OIF for Powered Armor why?

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

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.

So you played with one munchkin who never in his life ever had a limitation used against him, and that means that OIF is not a valid limitation?

 

As had been said by "16 other people:" if you don't enforce the limitation then it's not valid. If you don't enforce OIHID PA every few sessions then it becomes just as invalid as OIF. The problem is not the limitation. The problem is how often, if ever, the limitation is enforced in the games you have been associated with.

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

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.

Indeed. One factor Lord Beavis seems to be overlooking is that when a PA character has his focus go south or be unavailable, it generally makes the character nearly useless. That seldom happens to Cosmic Hammergod, who even without the Hammer Cosmic still has his superstrength, his enchanted chainmail, his enchanted goats, and his centuries of combat experience.

 

Mentor ran a powered armor character in our campaign for eight years. Without his armor Cyberknight was hands down the least powerful member of our team. With it he's one of our big guns. On one occasion the team had to stop an evil sorcerer who had cast a technology-destroying spell over Manhattan Island in preparation for opening a gate to Hell. The longer the field was in effect the more powerful and larger it became. The more sophisticated the technology, the more quickly it failed. I started by making Cyberknight roll Activation for every use of a power, and each use lowered the Activation roll. Even if it activated, it might not work at 100% efficiency. Two failures in a row meant the power failed permanently. By the time the heroes had fought their way through 20,000 gang members-cum-werewolves and the alligator-cum-dragon in the sewers, the only thing still working on his powered armor was Armor and about 2/3 of his 60 superstrength. No Flight, no Enhanced Senses, no Energy Blasts, no onboard computer with focused Skill levels.

 

He still fought bravely, and persevered even though it was clear very early in the scenario (which lasted two play sessions) that by the time they found the bad guy it was unlikely his PA would be functional at all. He could have turned back. But he didn't, and ultimately Cyberknight was the PC who managed to throw the evil sorcerer into the gate, thus destroying the bad guy and saving New York. The PA never worked again, and he had to build another set of it after the scenario ended.

[OddHat]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Indeed. One factor Lord Beavis seems to be overlooking is that when a PA character has his focus go south or be unavailable, it generally makes the character nearly useless. That seldom happens to Cosmic Hammergod, who even without the Hammer Cosmic still has his superstrength, his enchanted chainmail, his enchanted goats, and his centuries of combat experience.

 

Mentor ran a powered armor character in our campaign for eight years. Without his armor Cyberknight was hands down the least powerful member of our team. With it he's one of our big guns. On one occasion the team had to stop an evil sorcerer who had cast a technology-destroying spell over Manhattan Island in preparation for opening a gate to Hell. The longer the field was in effect the more powerful and larger it became. The more sophisticated the technology, the more quickly it failed. I started by making Cyberknight roll Activation for every use of a power, and each use lowered the Activation roll. Even if it activated, it might not work at 100% efficiency. Two failures in a row meant the power failed permanently. By the time the heroes had fought their way through 20,000 gang members-cum-werewolves and the alligator-cum-dragon in the sewers, the only thing still working on his powered armor was Armor and about 2/3 of his 60 superstrength. No Flight, no Enhanced Senses, no Energy Blasts, no onboard computer with focused Skill levels.

 

He still fought bravely, and persevered even though it was clear very early in the scenario (which lasted two play sessions) that by the time they found the bad guy it was unlikely his PA would be functional at all. He could have turned back. But he didn't, and ultimately Cyberknight was the PC who managed to throw the evil sorcerer into the gate, thus destroying the bad guy and saving New York. The PA never worked again, and he had to build another set of it after the scenario ended.

 

Sounds like a great scenario, and a great ending.

[Hugh Neilson]

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..."

 

OK, my view.

 

"Mathematical purity" has a number of connotations. Precise determination of an appropriate point cost, to the nearest whole point, is not possble or even desirable due to the complexity it would impose and variances between games, campaigns and even game sessions. "Mathematical purity" to me means that an ability which is less effective than a second ability should ideally cost less, and should never cost more.

 

"Fairness" in this context is the inverse. An ability which cost more should be more useful overall. That doesn't mean that a character must be deprived of his OIF for 1 in 3 game sessions (or 1/3 of all minutes in game sessions, since they vary in length) or any other precise determination. An OIF saves 1/3 of the cost of the powers. It should be a hassle often enough to justify that. A power that acts on 14- works something like 90% of the time. That's the same limitation. In my experience, it will likely fail to work once in a lengthy game session.

 

Powered armor being unavailable every third game session is hugely more limiting than having it fail to work for a single phase. Problems getting to your armor (resolved, but delaying your ability to join the fight), broken components, enemies removing it after you're KO'd so you need to escape without it and get it back, and many other examples of minor problems already given are each at least as disadvantageous as 6the power failing to act once, at least IMO.

 

In other words, you can't simply look at a -1/2 limitation and say "it reduces effectiuveness 1/3 therefore the ability should be completely unavailable 1/3 of the time". That's not the way quantifiable limitations work.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

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.

 

That 16 who say it's not abused in their games to 1 who says it is. Statistically, that indicates a low incidence of abuse. But a bigger sample would be more statistically relevant - so please, any lurkers, chime in with your experiences. [Or someone could post a poll.]

 

Let's look at thuis another way: what percentage of drivers drive poorly? Run red lights, speed, even drive drunk? Should we make driving illegal, or deal with the abusers? Obviously, driving is a bit more key to modern society than OIF in a role playing game, but the same logic applies. If the rule isn't used properly, it's not a reason to eliminate the rule. It might be a reason for a future product (Ultimate Powered Armor? Ultimate Gadgeteer? 6Ed?) to discuss the use of the Focus limitation in greater detail.

 

If I understand your concern, it's that your GM isn't enforcing it, so the power armor character is getting a free ride. Why not point him to this thread for some ideas how to actually play the limitation (at the risk of losing an immature player, as cited above)?

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Sounds like a great scenario' date=' and a great ending. [/quote']It was I think one of my best scenarios. The reason I posted it in this thread was that the entire scenario was designed from it's inception to bork Cyberknight's powered armor, and thus make him "pay" for putting all his eggs in one Carbon-60 armored OIF basket. None of the other characters on the team were in the least inconvenienced by the anti-technology field except for the minor fact our team radios crapped out; in fact the two magic-based characters on our team became proportionately more powerful as the anti-tech field got increasingly more powerful.

 

As we said at the time, Cyberknight wears powered armor because he's a hero; he's not a hero because he wears powered armor. He could have died, and he knew it and the player knew it.

[MitchellS]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Indeed. One factor Lord Beavis seems to be overlooking is that when a PA character has his focus go south or be unavailable, it generally makes the character nearly useless. That seldom happens to Cosmic Hammergod, who even without the Hammer Cosmic still has his superstrength, his enchanted chainmail, his enchanted goats, and his centuries of combat experience.

 

Mentor ran a powered armor character in our campaign for eight years. Without his armor Cyberknight was hands down the least powerful member of our team. With it he's one of our big guns. On one occasion the team had to stop an evil sorcerer who had cast a technology-destroying spell over Manhattan Island in preparation for opening a gate to Hell. The longer the field was in effect the more powerful and larger it became. The more sophisticated the technology, the more quickly it failed. I started by making Cyberknight roll Activation for every use of a power, and each use lowered the Activation roll. Even if it activated, it might not work at 100% efficiency. Two failures in a row meant the power failed permanently. By the time the heroes had fought their way through 20,000 gang members-cum-werewolves and the alligator-cum-dragon in the sewers, the only thing still working on his powered armor was Armor and about 2/3 of his 60 superstrength. No Flight, no Enhanced Senses, no Energy Blasts, no onboard computer with focused Skill levels.

 

He still fought bravely, and persevered even though it was clear very early in the scenario (which lasted two play sessions) that by the time they found the bad guy it was unlikely his PA would be functional at all. He could have turned back. But he didn't, and ultimately Cyberknight was the PC who managed to throw the evil sorcerer into the gate, thus destroying the bad guy and saving New York. The PA never worked again, and he had to build another set of it after the scenario ended.

We've done similar things over the years. Just a few sessions ago Mapleleaf was forced to endure a battlesuit malfunction very similar to the one which killed his father [Mapleleaf is the son of Alpha Flight's Guardians James and Heather]. The characters was dealing with the stress of the suit malfunctioning as well as some manipulation from the White Queen bring up the flashbacks of his father's death. It made for some interesting role-playing on the character's part with Jamie using almost none of the battlesuit's systems by the end of the session. The 3.5d6 punch he did to White Queen's face at the end with far more satisfying than any 15d6 blast he could do.

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

The 3.5d6 punch he did to White Queen's face at the end with far more satisfying than any 15d6 blast he could do.

That pretty much says it all.

[Mentor]

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. 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??

You claim that Power Armor is abused and that the limitations never kick in. That is simply not the case.

 

I gave you three specific examples of specific scenarios in which my PA character, Cyberknight, had the OIF limitations invoked and had to role play through the adventure using the PCs determination the Skills I had purchased for the PC to get through. It does happen often in our campaign!

 

Trebuchet, who has also posted on this thread ran these specified adventures so this isn't exactly unsubstantiated. Had I not purchased the Power Armor with any limitations, Cyberknight would simply have the Power Armor materialize, say from cybernetic nanites residing in his blood stream, thus the adventure would have been played out differently. On the other hand, I would have 38 fewer points to build on so Cyberknight would be an entirely different character, able to engage in combat at a moments notice but likely without the many interesting noncombat skills, which are as important as combat ability in our campaign.

[Mentor]

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..."

 

Very well said.

 

Rep to you.

[Derek Hiemforth]

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. 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??

Dude, you really need to stop assuming that everyone else's game is exactly like yours. Just because it's never used in your game doesn't mean it's never used properly in anyone else's game.

 

And I'm not claiming my game is perfect or anything. I freely admit that I don't perfectly balance the effects of all Limitations and Disadvantages all the time.

 

But do I try to exploit them when appropriate? Yes. Just recently, the heroes lost a fight to a villain group. When they woke up, the villains had gone... along with every Obvious Focus in the group. The heroes had to track the villains down and defeat them without the Foci in order to get their toys back.

[Kristopher]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

And I'm not claiming my game is perfect or anything. I freely admit that I don't perfectly balance the effects of all Limitations and Disadvantages all the time.

 

Same here, except I'm not sure I'd use the word "admit", as with some people it has gained conotations of having done something wrong.

 

I don't perfectly "balance" those effects in my games, but then I'm more interested in playing the game and having an interesting time, than in taking Mathematics 223: Gaming for the Obsessed.

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

But do I try to exploit them when appropriate? Yes. Just recently' date=' the heroes lost a fight to a villain group. When they woke up, the villains had gone... along with every Obvious Focus in the group. The heroes had to track the villains down and defeat them without the Foci in order to get their toys back.[/quote']Oooh, that's wicked. Despicable. Evil. Just plain ol' downright mean. I salute you, sir!

 

I can't do that to my Champions group because we basically don't use foci much anymore.

[pinecone]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

True, but you have to land that Haymaker. He's not just going to stand there and wait. It is a realistic maneuver, but not seen in quite some time.

 

 

 

So without the OIF limitation, you are saying Powered Armor is:

Always Worn....huh???

Cannot be destroyed......Say what???

Cannot be taken away....what you talking about Willis?

 

 

 

True, if the GM doesn't make it a limitation, it isn't. This goes with the armor not being available 1 in 3 times. (Who follows that rule??)

 

I believe Powered Armor, 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.

Well me for one.....As for the other part if it is not limited I have a problem with punishing someone for special effects too much, the Guyver dude is a power armor character with only OHID at Most (probibly no lim at all) I once ran a senario with two power armor types and you should have seen their faces when they found out the secret base was a nudest colony...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I once ran a senario with two power armor types and you should have seen their faces when they found out the secret base was a nudest colony...

 

Actually, there's a drawback Power Armor has over an OIF - magic ring (it glows when I use the powers). The Armor gives you Distinctive Features for free, where the ring would not [who notices someone is wearing a ring? big deal!]

[pinecone]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Actually' date=' there's a drawback Power Armor has over an OIF - magic ring (it glows when I use the powers). The Armor gives you Distinctive Features for free, where the ring would not [who notices someone is wearing a ring? big deal!']

Yes I was trying to show even I a almost perfect human being, also am willing to hose a player based on special effects alone. But I also let special effects work in the players favor so there was little heartache....

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I once ran a scenario with two power armor types and you should have seen their faces when they found out the secret base was a nudist colony...

 

That's priceless.

[incrdbil]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

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.

 

Well, you are free to believe whatever you want. .

 

Regardless, your belief won't lead to a change in the rules, or a framework for a special effect; if players/GM's will not use focus rules properly, they wont use whatever framework properly is devised to replace the focus rules. (And there wouldn't be a prohibition from powert armor users from using the focus rules instead of the PA framework anyway).

 

But let's say a Power Armor framework exists--the frameworks in existance, in general, make a character usually capable of doing more with fewer points. Multipowers give a player access to a lot of powers, albeit only one, or some, at a time; EC's give reduced costs to as many powers the player can work in. Power pools, while more expensive than just one straight out power, can offer up a potentially unlimited number of powers (the only limit being the number of unique power/advantage/limitations). So, whatever framework made for Power Armor users was dreamed up, it would would work in a similar manner--providing access to powers at some break in cost.

 

Well, focus does that. If the limitations of power armor aren't properly executed by the GM using foci rules, what will a framework in and of itself do? And if its deemed that power armor is no limitation whatsoever, then why should it have a new framework to lower costs?

 

You say the rule is being abused--their is no Power Armor rule, their is only the focus rules, which is what we're really talking about. the focus rules, as written, are fine. If GM's dont use them properly, no replacement rule will change anything--the same GM will simply not use the replacement rule properly, since obviously the GM believes Power Armor shouldn't be subject to the clear limitations that were already covered under focus rules.

 

The best argument you've put forward, really, is to not use any focus limitations at all, since people won't play out the effects of a limitation.--unless you have something to show that OIF: Pistol/Amulet/Ring is less prone to being abused that OIF: Power Armor. Heck, if GM's can't use focus limitations properly, you may as well dump the majority of, if not all, limitations, because there is no assurance they won't mess those up as well.

 

That's it--there's nothing more to say. If you still feel different, then we can just amicably agree to disagree, and conduct games as we best see fit for the enjoyment of all. To steal from Eddings, I believe we've exhausted the possibilities of this conversation.

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

To steal from Eddings' date=' I believe we've exhausted the possibilities of this conversation.[/quote']I think that just about sums it all up.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I was reading another thread that talked about 1st ed. Interesting, the game I am playing now is 5th Ed. The point is, these game mechanics have evolved. I would never want this game to become D&D where people say "1st Ed is the only edition. I don't know what you are playing, but it isn't D&D!!"

 

Staying on that point, I think I will create a new limitation specifically for Powered Armor. I will call it Powered Armor. It will follow in the lines of the idea behind Fuzion, that created arch type characters. By the way, in that version, all powered armor can be damaged, destroyed or removed even Dr. Destroyer!!!! (NO!!! Blasphemy!!!!)

 

Anyone who would like to help out is welcome!!! Those who have no interest in the project, take care!!!

[Trebuchet]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I was reading another thread that talked about 1st ed. Interesting' date=' the game I am playing now is [b']5th Ed.[/b] The point is, these game mechanics have evolved. I would never want this game to become D&D where people say "1st Ed is the only edition. I don't know what you are playing, but it isn't D&D!!"

 

Staying on that point, I think I will create a new limitation specifically for Powered Armor. I will call it Powered Armor. It will follow in the lines of the idea behind Fuzion, that created arch type characters. By the way, in that version, all powered armor can be damaged, destroyed or removed even Dr. Destroyer!!!! (NO!!! Blasphemy!!!!)

 

Anyone who would like to help out is welcome!!! Those who have no interest in the project, take care!!!

I!!! Am!!! Glad!!! You!!!! Have!!! Discovered!!! Exclamation!!! Points!!!

[Katherine]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

The problem here isn't the OIF limitation on Power Armor. That's not less valid than on a ring or something. Its that your GM hasn't been enforcing or using the story possibilites in the limitation.

 

Power Armor is a simple sfx. The trouble it causes should be relative to the cost break I get from it. Some special effects of "armor" can't be easily removed. The Guyer for instance. The bio booster suit is part of him. You can't knock him out and peel it off. So he doesn't get an OIF limitation for it. Neither does Dr D. His powers are so hard to remove/break/etc that they might as wel be inherent.

 

I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. If you want to rule in your campaign no powered armor can have such protection that is your right but that's not reason to rant and rave about it like everyone that doesn't do that is playing wrong.

[Kristopher]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I was reading another thread that talked about 1st ed. Interesting' date=' the game I am playing now is [b']5th Ed.[/b] The point is, these game mechanics have evolved. I would never want this game to become D&D where people say "1st Ed is the only edition. I don't know what you are playing, but it isn't D&D!!"

 

Staying on that point, I think I will create a new limitation specifically for Powered Armor. I will call it Powered Armor. It will follow in the lines of the idea behind Fuzion, that created arch type characters. By the way, in that version, all powered armor can be damaged, destroyed or removed even Dr. Destroyer!!!! (NO!!! Blasphemy!!!!)

 

Anyone who would like to help out is welcome!!! Those who have no interest in the project, take care!!!

 

A) What Treb said...I hope you and the exclamation point are happy together.

 

FUZION is the devil's toolbox.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

I was reading another thread that talked about 1st ed. Interesting' date=' the game I am playing now is [b']5th Ed.[/b] The point is, these game mechanics have evolved. I would never want this game to become D&D where people say "1st Ed is the only edition. I don't know what you are playing, but it isn't D&D!!"

 

Indeed the game has evolved. And, in each incarnation, it has held OIF, a -1/2 limitation. Those areas unchanged while all around it is adjusted are likely to be the ones that have stood the test of time.

 

What has changed is that OIHID has arisen to reflect those characters who seem to have an OIF, but the limitations come up far less frequently, and the concept that, if you don't take the limitation, its problems don't plague your character.

 

Staying on that point' date=' I think I will create a [b']new[/b] limitation specifically for Powered Armor. I will call it Powered Armor. It will follow in the lines of the idea behind Fuzion, that created arch type characters. By the way, in that version, all powered armor can be damaged, destroyed or removed even Dr. Destroyer!!!! (NO!!! Blasphemy!!!!)

 

A friendly word in your ear... Invoking Fuzion in a positive manner is not likely to enhance your credibility.

 

[Of course, I neither bolded my words, capitalized them nor used even a single exclamation point, so who would listen to me anyway? ]

[Lord Beavis]

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

 

Once again, I will be moving on with creating my specific limitation for powered armor. Those who would like to create a new rule for 6th edition, it should be in print in ohhh say.....12 years, we have some time.

 

This rule will probably be an alternate rule or even a possible new Power Framework. Powered armor has evolved beyond what it was in the previous editions.

 

I knew stating the Fuzion system would get a little response. I thought it was an interesting take, but the layout of the book was somewhat of a turnoff. They seemed to cram everything to try and save space. The artwork was good, and I like it in color.

 

As always, the detractors, are asked to please head to the nearest exit. Watch your steps. Don't Push, goodbye!!!!!!!!!!