OIF for Powered Armor why?

[OddHat]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

My overall point is this' date=' [b']Powered Armor with the OIF limitation is no different than Powered Armor without the limitation[/b]. The only difference is the reduced cost. The same armor, in both cases, does not have to be worn all the time, can be damaged, removed, require repairs, be stolen, be affected by magnetic powers (unless specifically protected from that; which is an Advantage).

 

Can someone name me a limitation that is OIF and not just normal for Powered Armor?

 

In other words, you as GM would impose the same problems on someone with power armor as a special effect whether or not the received points for the imitation. As GM, that is your choice. By the book and by common practice, the person who gets points fom his armor as an OIF should have to deal with the problems imposed by that limit more often than the person who takes it as an OIHID and far more often than the person who takes power armor with no limits at all.

 

If the GM is choosing not to enforce a limitation, that's his choice, not a problem with the system.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

The villain sees it is the source of your power and can arrange situations where it is not available.

 

Once again, as stated, this can happen to Powered Armor - no limitation.

 

If you are knocked out it can be stolen. This does not require total team KO unless your character is with his teammates 24/7.

 

If you put on, it can be taken off. Strike Two!!!

 

It can also be stolen when you are not wearing it (say, because you are making a trans-Atlantic flight in your secret ID), or it could just get rerouted (luggage does that - or were you taking your 125 pound briefcase full of metal on as carryon - this is a greater drawback for armor than, say, OIF Magic Ring).

 

I am sure your powered armor will pass customs in a commercial flight. I understand your point, but once again same as the regular armor.

 

Targeted with attacks, it can be broken.

 

Unless you specifically describe it as unbreakable, the regular power armor can be broken just as easily.

 

Captain Inherent is in his deathtrap with all his powers available. Powered Armor Man has his wits and his underwear. And that's all he will have until he gets back to the lab to replace his armour, or finds the guy that took it (not an option if it was broken). This may be a while if he's currently trapped in the Alterniverse.

 

And finally, regular power armor guy is in shorts too!!

 

That's an OIF. Still want the 1/3 point savings?

 

Yes, because of below.

 

In other words, you as GM would impose the same problems on someone with power armor as a special effect whether or not the received points for the imitation. As GM, that is your choice. By the book and by common practice, the person who gets points fom his armor as an OIF should have to deal with the problems imposed by that limit more often than the person who takes it as an OIHID and far more often than the person who takes power armor with no limits at all.

 

I agree. And this is why players take the OIF bonus (limitation) because it rarely if ever comes up. You know it and I know it.

 

If the GM is choosing not to enforce a limitation, that's his choice, not a problem with the system.

 

The problem is not with the system, but the GM who doesn't enforce it. I agree, that's why I say end the facad now. Make it a Power Framework!!!

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I believe Powered Armor' date=' which makes up most of the OIF, has really evolved into its own Power Framework. It has access to offensive, defensive, movement, and sensory powers.[/quote']You make an interesting point here. It's become virtually an informal Framework to some extent in many campaigns. However, I also believe it is unnecessary to make Powered Armor into an actual Power Framework. It can be dealt with the same way as EC or MP are, both of which provide the same level or less of point savings. It just needs to be remembered that Powered Armor will, just as with an EC, will have a common special effect and be hindered by the same types of attacks. If the PA's END Reserve gets drained, the PA will become essentially useless, or at least less effective just as with an EC.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

"The villain sees it is the source of your power and can arrange situations where it is not available.

 

Once again, as stated, this can happen to Powered Armor - no limitation."

 

Rarely--if ever, may possibly never happen to PA-no limit. With a focus, its possible every game, certain almost everytime they are captured.

 

"If you are knocked out it can be stolen. This does not require total team KO unless your character is with his teammates 24/7.

 

If you put on, it can be taken off. Strike Two!!!"

 

If it has no limitation, then it can't be taken off--without the owners consent. No limit PA can't be taken off any differently than a mutant vcan have his powers taken away. Perhaps the PA regenerates from his own cells. Perhaps it teleports to him. No strike two at all.

 

" It can also be stolen when you are not wearing it (say, because you are making a trans-Atlantic flight in your secret ID), or it could just get rerouted (luggage does that - or were you taking your 125 pound briefcase full of metal on as carryon - this is a greater drawback for armor than, say, OIF Magic Ring).

 

 

I am sure your powered armor will pass customs in a commercial flight. I understand your point, but once again same as the regular armor."

If its not an obvious focus, theirs no reason the no limit armor wont make it through customs. Perhaps it can fit under normal clothing. Perhaps it can be invisible. again, the focus armor, and the no limit armor are treated differently.

 

 

 

"Targeted with attacks, it can be broken.

 

Unless you specifically describe it as unbreakable, the regular power armor can be broken just as easily."

 

No, it can't. If its not a focus, you can't break it

 

 

"Captain Inherent is in his deathtrap with all his powers available. Powered Armor Man has his wits and his underwear. And that's all he will have until he gets back to the lab to replace his armour, or finds the guy that took it (not an option if it was broken). This may be a while if he's currently trapped in the Alterniverse.

 

 

And finally, regular power armor guy is in shorts too!!"

 

Regualr power armor guy snaps his fingers, and his armors back on, unless this is the once in a campaign session/power accident where he doesnt have hisarmor.

 

"I agree. And this is why players take the OIF bonus (limitation) because it rarely if ever comes up. You know it and I know it."

 

You claim it. The fact that there is significant, if not universal disagreement with you might indicate that your perspective isn't as common as it seems. the frequency of how often the GM properly utilizes the limitation rules isnt a rules problm, it is a GM skill problem.

 

 

"The problem is not with the system, but the GM who doesn't enforce it. I agree, that's why I say end the facad now. Make it a Power Framework!!!"

 

Special effect: Power armor doesnt merit a new framework more than mutant powers/ mystic powers/ digestive gas powers merit unique frameworks other than EC, multipoer, or VPP.

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I'm beginning to see where the issue lies with Lord Beavis now. He's under the assumption that all power armors are the same just based on the name. Unfortunately that is not the case.

 

Defender - OIF:

* Defender's armor is a first generation suit. It can be damaged in combat due to inferior design [any attack of 15 body].

* If the armor is compromised certain random systems will be broken and require repair [roll randomly for the damaged system].

* The armor has no security measures and so can be removed if Defender is not conscious to stop the removal [can be removed in one turn by anyone].

* The armor is slow to put on and requires a degree of secrecy to get in and out of.

* The armor is not worn at all times and so can be separated from the owner.

 

Ironman - OIHID:

* Ironman's armor is a fifth generation suit. It can only be damaged in combat from extremely intense attacks [GM assigns a breaking point].

* The armor has secondary backups which keep any particular system from becoming damaged [GM requires 2 penetrations to shut down a system].

* The armor has advanced security measures and can only be removed by someone with equal or greater understanding of the armor's systems. Even then it would take a long period of time and advanced equipment [GM assigns a value of -15 to security systems to allow the suit to be removed].

* The armor is worn under Mr. Stark's clothing and has flat-folding and retractable components which can be carried on person and easily put on [basically the same as Defender but without the need to find overly-secluded areas to change].

* The armor is not worn at all times, and only at those times can it be taken, but the armor is protected by elaborate security measures.

 

Dr. Destroyer - No Limitation:

* This is 10th generation armor. The armor is a blend of unique metals, polymers, and electrons and cannot be damaged by any conventional force currently known to man [it doesn't break].

* The armor has built-in nanotechnology which instantly repairs all damaged systems so no loss of power or function is ever experienced [systems can't break].

* The armor has a constant-flux security system which resets itself 200 times per second, as such the decoding frequency is not even known by Dr. Destroyer and so the armor cannot be removed by unconscious thought [it can't be taken off].

* The armor has no designated mass and causes no undue encumbrance. The armor can be instantly summoned and worn and arrives fully capable of battle [as per powers can be activated as a 0 phase action].

* When not worn the armor is stored as an electron atom within a compartment somewhere inside of Dr. Destroyer's body. Dr. Destroyer has 12 such compartments with different access codes hidden within his body [can't be taken away ever].

 

Each of those armors is very different and express how a GM would play them based on the limitations they are purchased. They are not all played the same way just because they are all armors.

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I'm beginning to see where the issue lies with Lord Beavis now. He's under the assumption that all power armors are the same just based on the name. Unfortunately that is not the case.

 

Defender - OIF:

* Defender's armor is a first generation suit. It can be damaged in combat due to inferior design [any attack of 15 body].

* If the armor is compromised certain random systems will be broken and require repair [roll randomly for the damaged system].

* The armor has no security measures and so can be removed if Defender is not conscious to stop the removal [can be removed in one turn by anyone].

* The armor is slow to put on and requires a degree of secrecy to get in and out of.

* The armor is not worn at all times and so can be separated from the owner.

 

Ironman - OIHID:

* Ironman's armor is a fifth generation suit. It can only be damaged in combat from extremely intense attacks [GM assigns a breaking point].

* The armor has secondary backups which keep any particular system from becoming damaged [GM requires 2 penetrations to shut down a system].

* The armor has advanced security measures and can only be removed by someone with equal or greater understanding of the armor's systems. Even then it would take a long period of time and advanced equipment [GM assigns a value of -15 to security systems to allow the suit to be removed].

* The armor is worn under Mr. Stark's clothing and has flat-folding and retractable components which can be carried on person and easily put on [basically the same as Defender but without the need to find overly-secluded areas to change].

* The armor is not worn at all times, and only at those times can it be taken, but the armor is protected by elaborate security measures.

 

Dr. Destroyer - No Limitation:

* This is 10th generation armor. The armor is a blend of unique metals, polymers, and electrons and cannot be damaged by any conventional force currently known to man [it doesn't break].

* The armor has built-in nanotechnology which instantly repairs all damaged systems so no loss of power or function is ever experienced [systems can't break].

* The armor has a constant-flux security system which resets itself 200 times per second, as such the decoding frequency is not even known by Dr. Destroyer and so the armor cannot be removed by unconscious thought [it can't be taken off].

* The armor has no designated mass and causes no undue encumbrance. The armor can be instantly summoned and worn and arrives fully capable of battle [as per powers can be activated as a 0 phase action].

* When not worn the armor is stored as an electron atom within a compartment somewhere inside of Dr. Destroyer's body. Dr. Destroyer has 12 such compartments with different access codes hidden within his body [can't be taken away ever].

 

Each of those armors is very different and express how a GM would play them based on the limitations they are purchased. They are not all played the same way just because they are all armors.

Excellent. Rep for you.

[OddHat]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I agree. And this is why players take the OIF bonus (limitation) because it rarely if ever comes up. You know it and I know it.

 

Campaigns vary. If a player has a limit or disadvantage in my campaigns, he will have to deal with it. That's one of the choices I make as a GM.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I remember one Pa character I had flew into an invisible time warp field of some sort (with zero foreshadowing or clues anything liek that was in the area--complete suprise)--where all items were translated into period appropriate items (Western era, i got soem guns, a Horse, a telescope and a rifle). Non focus powers were not affected.

 

I was unfortunately flying about about 30" of altitude, and promptly fell that distance, taking max falling damage against my very normal ID PD.

 

I was 2 Body from death, but my teammate rolled a 4 on their paramedics roll (with penalties for my massive body loss and lack of equuipment) to stabilize me.

 

Ouch.

 

I spent that game session, and half of the next, roleplaying moaning and being unable to move. I think that represented a limitation of some sort

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I remember one Pa character I had flew into an invisible time warp field of some sort (with zero foreshadowing or clues anything liek that was in the area--complete suprise)--where all items were translated into period appropriate items (Western era, i got soem guns, a Horse, a telescope and a rifle). Non focus powers were not affected.

 

I was unfortunately flying about about 30" of altitude, and promptly fell that distance, taking max falling damage against my very normal ID PD.

 

I was 2 Body from death, but my teammate rolled a 4 on their paramedics roll (with penalties for my massive body loss and lack of equuipment) to stabilize me.

 

Ouch.

 

I spent that game session, and half of the next, roleplaying moaning and being unable to move. I think that represented a limitation of some sort

 

So, you are saying, if your power armor had no focus, you would have appeared in the old west flying around with power blasts. The time warp was designed with the limitation, only affects foci powers???? Isn't the point of the time warp to bring you back to the period??

 

"Targeted with attacks, it can be broken.

 

Unless you specifically describe it as unbreakable, the regular power armor can be broken just as easily."

 

No, it can't. If its not a focus, you can't break it

 

Going by this brilliant logic, that means you can't break the wall of the villian base down, because it's not a focus!!! Your words not mine.

 

My prediction is when the 6th edition comes out, they will clean up the abuses of some of these limitations. The first one will be making Power Armor its own power framework!!!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

So' date=' you are saying, if your power armor had no focus, you would have appeared in the old west flying around with power blasts. The time warp was designed with the limitation, only affects foci powers???? Isn't the point of the time warp to bring you back to the period?? [/quote']

 

To my mind, you are approaching this backwards. You seem to be saying "Regardless of whether you take a limitation or not, this can logically happen to your powered armor". True. You conclude that, therefore, you should not have a point break for the limitation. Here I disagree.

 

I am saying "The fact that these bad things can logically happen to your powered armor means that you should save points, because the risk of these bad things is a limitation - one which is not shared by other powers". I conclude either that you MUST take the limitation, because these bad things CAN AND WILL happen whether you take the limitation or not, or that, if you choose to forego the point savings of the limitation, I will forego having these issues arise in play.

 

Look at this from a player perspective. Two players have characters with 40 STR, 30/30 defenses, a multipower of 3 60 AP attacks, 20" flight and a suite of enhanced senses. One is a Strange Visitor from Another Planet. Hios powers are intrinsic. The other is Powered Armor Man, whose focus can be broken, stolen, unavailable, etc. Why should Powered Armor Man pay the same cost as Strange Visitor? His powers are more limited - so he should not!

 

My prediction is when the 6th edition comes out' date=' they will clean up the abuses of some of these limitations. The first one will be making Power Armor its own [b']power framework!!! [/b]

 

How bout this. I'll bet, today, that when 6e is released, powered armor will NOT be a power framework. If I win, you send me the price of 6e. If you win, I'll send you the price of 6e. Anyone else want in on this?

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

How bout this. I'll bet' date=' today, that when 6e is released, powered armor will NOT be a power framework.[/quote']

I'll even add that it won't be an optional rule in The Ultimate Powered-Armor book when it gets published as well.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Look at this from a player perspective. Two players have characters with 40 STR, 30/30 defenses, a multipower of 3 60 AP attacks, 20" flight and a suite of enhanced senses. One is a Strange Visitor from Another Planet. Hios powers are intrinsic. The other is Powered Armor Man, whose focus can be broken, stolen, unavailable, etc. Why should Powered Armor Man pay the same cost as Strange Visitor? His powers are more limited - so he should not!

 

The rules are ok, the abuse of the rules are not. The problem: Powered Armor Man's armor is rarely (translation - Never) ever broken, stolen, or unavailable. It's just a charade!!! Look at how many characters have powered armor with the OIF focus, or other powers with the OIF focus. If it's such a burden, why is it so rampant. Ablative, Activation Roll, OIHID are obvious alternatives, but not taken anywhere in proportion to OIF. Wonder why??

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

The rules are ok' date=' the abuse of the rules are not. The problem: Powered Armor Man's armor is rarely (translation - Never) ever broken, stolen, or unavailable. It's just a charade!!![/quote']

Add the phrase "In the games I play in" and you will be correct in your statement. In our games it happens all the time.

 

Look at how many characters have powered armor with the OIF focus, or other powers with the OIF focus. If it's such a burden, why is it so rampant.

For one reason maybe the designers wanted those characters to be slightly inferior to the PCs. NPCs shouldn't be overshadowing player characters. There are only a half-dozen powered armor characters written up. The fact that they are designed so the PCs have a chance to break their armor in combat is a good thing, IMO.

 

Ablative, Activation Roll, OIHID are obvious alternatives, but not taken anywhere in proportion to OIF. Wonder why??

Ablative only affects defensive powers so would be of little use to all the powers in a powered armored character's pool. Same goes for activation rolls. You think Defender wants an activation roll on his energy blast? OIHID is valid but I believe it's saved for PCs. That's why, IMO.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Ablative only affects defensive powers so would be of little use to all the powers in a powered armored character's pool. Same goes for activation rolls. You think Defender wants an activation roll on his energy blast? OIHID is valid but I believe it's saved for PCs. That's why, IMO.

 

You are right, who would want activation, that's a real limitation. Can't cheat that.

 

There are only two real valid arguements for OIF.

 

1) Lots of characters use it. If the villian who fights you has it, why not the hero. It equals out. That does seem fair!!

 

2) Most supers follow the unwritten rule "don't steal or destroy" your opponents equipment (focus).

 

The second one isn't always followed. The rational for the hero not to steal the equipment of the villian is the heroic code. Once the villain is defeated the focus is turned over (deactivated) to the authorities.

 

The villain's rational (irrational) for not taking or destroying the focus is that any two-bit thug can do that, but "it takes the power of (insert the name of your favorite villain)" to go toe-to-toe with Power Armor Man and defeat him.

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

You are right, who would want activation, that's a real limitation. Can't cheat that.

 

There are only two real valid arguements for OIF.

 

1) Lots of characters use it. If the villian who fights you has it, why not the hero. It equals out. That does seem fair!!

 

2) Most supers follow the unwritten rule "don't steal or destroy" your opponents equipment (focus).

 

The second one isn't always followed. The rational for the hero not to steal the equipment of the villian is the heroic code. Once the villain is defeated the focus is turned over (deactivated) to the authorities.

 

The villain's rational (irrational) for not taking or destroying the focus is that any two-bit thug can do that, but "it takes the power of (insert the name of your favorite villain)" to go toe-to-toe with Power Armor Man and defeat him.

I really think you should try to understand what all these people are trying to tell you. Sometimes people get themselves stuck in an argument and then just become rude and argumentative rather the admit they might have been mistaken or did not fully understand something. I believe that is the point where you are now: running on pride not logic.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I really think you should try to understand what all these people are trying to tell you. Sometimes people get themselves stuck in an argument and then just become rude and argumentative rather the admit they might have been mistaken or did not fully understand something. I believe that is the point where you are now: running on pride not logic.

 

I am not here not change people's point of view. Obviously, the consensus is that it never happens in my game. We don't abuse the rules.

 

I have only seen probably 14 people respond to this thread. Not exactly, a large sample. I would guess more people abuse this rule, than play it straight.

 

My suggestion, try a game where you drop the OIF. I am willing to bet if you drop it for OIHID or not at all, you will probably never miss it.

[Tamashii2000]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Lord Beavis, your right, with out with out the limitation power armor can be stolen, broken and so forth.. but with out the limitation.. it simply never happens.. just like Doctor Doom. (Ironman has in fact had his suit destroyed, stolen, and not around when he need it...)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

The rules are ok' date=' the abuse of the rules are not. The problem: Powered Armor Man's armor is rarely ([b']translation - Never[/b]) ever broken, stolen, or unavailable.

 

If the GM is not using the limitation, it is just free points. But that's no different from a GM who never has the OIHID character's ability to shift into hero ID frustrated, never Grabs or Disarms an OAF, or ensures all scenarios take place within an intense magnetic field for the character whose powers only work in an intense magnetic field. The problem is not the rule. It is the GM and players' failure to use the rules.

 

Look at how many characters have powered armor with the OIF focus' date=' or other powers with the OIF focus.[/quote']

 

Actually, I see it on NPC's considerably more often than on PC's. Why? Because an NPC will likely only lose the focus when he's beaten (though breaking the focus provides another means for beating him). All those point savings don't cost him much while he's battling the PC.

 

However, the PC will still be a PC next week, after his armor has been stolen, and will have to limp along without whatever portion of his powers are tied up in that focus. As a result, the focus has more issues for the PC. This is similar to D&D, where the NPC spellcasters can blow all their spells fighting the PC's, since they know they won't be having any more encounters today that they may need to preserve some resources for.

 

If it's such a burden' date=' why is it so rampant.[/quote']

 

Because it is very common in the source material.

 

Ablative' date=' Activation Roll, OIHID are obvious alternatives, but not taken anywhere in proportion to OIF. [b'] Wonder why??[/b]

 

Ablative and Activation are both much less common in the source material. How many Supers have powers that fail on a regular basis? How many have armor that gradually flakes away? OIHID has its own problems - it's more prone to GM failure to enforce drawbacks than OIF is.

 

BTW, I've been running a character for some weeks who has Act 15- on most of his attacks. Do you know how infrequently a 16, 17 or 18 actually comes up?

[TheEmerged]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

#1> As a focus, the powers attached to it are harder to "turn back on" after being dispelled or brought to 0 active points by drain/suppress/transfer.

 

#2> As a focus, it can be removed by non-invasive measures. If it can't (cf Iron Man), it's not really a focus and is at best an OIHID.

 

#3> As "Obvious", you can't use it discreetly or trick opponents into underestimating you as easily. If not, it's not an Obvious focus.

 

Of course, the bottom line is that it's only as much of a limitation as the GM makes it -- if he never invokes out-of-combat situations, never uses dispel, etc etc then it's effectively free points.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

So' date=' you are saying, if your power armor had no focus, you would have appeared in the old west flying around with power blasts. The time warp was designed with the limitation, only affects foci powers???? Isn't the point of the time warp to bring you back to the period?? [/quote']

 

Actually the time warping thing was a wierd mixing of periods. Those with non focus powers retained them in some fasion or another. For one reason or another the GM didnt anticipate that I'd be flying at that point of entry (not sure why, as it was a common thing for me to do). I think my that my 'rifle' and guns had very special effects due to wierd west tech/gunsmithing, but flight hadn't been written into my package..so, kerplop. The main point was, the situation rmeoved foci, and I sufferred as a result. I certainly paid for that limitation. Another game, a villain targeted and attacked specific systems of my armor--a function of the focus limitation that couldn't have occurred if my armor was OIHD, or no limitation at all.

 

 

Going by this brilliant logic, that means you can't break the wall of the villian base down, because it's not a focus!!! Your words not mine.

 

Sorry that you seem to be getting frustrated, its not a personal thing. Your assumption about OIF Power armor not being a real limitation is simply wrong. You may as well argue to remove all OIF foci from the game of any FX, or, as someone else more accurately pointed out, never allow any PA type, including Dr. Destroyer and others, to buy armor without the OIF limitation.

The limitation focus has nothing to do with walls being broken or not. (There are explicit rules for walls, their defenses, and doing damage to them). There are no rules for 'breaking' power armor not bought as a focus or with any limitation whatsoever.

 

My prediction is when the 6th edition comes out, they will clean up the abuses of some of these limitations. The first one will be making Power Armor its own power framework!!!

 

Thats something that won't happened. Power Armor isnt a framework, its a special effect. A simple review of what a power framework is in Hero would sort of point out that they are not made to cater to one special effect.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

 

How bout this. I'll bet, today, that when 6e is released, powered armor will NOT be a power framework. If I win, you send me the price of 6e. If you win, I'll send you the price of 6e. Anyone else want in on this?

 

Count me in. In fact, I'll pay double if I lose.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

.

 

My suggestion, try a game where you drop the OIF. I am willing to bet if you drop it for OIHID or not at all, you will probably never miss it.

 

That would be only if the rest of us had games where OIF limitatiosn were not properly played--or games characters who did not take a limitation are treated like they have that limitation anyway, unfairly.

 

Perhaps you try some games where the limitation is played properly, and then see how it works.

[Kristopher]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Once more, with feeling...

 

Personally, I don't understand the obession with mathematical purity and slavish devotion to "fairness" that seem to underly so many of the discussions on this board.

 

"Well, guys, we were going to continue with the rescue of the space station that we started last week, but Captain Arsenal hasn't had any trouble with his power armor in three sessions, and so he's overdue to have someone steal it while he's asleep. So we're going to come back to the space station next time, and have a flashback session now, so that we're absolutely fair to everyone. Wouldn't want Captain Arsenal to not pay for his Limitations, now would we? Oh, and before we start, I need to roll all of your 8 or less Disadvantages..."

 

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

That would be only if the rest of us had games where OIF limitatiosn were not properly played--or games characters who did not take a limitation are treated like they have that limitation anyway, unfairly.

 

Perhaps you try some games where the limitation is played properly, and then see how it works.

 

My point is so far we have heard from probably 16 people on this subject who "claim" they don't abuse this rule. There is another thread about munckins. I believe this rule is abused more than it used properly.

 

I have played games where the rule is played properly. I have run games where the rule is played properly. We have lost many "players" because we actually role-played the limitations. In one encounter, a player with an OIF actually had it damaged (one power did not work). He complained that was not fair. I said to him, "you have an OIF limitation, and the power that doesn't function is only a minor power!! What did you expect when you took the limitation??"

He said back, "Nobody really plays out these limitations. They are there to get you better lower level point heroes."

" Well, we do. Nothing mean, just fair."

After the session, we never saw him again. I kept his character, he had a good background.

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Once more, with feeling...

 

Personally, I don't understand the obession with mathematical purity and slavish devotion to "fairness" that seem to underly so many of the discussions on this board.

 

"Well, guys, we were going to continue with the rescue of the space station that we started last week, but Captain Arsenal hasn't had any trouble with his power armor in three sessions, and so he's overdue to have someone steal it while he's asleep. So we're going to come back to the space station next time, and have a flashback session now, so that we're absolutely fair to everyone. Wouldn't want Captain Arsenal to not pay for his Limitations, now would we? Oh, and before we start, I need to roll all of your 8 or less Disadvantages..."

 

I believe you're overstating the case. It's not as though a game stops to go and find PA man's armor. In the midst of combat armor might be damaged and some systems lost for that adventure because the GM rules there is not enough time to return to base and replace or fix it, and so that counts as one of the "8" times it needs to be addressed.

 

The armor story might be a 2 or 3 session arc of the overall campaign. Perhaps the armor's power system break needs repair and the required component is made in Thailand but is not being supplied for some reason. The PC needs to go there and find out why and is forced to take powered armor which has no recovery on the end reserve. This turns into the whole team getting involved in a Mechanon plot with the PA guy needing to stop and buy duracells.

 

Those two things just used up half of your required 8 for the year before you even get into having the suit locked in the limousine when Foxbat steals it to make his get away. Can we say Ironfox?

 

It's easy to screw... err... properly manipulate players into situations like this and never make it a burden upon other campaign storylines.