anyway.[/quote']

Actually, you are wrong again. The Person w/ the FF must carry something/person for the Protects Carried Adder to take effect.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

All this aside, some version of an IPE (SFX) 1" Force Wall with no range, and some kind of lockout like Concentration througout would probably be a better way to model this effect anway.

[Rapier]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

But I'll tell you what bugs me: there's no equivalent for "variable advantage" or "variable limitation" for Adders' date=' which means an otherwise simple character who has a very narrowly defined set of powers -- but flexible, within that narrow scope -- winds up having to buy a monstrous Multipower or even Power Pool. Teleport, for example, has a bucketfull of Adders. If you want a character whose main schtick is Teleport, and want them to be able to use it in a variety of ways, you either spend a bazillion points to have a few levels of every Adder, or you buy a Power Pool, or you buy a Multipower with a ridiculous number of slots. That bugs me. It should be simpler than that.[/quote']

As a GM, if a player came to me with a Custom Power etc that was defined as 20 pts of Adders for TP (Var Advantage), and it included all the same advantages/limitations as the TP...I would let that in.

 

Now that you mention it, I do see some kind of need/utility for a Variable Adder.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Actually' date=' you are wrong again. The Person w/ the FF must carry something/person for the Protects Carried Adder to take effect.[/quote']

 

I was talking about my build of the power, using UBO.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

No' date=' the EFFECT is the protected person gets the benefit of your force field.[/quote']

 

That's the MECHANIC. The EFFECT is the SPECIAL EFFECT.

 

The special effect of this power is "The defending character imposes his bulletproof body between the protected character and all attacks aimed at the protected character"

 

The game mechanic used to achieve this effect is a Force Field, UBO, Others Only, with Feedback.

 

FF is a visible effect.

However, a visible FF should not be seen to surround and protect the protected individual.

 

The Force Field is the defending character's body.

 

The defending character's body is visible and can be seen to be surrounding and protecting the defended individual.

 

Therefore the effect is visible.

 

If the effect were Invisible, then when an attacker looked at the defended character, they would not be able to tell that the protected character was defended. And that makes no sense at all, because if an attacker looks at the defended character, he is certainly going to see the defending character standing there defending the defended character.

 

It's really not hard to understand.

 

Would it help if you thought of the Force Field power as "Visible Non-Persistant Resistant Defenses That Cost End To Maintain"? Because a Force Field isn't necessarily a continous field of energy or force, it's just visible non-persistant resistant defenses that cost END to maintain.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

I was talking about my build of the power' date=' using UBO.[/quote']

 

The power as described has a significant limitation over the typical UBO power - it cannot be used by the character himself. [FREd is quite specific that the power with +1/4 UBO may be targetted on the owner of the power, if desired].

 

Further, a UBO power would place the power under control of the target, not the owner of the power, and would also require END be paid by the target. Finally, you have pointed out that UBO requires being in the same hex, where "protects carried" requires the target in fact be carried.

 

All of the above items indicate that UBO is a very poor contruct for creating the desired power - UBO does not create the effect desired. "Protects carried" + "provides no defense to force field weilder" does create the effect desired, and is thus the superior construct.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

That's the MECHANIC. The EFFECT is the SPECIAL EFFECT.

The Mechanic is FF 25 PD / 25 ED. The Effect is the protected individual is protected by a visible aura. The Source is the generating character. "Is that so difficult for you to understand?"

 

 

The special effect of this power is "The defending character imposes his bulletproof body between the protected character and all attacks aimed at the protected character"

That does not satisfy the visibility requirement of a END costing Power like FF.

 

Also, you seem to be changing your tune; a couple of posts ago you indicated that you would only require the granter to be in the same hex as the grantee. Make up your mind which you mean.

 

The game mechanic used to achieve this effect is a Force Field, UBO, Others Only, with Feedback.

We are not discussing the UBO method, which is your approach due to your dislike of Protects Carried.

 

We are talking about a Protects Carried FF with a Limitation indicating that it ONLY protects Carried.

 

 

The Force Field is the defending character's body.

And must be visibile.

 

The defending character's body is visible and can be seen to be surrounding and protecting the defended individual.

That is indistinguishable from the defending character just standing there normally. The FF is not visible.

 

Therefore the effect is visible.

No, the source is visible, not the effect itself.

 

If the effect were Invisible, then when an attacker looked at the defended character, they would not be able to tell that the protected character was defended. And that makes no sense at all, because if an attacker looks at the defended character, he is certainly going to see the defending character standing there defending the defended character.

On the contrary, if they looked at the defending character it would look exactly the same as if some other character did the same exact thing but lacked the grantable FF Power.

 

It is not obvious that the defending character is actually granting additional protection beyond the norm, when in fact the defending character is granting the protection of a visible FF.

 

It's really not hard to understand.

And yet your continued inability to do so persists.

 

Would it help if you thought of the Force Field power as "Visible Non-Persistant Resistant Defenses That Cost End To Maintain"? Because a Force Field isn't necessarily a continous field of energy or force, it's just visible non-persistant resistant defenses that cost END to maintain.

Would it help you to understand that Powers that cost END must be specifically identifiable to 3 distinct senses unless bought with some version of IPE or where specifically noted in the text of the Power (such as DI)?

 

Can an observer tell that the granting character is offering greater than normal protection to a protected character? If not, then IPE: SFX is required.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

The power as described has a significant limitation over the typical UBO power - it cannot be used by the character himself. [FREd is quite specific that the power with +1/4 UBO may be targetted on the owner of the power' date= if desired].

 

Further, a UBO power would place the power under control of the target, not the owner of the power, and would also require END be paid by the target. Finally, you have pointed out that UBO requires being in the same hex, where "protects carried" requires the target in fact be carried.

 

All of the above items indicate that UBO is a very poor contruct for creating the desired power - UBO does not create the effect desired. "Protects carried" + "provides no defense to force field weilder" does create the effect desired, and is thus the superior construct.

And further, once you use UBO, he person you lend the Power to decides when it turns off, not the granter. This makes no sense in the context of this Power Construct either.

 

Give up on the UBO approach jackalope. It doesnt model the desired effect correctly.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

UBO termination:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2851

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Interestingly, that link also answers that a UBO power recipient may move up to 5xAP" away and keep the power which has been bestowed upon him. Thus, if using UBO, the fact that the target must remain in contact to retain the power is a limitation.

 

Which brings me back to my earlier post - the cost won't vary by much whether you use "protects carried; does not protect user" or "UBO, User may not use; Target must remain in contact".

 

I'd say the two limitations are more or less equal (given that UBO could otherwise be used by either a target or the owner, and Protects Carried would otherwise always protect the user).

 

As to whether it's a game-breaking power...depends on whether the Brick decides to carry the Mentalist at all times, I suppose [the answer to "Is this game-breaking" seems most commonly to be "It depends on the game"]

[Rapier]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

depends on whether the Brick decides to carry the Mentalist at all times

Now there is a concept I haven't seen in YEARS. The big strong brick with the little moppet on his shoulder.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

Interestingly, that link also answers that a UBO power recipient may move up to 5xAP" away and keep the power which has been bestowed upon him. Thus, if using UBO, the fact that the target must remain in contact to retain the power is a limitation.

 

Ya, I know -- I posted the question afterall

 

 

UBO = not a good idea for this particular power construct.

 

Actually, Im still of the mind that a limited No Range, Concentration Thru-out IPE (SFX) Force Wall would do the job, and fit the concept better.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

UBO = not a good idea for this particular power construct.

 

Interesting. I think it's pretty much a classic example of a power (PD or Armor, in this case) usable by others (simultaneously, in this case). With appropriate Limitations to reflect the special effect, of course.

[Rapier]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

As a GM, if a player came to me with a Custom Power etc that was defined as 20 pts of Adders for TP (Var Advantage), and it included all the same advantages/limitations as the TP...I would let that in.

 

Now that you mention it, I do see some kind of need/utility for a Variable Adder.

Lo and behold!! I was just typing another character into HD and found this little Advantage +1 Can Add/Remove Adders (FREd p 75).

 

Figures Stever would have thought of it. You want to talk about a Rules Lawyer? HA! I slay me. Yeah...ok...it's late.

[jackalope]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

That is indistinguishable from the defending character just standing there normally. The FF is not visible.

 

You are honestly going to sit there and say that a person actively defending a person from attacks, warding off blows, and constantly moving to shield another person is indistinguishable from a person just standing there doing nothing?

 

I mean, regardless of whether you use the adder or UBO, the special effect of using the power is clearly distinguishable from taking no action.

 

You are utterly full of crap.

 

I'm done talking to you. This bullshit is pissing me off.

[Rapier]

Re: Force Field Limitation

 

You are honestly going to sit there and say that a person actively defending a person from attacks' date=' warding off blows, and constantly moving to shield another person is [b']indistinguishable[/b] from a person just standing there doing nothing?

 

I mean, regardless of whether you use the adder or UBO, the special effect of using the power is clearly distinguishable from taking no action.

 

You are utterly full of crap.

 

I'm done talking to you. This bullshit is pissing me off.

I have an energy blast that is made of air. It's my air energy blast. Because it's made of air and you can't see air, my energy blast is invisible. Right?

 

WRONG.

 

SFX cannot be used as an end-run around IPE. The construct of the power must justify the SFX. Not the other way around.